Marine Booted For Wearing Uniform To Protest The War..Lawyer Says “we are going to continue to fight this to re- establish the precedence that the Marine Corps can’t be used for political purposes.”
By: Pam On: Jun/13/07 - 26 Comments
So Marine Cpl. Adam Kokesh was given a general discharge under honorable conditions, which is one notch short of honorable, because he was photographed by the WaPo wearing his uniform during an anti-war demonstration. Kokesh is a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War and chose to use obsentities when told that he was being investigated. Kokesh says that he he removed his name tag and military emblems from his uniform, making it clear he was not representing the military, but if his uniform was not meant to bring attention to him, why wear it?
Yes, I have a question…What?
June 14, 2007 - 05:40 AM on June 14th, 2007
Somebody inform this boob of a lawyer that this idiot Cpl. was using the uniform for political purposes, himself. This time the Cpl. should be dishonorably discharged for dishonoring the uniform, period.
June 14, 2007 - 10:49 AM on June 14th, 2007
1- Kinda disagree here. With all the military patches and his name removed, he was OUT OF UNIFORM. No longer a official uniform but just plain camo fatigues. If he showed up for duty dressed like that he’d be bounced on his ass.
This is just the military trying to squash dissent by an inactive and honorably discharged soldier.
June 14, 2007 - 11:17 AM on June 14th, 2007
2, Tofu, as usual you are talking ignorantly out your butt. The soldier was discharged AFTER this incident. Secondly, HE wore an issued uniform. He tried to disfigure it. Now, why even wear the uniform, Tofu? If the Cpl. was required to be in uniform, he violated the UCMJ ( I forget the initials) by removing his designations, etc. If the Cpl. wasn’t required to wear a uniform, why not go to the protest in civvies?
Tofu, this was a willful act of insubordination any way you look at it. Only liberal malcontents who are so preoccupied with “sticking it to the man”, can not see that the Cpl. was lucky to not be in Leavenworth breaking big rocks into little rocks.
June 14, 2007 - 12:37 PM on June 14th, 2007
2- PCD, I’m not going to go down to your level personal insults..
The protest occurred AFTER he was honorably discharged from active duty. His participation in this protest is what caused this new hearing and his discharge designation changed to ‘general discharge’.
June 14, 2007 - 12:44 PM on June 14th, 2007
Honorable Discharge: November, 2006
‘Operation First Casualty’ Protest: March 19, 2007
June 14, 2007 - 12:49 PM on June 14th, 2007
“PCD, I’m not going to go down to your level personal insults..”
Kudos to you TT.
But I have a question- this seems to contradict your statement:
“So Marine Cpl. Adam Kokesh was given a general discharge under honorable conditions, which is one notch short of honorable, because he was photographed by the WaPo wearing his uniform during an anti-war demonstration.”
June 14, 2007 - 03:07 PM on June 14th, 2007
6-”he was photographed by the WaPo wearing his uniform during an anti-war demonstration.”
Ted, you can’t use Peejz ‘commentary’ as a supporting fact.
Here’s how the Boston Globe described it:
“Kokesh had already received an honorable discharge from active duty before he was photographed in April wearing fatigues – with military insignia removed - during a mock patrol with other veterans protesting the Iraq war.”
June 14, 2007 - 05:34 PM on June 14th, 2007
this is so 1960’s its a joke.
June 14, 2007 - 07:31 PM on June 14th, 2007
7.
You can if it is accurate, and it was. Here is the reason, from the article:
“(Kokesk) is member of the Individual Ready Reserve, which consists mainly of those who have left active duty but still have time remaining on their eight-year military obligations.”
It would seem you contention that he was received an Honorable Discharge in November of 2006 is inaccurate.
June 14, 2007 - 07:53 PM on June 14th, 2007
Ted, not really.
No, my contention is correct. He received an honorable discharge from ‘active’ duty in Nov 2006.
I fully believe there is a distinction between active duty servicemen/women and IRR. I don’t believe the harsh restrictions of the UCMJ can apply to people under in the IRR. They are inactive, but ready to be called if needed. Until then, they are again civilians.
June 14, 2007 - 08:10 PM on June 14th, 2007
You can receive an honorable discharge from active duty, but have it revoked during the remainder of your commitment for “conduct that is prejudicial to good order and discipline“. That is UCMJ speak for doing something stupid that they really can’t charge you under any other section of the UCMJ. This can include any number of activities that would be perfectly acceptable outside of the military but might be deemed detrimental to the morale of other service members. This can include being a cross dresser, homosexual, etc etc. Generally as long as the activity doesn’t bring dishonor on the service, they’ll let it slide. His actions reflected poorly on the Marine Corps because he was wearing a Marine issue uniform. Marine Corps digital desert camouflage uniforms are only used by the USMC, so he can’t claim that he was dressed to look like an anonymous soldier. Soldiers wear different uniforms than Marines.
Keep in mind that while on Individual Ready Reserve, a service member can be recalled to active duty at any time. Also keep in mind that if the uniform was issued versus purchased from a military surplus store, it could be declared to be USMC property. Had he wanted to do this without facing ANY repercussions, all he had to do was purchase some non standard issue camouflage fatigues from any army navy store and the Marines wouldn’t have been able to do a damn thing about it. Being in a military issue uniform while still technically a service member was a bone head manuever. He simply put his foot in his mouth two months too early, and it came back to bite him in the ass. Until the 18th of June, his ass belongs to the United States Marine Corps. If they think he’s dishonored the Corp, they can revoke his honorable discharge and give him a general one. Hell, they could’ve reactivated him and sent him back to Iraq to do some real patrolling. Then if he refused to report, they could’ve charged him with desertion, court martialled him, and then given him a dishonorable discharge.
June 15, 2007 - 05:34 AM on June 15th, 2007
I wonder, how the case would look like if Kokesh had worn his uniform at the veterans day with a sign saying “Let’s kick Ahmedineshad’s ass”?
It takes much bigger balls to express your opinion the way he did and especially with showing that he is more likely to know why he has that opinion, than some pro-/contra-war activists that never experienced what war is like or what the situation of former Saddam victims in Iraq is.
I mean, the USA is not North Corea, where some mad dictator may order to sacrifice some hundredthousand soldiers who are absolutely obedient.
A western soldier should use his brain and have awareness of one of the oldest strategic rules: know when you should not fight!
June 15, 2007 - 05:40 AM on June 15th, 2007
11.
Thank for that answer- it clarifies things nicely.
June 15, 2007 - 05:54 AM on June 15th, 2007
12, It was insubordination. I guess that is something you excell at Mattias. You are such a disgrace to your father.
June 15, 2007 - 05:56 AM on June 15th, 2007
10, as I said before, Tofu, you don’t know what you are talking about as usual.
June 15, 2007 - 06:35 AM on June 15th, 2007
14- And I bet, you never understand the story of “A few good men”…
June 15, 2007 - 07:12 AM on June 15th, 2007
16, I understand that story alright. You are incapable of understanding there are guardrails to human behavior. You are one of those sick souls trying to dismantle the guardrails and then “Tisk, Tisk” at the human wreckage you cause.
June 15, 2007 - 09:21 AM on June 15th, 2007
11- Thanks for the info. I think he probably would have avoid this had he not responded to the email inquiry from a superior officer who questioned his wearing of the unform, or parts thereof, by using profane language. A level head and a little diplomacy can go a long way.
“the result of uniform regulation violations and disrespect to an officer,â€
June 15, 2007 - 09:49 AM on June 15th, 2007
“And I bet, you never understand the story of “A few good menâ€: “
How does this have any relevence?
June 15, 2007 - 12:18 PM on June 15th, 2007
If you go to my blog This Ain’t Hell I found proof that Kokesh wasn’t discharged as he and his lawyers claim. He had in his possesion a military ID card (which he wouldn’t have had if he’d been discharged as he claimed) which he used to access US military facilities in Europe to spread his propoganda – proof in his own words on his own website.
June 15, 2007 - 11:18 PM on June 15th, 2007
Thanks Tofu, I do try to offer a little insight when I can.
June 15, 2007 - 11:22 PM on June 15th, 2007
BTW for those who don’t know. A dishonorable discharge is considered a felony conviction. In other words, no voting, no firearms, no law license, no careers in law enforcement, etc, etc.
He should be glad that the Corps didn’t push the issue further.
June 16, 2007 - 01:38 PM on June 16th, 2007
Time for a whole lot of lawyers to lose the U.S. citizenship
June 16, 2007 - 06:33 PM on June 16th, 2007
Hey Snowy, what difference would it make? They’d just line up at ICE with a bunch of falsified affidavits, and receive z-visas.
June 17, 2007 - 10:23 PM on June 17th, 2007
Q.What do you call a bunch of lawyers up to their necks in sand? A. Not enough sand:razz:
June 18, 2007 - 08:31 PM on June 18th, 2007
Awww the wisdom of the Bard of Avon who wrote over 400 years ago. “The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers.” William Shakespeare.