| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Iraq Vet Faces Penalty For War Protest |
| 2007-06-01 |
| A U.S. veteran who served in the Iraq war could lose his honorable discharge status after being photographed wearing fatigues at an anti-war protest. Marine Cpl. Adam Kokesh and other veterans marked the fourth anniversary of the war in Iraq in March by wearing their uniforms — with military insignia removed — and roaming around the nation's capital on a mock patrol. After Kokesh was identified in a photo caption in The Washington Post, a superior officer sent him a letter saying he might have violated a rule prohibiting troops from wearing uniforms without authorization. Kokesh, a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, responded with an obscenity. A military panel has been scheduled to meet with Kokesh on Monday to decide whether his discharge status should be changed from "honorable" to "other than honorable." "This is clearly a case of selective prosecution and intimidation of veterans who speak out against the war," Kokesh said. "To suggest that while as a veteran you don't have freedom of speech is absurd." Kokesh is part of the Individual Ready Reserve, a segment of the reserves that consists mainly of those who have left active duty but still have time remaining on their eight-year military obligations. His attorney, Mike Lebowitz, said Kokesh's IRR status ends June 18. He said at least three other veterans have been investigated because of their involvement at demonstrations. Kokesh, 25, enlisted in the Marines while still attending high school in New Mexico. He was a reservist in an artillery unit, assigned to the November Battery, 5th Battalion, 14th Regiment of the 4th Division based out of Pico Rivera, Calif., near Los Angeles. Kokesh said he had reservations about Iraq even before the United States invaded, but wanted to go there to help rebuild schools and mosques after Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled. He even learned Arabic. He said he grew disillusioned with the war during his first tour and now believes there is no way for the country to achieve the rule of law with a foreign military imposing martial law. He was supposed to go to Iraq a second time, but was demoted from sergeant to corporal and not allowed to return after it was learned that he brought a pistol back after his first tour in 2004. Kokesh argues that he was not representing the military at the protest in Washington, and he made that clear by removing his name tag and other military insignia from his uniform. Lebowitz said Kokesh technically is a civilian unless recalled to active duty and had the right to be disrespectful in his response to the officer. He called the proceedings against Kokesh highly unusual and said the military usually seeks to change a veteran's discharge status only if a crime has been committed. If his discharge status is changed, Kokesh said he could lose some health benefits and be forced to repay about $10,800 he received to obtain his undergraduate degree on veterans benefits. Kokesh said he holds no ill will toward the Marines. "I love the Marine Corps," he said. "I always have loved the Marine Corps, and that is why I'm particularly offended to see it being used for political ends." |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #7 There are rules about wearing the uniform after being discharged or transferring to the IRR. If Kokesh violated those rules, he's open to prosecution. I only wish the biggest a$$hole that ever did this had been prosecuted - one john f(#$$%$^%%) kerry, senior dipsh$$. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2007-06-01 21:51 |
| #6 yeah, like Procopius2k said :-) |
| Posted by: Angaiger Tojo1904 2007-06-01 16:22 |
| #5 He's not being prosecuted for protesting, he's being prosecuted for wearing his uniform. That rule is very clear to any one serving in the military and he chose to disregard it while still on active duty reserve. Too bad, so sad. I hope he is dihonorably discharged. |
| Posted by: Angaiger Tojo1904 2007-06-01 16:21 |
| #4 You’re confusing some of be basics here. One, the lad was still under contract and not yet discharged. He may have been a veteran of Iraq, but he wasn’t yet a veteran of the service. Therefore as demonstrated, still subject to the UCMJ. Two, there is a standing military rule about not appearing in uniform in a political environment for partisan purposes. Three, the uniform is the blouse, pants, coat, etc all the other doodads are accouterments. If he had just worn the accouterments, he’d probably be ok, unless he pinned on unauthorized decorations. He didn’t. He got it backwards. Probably from a s**t house lawyer. The old saying applies. If you’re a lightning rod, you’d better expect to be hit by lightning. And Moose, the law, Title 10 is clear about the uniform. It’s just like the speed limit. Most of the time it’s not enforced within variance. However, if you get hammered by it, you really can’t defend yourself by saying “everyone else is doing it”. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-06-01 16:19 |
| #3 If a vet doesn't have a right to protest war, who does? |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-06-01 15:56 |
| #2 The rules have been pretty clear for a long time. That is, anyone can wear military uniforms as long as their have no insignia, have just the "US Army" tag, etc., *or* insignia with no "US Army" tag. Variances were liberally permitted. That is, decorated combat veterans could wear their complete uniform or jacket alone, with all of the above, to indicate their status, and they are "hands off" because of that status. (I saw a Major get reamed for ragging on a VERY decorated Vietnam Vet he got huffy about, when he saw him teaching a class while wearing a field jacket.) The primary reason for allowing civilians to wear an undecorated military uniform was because a huge number of such uniforms were sold off as surplus. Therefore, the law is pretty much on the side of these protesters. If they got in trouble, it should only be for disturbing the peace, if their patrolling in public created such a disturbance. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-06-01 09:06 |
| #1 Kokesh said he holds no ill will toward the Marines. "I love the Marine Corps," he said. "I always have loved the Marine Corps, and that is why I'm particularly offended to see it being used for political ends." Then why'd you do it? It sounds to me like he got caught looting (bringing back that pistol) and is pissed over that. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2007-06-01 07:40 |