The first of the two witnesses say, "When we were securing the package, he was flailing about like a pansy and fell. And then we were able to control him, but not until after he bloodied his lip."
The second witness says, "After the teorrist fell, and when my fellow SEAL jumped on him to secure the package, somewhere in the scuffle the terrorist got a bloody lip. But we got him! A most wanted terrorist. Booyah?"
The third witness says, "These two terrorists punched me. I don't which one, but they punched me. See! I got a bloody lip."
As the juror, just point to the picture, either top or bottom, which source is your most valued and who do you believe?
As usual your two faced answers expose your hypocrisy.Do you really think that if they had not lied, they would be in the situation they are in? If they had said "yup, it was a mess, we had to rough him up a bit for our own safety", do you think any one would have prosecuted them? What always happens is the coverup is worse than the actual event.
Please let us know which face we are talking to. The one who says our seals are lying and the terroist is telling the truth or the other face that says we don't know the information.
See Redress, the difference between us and you is that when we see a terrorist who has murdered Americans and taken into custody, we don't assume he is the one telling the truth, unlike you.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
Fact: The terrorist charged the seals with nothing, he does not have that power. I know this is inconvenient to the way you want to paint this, but it is the truth.
Fact: The US Navy and the DOJ are the ones who are charging the soldiers with crimes.
Fact: The reason this is going to court marshal is the Seals requested it over NJP.
Fact: Their guilt or innocence will be determined at a court marshal, and based on the actual facts of the case, which you are, like so many other things, ignorant of.
There is more then one witness in this case.
previous cases where servicemen were being charged for something they did in the line of duty, I strongly believe all charges against the SEALs will be dropped at some point in the future.
Because if those who serve in the military begin getting prosecuted successfully every time something went awry during a war time campaign, we'd have a very skeptical, weak military always afraid to pull the trigger. That would be far more damaging to our military effectiveness than the 'benefits' (if there are any) of prosecuting two Navy SEALs for capturing a most wanted terrorist.
We can cement this comment to the archives, but mark my words, all charges will be dropped at some point in the future. That's my prediction and I'm sticking to it!