<< LEN EVANS ~ MAIN ~ SUNSHINE POWERFUL >>

WORLD STRANGE

J.D. Harding of Eastwood writes to the Sydney Morning Herald:

Join the US Marines as a grunt and find yourself fighting for your life in Iraq. Join the US Marines as a lawyer and find yourself swanning around Australia, doing the talk-show circuit while defending a character who is alleged to have the same beliefs as those trying to kill the grunt. It is indeed a strange world.

Posted by Tim B. on 08/17/2006 at 12:31 PM
  1. Since when does a an officer in the United States government denigrate his country publicly in a foreign country? The Dixie Chicks can do it, but they do not serve their country in the military (or at all). The jackass should be court-martialed.

    Posted by stats on 2006 08 17 at 12:49 PM • permalink

  2. He looks like Gomer Pile.

    Posted by Daniel San on 2006 08 17 at 12:50 PM • permalink

  3. Since the convulsive age of self imposed flagellation over the Vietnam battlefront in the larger Cold War fight, as forced upon the US by the adherents to the enemy, traitors, seditionists, cowards and other forms of intellectually inbred scum, the US military has been forced to build a secondary command structure, much like the old Soviet Political Officer in the Soviet military.

    Our secondary command structure, which is also granted command over-ride and the ability to meddle in anything it wishes at any time it wishes is our Judge Advocate General and other forms of less than militarily competent legal officers.

    We are due to suffer the same fate as the Soviets because of this.

    Posted by Grimmy on 2006 08 17 at 12:56 PM • permalink

  4. That transcript was…..disturbing.  On the one hand, MAJ Mori is a defense attorney, and must defend Hicks.  Got it.

    OTOH, that marine seems to be suffering from some form of the Stockholm Syndrome.  Some of the things that he says might be borderline insubordination, but his whole attitude is “Screw ‘em!!”  Maybe one of the lawyers (with military law experience) here can educate me on this, but I have my doubts that this is ethical behavior for a military lawyer.

    But taking this to the talk-show circuit in Australia, when the legal system involved is in America?  That’s just sewing seeds of discord.  From a commissioned officer, that’s disturbing.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 08 17 at 01:14 PM • permalink

  5. Well, he’s been given the job of defending Hicks, so as a good defense lawyer he has to proceed on the assumption that his client is innocent.  I don’t know why he saw the need to go on talk shows, though.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 08 17 at 01:15 PM • permalink

  6. Well, this isn’t even close to the worst thing a JAG officer has done so far in the war.  Remember when we apparently had the opportunity to kill Mullah Omar?

    The Predator tracked the convoy to a building where Omar, accompanied by a hundred or so guards and soldiers, took cover. The precise sequence of events could not be fully learned, but intelligence officials told me that there was an immediate request for a full-scale assault by fighter bombers. At that point, however, word came from General Tommy R. Franks, the CENTCOM commander, saying, as the officials put it, “My JAG” — Judge Advocate General, a legal officer — “doesn’t like this, so we’re not going to fire.”

    Posted by 68W40 on 2006 08 17 at 01:22 PM • permalink

  7. Yeah, I know about that, 91B30.  Idiot JAG.  Put him on the sharp end of the stick sometime, and see what happens then.

    Rebecca—that’s my point, in part.  He is defending Hicks.  But that Marine is openly dissing political decisions.  That’s a no-go for military personnel, especially in uniform and in public.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 08 17 at 01:50 PM • permalink

  8. I just wonder if the roles were reversed and hicks and his gang had this guy held prisoner, exactly how much soul searching and agonising they would go through before they severed his spinal cord.

    Posted by phillip on 2006 08 17 at 03:16 PM • permalink

  9. #5 Rebecca, et al. Maybe the USA military and the world has changed since I savaged my ass as a Korean War officer, but I was told in no uncertain terms that if I had a complaint, an idea, a suggestion, a gripe, a problem that there was something called the CHAIN OF COMMAND and I was to go up that chain and NEVER, Never outside of it, or it was my ass. Maybe they put this guys ass where his face should be, perhaps that’s the procedure that has replaced the Chain of Command.

    Posted by stats on 2006 08 17 at 03:40 PM • permalink

  10. ...I savaged my ass as a Korean War officer…

    I’m hoping stats is referring to an unfortunate incident with a donkey, here.

    Really hoping.

    Posted by R C Dean on 2006 08 17 at 05:16 PM • permalink

  11. Whether his behaviour is inappropriate or not is small change compared to the fact that the Military Tribunals themselves are unauthorized by federal statute and in violation of international law.

    Well at least that’s what the US Supreme Court and it’s terrorist sympathising judges found.

    Posted by bongoman on 2006 08 17 at 05:18 PM • permalink

  12. I thought he seemed a genuine enough guy just doing his job.  Lawyers are like that

    Posted by PeterTB on 2006 08 17 at 05:52 PM • permalink

  13. Mayhaps it is small change, bongoman.  But doubtless you never considered the fact that the good major might be violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with his behavior.  Since a military lawyer lives and breathes UCMJ, I have to think that he is aware of Article 88:

    888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
    Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

    His behavior is at least borderline, and he certainly skates the edges.  But if this military lawyer is so tactless and indiscreet in this behavior as a commissioned officer, just how good of a lawyer is he, hmmmmmm? 

    If he were my lawyer, I’d have second thoughts, that’s for sure.

    And as for…

    Whether his behaviour is inappropriate or not is small change compared to the fact that the Military Tribunals themselves are unauthorized by federal statute and in violation of international law.

    Correct as far as federal statue goes…..but the Court stated that this is so under current law, and that Congress can create laws authorizing such tribunals.

    Or, under international law, the United States can simply hold the Gitmo prisoners for as long we have hostilities, if we don’t try them in a military tribunal.  So long as we don’t try them, we can hold them.

    Remember, context is all important, bongoman.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 08 17 at 05:57 PM • permalink

  14. BTW…..I am not a military lawyer, but my military training and experience tells me that this guy is skating the edge.  However, it’s the call of his commanding officer. 

    And since Mori has been Hicks’ lawyer for a long time, I have to think that his commander is well aware of his attitude.  Perhaps the behavior is tolerated (for whatever reason), but his actions as a member of the armed forces of the United States are questionable.  Soldiers have been disciplined for lesser violations of Article 88.

    This is not in the best interests of his client, I think. 

    But, hey, keep an eye on that big picture, eh, bongoman?

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 08 17 at 06:01 PM • permalink

  15. #5 a defence lawyer’s job is not to believe his client is innocent, but to provide him with the best defence available. A defence lawyer does this by challenging all disputable evidence and requiring the prosecution to prove all elements of the crime, without lying or misleading the court.
    Mori strikes me as a man with one eye on life after the military.

    Posted by larrikin on 2006 08 17 at 08:03 PM • permalink

  16. Was the lawyer appointed? Did he volunteer? Maybe he’s the only one who’d defend Hicks.

    Posted by kae on 2006 08 17 at 08:09 PM • permalink

  17. It took Mr Mori three years (after some chance chat with Hicks) to realise that Hicks might be entitled to British citizenship, therefore increasing his chances of release…
    Mr Mori couldn’t defend chicken thieves in the real world…

    Posted by Honkie Hammer on 2006 08 17 at 08:19 PM • permalink

  18. kae, the transcript Tim linked to has Mori describing himself as a volunteer, but without realizing he might be tapped to defend, as opposed to prosecution.  I can’t say if that means anything, so take it as you will.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 08 17 at 08:26 PM • permalink

  19. I’m with Larrikin on this one - I reckon he is settng himself up for a hefty pay rise on going into civilian life.  Early to bed, early to rise, work hard and advertise. . .

    Posted by Razor on 2006 08 17 at 09:46 PM • permalink

  20. Oh well, that’s the SMH’s 2006 quota for publishing an intelligent letter all used up.

    Posted by Bonmot on 2006 08 17 at 10:13 PM • permalink

  21. Re all those who question Major Mori’s abilities:  Do you really want Hicks to get Johnny Cochran?

    Ive said it before, I’ll say it again, the Afghans would have saved us all a lot of trouble if they’d just shot him right there and then. 

    Aint no uniform, aint no geneva conventions.

    Posted by The_Wizard_of_WOZ on 2006 08 17 at 11:28 PM • permalink

  22. Yeah, god forbid that he get a fair trial. Can’t have that can we?

    Despite your true hard-man leanings, Wizard of Woz,
    the fact is he is in detention and the Supreme Court found that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions applies to all detainees, and a failure to treat detainees in compliance with Common Article 3 constitutes “war crimes”.

    And just now a Federal Court has found the NSA program to be in violation of FISA, the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment and issued a permanent injunction against the Bush administration’s eavesdropping in violation of FISA.

    Posted by bongoman on 2006 08 17 at 11:53 PM • permalink

  23. Article 3 schmarticle 3.  Read article 4.  He dont count.

    For those who havent read the conventions, Actricle 3 relates to the treatment of POW’s.  Article 4 relates to who IS a POW.  Hicks may be held in a military prison (whatever u wanna call Gitmo), but he is NOT entitled to protection under the geneva conventions because he didnt fight under the laws of the geneva conventions.

    Aint no uniform, aint no geneva conventions.

    Posted by The_Wizard_of_WOZ on 2006 08 18 at 12:34 AM • permalink

  24. bongoman, WOZ has it right.  Now go and clean up your room—the adults want to have a serious discussion.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 08 18 at 02:12 AM • permalink

  25. That’s great news for bongoman. Now he can get back to campaigning for the release of those imprisoned without trial in China, Iran, Cuba…

    Posted by Henry boy on 2006 08 18 at 03:07 AM • permalink

  26. Major Mori seems to have been hovering at Major rank for a rather long time.

    Given his near insubordinate bagging of the US government, I doubt he will ever be a Lieutenant Colonel.

    Posted by Pedro the Ignorant on 2006 08 18 at 03:47 AM • permalink

  27. Bongoman

    You think Hicks is entitled to POW status?  Ok then.  Let’s process him.  What is David Hicks’s…er…Abu Muslim al-Austraili’s…er…Mohammed Dawood’s… rank and serial number?

    Posted by murph on 2006 08 18 at 05:55 AM • permalink

  28. #22 bongoman   If everybody is covered by the Geneva convention under all circumstances everywhere regardless of how they behave or what organisation they belong to the convention becomes meaningless, perhaps bongoman could tell us who ISNT covered by it and why, i look forward to your reply

    Posted by phillip on 2006 08 18 at 06:21 AM • permalink

  29. #28 ooh ooh.  i can answer that…

    Baby eating ‘MerriKKKuns, Joooos and other agents of Chad McBu$hitler’s neo-imperialist war machine!!!!

    Posted by murph on 2006 08 18 at 06:33 AM • permalink

  30. #2 GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO-LLY.
    Sha -zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-am

    Posted by crash on 2006 08 18 at 10:41 AM • permalink

  31. The Geneva Conventions for those *cough*bongoman*cough* unfamiliar with them.

    Posted by Achillea on 2006 08 18 at 11:22 AM • permalink

  32. Maj. Mori could well be a reserve officer called up for active duty (which would account for both his time in grade, tenor and his zeal) like the ACLU lawyer at the end of this post.

    Posted by tree hugging sister on 2006 08 18 at 02:14 PM • permalink

  33. Funny what the idiocracy can find to whine about. Gitmo too harsh?

    I guess everyone has selectively forgotten that the original alternative to Gitmo was to allow the Afghans of the Northern Coalition to lock their unwanted or unrehabable prisoners up into shipping containers and just let them die by dehydration.
    The current alternative for many presently held at Gitmo is to be released back to their nation of birth and be tortured then executed.

    Of course, those released back to their nation of birth within the anglosphere will be released and allowed to re-join their comrades on the battlefield.
    Ain’t we just brutal?

    Posted by Grimmy on 2006 08 18 at 03:48 PM • permalink

  34. Northern Alliance, I mean.

    Posted by Grimmy on 2006 08 18 at 03:48 PM • permalink

  35. Personally, I think David Hicks should be extradited to Afghanistan, tried by the Afghan government for crimes he committed on Afghan soil, and if found guilt, punished under Afghan law.

    THAT SAID . . . I’m also inclined to cut Michael Mori some slack on this. He’s a Marine who was given his orders and told to do his duty, and as any good Marine should, he’s doing his duty to the best of his ability with everything he’s got. The fact that a Marine officer can provide such a zealous defence speaks volumes about the lengths the American government will go to in order to provide as fair a trial as possible, when all pricks like David Hicks deserve is a one-way ticket to Kabul.

    Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2006 08 18 at 08:19 PM • permalink

  36. Possibly, O&I.  That’s why I’m not asking about Article 32 investigations.

    I will say, though, that regardless of what he believes, hardcore defender or raving moonbat, he stands a good chance of never making lieutenant colonel.  Perhaps that’s the price he is willing to pay.  Perhaps he doesn’t care.  But that is where Mori could be headed. 

    And it disturbs me greatly that I can’t tell the difference.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 08 18 at 10:19 PM • permalink

  37. Methinks Mori has his eye on the US talk show circuit once he is done with the Hicks case.  Can you picture him staying in the service?

    Posted by The_Wizard_of_WOZ on 2006 08 19 at 12:47 AM • permalink

  38. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.