Nat Helms is a Contributing Editor to Defend Our Marines. He is a Vietnam veteran, former police officer, war correspondent, and, most recently, author of My Men Are My Heroes: The Brad Kasal Story (Meredith Books, 2007).
Posted on 12/28/2007 7:15:49 AM PST by RedRover
Nat Helms is a Contributing Editor to Defend Our Marines. He is a Vietnam veteran, former police officer, war correspondent, and, most recently, author of My Men Are My Heroes: The Brad Kasal Story (Meredith Books, 2007).
I am cheering for Salinas’ loyalty. I still have divided caution, but this sounds very hopeful.
Nat Helms retelling of the Haditha story, updated from the normal pablum written by the media at the time of the original Haditha charges, is refreshing. I places everything in proper context.
It talks about the insurgents, the presence of Al Qaeda, the firefight, the storming of buildings that were hostile.
It should be the standard for truth in reporting now that so much information has come out in the Article 32 hearings.
Many of our Marines are still in serious jeopardy, and they deserve our support as we head down the homestretch.
Do we have any projections on Court Martial dates? It’s obvious that “speedy trial” isn’t in anyone’s handbook anymore.
Good news. It’s about time. From various reporting it appeared that Sgt. Salinas was a key witness to most of the events that occurred that day. It made no sense that Sgt. Salinas was not granted immunity for the Article 32’s if their purpose was to get to the truth. Good for Lt. Gen. Helland for granting him immunity for LCpl Tatum’s upcoming trial.
I’m clearly on the side of the defense lawyer that wants immunity for Chessani. Chessani has clearly done nothing wrong and is charged only for political expediency.
If he were permitted to speak freely, and with permission to include classified information, then I’m certain that all other defendants would have charges dismissed.
All those involved in pushing this case ought to be tried for treason.
This is encouraging news and it is refreshing that Nat Helms reports on the story without reflecting the bias that the MSN clearly has when it comes to this incident. He has done his homework with all his articles and tells it like it is, my hat goes off to him.
The man in black....???
Why, that’s ALWAYS been
Johnny Cash.
:>)
(Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, Girlene!)
Now THIS is good news to start the New Year. Thanks for the ping Red and Happy New Year!
PS
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!! :-)
Exactly. Bullseye to both you and Jaz.
Anyone writing about Haditha from henceforth should be required to have a course with Nat Helms before they’re allowed to publish.
That DOD source must have had an awful lot of time on their hands to visit multiple media sources in a desperate attempt to destroy these Marine's lives. We now know that this source was disseminating false information, to boot.
It is way past time an investigation into the DOD to find this mole commenced, and time to put SECNAV Winter in front of a senate panel under oath to see how much dirt - or bilge goo as it were - he has under his fingernails.
It'd be nice to see the media update their stories to reflect the truths so eloquently portrayed by Nat Helms, but I'm not holding my breath waiting, especially after that sickening rant by the NCT against LCpl Delano Holmes - the ONLY media source that used to be somewhat on the level. I wonder how Mark Walker feels about his colleagues right about now. This is encouraging news, though. It appears that Lt. Gen. Helland may be more interested in discovering what really happened than many of his peers.
I would think that Sgt. Salinas's testimony concerning the taxi full of "students" could have cleared up many misconceptions over a year ago, and affected the previous Article 32s, as it was one of the initial and pivotal events in this case, one that the media & NCIS used to paint the whole squad as blood thirsty and trigger happy.
I'm heading north till next week to work on the house, thanks for the ping.
I was involved in the Courts Martial of one of my troops, and although the right to a speedy trail is guaranteed by the US Constitution, the defendant on advice from their lawyer can waive that right. This is usually done when the defense attorney feels they need more time to prepare an adequate defense, gather more testimony/statements from witnesses, or have any evidence reviewed by their own experts. If the accused does not waive that right, the Courts Martial must convene within 120 days after being charge with a crime (Article 32 Hearing).
-Traveler
Ping
Excellent post, 4WB.
Additionally, this should be a piece of any attempt to prove unlawful command influence by someone in the chain of command.
Unlawful command influence can be an issue even if one can prove only an "appearance" of unlawful influence.
One need not get NPR's "sources," if they choose to play hardball and hide behind "freedom of the press." One only needs to get them on the stand to affirm that they were told this things by actual, DoD sources.
This would be convincing testimony that give the "appearance" of malfeasance.
To refute it, the DoD would then have to pony up the names of their people who were doing the leaking. Even then, one could look at the ties between that person and the Haditha troops' chain of command.
As Marines, the direct Chain of Command would go through the Marine Corps Commandant, the SecNav, the SecDef, and the Pres.
Thanks, Traveler. Good info.
I stand corrected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.