I just finished looking at every news-story and blog-article listed at Google News concerning this. They basically all say what was reported in this thread OP. According to the US military, three Navy Seal commando's have been officially charged with “abusing a detainee” and “falsifying official documents”. The initial charge stems from an abuse complaint filed by the terrorist himself. The secondary charge is a consequence of the initial abuse charge.
People can only go by what the military itself has stated. Either the military is witholding pertinint information on this case, or the military is engaged in a ridiculous and petty application of political correctness as reported.
Neither scenario is very comforting.
From what I can find, every source is referencing the FOX story. I am not finding any actual additional information. If you did, I would love a link please so I can read more.
This quote is from the FOX story:
United States Central Command declined to discuss the detainee, but a legal source told FoxNews.com that the detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued.
In point of fact, there is a distinct lack of the military's side of the story. That and the fact that what is presented is presented in a very one sided manner suggests that there is a good chance that there is important details we do not know. I find it unlikely that a "bloody lip" would result in even NJP under most circumstances.
If I had to make a guess, and I emphasize this is just a guess, what happened is the guys got a little carried away with Ahmed Hashim Abed, knocked him around a bit. He complained to the Iraqi's, who passed it along to the US, who decided to do a token investigation. The Seals lied about it, and the lie came out. They are now in trouble not for knocking Abed around a bit, but for lying to an investigation, which is serious. If they had been honest with the investigation, I am betting they would never have gotten more than a little extra duty and an ass chewing, which is the most it would be worth. The US liaison with the Iraqi's goes back and reports that the offenders where punished, and that ends it. As happens far too often, it's the coverup that is the big problem.
I repeat again, the above paragraph is just a guess, based on what little information that is available that I have found. If you have more information, I would love to see it. I also want to repeat that even if all the above paragraph is basically accurate, I still don't think much should be done to the Seals. You have to do something, both because you cannot allow people to get away with lying to an investigation, and because you do not reward people for pushing something to a court marshal. 60/60 sound about right, it hurts, but only for a little while.
What I also want to emphasize here is I am not saying this is not messed up, nor am I saying anything concrete really except I do not think we have enough information to rush to a judgment.