AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 10, 2007 11:17 PM:It does my heart good to see that there's at least one hearing officer who believes in the government's obligation to support its charges with independent evidence. It's sad that in the cases of the Marines accused in Hamdania, their hearing officers seemed to disregard evidence and deny requests for declassification of evidence by attorneys to help in defense of their clients. I believe the Hamdania Marines are the sacrificial lambs in this whole mess. I just can not fathom that not one single hearing officer or Mattis would also share Lt. Col. Ware's feeling that further prosecution could set a dangerous precedent that might "encourage others to bear false witness against Marines as a tactic to erode public support of the Marine Corps and its mission in Iraq". Well, sadly, that's just what is happening in the Hamdania cases. No independent verification of Iraqi testimony, no corroboration of so-called evidence, rights denied, etc, etc, etc. Congressman Murtha made similar statements about the Marines accused in the Hamdania incident. Why has not one hearing officer had the guts to stand up for the accused and admit to the Abuse of Power demonstrated by this Congressman? To ruin the lives of these young men for the agenda of politicians is unforgiveable and plays right into the hands of the enemy. Not very honorable for anyone professing to be a Marine. I'm a civilian and have always had great respect for the Marine Corps but have lost practically all respect for the military justice system. Lt. Col. Ware is the first ray of light to come from the darkness that has enveloped most of the proceedings thus far. Are there any other "real" Marines out there who will stand up for the rights of their own? It certainly isn't happening for the Pendleton 8.

To AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 2:09 AM:You sound like a Republican talking point. You speak of abuse of power by Cong. Murtha, yet you seem to neglect to mention the abuse of power and lies that were told by the administration (The Liar in Chief and his puppet master Darth Vader, VP) that sent these men into a false war - - A farcical war. An act of aggression against a sovereign nation who didn't have WMD's, didn't have terrorists (not until American troops invaded), wasn't buying uranium, etc, etc. The list goes on and on. I personally wouldn't be too surprised if it turns out that these crimes were committed. Think about it... The recruiters have been signing up all kinds of guys who previously couldn't get into the the military...from ex-cons, to racist neo-nazis, gang bangers etc so who knows what really happened. Just to fill the ranks for this tragedy of errors called the Iraq war.

Waiting... wrote on Jul 11, 2007 4:36 AM:When charges are dropped in this case, I'm sure it will be worthy of News Alerts across the media kingdom. But I'm not holding my breath.

to AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 4:39 AM:The Hamdania trials are getting underway. What do you need to hear / see / read that will convince you that they are guilty of this crime? Or will you find them innocent victims regardless of the evidence presented and the rendition of their juries?

veteran wrote on Jul 11, 2007 7:12 AM:Why are we trying the grunts? Shouldn't we be trying their bosses? I thought that the Marines were supposed to be honorable yet we see the Marine brass throwing low ranking people under the bus to save their own hides. For goodness sake, Go after the suck up generals that keep us in this mess, and leave these guys alone.

John1 to "To AW4" wrote on Jul 11, 2007 8:35 AM:I don't understand your post. The defendants starting trials for Hamdania have nothing to do with Haditha and in any event are considered innocent until proven guilty. Surely you would not be chosen for the jury with your opinions!

Concerned-1 wrote on Jul 11, 2007 8:54 AM:AW4cryinoutloud is a huge cheerleader for the Bush disasaster called Iraq. She decries any decision against the accused as a conspiracy and calls any decision in their favor justice, all this as an armchair observer. WHAT A JOKE

Zeke wrote on Jul 11, 2007 9:30 AM:To You sound like a Republican talking point. "You sound like a person with a paper ... The next time you think about posting such drivel you should research the facts, you just exposed your ignorance and your blind devotion to moonbat pundit talking points."

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 11:37 AM:I don't believe that the post at 8:35AM was written by John1. Not the way he relates his opinions. I also do not believe that the post at 8:54AM was written by Concerned-1. Not the way he relates his opinions either. Both, whether you agree or disagree with them, are more intelligent than those posts. Both have more class, and both know me better than to make the comments in question. For months someone has used my blog name every now and then to misrepresent my views. They have also used Concerned-1's in the past, and I recently read another blogger's comment that he had not made comments atrributed to him. If NCTimes has any bright ideas to resolve this it would be greatly appreciated. There are admittedly a couple of people that I don't care for but I would never pull such crap on them. Regardless of my opinion of them, they have the right to their views and certainly to not be misrepresented. If they were to bother me so much that I couldn't handle it I'd just stop reading it. I would not obssess over it.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 12:11 PM:To the post at 2:09AM: Not to be rude but, you sound like an old record with the needle stuck in a groove. I don't obssess over what Bush has or hasn't done. It's done! I can't change it. As for your insulting comment about the troops and the type of people who enlist. "Ignoramous"! If anyone could not previously get into the military, please explain how they finally got in? If they were not of the caliber expected, then how did they get in? This is a volunteer Armed Forces made of patriotic, educated, intelligent Americans. Did you get in? Did you show your country how a fine upstanding, educated person was willing to put himself in harm's way for people he doesn't even know, for a country that may not one day give him the benefit of the doubt if he was wrongly accused of something, for a government tha would trample all over his rights as an American just because that government knew it could; because that government could use him as a scapegoat for its scre-ups? If you hate this Administration so cottonpickin' much then stand up against it and defend those who at least tried to defend you and your country. Take your pathetic misplaced animosity and put it where it belongs; Not on the backs of our Marines. "Ignoramous"!

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 12:48 PM:The comments at 11:37 and 12:11 were not written by the real AW4crinoutloud, but by a rude and obnoxious alter ego.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 12:58 PM:To the post at 4:39AM: You have got to be kidding me! Let's start at the very beginning. Iraqis who most likely were insurgents or at the least sympathizers, in a known insurgent town, where the accused Marines were sent to...quote: "capture or kill" insurgents, accuse our Marines and their commander takes the word of these people? Then the media uses Iraqi "stringers" to take and translate testimony from the so-called witnesses; which the media admits "in print" can not be confirmed yet reports as gospel. Then we have NCIS, who itself is "supposed" to be under investigation comes in and does its number on the accused. Then the accused are brought back to the states without any restraints, yet the next day are taken, shackled, and stuck in the Brig for three weeks without any charges preferred against them. NOW, ask me again what I need to hear, see, or read that will convince me of any guilt. Dude! I don't even think a crime was committed. I think it has been cleverly "created" by the prosecution through coercion that began in Iraq and threats that continued in the states. Why do you think the prosecution dropped the death penalty early in the proceedings? Death penalty, NO plea deals....Hello!? Until I read that I actually was naive enough to believe that the prosecution was being fair. Ah ha ha! Ain't that hysterical? The juries can "render" their verdicts till the cows come home and it won't be enough to convince me. I could list many things it would take to convince me but they became null and void the minute the accused' were denied their "right" to presence of counsel in Iraq. The minute they were forced into coercive interrogations. They should not even be where they are today. These Marines are not your gang-bangers or neo-nazis you mention. All of them are from good, hard working, decent families. All of them had exemplary records as Marines and the Corps has spit on them and turned its back on them, yet still says Marines take care of their own. Well; I've heard that the Mafia also takes care of its own.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 1:12 PM:The 12:11PM post. I hate it when I leave a letter out. "scre-ups"...supposed to be screw-ups. Looks like I screwed up. Nerts!

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 1:28 PM:I knew that wasn't John1 or Concerned-1 who blogged at 8:35 and 8:54AM. What do they call it? Cyberstalking? The post at 12:48PM wasn't made by me. Apparently someone has an obssession problem. I wonder if I stay at this for the whole day if they will also. Oh well. Since they don't have the guts to use their own blog name, a friend of mine has one for them: "Insurgent Blogger". Cowardly, hide in the shadows, afraid to face anyone unless they have the advantage. Hey NCT; May I use the term Insurgent Blogger for my new-found cyberstalking friend? That would take a lot of dots, huh?

SCOOBYDO wrote on Jul 11, 2007 2:51 PM:There WERE WMD's, if not what do you call the poison gas used to massacre hundreds of Kurds?? How about the SCUDs that were hurled into Israel by Hussein during Iraq War I? Surely the definition of weapons of mass destruction is not confined to nuclear bombs! I agree that we should not have sent ground troops into Iraq and should have used air power only. I also agree that Bush 43 is a complete disaster as a President. But let's not minimize and trivialize the horror that Sadam Hussein was and the threat he posed to the whole Middle East. Now that our troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan, let's support them with all we have in us, to include supporting unconditional pardons for the Marines now charged with having committed crimes based on murky evidence and during the heat of combat. Our troops are doing great damage to the terrorists, but they have done more than enough and should all be brought home sooner than later. They are the finest military force in the world, bar none and to denigrate them with remarks about lowered recruitment standards is abominable. The war on terror must continue, but a better strategy is in order, to include the use of advanced technologies and increased homeland security.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 2:56 PM:I've had a change of heart. I see the light now! I was sooo confused b4. Yes, I now believe that the government has more than enough evidence to convict the marines still charged. May justice prevail!!

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 2:59 PM:The blog posted at 1:28PM today, was NOT posted by me but by an impostor. I really do believe now that I must change my blog name to preserve my identity as an upholder of all that is right and just!! Amen.

YUCCA BEAN wrote on Jul 11, 2007 3:19 PM:I, Yucca W. Bean, do hereby declare and afirm and aver that the scoundrel who impersonates impersonators is both fuzzy of mind and lacking in grace. By the way, yucca stew is a heck of a good dish. Having said that, it's more than a puzzle as to why the government brought charges against Sharratt in the first place. If their evidence is not clear and convincing in this case, why should one have any confidence in the government's evidence in all of these cases!?! What's the real agenda of the government here? Maybe trying to please and appease those whom we should instead realize are in fact our enemies?

beg to differ AW4 wrote on Jul 11, 2007 3:30 PM: The post of 8:35am certainly sounds like John1. It really isn’t a big deal, but it is almost identical to things he has said to me...that is short and with an air of authoritativeness and a touch of arrogance. The rest of the mishmash I can't begin to figure out.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 4:07 PM:To beg to differ: I know that John1 and others have gone back and forth, the same as myself. But he knows that I believe in the innocence of the accused, so would have no reason to make the comment. You may notice also that Insurgent Blogger is back at 2:59PM. He also hit Concerned-1, who also knows where I'm coming from. I must be right about something or Insurgent Blogger wouldn't be at it so much. That's great because that gives me a 'head's-up'. Hadn't thought of that before. I hope he's not an American. That would be a disgrace.

John1 to AW4 and Beg To Differ wrote on Jul 11, 2007 6:14 PM:I have been following the Thomas case and speaking with my son all day and not on this blog. I am unfortunately late to this party, "beg to differ".

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 7:36 PM:The blog at 2:56Pm also was NOT mine. Just for the record.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Jul 11, 2007 7:37 PM:To John1: Thanks. I knew it wasn't you.