Watada Mistrial Declared

[LoungeMachine]

Mistrial declared court-martial of war objector
Wed Feb 7, 2007 7:01pm ET

Mistrial declared in war objector court-martial
FORT LEWIS, Washington (Reuters) - A military judge declared a mistrial on Wednesday in the court-martial of a U.S. Army officer, who publicly refused to fight in Iraq and criticized the war.

First Lt. Ehren Watada had faced up to four years in prison and a dishonorable discharge if found guilty on a charge of missing movements for not deploying to Iraq and two charges of conduct unbecoming an officer for his criticism of the war.

Lt. Col. John Head, the military judge, declared a mistrial after throwing out a "stipulation of fact" -- an agreement over certain facts of the trial -- that forced the government to ask the judge for a mistrial instead of arguing its entire case again.

The judge said he could not accept the stipulation, because it amounts to a confession to the missing movements charge when Watada, 28, stated he is not guilty.

At the center of the dispute is the defense's assertion that Watada would not go to Iraq because he considered it an unlawful order that would make him party to war crimes and as result, it was not his duty to obey it.

"There is a material misunderstanding over what this stipulation is," said Head.

He set a new trial date for the week of March 19, but agreed the timing would be subject to change. Continued... http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2007-02-08T000024Z_01_N05474363_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-IRAQ-OFFICER.xml&WTmodLoc=PolNewsHome_C1_%5BFeed%5D-3

[FORD]

Excellent news. Hopefully it will lead to a larger question of the illegality of the entire fucking war.

[LoungeMachine]

Let's hope.

I'm sure the Neo-Con Chickenhawk Shitbags will try and make hay of this....

If they're not too busy with American Idol or Air America. :)

[hideyoursheep]

The stipulation of fact is - it IS an illegal war.

Mistrial is easier.

[LoungeMachine]

Imagine the precedent though.

Holy Batshit, Cheney....

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by FORD
Excellent news. Hopefully it will lead to a larger question of the illegality of the entire fucking war.

It may focus more attention on it, but this "mistrial" is just a postponement of the trial. A new trial date will be set.

[LoungeMachine]

March 19th.

What is our resident scum-sucking shyster's opinion?

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Imagine the precedent though.

Holy Batshit, Cheney....

This is exactly why the government will need to push very very hard on this one. With the amount of press this is getting, if Watada somehow avoids punishment, just imagine how many other soldiers will take it as an invitation to abandon their posts.

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
March 19th.

What is our resident scum-sucking shyster's opinion?


Midnight trial capped off with crucifixion on Faux Noise.

[knuckleboner]

if this is an illegal war then so was vietnam, panama, korea, iraq I, grenada, etc.


i didn't like the decision to go to...military action...here anymore than anybody else. i thought it was the wrong decision at the time and i'm even more sure today that the decision was wrong.

still, if this is declared, "illegal" under what authority can a president ever send troops into combat? only after congress has declared a state of war? eh, i'm not entirely sure the law backs that up. in which case, bush made an extremely bad decision, but this soldier's decision wasn't right, either.

[hideyoursheep]

I'd say it's his choice to do what he wants with his military career...

I mean,what are you gonna do? Send him NOW? What the hell for?

[Nickdfresh]

You know. I recall reading that once a German SS officer refused to execute Polish(?) civilians, and he was promptly court martialed and threatened with execution.

His argument was that he was violating German law, as they were signatories to the Geneva and Hague conventions. The Nazis saw that he was right, and realized that the trial would be a public relations disaster, so he was quietly set free (and later fought on the Allied side)....

Interesting...

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by hideyoursheep
it IS an illegal war.



What makes it illegal?

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
What makes it illegal?


The fact that those bastards LIED to the world and acted unilaterally.

LIED to our guys and used them for their own agenda.This is the first time the US used the military for a pre-emptive strike on another nation that Gen.Powell himself said.."was no longer a threat to the world or his neighbors" , months before the invasion.He acted against international law, alot like Iraq in '90 invading Kuwait, but for different "reasons".
This Lt. seems to think he would be following unlawful orders by participating in the Iraq theater.He requested to be sent to Afghanistan,but was denied,so this isn't an act of cowardess.

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by hideyoursheep
The fact that those bastards LIED to the world and acted unilaterally.



so you have 2 rationales why it's an illegal war. 1) that the administration lied about the reasons for starting it, and 2) that the U.S. acted unilaterally in it.


looking at #2 first, it doesn't matter. there is no requirement in U.S. law that we have some sort of international backing before undertaking military action. and whatever treaties and agreements we've signed do not state that the U.S. must adhere to international law, specifically, in order to get international approval before undertaking military action. so, the fact that NATO, or the U.N. or OPEC, or OAS didn't approve our action has no bearing on whether or not our actions are illegal from the U.S. standpoint.


#1: it's a bit more tenuous to say that if the rationale for going to war involved lies that means the war is definitively illegal, but what the hell, i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it is.

still, there's no proof that the administration lied. there is ample proof that they used evidence now found to be faulty at best, downright wrong at worst. and in all likelihood, the administration relied more on just those information sources it hoped would be true, rather than doing a more thorough analysis. but there's no evidence they lied.

now, is it POSSIBLE that the evidence of lies hasn't been uncovered yet? of course. but as of now, the evidence isn't there. so that's not really a reason.



the war may have been ill conceived (and that's putting it GENEROUSLY, i think) but i've yet to see anything that makes it illegal.

[scamper]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
This is exactly why the government will need to push very very hard on this one. With the amount of press this is getting, if Watada somehow avoids punishment, just imagine how many other soldiers will take it as an invitation to abandon their posts.

Soldiers don't get to decide their wars...end of story

[FORD]

Originally posted by scamper
Soldiers don't get to decide their wars...end of story

But they DO get to refuse illegal orders, and that's what he did.

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by FORD
But they DO get to refuse illegal orders, and that's what he did.

assuming the order was illegal...

(bad order? yes. illegal order?...eh...)

[scamper]

Originally posted by FORD
But they DO get to refuse illegal orders, and that's what he did.

Who makes the call? The soldiers? If that is the case we now have no armed services.

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
assuming the order was illegal...

(bad order? yes. illegal order?...eh...)

That's why this is going to be an intresting case.He's obviously onto something....otherwise it would have been closed.

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by FORD
But they DO get to refuse illegal orders, and that's what he did.

That's probably not always an option in the field,FORD.Sad,but true.

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
the war may have been ill conceived (and that's putting it GENEROUSLY, i think) but i've yet to see anything that makes it illegal.


I'm not JAG, 'bones, so I can't sew it up nice, but I do belive there is a stipulation somewhere that holds the president accountable for certain things that he cannot order military action without certain reasons, and stuff.
I don't know if it's in the constitution(which we were sworn to support and defend against all enemies,foriegn and domestic)or part of the UCMJ(that I purposely stayed the fuck out of)but there's an argument in there somewhere.

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by scamper
Soldiers don't get to decide their wars...end of story

And that's too fuckin bad for all those that volunteered after 9/11 and were used for Iraq!
Maybe we have a competent CIC,SOD, and a strategy,they don't have to lower the standards to meet recruitment requirements.
MAYBE Americans see a cause so great,they're turning them away @ the recruiter's office.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
so you have 2 rationales why it's an illegal war. 1) that the administration lied about the reasons for starting it, and 2) that the U.S. acted unilaterally in it.


looking at #2 first, it doesn't matter. there is no requirement in U.S. law that we have some sort of international backing before undertaking military action. and whatever treaties and agreements we've signed do not state that the U.S. must adhere to international law, specifically, in order to get international approval before undertaking military action. so, the fact that NATO, or the U.N. or OPEC, or OAS didn't approve our action has no bearing on whether or not our actions are illegal from the U.S. standpoint.


#1: it's a bit more tenuous to say that if the rationale for going to war involved lies that means the war is definitively illegal, but what the hell, i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it is.

still, there's no proof that the administration lied. there is ample proof that they used evidence now found to be faulty at best, downright wrong at worst. and in all likelihood, the administration relied more on just those information sources it hoped would be true, rather than doing a more thorough analysis. but there's no evidence they lied.

now, is it POSSIBLE that the evidence of lies hasn't been uncovered yet? of course. but as of now, the evidence isn't there. so that's not really a reason.



the war may have been ill conceived (and that's putting it GENEROUSLY, i think) but i've yet to see anything that makes it illegal.

We never declared war. The Congress allowed Bush to use "military force" as a "last resort."

There are clearly multiple contradictions and gray areas in many of the War rationales...

Not to mention that Bousche has tacked on the basis in legality of a number of completely unrelated, but highly illegal, programs relating of domestic spying on to the original resolution...

[FORD]

Watada's lawyer is claiming "double jeopardy", apparently, so the illegality of the orders might not be called into question after all. Unless the BCE tries to charge him with something else.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by FORD
Watada's lawyer is claiming "double jeopardy",

Does that mean all of his answers from the stand must be in the form of a question?

[scamper]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Does that mean all of his answers from the stand must be in the form of a question?

LMFAO