Watada formally charged
posted at 11:50 am on July 6, 2006 by Bryan
Lt. Ehren Watada is a step closer to make little rocks out of big rocks at Leavenworth:
The U.S. Army filed three charges on Wednesday against an officer who refused to fight in Iraq due to objections over the legality of the war.
First Lt. Ehren Watada, who supporters say is the first commissioned U.S. officer to publicly refuse to serve in Iraq and face a military court, remained at Fort Lewis base in Washington state when his unit shipped out to Iraq on June 22.
Watada called the war and U.S. occupation of Iraq “illegal” and said participation would make him a party to war crimes.
And yet, he joined the Army after the invasion. He joined the infantry, the root word of which means “unable to speak,” hence, once you’ve volunteered you don’t get to pick and choose the wars you fight–you go where you’re assigned. And you don’t join an army at war only to declare that army’s main mission illegal and immoral, smearing your CINC along the way. That’s a crime. He should have looked into the law before joining up:
Watada’s lawyer said he expected the missing movement charge, but was somewhat surprised by the decision to charge the officer with contempt toward officials and conduct unbecoming an officer, because it raises free speech issues.
Dumb. Very dumb.
Update: My bad–Watada is field artillery, not infantry. Oak Leaf, who set me straight on that, speculates as to how the Watada case is likely to end. It’s a very interesting read.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
He will get a full Pardon the moment a Democrap is elected President…as well as pardoning the “Yellow Stained drawers” cowards that ran to Canada. Hell I wouldn’t be surprised if that Akbar dude gets a pardon too…(He’s that dirt-bag that threw grenades in his own officer’s tents, in prelude to our Advance into Iraq)
havok on July 6, 2006 at 12:06 PM
I sure hope that he gets more than a dishonorable discharge and a slap on the wrist.
docdave on July 6, 2006 at 12:07 PM
He will get a full Pardon the moment a Democrap is elected President
I guess we need to make sure that doesn’t happen.
docdave on July 6, 2006 at 12:09 PM
Another one who should have read Heinlein:
Enjoy your life in Leavenworth, Lt. Retarda. Hope your little left-wing publicity stunt was worth a life of hard labor and confinement.
thirteen28 on July 6, 2006 at 12:13 PM
He should get a minimum of 20 years..hard labor. I hope he gets stuck in a cell with a crazed ex sgt who did some real crime and not some fellow yellow bellied Cindy Sheehan types.
This crap needs to end now. It used to be a firing squad for these cowards. This is premeditated cowardice and a disgace to all real soldiers.
shooter on July 6, 2006 at 12:30 PM
I agree, I’ve mentioned elsewhere but I’ll repeat here: I think his whole enlistment was to get to this point. He wanted the national stage to protest the war.
I think though, that he may have underestimated the Army’s willingness to prosecute him. I think he expected his fifteen minutes of fame and then to walk aways from the military. I think the consequences of his actions will last a lot longer than the fifteen minutes he expected.
High Desert Wanderer on July 6, 2006 at 12:40 PM
What is Watada’s lawwwwyahhh trying to pull with this First Amendment stuff? The UCMJ provides clear speech guidelines. Furthermore, Garcetti v. Ceballos (link below) establishes what free speech in the workplace constitutes. Retarda’s fortunate to have not been charged with Misbehavior Before the Enemy (Article 99 UCMJ) which is punishable by death.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/04-473.pdf
Kid from Brooklyn on July 6, 2006 at 12:41 PM
Surely, Watada’s behavior meets the standard for “Misbehavior Before the Enemy”. See link below. Maybe I should take Allah up on the HTML advice.
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl99.htm
Kid from Brooklyn on July 6, 2006 at 12:44 PM
Uhhh… Free Speech issues??? He was essentialy inciting to mutiny by his example.
Romeo13 on July 6, 2006 at 1:07 PM
There is no free speech issue here, as far as I can tell by reading Article 88.
Slublog on July 6, 2006 at 1:09 PM
Clearly, there isn’t a “free speech issue” here. The whole argument, as I said earlier, is rendered moot by the UCMJ, and SCOTUS’ recent ruling on Garcetti v. Ceballos. That isn’t going to stop some lefty lawwwwwyaaahhhhhh from raising that straw man, as part of a “dissent” angle.
Kid from Brooklyn on July 6, 2006 at 1:23 PM
Ya know, in some countries they’d use a guy like watada to find mines and IEDs …. by walking on ‘em. He should feel lucky he’s only gonna get some jail time.
darwin on July 6, 2006 at 2:16 PM
A contract is a contract.
Honorable men and women who serve deserve the highest respect.
My tax dollars could have spent else where rather than on this scumbag.
I hope he goes away for a long time and when he’s out, lives with his shame forever. (He’ll probabaly wear it like a badge of honor)
Kini on July 6, 2006 at 2:20 PM
These charges may or may not just be the first. Prosecuters frequently start out with simple charges while looking at bigger ones. I sure hope they don’t air condition the cells at Leavenworth.
David on July 6, 2006 at 2:20 PM
Hey there Kid,
while I agree with you…. doesn’t misbehavior in front of the enemy mean you actually have to see the bad guys? Lt. wannabe never quite got that far…..
robo on July 6, 2006 at 2:22 PM
Kid from Brooklyn, Allahpundit is probably a little busy right now to give HTML advice, but maybe I could give some advice.
It looks like you know how to hyperlink, but not how to abreviate it. So you are actually about 90% there. So here are some steps to get you the rest of the way.
Let’s say I wanted to provide a link to a Cox & Forkum cartoon dated from June 28, 2006, called “Non-Negotiable”
1) I would first go to http://www.coxandforcum.com and find the cartoon by scrolling down utill I found it.
2) After I found the cartoon, I would then go to the bottom of the cartoon. At the bottom, I find the following text: “Posted by Forkum at 10:46 AM / Permalink”
3) The word “Permalink” is the key. I then click on “Permalink”. This provides the permanant web address to this specific cartoon, and not just the Cox & Forcum main web page.
4) At this point I go to the address bar at the top of the web page and I copy the web address.
5) I then navigate to the HotAir comment section and type the following message:
“Hey Kid from Brooklyn. Why don’t you look at this cartoon called “Non-Negotiable”?
6) I then highlight the words “Non-Negotiable” with my mouse/cursor. DON’T copy them, just highlight them
7) Leaving the words highligted, I then go to the “link” button on the HotAir comment section and click it.
8) When the window opens that says “Script Prompt: Enter the URL”, I clear out anything that is in that window already, such as a highlighted “http://” and paste the address to the cox & forcum cartoon. (What I paste this particular address, it looks like this “http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000877.html”)
9) After doing this, I press “OK”, and I should end up with this:
“Hey Kid from Brooklyn. Why don’t you look at this cartoon called “Non-Negotiable“?
And there you go. A cool looking hyperlink. As you start getting better and better at it, you will start including hyperlinks as part of your written banter and tounge in cheeck humor. Allahpundit is quite good at it. You don’t see it as much here, but when he was writting as Allah at his old web-sites, you would find yourself having to constantly click on words he had hyperlinked in order to get the joke he was making. (Which can be pretty cool if you have highspeed internet access. But if you are on an AOL dial-up account, you may find yourself unable to appreciate it. But that is a story for another day and I don’t feel like talking about it so quit asking questions and leave me alone!!! … Sorry. I got issues…)
Have fun with it. But not too much fun. For instance, if you had an annoying bible thumping co-worker, it probably wouldn’t be a good idea to send him an anonymous e-mail with a the words “Click here to receive your free biblical message from Billy Graham”, but instead of linking the words to Billy Graham’s website, you linked them to a XXX gay pornography site, well, that would be bad. Especially on a work computer. Just sayin’.
EFG on July 6, 2006 at 2:39 PM
As the investigation moves forward, I think a charge of mutiny is possible.
The Army is probably digging into all of his interviews, statements and speeches and if they find that he encouraged others to follow his lead, he’s in trouble.
Slublog on July 6, 2006 at 2:53 PM
Ok, let’s see how well I follow instructions (thanks,EFG)…
Robo, the statute is clear. Avoiding a deployment which would inevitably lead to engaging the enemy is the same as “running away”, and constitutes “cowardly conduct”.
Kid from Brooklyn on July 6, 2006 at 5:37 PM
I am not defending Watada. He is a disgrace. And he will get punished for it.
HOWEVER, there is not the slightest chance he will be charged for anything like Mutiny or Dessertion or Misbehavior in the Face of the Enemy or any of these other charges. None.
Some of the arguements for why he could be charged with some of these more serious offenses seem to take the form of “He did ‘A’, which could lead to ‘B’ which is similar to ‘C’ which could lead to ‘D’, so he could be charged with ‘D’.” Logically, this could work in real life, or a debate. But legally, it doesn’t work like that. The army isn’t going to charge him on a bunch of “what ifs” or “could have’s”. They are going to charge him and convict him with something that he has clearly violated. Like Missing Movement, which could be easily pled down to Disobeying Lawful Orders. The Contempt for Officials is almost certainly going to be dismissed, or pled down. Probably the same with Conduct Unbecoming an Officer. But there is no way, unless he does something else while waiting for his Court Martial, that he will be charged with Desertion or something else.
EFG on July 6, 2006 at 9:08 PM
A true man, especially a Military Officer, considered a “leader of men,” does not have the luxury of choosing duty assignments. You accept and go where you are needed.
This guy violated his oath and his uniform and deserves whatever he has coming.
We don’t need cowards standing behind our brave people instead of leading them.
LewWaters on July 7, 2006 at 1:46 AM
LewWaters:
I think you have summarized it perfectly there.
For shame, 1LT Watada. Where have you led your men? Nowhere. Who is leading them? The man who took your place was almost certainly junior to you. But I am sure he will lead and take care of his men better than the likes of you. Right now you are 1LT Watada. Soon I suspect you will be PVT Watada. And then it will just be Watada…
So it goes.
EFG on July 7, 2006 at 2:31 AM
Maybe John Murtha will bail him out.
gary on July 7, 2006 at 10:05 AM
Quite a few positive aspects came from this
1 – Matada’s not endangering others in Iraq.
2 – Even Americans ambivalent over the war are angered over this, so it helps build public resentment against the Left.
3 – Matada almost certainly did this for political reasons. Similar to flag-burners, this destroys any future he had at national politics.
Always good to look at the positive side.
Jason
Jason on July 7, 2006 at 11:02 AM
I don’t mind if he goes to prison for a long time, even if he becomes a cause celebre of the left. Traitors are shot during wartime. He may be fortunate to only have prison time ahead of him.
Doug on July 7, 2006 at 1:51 PM