Posted on 08/25/2006 2:43:32 PM PDT by george76
Nine veterans groups in California are criticizing 1st Lt. Ehren Watada for his decision to disobey deployment orders to Iraq.
Watada is trying to "make himself a martyr and a hero," said Robert M. Wada, a charter president of the Japanese American Korean War Veterans.
He said Watada's actions disrespect a legacy of military service by Japanese-American soldiers dating back to World War II.
"No Japanese-Americans did anything like that and that is why Japanese-Americans are so upset," Wada said.
"He is doing something that has never been done by Japanese-Americans."
The groups expressed their outrage at Watada in a public statement Monday.
Watada, 28, a graduate of Hawaii Pacific University and Kalani High School, refused to deploy to Iraq on June 22 with his unit based at Fort Lewis, Wash. He is now awaiting the finding of a hearing held last week that could lead to his court-martial on charges of conduct unbecoming of an officer, missing troop movement and contempt toward officials.
"No one refused to go just because they didn't believe in the war," Wada said. "We went to Korea, and we didn't know what the hell we were there for. ... But nobody refused to go."
But Bob Watada, the lieutenant's father, said his son is grateful for the veterans who fought in previous wars and he isn't dishonoring their legacy.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Nice try, pop. I'm sure the Constitution gives a specific out to someone who wants to renege on his oath. Just what Amendment is that, again?
"My son is doing the same thing, fighting for the Constitution, fighting to preserve civil liberties," Bob Watada said. "He is standing up for our Constitution and all the principles it stands for."
his civil liberties stopped the moment he joined. he's now subject to the UCMJ and should have the book thrown at him (making sure the book is securly affixed to an anvil)..
Put him in the brig, try him. He is refusing a direct order to report to his assignment.
It is just like desertion. Doubly bad, for as a commissioned officer, he has learned different.
"It is not for us to question why, but to do and die," said Ron Oba, the president of the 442nd Veteran's Club of Honolulu.
"That addresses the entire Watada case."
That is a matter of opinion. And the opinion of someone who raised a son so poorly interests me not at all.
Article 88 ?
Article 88: Disrespect Towards Officials
Article 94: Mutiny or Sedition
Anybody know his commissioning source?
Aspiring Democrat politician
You're probably spot-on.
I think the sticking point on Mutiny would be that he didn't do this in concert with other military members.
He is definitely going down for Art 88 Contempt, 87 Missing Movement, 133 Conduct Unbecoming. I don't know if you can charge him with Failure to Obey a General Order and Missing Movement, although his missing movement was definitely planned.
If the Army really wanted to go after him they would get the Feds to seize his computer and see if there is any hard evidence of this being planned from the time he decided to enter the military. If he entered via OCS and signed after the OIF commenced then we know this stunt was the whole reason for joining. Then you get him for Art. 83 Fraudulent Enlistment, 81 Conspiracy, 107 False Official Statement, and throw in 134 just for fun.
Darn, you're good.
His civil liberties may have stopped, his Constitutional rights did not.
Of course none of them apply in this case. No right to desert, no right to refuse to go. Heck there's not even any real question of any illegal orders. The Congress authorized the use of force, twice. Once right after 9-11 and again just before we took down Saddam's "forces". So he's just a left winger, from a wing family, trying to score left wing points.
The only question I have is why he ever joined and took a commission in the first place. Just to make such a point?
"Watada has said he did not apply for status as a conscientious objector because he isn't opposed to war in principle, just the war in Iraq."
ht to kcvl
Good point. I would also like to know of communications with the aclu, codepinko, moveon, commies-are-us, etc.
Article 83—Fraudulent enlistment, appointment, or separation (he was fully aware of Iraq BEFORE he accepted his appointment).
Article 88—Contempt toward officials (an individual charge every time he opens his mouth).
Article 87—Missing movement (could only be imposed once his unit leaves and he refuses to go with them).
Article 132—Frauds against the United States (he took his oath knowing full well that he could be assigned to Iraq...with no intention of complying).
Article 134—Disloyal statements (an additional charge every time he opens his mouth).
Article 134 - (False pretenses, obtaining services under)(again, he knew about the Iraq situation before accepting his appointment).
ht to CWOJackson
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.