Shek

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...logger-ON.html

Blogger punished by Arizona National Guard

Joseph R. Chenelly
Army Times
Jul. 29, 2005 05:30 PM

An Arizona National Guardsmen who had been openly critical of the war in Iraq on his Web log, has been punished for violating operational security and for 11 counts of disobeying orders, according to Multinational Coalition Force - Iraq.

Spc. Leonard A. Clark was busted down one rank to private first class, fined $820 per month for two months, and sentenced to 45 days restriction and 45 days of extra duty. The restriction and extra duty were suspended for five months.

In an unusual move, MCF-Iraq released the details of Clark's Article 15, which is nonjudicial punishment.

In response to a query by a reporter with National Public Radio, MCF-Iraq public affairs released a written statement saying that Clark had been found guilty of 11 specifications of Article 92, failure to obey an order, and two counts of Article 134, reckless endangerment.

Clark violated Article 92 by "releasing classified information regarding unit soldiers and convoys being attacked or hit by an improvised explosive devices on various dates, discussing troop movements on various dates," according to the statement. He also was found to have released tactics, techniques, procedures and rules of engagement, MCF-Iraq said.

The two Article 134 specifications had to do with releasing specific sensitive information "that the enemy forces could foreseeably access . . . such that with that information it was likely that the enemy forces could cause death or serious bodily harm to U.S. forces engaged in the same or similar mission," the statement said.

Clark and his site's Webmaster did not return several e-mails and phone calls seeking comment.

It is unclear what information actually was put online. Clark's blog has been purged of all past posts. An entry claiming not to be on behalf of Clark and offering links to articles about Clark remains on the site.

In civilian life, Clark is a kindergarten teacher, activist and perennial candidate for public office. In the Guard, he is a member of the 860th Military Police Company. The Arizona Republic reported that Clark, a Democrat, filed papers to run for the U.S. Senate seat held by Republican Jon Kyl. Clark previously ran for the Arizona House of Representatives and state Senate.

Typically, Army officials cite privacy rights and will not release nonjudicial punitive proceedings because the practice is restricted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Col. Bill Buckner, the chief of public affairs for Multi-National Corps-Iraq, acknowledged Article 15 information is not normally released but said it often is released when a request is filed under the Freedom of Information Act. Buckner said the decision was made to release the information without an FOIA request in part because of allegations Clark was making in the media.

Clark's wife told The Republic that he told her he was arrested for "having a big mouth about his politics."

In a post on his site July 5, Clark responded to questions about a report that he is being investigated for his writings: "Folks, I have decided to write you this email in response to those who are wondering in their own views why I am apparently violating the 'rules.' Since I don't have much time here is the gist of it: I believe American soldiers (my brothers and sisters) are being killed needlessy [sic] over here in this lie we call 'the Occupation of Iraq.' "

Clark is the first known case of a blogger getting in trouble since a policy went into effect in April that requires all Defense Department personnel blogging from Iraq to register their sites with their commands.

Shek

Private First Class Leonard Clark Press Release

On July 19, 2005, Lieutenant Colonel James F. Switzer, Commander, 504th Military Police Battalion, 42nd Military Police Brigade, Multi-National Corps-Iraq, notified Specialist Leonard A. Clark, 860th Military Police Company, of his intent to dispose of alleged misconduct under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

After consulting with a Trial Defense Counsel, a military defense lawyer, Specialist Clark elected to accept disposition of the alleged offense using Article 15 proceedings. Specifically, Specialist Clark was charged under Article 15 with the following violations of the UCMJ:

Article 92 (Failure to obey order), 11 specifications; by releasing classified information regarding unit soldiers and convoys being attacked or hit by an improvised explosive devices on various dates, discussing troop movements on various dates, releasing Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures and Rules of Engagement used by the unit on various dates, in violation of a lawful general order prohibiting the release of such information.

Article 134 (Reckless endangerment), 2 specifications; by releasing specific information, on various dates regarding Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures and Rules of Engagement used by his unit and encouraging its widespread publication, such that the enemy forces could foreseeably access the information, such that with that information it was likely that the enemy forces could cause death or serious bodily harm to U.S. forces engaged in the same or similar mission.

On July 19, 2005, at a hearing before Lieutenant Colonel Switzer, Specialist Clark was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of all Specifications. As a result, Specialist Clark received the following punishment:

Reduction to Private First Class (E-3), forfeiture of $820 per month for two months, 45 days restriction, and 45 days of extra duty. Both the restriction and extra duty were suspended for five months.

Private First Class Clark has appeal rights, but he has chosen not to exercise those rights.

highsea

Assh*le. He should have got a dishonarable discharge.

__________________
My baby called me up. She said- Why don't you ever take me out? Pick me up in your brand new car....You shake the short change from the old fruit jar...

Leader

One has to wonder why he joined the army. He obviously doesn’t follow orders very well and he seems to be a hardcore leftist, most of whom despise the military.

__________________

Bluesman

Probably joined just to be the flysh!t in the sugar bowl. Wants to draw attention to himself, prove what an iconoclast he is, not a lemming, not one of the sheeple.

It was almost certainly NOT for the purpose of defending the country, not with behavior like his.

__________________
"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory."
- George Orwell

LUND

'most' people who join the military tend to come from the underclass. For most, the military is the only way out of a life of deprivation and poverty.

There are many deserters now, just like during Vietnam. There are hundreds living in Canada.

Leader

Stats please.

Well that's BS. I'm 19, and I make more then enough to support myself without any help from anyone. The military is a way out. Not the only way.

The parallel is absurd.

So your country is sheltering traitors and cowards. I'm so happy for you.

Bluesman

LUND, do you know why we all look forward to your posts so much?

Because facts seem to bore you, and you don't hold accuracy in any sort of esteem. You just kind of make stuff up.

You really have no idea about which class 'most' of the American military comes from. You have no idea why they joined, or what their circumstances were before they joined.

But keep posting, because your lies are the best weapon that you've placed in your opponents' hands, a blunt instrument to beat to death your point-of-view, your cause, your ambitions for the outcomes of the great issues of the day.

Go ahead and try to change some minds, gather some votes, influence events. My side needs as much help as you can contribute to the damage you do to your own side.

Shek

This dude is 40 years old and has run for political office before. You can't do that if you are poor. It costs $$$ to put together a political campaign, even at the local level.

Next, the demographics of the US Army are inclusive of the middle 50% of America. The top 25% and the bottom 25% of Americans in terms of household income are an extreme minority. Thus, the US Army is not made up of the underclass.

Finally, the number of deserters is very small. Based on the deportation hearings from Canada, I'd put the number of deserters living in Canada at under 10. That number will quickly decrease when Hinzman's appeal is denied; however, the population of military inmates at the Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth will increase by the same number.

LUND

U.S. deserter fears 'social persecution'


By MARINA JIMÉNEZ, Globe and Mail (Toronto), 9 December 2004
A U.S. Army deserter seeking asylum in Canada said he will face ''social persecution'' if he is sent back to the United States and believes he is within his legal right to refuse to fight in the Iraqi war because he does not want to commit atrocities.

As his three-day refugee hearing wrapped up yesterday, Jeremy Hinzman told reporters he believes his case went well and is hopeful Canada will declare him a refugee.

"We established the atrocities are not merely anomalous but part of a system, and that as an infantryman, I could have taken part in them," said the 26-year-old former paratrooper, who could be imprisoned in the United States for desertion. "It wouldn't be a rosy experience in military prison . . . but after being released from jail, the chances of obtaining a job would be slim. The climate in the U.S. is hostile to dissent."

Mr. Hinzman deserted the 82nd Airborne Division in January, 2004, and fled to Toronto with his wife and two-year-old son after his application for conscientious-objector status was rejected.

Immigration and Refugee Board member Brian Goodman has said he would not consider testimony about the legality of the U.S. military campaign in Iraq but would consider international condemnation of how the war was conducted.

Jeffry House, Mr. Hinzman's lawyer, acknowledged that the refugee claim is a difficult one. He argued that to prosecute someone for refusing to participate in a war in which atrocities were committed is tantamount to persecution. "Mr. Hinzman had a right not to participate."

Mr. Hinzman's claim is considered a test case. There are three other refugee claims from U.S. Army deserters that will be heard after the decision has been issued in the Hinzman case, expected in February of 2005.

In recent years, U.S. Army deserters have been treated leniently, serving one-year sentences in military prisons on average, according to a lawyer for the Canadian government, which is intervening in the case.

Canada has given refuge to army deserters from Iraq, Iran, Turkey and other countries with conscription, but never to soldiers who volunteered.

If Mr. Hinzman's claim is rejected, he could appeal to the Federal Court of Canada and could file an application to stay in Canada on humanitarian grounds.

A former U.S. Marine testified at the hearing yesterday about alleged atrocities, saying his superiors ignored his objections about the killing of Iraqi civilians and other violations of the Geneva Conventions.

Jimmy Massey, a 12-year-veteran and former staff sergeant, said some U.S. Marines became paranoid and trigger-happy by exaggerated intelligence reports about Iraqi suicide bombers.

They treated civilians who failed to stop their cars at military checkpoints as enemy combatants, in clear violation of the rules of war, he said.

"I told them [my superiors] I am not an assassin. The Marine Corps I work for does not kill innocent civilians."

He acknowledged he was tormented about participating in the "murder" of more than 30 unarmed men, women and children who drove through military checkpoints in and around Baghdad in April of 2003.

"I knew in my heart these vehicles were civilians, but I had to act on orders given. I saw plenty of Marines become psychopaths . . . they enjoyed killing."

He said he tried without success to bring to his superiors' attention his concern about such killings. When he went to a division psychiatrist in May of 2003, he was told to request conscientious-objector status.

"There is a blackball system within the military if you file a C.O. petition; you're giving yourself a death sentence. I've known Marines who have been beaten, harassed and sexually assaulted."



Former Marine Testifies to Atrocities in Iraq

Unit Killed Dozens of Unarmed Civilians Last Year, Canadian Refugee Board Is Told
By Doug Struck Washington, Post Foreign Service, Wednesday, December 8, 2004

TORONTO, Dec. 7 -- A former U.S. Marine staff sergeant testified at a hearing Tuesday that his unit killed at least 30 unarmed civilians in Iraq during the war in 2003 and that Marines routinely shot and killed wounded Iraqis.

Jimmy J. Massey, a 12-year veteran, said he left Iraq in May 2003 after a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress. He said he and his men shot and killed four Iraqis staging a demonstration and a man with his hands up trying to surrender, as well as women and children at roadblocks. Massey said he had complained to his superiors about the "killing of innocent civilians," but that nothing was done.

Massey, 33, of Waynesville, N.C., was the chief witness at a refugee board hearing for a U.S. Army deserter, Jeremy Hinzman, who is attempting to win asylum in Canada after he fled from Fort Bragg, N.C., rather than go to Iraq. Hinzman, 25, the first of at least three U.S. military deserters to apply for asylum here, argues that he refused to go to Iraq to avoid committing war crimes.

In Washington, a Marine Corps spokesman at the Pentagon said Massey's charges had been investigated and were unproved.

"We take such allegations very seriously," said Maj. Douglas Powell. "And Jimmy Massey, who is a former staff sergeant, out of the Corps, has made these statements before in the press. They've been looked into, and nothing has been substantiated."

Massey is a former Marine recruiter who served in Iraq as the staff sergeant for a platoon that ranged from 25 to 50 men. He testified that the killings occurred in late March or early April 2003 as his unit, the weapons company of the 3rd Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, moved northward to Baghdad and then beyond.

During one 48-hour period, Massey said under oath, his platoon set up roadblocks and killed "30-plus" civilians. He said his men, fearing suicide bombers, poured massive firepower into cars that did not stop as they approached the roadblocks. In each instance, he said, none of the cars was found to have contained explosives or arms.

"Why didn't the Iraqis stop? That is something that has plagued me every waking moment of the day," he said. He said they may have been confused by the Americans' gestures or thought that a warning shot was celebratory gunfire.

"I don't know if the Iraqi people thought we were celebrating their newfound freedom. But I do know we killed innocent civilians," Massey said. In one case, the driver of a car leaped out with his hands up. "But we kept firing. We killed him," Massey said. In another case, he and other Marines shot and killed four protesters near a checkpoint after a single incoming gunshot from an unknown source, he said. None of the protesters was found with arms.

The testimony of Massey, who was honorably discharged six months after his medical evacuation from Iraq, is the main surviving thrust of the strategy by Hinzman's attorney to put the Iraq war on trial at the refugee hearing. The asylum bids by Hinzman and two other servicemen are a dilemma for the Canadian government, which is seeking to repair relations with the Bush administration. Canada refused to join the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the war remains highly unpopular in Canada.

The government won a ruling that the legality of the Iraq war could not be an issue at the refugee hearing. But Hinzman's attorney, Jeffry House, has introduced testimonials and human rights reports to support Hinzman's claim that he would have been forced to violate the Geneva Conventions in Iraq.

Some of Hinzman's supporters, including House, are Vietnam-era draft dodgers. They compare Massey's testimony to the disclosure of the My Lai massacre of civilians in Vietnam.

Hinzman, who served a tour in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne Division, had applied for a transfer to a noncombat position in the Army. When that was rejected and his division was ordered to Iraq, Hinzman drove from Fort Bragg to Canada in January with his wife and infant son.

The family is living in a basement apartment in Toronto while their request is heard. If it is rejected, Hinzman has said, they expect to file appeals in the Canadian courts.

Staff writer Christopher Lee in Washington contributed to this report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Dec7.html

Shek

Lund,
Thanks for verifying that your claim of hundreds of deserters is flat out wrong. Even I over estimated the number two fold - the articles cite a total of four deserter servicemembers. BTW, he lost his hearing and is waiting for his appeal. Pretty soon he'll know very well how to make small rocks out of big rocks

Anon

"Pretty soon he'll know very well how to make small rocks out of big rocks"

LOL, one of my favorite militaryisms.

Officer of Engineers

15 known deserters are claiming refugee status (that door has officially closed though). It is BELIEVED that there are 130 more hiding.

__________________
Chimo

LUND

my sources reveal close to 245, besides the hundreds who are undocumented "visitors" who refuse to go back.

Shek

I hope these aren't the same sources that claim that the Army is made up of underclass Americans who face the prospects of joining the Army or going to jail thanks to lack of jobs and historically high unemployment that the US has suffered under President Bush. I only wish I had bought a bunch of defense stocks; then maybe I'd be rich now and wouldn't have to work and could hire some laborers at minimum wage to do my landscaping. Anything to keep the man down!