Major Mathew Golsteyn may face hearing
We talked about the case of Major Mathew Golsteyn, the Special Forces officer who had his Silver Star for gallantry under fire taken from him by the Secretary of the Army John McHugh. Allegedly, Golsteyn told CIA investigators that he had captured an Afghani bomb maker and summarily executed him. He buried the body, but then Golsteyn claims that he returned to the scene, exhumed the corpse and burned it.
The Army can’t punish him because they can find no witnesses nor can they find the body, according to the Associated Press, criminal investigators won’t rely solely on his confession for prosecution;
Though a criminal investigation failed to find remains of his alleged victim and didn’t result in charges against Maj. Mathew Golsteyn, he’s been targeted for possible dismissal from the Army and the consequent loss of veteran’s benefits with a less-than-honorable discharge.
A Fort Bragg hearing before three, higher-ranked Special Forces officers could meet later this month to weigh arguments from Golsteyn’s attorney why he should remain on active duty.
“My hope is that Golsteyn will receive a fair and impartial hearing. Based on the Army’s actions and decisions thus far, I regret to say this won’t be the case,” one of the soldier’s defenders, U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., wrote Wednesday to Army Secretary John McHugh. Army brass have kept Hunter updated on the case.
So the Army really has no evidence against the Major, so they intend to punish him administratively – a pretty common practice in the military. Let’s say that Golsteyn had captured the bombmaker instead of killing him. The murderer probably would have been released by the Karzai administration, or escaped from custody and he’d be back at making bombs, killing not only US military personnel but Afghani civilians as well. The world is a better place without the fellow – and that’s if Golsteyn had actually killed him and he wasn’t just bragging to the CIA investigators, as evidence, or the lack of evidence, actually, suggests.
Category: Military issues
Bomb-boi got exactly what he deserved, but I’m afraid MAJ Golsteyn is fooked.
Over Fooked, and is going to get COOOKED !!!!!!!!
As I recall the story yesterday the SF Captain in a conversation with a CIA told him that he offed the bomb-maker. What a fricken clown the CIA schmuck is for giving him up!
What’s the inside talk on Goldsteyn…is he, as AW1Ed suggests, “fooked?”
Reminds me of the schmuck who gave up the Navy SEALS for smacking some asshole around. You know, the asshole who killed, burned, and then hung from a bridge those contractors in Iraq.
I remember that story. Part of our procedure when recieving detainees was photographing, and making note of any injuries on said detainee. I will not take the rap for anybody when it comes to detainee abuse. Not that I like them, I am just not going to go through a shit storm for someone else.
I actually got to sit in on those court martials for a bit (spectator, not a participant)
listening to goat boy was hilarious. His story changed from day to day.
Unfortunately for him, evidence doesn’t lie, unlike goat pumping hajis….
People sometimes make the mistake of thinking the CIA is aligned ideologically with the military.
In my experience, the agency is chock full of bleeding-hearts who would happily “do the right thing” by selling out a soldier.
Regardless, pretty foolish of the Major to volunteer the info.
Bingo. Further, from what little I’ve seen of the IC parts of it are a very backstabbing, dog-eat-dog, “don’t trust anyone” environment. My impression is that some will turn on or burn a colleague in a heartbeat if they think it will further their career.
Part of that is necessary, given the potential insider threat. But it’s something many military people simply aren’t prepared to encounter.
Don’t have any “inside scoop”, but in today’s PC climate within DoD – I’d bet $20 against a cheap donut that he’s scrod. And I ain’t talkin’ the fish they served baked in Boston.
Rule #1: don’t take any pictures or vids if you’re doing something you wouldn’t want on the front page of your local newspaper.
Rule #2: if you did something that could be an issue if it ended up on the front page of your local newspaper, keep your damn mouth shut about it. Particularly when there are no witnesses.
Rule #3: Don’t lie about doing stupid sh!t you really didn’t do. There’s a good chance that someone will take you seriously – and it will end up on a newspaper’s front page.
What Hondo said! I don’t agree with any punishment, but, the MAJ should know not to say anything……
Common Sense 101.
They should teach it.
Word
Common sense . . . isn’t particularly common. And best I can tell, it can’t generally be taught.
Right on. Those of you still in uniform hunker down and shut yer yaps.
The leadership climate for a while is about CYA. If you find or serve with a fire eater protect him/her. Don’t let them leave.
It’s going to be bumpy ride ahead.
Yep. Something my dad used to tell me: Loose lips sink ships. If you did something keep it at platoon/squad or whatever level. Definitely don’t tell outsiders that’s for damn sure. You’ll end up telling it to a Cpt. Commissar type who’ll in turn drop a dime on you immediately.
Rule #4: The only way two people can keep a secret is if one of them is dead.
IF USACID couldn’t find anything, I’m inclined to think he may have a case of “braggadio” where-in he was drinking with someone and told his so-called “war story” not thinking much about it other than he was trying to impress the other person. Ala “Winter Soldier” and our old pal’s from “Winter Crybabies-II”…
I read the linked AP story and, really, I am mystified. On the one hand, there’s a statement, confirmed in a memo to have made by the major to the CIA, that he executed a bad guy and then covered up the killing. On the other hand, although the major’s account cited two witnesses to the deed, the investigation found no one who saw, let alone helped, the major in disposing of the bomb maker. Coupled with the absence of physical evidence that corroborates the major’s account and you are left with a big fat, “WTF is going on here?” It is one thing to brag about your exploits in combat and quite another to say that you executed someone and that you knew it was an illegal killing. This just doesn’t make sense to me.
From what I understand, the Major was applying for a job with the CIA, and admitted the unlawful killing during his pre-employment polygraph examination. Which itself raises the question, if you knew that you had (literally) gotten away with murder at some point in past, why would you apply for a job, knowing that you are going to have to take a “lifestyle” polygraph?
This whole thing strikes me as a very strange and sad case. From everything I’ve heard, the Major was a very fine officer and outstanding combat leader, but he may have crossed the line in a big way.
Yeah, I was wondering about the nature of the interview. I may have missed it, but I didn’t say the word “job’ or “employment” in front of interview in the story. But how does one claim that there were two witnesses and none are found? I guess if they were civilian witnesses that is probable but if they US troops? Not. And another thing, IF the officer did what he said he did, how in the wide, wide world of sports does that not move like wildfire through the ranks? People would have heard about it. Hell, people would have seen it, smelled it, and talked about it. But the investigation comes up with zip? I tell you, this is some seriously crazy stuff.
Hayabusa, if your understanding of the Major being in an application process with the CIA is correct, then that was a big FUBAR on his part. He is no dummy by any mean and knew without doubt, the big “this is your life” polygraph would happen. If what he bragged about doing is true, then in my opinion he should have kept quiet and continued his successful career as a Special Forces Officer and not tried to up the ante by going CIA. The CIA does like to recruit from the military, especially from the Rangers and other higher echelon Special Operations sectors. No matter what he did or did not do, proof or no proof, his deal is sealed as far as his Army career is concerned. It’s a shame to me. He was a good Officer and I could care less, in fact I applaud him, for offing a known terrorist bomb maker.
@Hayabusa
I think you’ve put the proverbial last nail in the coffin – – – and the polygraph is the nail.
Probably most of us here have taken the test sometime in our lives and while nervewracking if you’ve “walked the line” you have nothing to worry about. The damn thing is pretty accurate though, good administratively just not enough for court.
The trick with polygraphs(and I’ve told a couple secret squirrel aspirees) is that the machine– it’s just a box made to flicker every time it tracks a certain stimulus. Perspiration, heartbeat, et cetera. Control that, you control the test– I have a hard time believing polygraphs are good for anything other than a stage prop for the [I]real[/I] lie detector that’s trying to grill you.
Hmmm. Then again, the Major could just be having some mental issues. Sad.
On the other hand, this sort of “unpleasant departure” scenario appears to be a potential ticket to a Congressional seat. I can think of at least one recent example where this apparently worked.
So are those Marines with poor photographic choice and questionable bladder control running for office?
several of them have passed away.
Sounds like some situational ethics may be in play here in addition to whatever else is or isn’t driving this thing. Too many questions.
Who keeps the official tally of which terrorist is or isn’t dead? Any chance that reporting the elimination of one to the CIA would be appropriate? I dunno.
Just read Hondo’s comment above. No, during a job interview might not be the appropriate reporting procedure.
Errr, Hayabusa’s comment.
The Military and Army Times linked to some documents on this cast a few weeks ago.
http://ec.militarytimes.com/pdfs/u-s-army-documents-on-major-mathew-golsteyn.pdf
Included in the documents are MAJ Goldsteyn’ Letter of Reprimand (which interestingly doesn’t mention murder, only that there was an admittance to a Law of War Violation). What is interesting is that there is no finding of facts on the part of the GO, nor is the rebuttal of MAJ Goldsteyn included in the documents.
From reading the Information paper, it appears that the Senior Army Decorations Board did review the information and recommended issuing the DSC.
Also, according to a report in the Washington Post earlier this week, the polygraph is not admissible as part of his administrative hearing.
Polygraphs are excellent tools to make people subject to them THINK that must not lie. Otherwise, they ain’t worth a shit and anyone who volunteers to take one is a danger to himself. What to do?
“What do you have to hide?
“Absolutely nothing that is relevant to this job. But if courts the land over have steadfastly refused to accept the polygraph as good science, and not quackery, then my future is too important to me to rest it on a machine’s needle. So, no, I will not subject myself to that. Please note my full response for the record. Thanks.”
He’s a dumbass for talking about it if he did it.
He’s a double dumbass for claiming he did it and actually didn’t.
He should lawyer up with the best available conservative law firm in TX and GO GAME ON … It is general election season!
Rule of thumb … Never talk to another agency about issues without YOUR lawyer present!
I feel bad for the Warrior!
‘an interview with the CIA’
This could be interpreted a number of different ways.
My hunch is ‘interview’ = ‘job interview’.
And while not all the polys are hostile, some are.
For those criticizing his bring it up, if the poly question is along the lines of ‘have you ever committed a crime that you have not had to answer for’…you and the examiner hash out all the harmless cases – which hopefully covers everything. You talk about the pack of bubblegum stolen in the 5th grade, letting the air out of your English teachers tires in 9th grade so she’d be late and the final would be postponed an additional day, etc.
And then the question will come across as ‘discounting everything we have just discussed, have you ever committed…’
And no lawyers present on employment related polys of course.
In other words, he may not have seen it coming or figured he could beat it thru omission. It’s happened before, it will happen again.
The above is all speculation with some personal experience mixed in.
Whatever the facts are, revocation of a Silver Star awarded for a totally unrelated incident is complete nonsense.
So the good Major took out a bomb maker, an individual dedicated to the ‘craft’ of maiming and killing soldiers and civilians including women and children.
What, exactly, is the problem here?
Maybe the Major was working his own sting. Maybe he bragged to the CIA to find out where the leaks were in his organization. It’s when the story comes back around that you find out who you can trust to keep their yap shut.
And if he actually DID kill the bomb-maker…I think they ought to hang another medal on him for it.
1SG: “OK Major, it’s time for some foot locker counseling.”
MAJ: “Ummm, OK Top.”
1SG: “Do I look like I spin on my head?”
MAJ: “No.”
1SG: “OK, back to business. You Major have what we call a severe case of the dumb-ass.
You need to call your attorny and tell him you made all that sh!t up. Then you need to march your happy arse over to mental health and tell them you made the sh!t up. Then you need to respond to that GO leter of reprimand and tell the General that you made the sh!t up.”
MAJ: “OK.”
1SG: “If you do all that you might have half a chance of getting out of here with with your VA bennies.”
1SG: “That is all, carry on!”
excuse the typos… lol