-
Website
http://sayanythingblog.com/ -
Original page
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/anti_war_marine_adam_kokesh_kicked_out_of_corps_with_other_than_honorable_d -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Adam Kokesh demonstrated far greater courage in demonstrating against this illegal war after being sent to participate in it than any armchair warrior blogging about it from home. Re-enlisting him simply to downgrade his discharge in retaliation for protesting says more about the pettiness of the government than him. He may have lost his "honorable discharge," but he's proven his honor more than General Bergman.
Kokesh violated his oath and the regulations of the service which he volunteered to join. In just compensation for that betrayal he has joined the tiny and dishonored ranks of the ex-Marines.
If Kokesh's actions were so honorable, why would he be concerned with the penalty for violating military regulations brought on by those actions?
Anyway, he can always go out an marry some rich ugly widow and make a career out doing nothing while "serving" in the US Senate for 20 years. Perhaps he's even got some home movies and a magic hat stashed away somewhere?
So let's sum up: he's a discharged veteran who protests against the war. He wore clothing that many people commonly wear without insignia and was charged for wearing a uniform at a political event. Other active duty soldiers are not being similarly charged for wearing full military dress at political events. Therefore, his primary crime is to exercise his First Amendment right to protest a government with whom he disagrees.
Go ahead and spin this one, gentlemen. I can't wait.
Come to think of it, I believe Cindy's little piece of heaven in Crawford, TX is for sale. Perhaps Mr. Kokesh would be interested in taking over the protest and the payments, now that Saint Cindy has retired and [i]Move[/i]d [i]On[/i].
You forgot the step where former Marine Kokesh was informed he was under investigation for violation of the UCMJ:
Either of the offenses would have earned an active duty member a summary court martial and a Big Chicken Dinner.
Former Marine Kokesh got off lite.
He also goes on to quote George Washington, "When we assumed the Soldier, we did not lay aside the Citizen." He very neatly summarizes the action in this statement: "While there may be some purpose of this prosecution in order to maintain the, 'good order and discipline' of the inactive reserve, it is clear by its prejudice that it is intended to silence the voices of dissent."
Dissent is not unpatriotic, nor is it treasonous. Our nation was founded on dissent, but to hear the rhetoric spouted these days you'd think any kind of disagreement justifies reclassification as an "enemy combatant."
He violated his oath and brought dishonor upon himself, for which he has been very lightly punished.
Just as even the devil can quote scripture, so too can a dishonored scoundrel quote the indispensable man amongst our Founding Fathers, who being safely dead, cannot spit in the face of this disgrace to the service.
What oath did he violate? He was discharged, no longer bound to hold his tongue against what he perceives as abuses in our government. Even while in service, he acknowledges the right and duty of active duty servicemen to [i]conscientiously object,[/i] to speak out when circumstances warrant it.
The UMJC had to deliberately [i]reactivate[/i] him in order to downgrade his discharge. Furthermore, they went out of their way to schedule the review in such a venue where witnesses could not easily testify on his behalf. Finally, they're focusing on him for expressing an unpopular opinion while turning a blind eye to others who were far more blatant in their violations of the oath you site.
How do you condemn a man for wearing quasi-fatigues in violation of an oath he's been released from and not prosecute another for wearing full military dress at political speeches and fund-raisers?
He was still in IRR and bound the rule against using the uniform of the US military for personal political purposes.
What part of this do you not understand? It is explicitly against the rules. He can say whatever he wants to about the war or the President when he's dressed as a civilian, but he can't use his uniform.
And he can't cuss out superior officers.
Try actually knowing things, Michael.
Tell you what...[i]next[/i] time you are [i]gainfully employed[/i], go up to your supervisor (in your case, maybe the guy running the [i]french fry machine[/i] ) and tell him off using an obscenity . See if the people who have authority over [i]you[/i] will go out of their way to exercise it!
I therefore return to my earlier statement:[quote]So let's sum up: he's a discharged veteran who protests against the war. He wore clothing that many people commonly wear without insignia and was charged for wearing a uniform at a political event. Other active duty soldiers are not being similarly charged for wearing full military dress at political events. Therefore, his primary crime is to exercise his First Amendment right to protest a government with whom he disagrees.[/quote]
They sent him an email saying they were investigating him for possibly misusing his uniform. He responded by cussing out a superior officer. They dismissed him from the service.
Seems rather straight forward to me.
[quote]For wearing a hat without insignia or other token of military service[/quote]
It wasn't just the hat. He wore his entire uniform, and while the insignia may have been removed, it was still a Marine uniform used improperly.
[quote]Meanwhile, others dress in full military regalia at political events without so much as a stern glance.[/quote]
If you're talking about military personnel present at events the President and other politicians attend then yes, you're correct. Except that these military personnel are performing their job duties and do so at events starring both Republican and Democrat politicians.
So again, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
USMC fatigues are clearly marked as such, indelibly. In all the pics I have seen of Cpl Kokesh at these protests he is clearly wearing USMC uniform. And that is the end of it.
A service member is obligated to 8 years of service when they voluntarily enlist. The eight years can be (and usually is) broken up between active duty service and reserve service. I found that this guy was still obligated until 18 June 2007, that means that when he did his little demonstration he was still obligated to the rules/regulations of the Marine Corps. The uniform may be worn during parades, celebrations, and other public functions as long as it is worn in accordance with regulations. The Marine (including retired Marines) are not allowed to make public political speeches while in uniform unless they obtain permission from the proper military authority first.
In the cases that I have seen military personnel appear with politicians they were either receiving an award of some type or they were just there and made no public speech. This EX-Marine was still under obligated service. Since he attended a political rally while improperly wearing the uniform of a Marine he can be charged under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). I'm sure that if he had been a little more mature and not used profanity with the investigating officer he would have been better off.
After a little checking I found some interesting things.
1. On Kokesh's own blog on 20 March 2007 he wrote;
"I feared that violating the sanctity of the Marine Corps utility uniform would be sacrilege. I think if I was still on active duty right now, and was watching fellow former Marine Sergeant and IVAW member Liam Madden marching though the capitol in his utilities, I probably would have called him a "shit bag". But to not participate when perfectly able would have been to betray myself. In light of the stakes, making a parody of military operations is the pettiest of transgressions."
2. Kokesh was demoted from sergeant to corporal and not allowed to do a second tour in Iraq after it was learned that he brought a pistol back after his first tour in 2004.
3. Kokesh used his military ID to gain access to an Army base in Germany to deliver an anti-war message. He also tried to get a fellow protester (who was not in the military) on to the base by lying and saying that this person was in the military but did not have is ID card.
Seems to me that he made the Marine Corp's case when he said that it would be a sacrilege to improperly wear the uniform.
Taking weapons home is considered profiteering or black marketing, not to mention there are safety reasons for not carrying a weapon on your person when you leave a combat zone. He is lucky he didn't serve time in prison. This guy seems to have a problem with following even the simplest of instructions. In my experience when the Marine Corps busts you and boots you out they figure you are not worth keeping around but they don't want to ruin your life. This guy was walking a tight rope. I think he was probably what we call a ribbon hunter ( a lot like John Kerry...hey he desecrated the uniform too didn't he?).
The more I hear about this guy the more I get a picture of a looser that joined the reserves so that he could play Marine and then, to his chagrin, got sent to war. He was probably a foul up while he was there and didn't do much more that sit on his rear end.
First, thank you for your service. If you care to share, I'm curious what the "R" stands for.
Thank you too for the information on Kokesh's activities before his discharge from active duty. Clearly those on the anti-war Left are trying to make some sort of hero out of Mr.Kokesh... much as was done with John Kerry over 30 years ago. If Kokesh manages to develop a career similarly devoid of any substantive accomplishment, we will all be the better for it.
And thanks for your time and sweat. How long you been outside the wire?
When I was discharged from active duty I was a civilian.
Subject only to civilian law.
I didn't salute flag officers as they drove by. If Sgt Major Rohrbaugh
told me to police the area , I was not about to do it. I was a civilian.
Has anyone else ever been subject to the kind of discipline this Marine was or is the Corps breaking new ground?
That may well be the only thing we ever agree on.
That would depend on the nature of your last contract and the nature of your discharge. Absent your DD-214, we have no way of knowing if you served, let alone the nature of your post active duty obligations.
Woof, maybe I didn't read it correctly but this Marine was still in active duty wasn't he? I find it odd that they classified him as a veteran prior to discharge when we normally use the term for only "have served" and not "currently serving" ... but apparently it isn't exclusively past tense.
He was IRR, inactive ready reserve.
How is he subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice when not on active duty?
Can you give us specifics of these "abviously fabricated reasons" given for waging the war?
Right there you lost the argument.
Get your facts straight.