Posted on 07/07/2007 8:23:12 AM PDT by jazusamo
"The war in Iraq violates our democratic system of checks and balances," he said. "It usurps international treaties and conventions that by virtue of the Constitution become American law. The wholesale slaughter and mistreatment of the Iraqi people with only limited accountability is not only a terrible moral injustice, but a contradiction to the Army's own Law of Land Warfare. My participation would make me party to war crimes. My oath of office is to protect and defend America's laws and its people. By refusing unlawful orders for an illegal war, I fulfill that oath today."
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0815-32.htm.
("The wholesale slaughter and mistreatment of the Iraqi people with only limited accountability is not only a terrible moral injustice, but a contradiction to the Army's own Law of Land Warfare.") qualifies as a usable sound bite for the enemy, but does it legally rise to treason?
In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor. Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason
I don't see that Watada has willfully cooperated with the enemy.
He erred in describing the invasion and occupation as "wholesale slaughter", and Al Qaeda and Co can use it, but Watada has not shown me willful cooperation with them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehren_Watada
Counseling soldiers to stop fighting seems to cross a line - the line of mutiny?:
On September 15, the Army announced that it had preferred another charge against Watada of "conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman", based on remarks that he made at a Veterans for Peace convention. This brought the potential prison term faced by Watada to eight and one-half years in prison if convicted of all charges. Approximately six of these years would have been for statements that he made concerning the war rather than his refusal to deploy to Iraq; "missing movement" is normally punishable by two years. Keith (presiding investigative officer) justified the additional charge by asserting that "contempt for the President and (the) suggestion that US soldiers can stop the war simply by refusing to fight borders on mutiny and sedition."
His attorney should be disbarred for even suggesting “double jeopardy”. Clearly he has no idea what it actually means.
“On the issue of double jeopardy, Joe Piek, spokesman for Fort Lewis, argued[32] that the rules for courts-martial (MCM Rule 915(c))[33], allow the Army to try Watada again, on the theory that the mistrial is not a decision and that the mistrial was not due to prosecutorial misconduct. Others, including the military defense attorney assigned to Watada, as well as Kagan and Lobsenz, argued that “jeopardy” attached at the start of the presentation of evidence.[34] Rule 907(b)(2)(C) of the MCM states that jeopardy attaches at the “beginning of the presentation of evidence on the merits,” raising the possibility that jeopardy attached prior to the declaration of mistrial. Even if jeopardy attached, however, the issue then becomes whether Judge Head abused his discretion (MCM Rule 915(c)(2))[33], according to Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice at the American University Washington College of Law[32]. In the appeal, Kagan argued that Judge Head did indeed abuse his discretion[30], as did Seitz on the day the mistrial was declared[35].”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehren_Watada
You are not familiar with the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Counseling military members to disobey orders falls can be considered mutiny or treason.
Last time I checked it is illegal to try to coerce or cause another individual to break the law. Even if you're a civilian.
I am very disappointed that this administration did not seek to prosecute the anti-America groups (code pink, answer, etc) who encouraged soldiers to desert. In fact; during a protest, answer members marched with a banner that said “We will support our troops when they kill their officers.” So I have to ask you secretagent. Whose side are you on?
Mutiny and sedition by members of the Armed Forces (especially commisioned officers) is usually accompanied by death by hanging.
He is lucky to have such a trial IMHO.
Forgive me if I treat Wikipedia with a bit of skepticism.
I oppose all the "peace groups" that really just oppose freedom. A.N.S.W.E.R. comes to mind first, and obviously the group, whatever their name, that had the banner reading "We will support our troops when they shoot their officers."
I think Watada has allied himself with a "support group", I can't recall the name, that fell into my "I oppose" category.
Does the US military engage in "wholesale slaughter" in Iraq, as Watada contends? No, more like wholesale restraint of engaging in reprisals.
Did the US engage in war not in self defence or with the sanction of the UN Security Council? Clearly not in the second case and arguably so or not so in the first.
Does the UN Charter allow only for war meeting at least one of the above criteria, as Watada contends? I don't know.
Has the the US, as a signatory to the UN Charter, thereby violated the UN Charter if it did not act in self defense by invading Iraq? Perhaps.
Does a violation of the UN Charter automatically violate the US Constitution, as Watada and others maintain? Under their theory that treaties have an equal authority with the Constitution, yes. I don't like the sound of that, but if true, then it sounds like a good reason to withdraw from the UN.
I don't know exactly what you mean by "whose side are you on?", but hope this helps.
You are not familiar with the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Counseling military members to disobey orders falls can be considered mutiny or treason.
That sounds right, at least about mutiny. I still don't see the treason, which requires "willful cooperation with the enemy". Again, according to Keith, the presiding investigative officer: "(the) suggestion that US soldiers can stop the war simply by refusing to fight borders on mutiny and sedition." No mention of treason there.
Why hasn't the military charged Watada with mutiny? Perhaps because he wasn't "in the heat of battle". Most likely because they don't want to amplify his legal and moral claims.
Art. 94. (§ 894.) Mutiny or Sedition.
(a) Any person subject to this code (chapter) who—
(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concern with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;
(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or other disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition;
(3) fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.
(b) A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutiny
I read from the above that, literally, any disobedience of orders could qualify as mutiny. Obviously the military reserves mutiny charges only for extreme cases, though.
Mutiny and sedition by members of the Armed Forces (especially commisioned officers) is usually accompanied by death by hanging.
Examples?
Skepticism welcome here.
I thought we should strap him to the front of a Stryker.... “Let us know where the IEDs are.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.