Soldier on trial for Iraq refusal

[Liebling:-)))]

No he hasn't. He hasn't served in the military to other countries.

Yes, he have.

He would never face the death penalty only imprisonment.

Accord military, yes he knew that he may face the death penalty or imprisonment before he public refuse to go Iraq war. After his refusal, it says that he may face imprisonment.

Just one person's web page.

Ehren Watada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia? That's a joke!

If you disagree with those links then visit to google. There´re plenty.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Good post jiro.

Yet do you think she is actually reading anything we say? Hardly. :roll:

Of course I do understand.. .I take BOTH sides to real life experience and websites, not one side, just websites. I know soliders and US civillians experience in real life than I know websites. You can beleive websites what you want. You as former lawyer must have known it. :roll:

Jiro123, yes I know the law but the Government ignored their own law sometimes. Yes, the links could be deny sometimes. You can beleive what you want and think Government follow the law correct. Really truth, it could be manpiulate sometimes.

 

[Jiro]

Of course I do understand.. .I take BOTH sides to real life experience and websites, not one side, just websites. I know soliders and US civillians experience in real life than I know websites. You can beleive websites what you want. You as former lawyer must have known it. :roll:

personal experience and personal knowledge cannot be used to present the case in debate. That testimony is usually weak if there's no evidence to back it up. Byrdie as the former lawyer knows this already and so do all lawyers. in court - byrdie would be using previous cases which is called "a legal precedent" for stronger support and a rock-solid witness's testimony - the more, the better especially if overwhelming number of the testimonies are told by high-level officials.

Jiro123, yes I know the law but the Government ignored their own law sometimes. Yes, the links could be deny sometimes. You can beleive what you want and think Government follow the law correct. Really truth, it could be manpiulate sometimes.

No. You confuse "ignoring their own law" with Executive Orders or special bills passed by Congress (ie. Patriot Acts). The President can temporarily issue an order that overrides the law such as Martial Law.


I've repeatedly told you to carefully choose your words. If you want to make a statement like "ignored their own law sometimes" - then you need to prove it. Otherwise it makes you look like - a some conspiracy theorist or a reporter for tabloid newspaper.

 

[jenni-m]

Yup.

Anyway... it is true that he shouldn't have signed up, legally, if he wasn't willing to follow orders.

However, dissent happens. The US would not be it's own country right now, if dissent did not happen. We would still be under England. Within the system itself, you have to pay for dissent, or mutiny, because doing it frivolously breaks cohesion and unity... if you are going to mutiny, you need to make damn sure it is worth going to prison or possibly dying for.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

personal experience and personal knowledge cannot be used to present the case in debate.

Yes, we can because we shares their own experience to know what and how it doing and can say something difference. You can´t ignore someone´s experience to beleive in websites only. Each website have different knowledge and opinion, some Fact and some opinion. I beleive in real life experience situation and original than the medias from any websites written. I am not saying that website is false but they write their own view, knowledge and opinion. I often see 3 or 4 websites to against each other over "fact". I have one Ader who PMed me about his/her experience to work for US Army as well. She/He rather to share real life experience with me privacy than public post because her/his experiences had been denied in the past and beleive websites more than her/his experiences. I do not have to tell everything what I know them in real life but share some. Anyone need to open their mind to listen both side, not one side. I would not post if I don´t have any experiences.

That testimony is usually weak if there's no evidence to back it up. Byrdie as the former lawyer knows this already and so do all lawyers. in court - byrdie would be using previous cases which is called "a legal precedent" for stronger support and a rock-solid witness's testimony - the more, the better especially if overwhelming number of the testimonies are told by high-level officials.

We also have our own experience to have lawyers in the past. :roll: As lawyer, he/she listen both side to the law and client before advise/recommend/explain to clients. Of course lawyer can write a letter to miltary or contracter to ask something for clarify and deal. If Miltary or contractor agreed then add something in writing on the contract. I can ask contracter to add something to fix the agreement contract... It´s my experience. For Brylie, he as former lawyer should take both sides to listen, not one side but he took only one side...

No. You confuse "ignoring their own law" with Executive Orders or special bills passed by Congress (ie. Patriot Acts). The President can temporarily issue an order that overrides the law such as Martial Law.

No you don´t understand... The fact, they can ignore the law if they wish. I am not saying that the law could be ignore all the time but sometimes. one ADer and I know real life experience because we both work for US Army.

I've repeatedly told you to carefully choose your words. If you want to make a statement like "ignored their own law sometimes" - then you need to prove it. .

I am sorry that you don´t want to see but it´s really truth that we all including Government, Employer, doctor, etc ignore/violate/obey the law. Yes it´s a fact.

Otherwise it makes you look like - a some conspiracy theorist or a reporter for tabloid newspaper

Very interesting, you quoted to insult me as but , therorist, reporter, tabloid, etc. and said nothing to immaturity posts to insult soliders as coward, chicken, etc. I´m very disappoint in you. It´s bad if you don´t like or refuse to open your mind to see both sides to real life experiences and websites. Don´t you know that there´re freedom of speech and use good common sense in AllDeaf Forum Rules?

 

[jenni-m]

Very interesting, you quoted to insult me as but , therorist, reporter, tabloid, etc. and said nothing to immaturity posts to insult soliders as coward, chicken, etc. I´m very disappoint in you. It´s bad if you don´t like or refuse to open your mind to see both sides to real life experiences and websites. Don´t you know that there´re freedom of speech and use good common sense in AllDeaf Forum Rules?

There is a big difference between something that you FEEL is insulting and something that actually is insulting.

I am sorry that you don´t want to see but it´s really truth that we all including Government, Employer, doctor, etc ignore/violate/obey the law. Yes it´s a fact.

I think you need to see that ignoring the law is the same as breaking the law, which is entirely irrelevant here, because as jiro pointed out rather plainly for you, this is about executive order, which is ALLOWED and has nothing to do with breaking laws.

You can call something illegal all you want, and that is fine. The system, however, does not. Just because you feel something is illegal, doesn't make it illegal, unless you can bring up something that is in policy right now to prove it.

You can't decide on your own what 'illegal' means, and then expect it to be binding to others.

 

[Jiro]

Yes, we can because we shares their own experience to know what and how it doing and can say something difference. You can´t ignore someone´s experience to beleive in websites only. Each website have different knowledge and opinion, some Fact and some opinion. I beleive in real life experience situation and original than the medias from any websites written. I am not saying that website is false but they write their own view, knowledge and opinion. I often see 3 or 4 websites to against each other over "fact". I have one Ader who PMed me about his/her experience to work for US Army as well. She/He rather to share real life experience with me privacy than public post because her/his experiences had been denied in the past and beleive websites more than her/his experiences. I do not have to tell everything what I know them in real life but share some. Anyone need to open their mind to listen both side, not one side. I would not post if I don´t have any experiences.

OK - 3-4 sites against each other over "fact" but guess who usually wins? The one with substantial amount of facts/statistics/proofs/LAWS that actually back it up. Most of time - "protesters" sites do not win the validity test. All they rely on is victims' words and they cloud their view/judgment with emotions and sympathy.

We also have our own experience to have lawyers in the past. :roll: As lawyer, he/she listen both side to the law and client before advise/recommend/explain to clients. Of course lawyer can write a letter to miltary or contracter to ask something for clarify and deal. If Miltary or contractor agreed then add something in writing on the contract. I can ask contracter to add something to fix the agreement contract... It´s my experience. For Brylie, he as former lawyer should take both sides to listen, not one side but he took only one side...

Byrdie has seen both side and concluded Lt. Watada is guilty of charges. why? because he violated the contract. plain and simple. Did you not read my links to Enlistment Contract and 2 sites explaining how to read that contract? I even went extra measure to show you how and why soldiers cannot leave at anytime they want. But you choose to ignore the FACTS and you choose to use your personal experience, soldiers' misery, etc. as the FACTS. Are you calling White House, Congress, Pentagon and the laws a LIAR?

I'll repost again -

1. Enlistment Contract
2. How to Read an Enlistment Contract
3. Understanding Your Enlistment Contract for the Military

You quoted "Of course lawyer can write a letter to miltary or contracter to ask something for clarify and deal. If Miltary or contractor agreed then add something in writing on the contract."
No - Not at all. If you do not agree to military contract or want something added, NOT GONNA HAPPEN. The Enlistment Contract is AS IS. You have 2 simple choices - sign it or leave. Read #3 link - "Technically, the military owns you for the eight years subsequent to signing your contract" and "This is a decision that will impact the next eight years of your life, and is not to be taken lightly." I do not understand why do you keep using your lawyer example. That is none of my concern and soldiers' concerns. Your case does not apply to the soldiers. You are a CIVILIAN! You are not a military personnel. As a civilian - you are free to adjust the contract with anyone. For soldiers - NO - the contract is AS IS. 2 choices - SIGN IT or LEAVE


I highly highly suggest you to show this contract to your lawyer friend and then come back to me - show me where in the contract and laws (such as Stop Order Policy) that the government has violated.

No you don´t understand... The fact, they can ignore the law if they wish. I am not saying that the law could be ignore all the time but sometimes. one ADer and I know real life experience because we both work for US Army. I am sorry that you don´t want to see but it´s really truth that we all including Government, Employer, doctor, etc ignore/violate/obey the law. Yes it´s a fact.

I understand perfectly. I wonder if you do. By saying "they CAN ignore the law if they wish" is a serious accusation. What's even worse is you made accusation without evidence. Yes it's a well-known fact that we all break the laws but what will happen to us if we get caught? WE GET PUNISHED. Plain and simple. Yes I drove above the speed limit. Yes the accounting firm fudged Enron's bank account. Yes the high-ranking officer has sexual relationship with the lower-ranking officer. Yes the doctor will double-charge you or add couple of things that you never had to your bill. But what will happen to us if we're brought to court? WE GET PUNISHED!

Very interesting, you quoted to insult me as but , therorist, reporter, tabloid, etc. and said nothing to immaturity posts to insult soliders as coward, chicken, etc. I´m very disappoint in you. It´s bad if you don´t like or refuse to open your mind to see both sides to real life experiences and websites. Don´t you know that there´re freedom of speech and use good common sense in AllDeaf Forum Rules?

Do you only read only selective words in a complete sentence? I did not insult you directly or indirectly. You ignored my complete sentence that is in no way, shape, form any kind of insult - I said "If you want to make a statement like "ignored their own law sometimes" - then you need to prove it. Otherwise it makes you look like - a some conspiracy theorist or a reporter for tabloid newspaper."

TRY TO BE OBJECTIVE! ​

**Please do not reply to my post if your answers are still same. Getting tired of restating my same answers in 10 different ways**

 

[Jiro]

Yes, he have.

Re-read Lt. Watada's military background. He has never served in any military conflict once. He only served at office in Korea and Washington. When he received an order to go to Iraq (even offered as desk job), looks like he got all scared and panicky. What a coward. SHAME ON HIM. This is not about Iraq War being illegal. that's just a smoke screen to cover his cowardice.

 

[Reba]

It's time for LT Watada to be punished and discharged. No one wants him sent to their command now, even if they could force him. No one in a combat situation wants his backup to be someone that could turn and run. No one would even want to work for him in a non-combat office situation because there would be no respect or trust present. LT Watada is now useless to the military, and must be discharged--BCD or Dishonorable (meaning he will be ineligible for VA benefits). He also must pay back all the money he got from the military for his education. That's a common requirement.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

There is a big difference between something that you FEEL is insulting and something that actually is insulting.

No, those word, you use to insult me.

I think you need to see that ignoring the law is the same as breaking the law, which is entirely irrelevant here, because as jiro pointed out rather plainly for you, this is about executive order, which is ALLOWED and has nothing to do with breaking laws.

You can call something illegal all you want, and that is fine. The system, however, does not. Just because you feel something is illegal, doesn't make it illegal, unless you can bring up something that is in policy right now to prove it.

You can't decide on your own what 'illegal' means, and then expect it to be binding to others.

Whatever, you can say anything what you want. I do not expect you to agree with me or give me right. I speak out of my experience to compare with websites, that´s it. I state in general way that we all are human being who make mistakes, illegal, etc. No matter either you try to convince me because we see differently POV. It´s our decision to agree to disagree on something.

 

[Byrdie714]

OK - 3-4 sites against each other over "fact" but guess who usually wins? The one with substantial amount of facts/statistics/proofs/LAWS that actually back it up. Most of time - "protesters" sites do not win the validity test. All they rely on is victims' words and they cloud their view/judgment with emotions and sympathy.


Byrdie has seen both side and concluded Lt. Watada is guilty of charges. why? because he violated the contract. plain and simple. Did you not read my links to Enlistment Contract and 2 sites explaining how to read that contract? I even went extra measure to show you how and why soldiers cannot leave at anytime they want. But you choose to ignore the FACTS and you choose to use your personal experience, soldiers' misery, etc. as the FACTS. Are you calling White House, Congress, Pentagon and the laws a LIAR?

I'll repost again -
You quoted "Of course lawyer can write a letter to miltary or contracter to ask something for clarify and deal. If Miltary or contractor agreed then add something in writing on the contract."
No - Not at all. If you do not agree to military contract or want something added, NOT GONNA HAPPEN. The Enlistment Contract is AS IS. You have 2 simple choices - sign it or leave. Read #3 link - "Technically, the military owns you for the eight years subsequent to signing your contract" and "This is a decision that will impact the next eight years of your life, and is not to be taken lightly." I do not understand why do you keep using your lawyer example. That is none of my concern and soldiers' concerns. Your case does not apply to the soldiers. You are a CIVILIAN! You are not a military personnel. As a civilian - you are free to adjust the contract with anyone. For soldiers - NO - the contract is AS IS. 2 choices - SIGN IT or LEAVE


I highly highly suggest you to show this contract to your lawyer friend and then come back to me - show me where in the contract and laws (such as Stop Order Policy) that the government has violated.


I understand perfectly. I wonder if you do. By saying "they CAN ignore the law if they wish" is a serious accusation. What's even worse is you made accusation without evidence. Yes it's a well-known fact that we all break the laws but what will happen to us if we get caught? WE GET PUNISHED. Plain and simple. Yes I drove above the speed limit. Yes the accounting firm fudged Enron's bank account. Yes the high-ranking officer has sexual relationship with the lower-ranking officer. Yes the doctor will double-charge you or add couple of things that you never had to your bill. But what will happen to us if we're brought to court? WE GET PUNISHED!


Do you only read only selective words in a complete sentence? I did not insult you directly or indirectly. You ignored my complete sentence that is in no way, shape, form any kind of insult - I said "If you want to make a statement like "ignored their own law sometimes" - then you need to prove it. Otherwise it makes you look like - a some conspiracy theorist or a reporter for tabloid newspaper."

TRY TO BE OBJECTIVE! ​

**Please do not reply to my post if your answers are still same. Getting tired of restating my same answers in 10 different ways**

Best said.

I don't know why we are continuing to debate with this individual as all she does flame anti-American sentiments, troll the boards, and inflame individuals due to political differences.

I get the impression she isn't in it for the debate, just to prove that she is right and everyone else is wrong. :roll:

 

[Liebling:-)))]

OK - 3-4 sites against each other over "fact" but guess who usually wins? The one with substantial amount of facts/statistics/proofs/LAWS that actually back it up. Most of time - "protesters" sites do not win the validity test. All they rely on is victims' words and they cloud their view/judgment with emotions and sympathy.

Each person is different. I rather to look at both side, not one side. If I see he did something for no reason then I would not support him because he violate the law but he has a good reason to point out then I support him.

Byrdie has seen both side and concluded Lt. Watada is guilty of charges. why? because he violated the contract. plain and simple.

But Walata´s lawyer is on his side after read his contract and know something wrong. I have re-read and saw the point why Walata reject.

Did you not read my links to Enlistment Contract and 2 sites explaining how to read that contract? I even went extra measure to show you how and why soldiers cannot leave at anytime they want. But you choose to ignore the FACTS and you choose to use your personal experience, soldiers' misery, etc. as the FACTS. Are you calling White House, Congress, Pentagon and the laws a LIAR?

No, it´s not what I am trying to explain/say. Yes I have read and save your link. I do not say anything that you are wrong but I want to say the problem is soliders beleive in their employer´s word out of mouth before they sign which they thought they trust their employer. What I say it´s manpilutation what he/she made toward soliders. What employer did is ignore the law because they are supposed to correct solider´s questions. Yes, they were being advised to see the lawyer if they doubt employer´s word. The lawyer will explain correctly what he/she read the contract if the solider want to question. It´s bad if they already signed.

No - Not at all. If you do not agree to military contract or want something added, NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

Yes, they can if they want to. I gave my contract to my lawyer for over change work time. He wrote a letter to my Employer and they agree to add something on my employee agreement contract. My hubby does the same as well last January. Our employer see no problem for that because we did not sue our employer but want our contract to be safety. We also have no problem if our employer say no and stick our work time. It does the same with my house as well. We deal each other until we agree then add on agreement contract then we sign. The miltary´s law remain unchanged but for a solider, they can add for a solider with miltary´s permisson.

The Enlistment Contract is AS IS. You have 2 simple choices - sign it or leave. Read #3 link - "Technically, the military owns you for the eight years subsequent to signing your contract" and "This is a decision that will impact the next eight years of your life, and is not to be taken lightly." I do not understand why do you keep using your lawyer example. That is none of my concern and soldiers' concerns. Your case does not apply to the soldiers. You are a CIVILIAN! You are not a military personnel. As a civilian - you are free to adjust the contract with anyone. For soldiers - NO - the contract is AS IS. 2 choices - SIGN IT or LEAVE

I tried to say that IF soliders doubt they understand the contract then check with lawyer until they convince and then agree or not. If they disagree then not sign. You & I said the same thing in previous posts.

I highly highly suggest you to show this contract to your lawyer friend and then come back to me - show me where in the contract and laws (such as Stop Order Policy) that the government has violated.

I never said that Government violated the Stop Order Policy. I would not like to repeat it.

I understand perfectly. I wonder if you do. By saying "they CAN ignore the law if they wish" is a serious accusation. What's even worse is you made accusation without evidence. Yes it's a well-known fact that we all break the laws but what will happen to us if we get caught? WE GET PUNISHED. Plain and simple. Yes I drove above the speed limit. Yes the accounting firm fudged Enron's bank account. Yes the high-ranking officer has sexual relationship with the lower-ranking officer. Yes the doctor will double-charge you or add couple of things that you never had to your bill. But what will happen to us if we're brought to court? WE GET PUNISHED!

I would suggest you to check MANY threads including links to see yourself etc. That´s how I learn and agree that the law could be ignore SOMETIMES.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Best said.

I don't know why we are continuing to debate with this individual as all she does flame anti-American sentiments, troll the boards, and inflame individuals due to political differences.

I get the impression she isn't in it for the debate, just to prove that she is right and everyone else is wrong. :roll:

Interesting, you can assume what you want. You really have no idea what you are saying. :roll:

 

[Jiro]

Whatever, you can say anything what you want. I do not expect you to agree with me or give me right. I speak out of my experience to compare with websites, that´s it. I state in general way that we all are human being who make mistakes, illegal, etc. No matter either you try to convince me because we see differently POV. It´s our decision to agree to disagree on something.

That's perfectly fine to speak out your concern - FREE SPEECH! Yes Yes. I have no problem with that. But you went too far by trying to correct us - calling Iraq War as illegal war, defending Lt. Watada, proving that he's right, and using some protesters' overzealous sites & your personal experience as "facts" - not "both sides."

What's worse is you called our government a LIAR and yet you work for them & get paid by our government. :roll: <-- ***You do not have to respond to that. I already know what you're going to say. I'm just saying it out - Free Speech, remember?

 

[Liebling:-)))]

That's perfectly fine to speak out your concern - FREE SPEECH! Yes Yes. I have no problem with that. But you went too far by trying to correct us - calling Iraq War as illegal war, defending Lt. Watada, proving that he's right, and using some protesters' overzealous sites & your personal experience as "facts" - not "both sides."

What's worse is you called our government a LIAR and yet you work for them & get paid by our government. :roll: <-- ***You do not have to respond to that. I already know what you're going to say. I'm just saying it out - Free Speech, remember?

No, I am not here to correct you but firm your post for try to deny my post.

What I say about Lt. Watada is my decision. It´s my decision to agree with his reason. Yes I agree that Iraq War is an illegal is my decision. If you agree something different then is your decision. You can convince me if you like to ... I might agree with you or not. What I want to agree or disagree is my decision.

Can you show me where I call your government a liar? I do not see anything but speak generally that the law could be ignore SOMETIMES which I mean we all including Government. Don´t take my post personal when I see different as you. I do not take your post personal when you negative about our Government including Bush... Do I am not allow to say anything negative about your Government because I am not an American? You allow to say anything negative about your Government because you are American? Do I understand you correctly?


And I stand what I experience is the fact, not myth.

 

[Byrdie714]

Interesting, you can assume what you want. You really have no idea what you are saying. :roll:

Ain't that the pot calling the kettle black!

 

[Byrdie714]

No, I am not here to correct you but firm your post for try to deny my post.

What I say about Lt. Watada is my decision. It´s my decision to agree with his reason. Yes I agree that Iraq War is an illegal is my decision. If you agree something different then is your decision. You can convince me if you like to ... I might agree with you or not. What I want to agree or disagree is my decision.

Can you show me where I call your government a liar? I do not see anything but speak generally that the law could be ignore SOMETIMES which I mean we all including Government. Don´t take my post personal when I see different as you. I do not take your post personal when you negative about our Government including Bush... Do I am not allow to say anything negative about your Government because I am not an American? You allow to say anything negative about your Government because you are American? Do I understand you correctly?


And I stand what I experience is the fact, not myth.

The bold that is highlighted in the above post just does not make sense!

 

[Reba]

We also have our own experience to have lawyers in the past. :roll: As lawyer, he/she listen both side to the law and client before advise/recommend/explain to clients. Of course lawyer can write a letter to miltary or contracter to ask something for clarify and deal. If Miltary or contractor agreed then add something in writing on the contract. I can ask contracter to add something to fix the agreement contract... It´s my experience.

An American military enlistment or commissioning contract is not the same as a civilian employment contract or even a military business contract. Whatever you experienced with your contracts, it is not the same as the contract that Watada signed. Military people can't use lawyers to negotiate or change contracts before signing. They either take it or leave it.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

An American military enlistment or commissioning contract is not the same as a civilian employment contract or even a military business contract. Whatever you experienced with your contracts, it is not the same as the contract that Watada signed. Military people can't use lawyers to negotiate or change contracts before signing. They either take it or leave it.

Correct, we have different agreement contracts. It's also correct that US/LN civilian employees and military agreement contract are not same as well.

No, any agreement contracts cannot be change but our negotiate can only if employer/military agrees. We have to stick with agreement contract if employer or military said no to negotiate. Yes some military people use lawyer to convince what it written in contract if they doubt to trust their employer. If they agree with negotiate then add in writing, never use the negotiate out of their mouth.

I admire Watada for stand up for his own rights because he did not desert or run away and hide from his decision when he knew what the consequences is about when he refuse to deploy to Iraq War. That's bravey.

 

[Liza]

Liebling, are you talking about soldiers being unduly pressured into serving the army longer than their contract? No one can allow this to happen if they dont want to, no matter how much pressure is used.. unless they are being threatened. Then that is a different story!

Hate to say it but soldiers who signed up have to follow orders or get themselves discharged in some manner. Changes need to come from the top of chain, very hard in the lower chains. Oh yes, changes very much needed.