Bob Watada

Bob Watada discusses the case of his son Ehren, the first U.S. Army officer to refuse to deploy to Iraq, his military judge’s decision to throw the case out when it looked like he may be acquitted, attempt to try him twice for the same crime in violation of the 5th amendment to the Constitution of the United States and recent intervention by the civil federal courts.

MP3 here. (17:45)

Bob Watada is the father of Lt. Ehren Watada, the first American officer to refuse his orders to deploy to Iraq.




RSS feed

8 Comments »

Comment by Marycatherine Barton
2007-10-12 06:27:11

They better not try him twice. Where are the hundred of thousands of lawyers in this country? They need to step up to the plate and fight for liberty and justice which is being denied us by this federal government, to put it mildly.

 
Comment by Steve Sulkanen
2007-10-12 08:55:36

I wish to hell there had Watadas when I was in the stinking Army in the 60s. Tons of ass-kissers who pay lip service to the well being of the troops.And in some cases thieves when gear turns up missing and troops are suspected instead of warrant oficers. As the Army’s CID about that !!
Steve Sulkanen

Comment by mike white
2008-05-02 04:47:57

i like the way you express yourself. reminds me of a guy i knew in michigan.

regards
mike white

 
 
Comment by ChrisBaker
2007-10-12 10:25:52

If you want to deploy, then don’t join the military in the first place.

Comment by The Vooch
2007-10-13 09:18:03

‘If you want to (not) deploy, then don’t join the military in the first place’

sorry, our Officer class isn’t a bunch of mindless automatons. They are citizen soliders who bow down to no tyrants.

It is the duty of every professional Officer to refuse illegal and immoral orders. In Watada’s situation he believes the War is illegal and so in accordance with his sacred duty as an Officer refuses to deploy.

Watada is also willing to bear the consequenses of his decision.

 
 
Comment by Jenkins
2007-10-12 15:32:25

IF you have a mistrial, you can have a do-over. It’s not double jeopardy.

It would only be double jeopardy if there had been a ruling in the original case.

I thought everyone knew this.

 
Comment by Scott
2007-10-12 16:01:59

It is in fact double jeopardy if the judge only threw the case out because the accused was about to be acquitted - a view of this case that at least one federal judge has found has “merit.”

We’ll see whether this young man’s rights will be protected.

 
Comment by Joe Anybody
2007-11-11 00:00:56

http://pdxpeace.org/blog/madmal/2007/nov/09/court-bars-second-court-martial-watada-now

Nov 9 2007 Judge rules “It would in fact be Double Jeopardy”

YES! ….. Now let him go free!

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post