******Please take action to support Lt. Ehren Watada********

[JeffR]

Email received this morning from www.ThankYouLt.org and wanted to share here.

Urgent Action Alert
Tell Fort Lewis: “No court-martial for Lt. Watada!”
August 28, 2006 - The future of Lt. Watada’s court-martial is now in Fort Lewis General’s hands. Your phone calls and letters today could make a difference. Forward this urgent action alert to friends.

On August 17, U.S. Army First Lieutenant Ehren Watada succeeded in placing the war on trial during an Article 32 pre-trial hearing in a military courtroom at Fort Lewis, Washington. The investigating officer recommended that Lt. Watada be referred to a general court martial on all charges – including five charges for political speech.

Fort Lewis’ Commanding General, Lieutenant General James Dubik makes the final decision on whether to proceed to court-martial on any or all charges. Take a moment today to phone and write Lt. Gen. James Dubik and respectfully request “no court martial for Lt. Watada.”

Use your own words, but a suggested message would be:

Along with tens of thousands, I support Lt. Ehren Watada’s right to refuse an illegal war. I ask that you not bring court martial proceedings against him. If there is a court-martial this fall, I look forward to visiting Ft. Lewis and letting you know how I feel in person.

Lt. Gen. Dubik can be reached via his aide Lt. Colonel Kamper at 253-967-0022, and/or call the Ft. Lewis switchboard at 253-967-1110.

Commanding General
Fort Lewis and I Corps
Lt. Gen. James M. Dubik
Bldg 2025 Stop 1
Fort Lewis WA 98433

When writing, please consider a handwritten letter on stationary (if available) posted via express or priority mail for additional impact and timely delivery. We expect that Lt. Gen. Dubik will issue his decision next week, but there is no required timeline. Do not delay and take action today. The contact address and phone numbers for Lt. Gen. Dubik may change over the course of this action alert, so check www.ThankYouLt.org for these and other updates.

For more, please go to: www.ThankYouLt.org

[helderheid]

1. First of many recommends

[EFerrari]

2. K&R

:kick:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

3. K&R

[Sailor for Warner]

4. He will be given his day in court and will likely be found guilty

I dont know the charges against him but he easily meets the specifcations for several violations inder the UCMJ. But I have already been blasted for my views on this issue.

[JeffR]

6. More on the charges:

On July 5, U.S. Army First Lt. Ehren K. Watada was formally charged with three articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: two counts of contempt towards officials (Article 88) - specifically President G. W. Bush, three counts of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman (Article 133), and one count of missing movement (Article 87). If convicted of all six charges by a general court-martial, Lt. Watada could be sentenced to over seven years in a military prison

I'm not military, but it seems to me that the Article 88 charges are ludicrously heavy-handed. The nature of the defense is going to be calling the legality of the invasion of Iraq into question.

As to the Article 133 & 87 charges, Lt. Watada looks to be very much at risk.

[Sailor for Warner]

8. He meets all the elements for Art 88

All the court has to do is determine if he indeed committed those acts and the defense has a decent case for 88, but almost no good defense exists to protect him from 133 and 87, you are correct there.

[JeffR]

9. If this snip from the website is correct, 88 is rarely used

Most previous prosecutions of Article 88 took place during the Civil War and World War I, and the last known prosecution was in 1965 (Howe vs. U.S.). Lt. Henry Howe protested U.S. foriegn policy during the Vietnam War.

Lt. Watada’s lawyer, Eric Seitz, said: "We expected the missing movement charge, but we are somewhat astounded by the contempt and conduct unbecoming charges. These additional charges open up the substance of Lt. Watada's statements for review and raise important First Amendment issues. We are delighted that the Army has given us the opportunity to litigate these questions."

I'm way too ignorant to understand how military justice squares or doesn't square with First Amendment rights; it's also possible that the attorney's statement is just bluster...?

[Sailor for Warner]

11. There are several limitations to ones

First Amendment rights when you become a member of the military (i.e. critisizing your superiors, direct partistan politiking, etc). These are pretty clearly delineated in the UCMJ and military case law, Lt Watada crossed those lines, hence the charges. His being an officer plays into it as well.

[JeffR]

12. Thanks for the info

I'm assuming Watada realized the stakes when he first announced he would refuse deployment. He strikes me as very brave. Given the state of the nation these days, I fear he will end up a martyr.

[Sailor for Warner]

13. I have mixed feelings on Watada

I hold fellow officers to a very high standard and I think that he did a gross injustice to the men under his command, I have been flamed quite hardily for saying that in the past, but its really is what is in my heart, I would never do that to the people I supervise and would expect the fullest of punishments if I did, no matter how justified I felt.

[JeffR]

14. I respect your opinion even if I disagree

I'd be surprised, though, if the lieutenant didn't expect full punishment when he made his stand.

From Watada's speech to the Veterans for Peace Convention, Seattle, August 14:

... neither Congress nor this administration has the authority to violate the prohibition against pre-emptive war - an American law that still stands today. This same administration uses us for rampant violations of time-tested laws banning torture and degradation of prisoners of war. Though the American soldier wants to do right, the illegitimacy of the occupation itself, the policies of this administration, and rules of engagement of desperate field commanders will ultimately force them to be party to war crimes. They must know some of these facts, if not all, in order to act.

Mark Twain once remarked, "Each man must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, which course is patriotic and which isn't. You cannot shirk this and be a man. To decide against your conviction is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country …" By this, each and every American soldier, marine, airman, and sailor is responsible for their choices and their actions. The freedom to choose is only one that we can deny ourselves.

The oath we take swears allegiance not to one man but to a document of principles and laws designed to protect the people. Enlisting in the military does not relinquish one's right to seek the truth - neither does it excuse one from rational thought nor the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. "I was only following orders" is never an excuse.

[Geoff R. Casavant]

15. No flame from this direction.

Let's see -- a sailor, with an obvious knowledge of military law, and living in Jax according to your bio. JAG or LN?

Either way, good to see you posting. Feel free to ping me with your real name if you wish. Mine's right there.

[Gregorian]

5. And it's not even a war!

This is enough to make us tear our hair out! President AWOL just skipped away from the National Guard. And this man, who on face value, appears to be an intelligent being, unlike Bunnypants, is being put through a gauntlet from hell. It's the dark ages all over again.

[Sailor for Warner]

7. Sigh...

Here are the UCMJ Articles he meets the elements of and what I would charge him under were I the Govt counsel...

Article 87 - Missing Movement
Article 88 - Contempt toward officials (No jokes please)
Article 90 - Willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer
Article 92 - Failure to obey order or regulation

The Argument can also be made for...
Article 133 - Conduct Unbecoming of and Officer and a Gentleman
Article 134 - General Article - Disloyal Statements

[Gregorian]

10. Oh, I'm sure your are correct.

But it's the fact that this act of aggression is illegal to begin with. Although I already know that doesn't hold up in this man's case.

I think everyone here is upset by the amount of water that is going under this bridge. Steal an election; Start an illegal war; etc. And then hold people accountable for the very thing the president is guilty of. And yes, you are right. On face value, this man will be punished. Unless he has keen lawyers who can put a legal perspective on this. That would take an act of magic.

[JeffR]

16. Kick - please consider calling and/or writing General Dubik

Thanks!

[leftchick]

17. when was war declared ?

I guess I missed that? Go Lt!!!!!

Thank you for this!

:)

[Dystopian]

18. We've been standing with Lt. Watada - k/r

[JeffR]

19. kick again

[Sailor for Warner]

20. Kick