Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

The three, all members of the Navy's elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral's mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named "Objective Amber," told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7. Another three SEALs — two officers and an enlisted sailor — have been identified by investigators as witnesses but have not been charged.

FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

"I gave the detainee a glance over and then left," the SEAL wrote. "I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health."

Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.

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.

The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that "Objective Amber" planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and "they had been tracking this guy for some time."

The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.

The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.

The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576646,00.html

------------

Political corectness is killing the Armed Forces.  The terrorist is lucky he was not the resuly of a breach and clear "accident."  The ex-Seal I know would have done just that. Hooyah over and out. 

Should have never been over there in the first place....

There will be more and more litigation as the Iraqis are less than ever willing to support an illegal occupation.

That is an opinion.  The fact is that the OpAmber target was not an innocent Iraqi civ but a hardened terrorist.  The SEALs should not be punished for only giving him a fat lip and hurt feelings. 

By the way US forces are on base hanging out at the BK (FOB Anaconda most likely) and provided security when the Iraqis ask for it.  2011 is the pull out date. 

but... unless i'm reading this wrong... they were charged by the Army.

Iraqis weren't involved.

Court Martial seems a bit steep... but hitting a prisoner even if he did kill a bunch of people should be punished.

++

This post says all I wanted to.

Yeah, another rare occasion as we appear to be on the same page here.

There are some details that could make it worse or could mitigate it however.  For example if he was struggling against them and was attempting to get away I could see circumstances where his being struck might be more justifiable depending on how it went down.  On the other hand if they were taking their turns at punching him while he was restrained just for amusement I could certainly see it being elevated to something worthy of formal punishment.

Either way I wouldn't get up in arms about it either way without more details on the exact situation.

From reading the story, it sounded like he was hit after in captivity, and the two other guys let it happed/didn't report it.

Or at least that's what it seems like considering the charges.  But yeah, probably would need to know more.

Yep I pretty much entirely agree Sqrl. In the case of resisting arrest force might be justifiable. It being investigated isn't a bad thing either way.

Also I might disagree with you on most issues but I do respect how and why you reach your viewpoints.

Bottom line is an investigation appears to be more than justified.  I won't be surprised if the cover up ends up biting them in the ass worse than the act they were covering for.

My only real problem with the story is that it is not being handled more quietly until they're confident they know what happened.  I'd prefer to give a soldier the benefit of the doubt until it is shown they don't deserve it but that of course only goes so far.  Even so that is a minor gripe really.

I appreciate it and I hope you know I feel the same.  I will admit I don't always completely follow where you are coming from (I'm sure that is mutual), but I do recognize that your views are built towards helping people the best way you see how.  Even if we don't agree on the 'how', I can't help but respect someone who has honest intentions to do good and is willing to debate it rationally when the occasion arises.

Now erm...back on topic before I have to give us both a warning =P