The Wicked Wop Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Soldier Found Guilty of Desertion in Iraq 8 minutes ago Add Top Stories - AP to My Yahoo! By RUSS BYNUM, Associated Press Writer FORT STEWART, Ga. - A military jury convicted a U.S. soldier Friday of desertion for leaving his combat unit in Iraq (news - web sites) in protest of an "oil-driven" war. Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia of the Florida National Guard was found guilty by a jury of four officers and four enlisted soldiers. Jurors deliberated almost two hours. He faces up to a year in jail and a bad conduct discharge and was to be sentenced Friday afternoon. Mejia, 28, failed to return after a two-week furlough in October and was missing from the Army for five months before turning himself in in March. Mejia, who has called the conflict an "oil-driven war," testified Thursday that he disobeyed orders to return to his unit because he planned to seek status as a conscientious objector. Mejia said he became upset after seeing civilians hit by gunfire and watching an Iraqi boy die after confusion over which military doctor should treat him. He also said he also believed he should have been discharged under a National Guard regulation limiting service of non-U.S. citizens to eight years. Mejia, a citizen of Costa Rica and Nicaragua, served for nine years. Military prosecutors argued Mejia, an infantry squad leader, abandoned his troops and didn't fulfill his duty. "The defense says he accomplished all his missions. Except the most important one — showing up," lead prosecutor Capt. A.J. Balbo said in closing arguments. Defense lawyer Louis Font said Mejia made "an honest mistake of fact." "This case clearly is about what was in the accused's mind," Font said. "He had an honest and reasonable view that because he had become a conscientious objector, he would not be required to serve in Iraq anymore." After the verdict was read, Mejia hugged his mother, Miami peace activist Maritza Castillo, and she kissed him on the cheek. "He feels that he still did the right thing, and he did it under his conscience and his beliefs. His feelings have not changed," Castillo said. Mejia's lawyers had argued that he walked away from the war partly to avoid orders to abuse Iraqi prisoners, such as using sleep-deprivation tactics with blindfolded detainees, and in at least one instance by loading a pistol next to their heads. But the judge, Col. Gary Smith, ruled that evidence on the "legality and morality" of prisoner treatment in Iraq was irrelevant to the desertion charge that Mejia shirked his duty by leaving the Army for five months. Mejia's application to be deemed a conscientious objector is being considered separately from his court-martial on the desertion charge. In his objector application, he claims he saw Iraqi prisoners treated cruelly when he was put in charge of processing detainees last May at al-Assad, an Iraqi air base occupied by U.S. forces. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20040521/ap_on_re_us/anti_war_soldier&printer=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 So can we take back his green card and kick him out of our country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 He was upset with sleep deprivation? Sheesh, with more men like this, we'd lose a war against the French. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Maybe he meant what Kerry did. Maybe he meant to join the Army to THREATEN the use of force, not actually have to be INVOLVED in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Ghost, I noticed that line too. A skillful example of liberal bias in the media. Notice that paragraph and how it's constructed: "Mejia's lawyers had argued that he walked away from the war partly to avoid orders to abuse Iraqi prisoners, such as using sleep-deprivation tactics with blindfolded detainees, and in at least one instance by loading a pistol next to their heads. " The writer says one reason why Mejia walked away is because he wanted to avoid orders to abuse Iraqi prisoners and it gives an example of that "abuse". Bias in journalism is subtle. This writer is telling you that abuse is depriving prisoners of sleep while blindfolded. It's not just the lawyers saying that's the reason. It's the writer agreeing. You know because a good journalist, impartial in his presentation would have written the same information this way: "Mejia's lawyers had argued that he walked away from the war partly to avoid orders Mejia felt was abusive of Iraqi prisoners, such as using sleep-deprivation tactics with blindfolded detainees, and in at least one instance by loading a pistol next to their heads. " See, that way the reader can draw his own conclusion as to whether those examples are abuse or not. Some would say yes. Some would say no. But, the writer, clearly biased in his views, deems that it is by not attributing the abuse. Simply agreeing that it was abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Wait a minute, you mean the media is liberally biased? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEF Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 You guys need some new material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Originally posted by LC80 You guys need some new material. No. We just need guys like you to open your eyes and wake up to reality. If liberals wouldn't deny the obvious we wouldn't have to keep drilling into your heads until you get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEF Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 No, you need some new material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Originally posted by LC80 No, you need some new material. No, again, you need to wake up. Simply living in a state of denial about things is not a sign of intelligence. Holding your little ears and tuning out others shows the typical liberal intolerance all too common with people who can't face the trouble those they believe in cause. Trust me, when people like you acknowledge reality, we'll have to turn our attention to other areas of education to assist you. Until you do, we continue to dig deep and force you to confront the truth. With hope, it won't take a terribly long time to get you to figure things out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEF Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 New material. Definitely. But I'm sure people like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Originally posted by LC80 New material. Definitely. But I'm sure people like you. Complete sentences please. Showing ignorance in one way is something I can work with. In simple ways, I'll have to worry about you and I've no time for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEF Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Here's a truism: arrogance does not equal correctness. But, like I wrote, I'm sure people like you. You seem to be an absolutely wonderful person. Really. I. Mean. It. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Originally posted by LC80 Here's a truism: arrogance does not equal correctness. But, like I wrote, I'm sure people like you. You seem to be an absolutely wonderful person. Really. I. Mean. It. Arrogance may or may not equate to correctness. That doesn't alter the fact that I am correct, whether you view me as arrogant or not. Trust me though when I say this, nothing is more arrogant than a liberal such as yourself simply refusing to acknowledge the evidence and overwhelming public perception of clear, documented liberal bias in the media. It's the ultimate arrogance to know something is true and yet to tell people telling you so that it's not through trite, dismissive responses. You see, since you keep saying the same thing, I'm golden saying it too. That's the beauty of a debate with a liberal. You can keep pounding the truth while they hold their breath in denial. Only one of us comes out looking stupid. It's true that the other of us comes out looking arrogant. I can't help it though. Communication of the truth doesn't have to be brought by Mr. Rogers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEF Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Your perception is not the truth. The fact fact that the right beats this drum relentlessly to sway public opinion doesn't equal truth either. And you're right. Only one of us comes out looking stupid. Only one comes out looking arrogant, too. You're a double winner. Congrats. I have to take my children to the movies now. Feel free to masturbate your gigantic ego until I return. And don't presume to know what I "know" is true. It only makes you wrong again. Keep beating that drum, though. Wouldn't want you to be atypical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 No, my perception is not the truth. The truth is. What is, is, my man. Evidence, documentation, overwhelming public sentiment and, indeed, simple, basic human intelligence will tell you the truth in this case. You simply chose to ignore it because you don't want to believe you are led around by the nose by a like-thinking group of people who control the information you get. Enjoy the movies with your children. Please come to me for assistance raising them better, as it would appear you are in need of help, and your children are at risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 It's amazing. Why does the left thing the Limbaughs and other 'right-wing' talk radio hosts sprouted up? Why do they think Drudge, Frontpagemag, FRepublic and other sites became so popular? Could it be because that side wasn't getting coverage and certain stories were being buried or killed by a slanted media? Only a blind person would ignore the slant of the established mainstream media. That said, the slant isn't enough for some people, which is why the reactionary left has indymedia, counterpunch and some other sites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Wait a minute, you mean the media is liberally biased? I know... I just learned that earlier today on another thread. I'm appalled! Can't you just feel the Politically charge? Electrifying!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Originally posted by Art Enjoy the movies with your children. Please come to me for assistance raising them better, as it would appear you are in need of help, and your children are at risk. This is a bit out of bounds, don't you think. Attack the man's opinion, not his ability as a father. That really doesn't seem to be in the spirit of what this site is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 Originally posted by bird_1972 This is a bit out of bounds, don't you think. Attack the man's opinion, not his ability as a father. That really doesn't seem to be in the spirit of what this site is all about. I don't think so at all, though I certainly understand the sentiment you present. Yet, when you are exposed to someone who has shut his eyes off to reasonable thought and who has children, it can not help but cause one concern for the future welfare of those children. It is reasonable to admit the liberal bias in the media, but argue that the influence of that bias is not the conspiracy the right likes to portray it as. But to close one's eyes to the bias -- one that exists at the very least because human beings write the news and a vast majority of those drawn to news as a profession happen to be liberal -- is, by itself, a bother. If children are taught to simply ignore any reality one doesn't happen to like, it speaks ill for the future. I am genuinely concerned for the ability LC's children have to be adequately prepared to deal with life if this is any sign of how he deals with exposure to concepts he doesn't happen to appreciate. I am genuinely concerned for any children exposed to such an intolerant, petulant upbringing and since he brought those children up in conversation, I'm certainly not going to disguise my worry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 Anybody hear about a time and place for the execution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEF Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 Originally posted by Art No, my perception is not the truth. The truth is. What is, is, my man. Evidence, documentation, overwhelming public sentiment and, indeed, simple, basic human intelligence will tell you the truth in this case. You simply chose to ignore it because you don't want to believe you are led around by the nose by a like-thinking group of people who control the information you get. Enjoy the movies with your children. Please come to me for assistance raising them better, as it would appear you are in need of help, and your children are at risk. First, let me say that you are a total jerk. I doubt you could wipe a childs a$$, much less raise one. I'm sorry for you that you are such a friggin coward that you would take a simple mention of my children and bring them into one of your idiotic rants. The "media" in this country is demonstratably to the right. Show me the left bias in the treatment of Gore vs. Bush in the last election cycle and the recount. Show me the left bias in the coverage of the Clinton "scandals". Show me the left bias in the coverage of the current administration. The left bias in the coverage of the march to the Iraq war. You can't, because it doesn't exist. Better yet, don't even attempt it. Keep spreading your childish little RNC memes. It sooo you. The only thing wrong with this forum is that douchebags like you can't be put on ignore. On that, I'm sure we can agree. I'm sure your next cowardly act will be to ban me. I've got a better idea for you: Eat me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 Originally posted by LC80 The "media" in this country is demonstratably to the right. Wow, that's a first... I'd lik e to see that demonstrated - if you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 More evidence of slanted reporting: When it came time to sum up the week, the Sunday morning TV shows were predictably harping on prison abuse, and mostly left the Berg story out. The weekly news magazines glossed over Berg in varying degrees. U.S. News & World Report’s cover read "Inside the Iraq Prison Scandal. The Ghosts of Abu Ghraib. Why the System Broke. The Psychology of Torture." Inside the magazine carried ten pages of Abu Ghraib coverage, but gave just about three-fourths of a page to the Berg killing. Time carried a Bush/Iraq cover with no mention of Berg. It carried five different Abu Ghraib articles, and one sidebar on Berg. ---------------------------------------- You're right, LC. Demonstrably to the right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEF Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 One article proves what? Nothing. There was a study done after the last election. In it they found that Bush had a ton more postive articles written about him than Gore did. It also found Gore had a ton more negative articles written about him than Bush did. A little more telling than finding an article alledging bias from one source. I could probably find an article with a bias for retarded, three-legged dogs. The over-all media bias in this country is hardly Liberal. "I've gotten balanced coverage, and broad coverage — all we could have asked. For heaven sakes, we kid about the 'liberal media,' but every Republican on earth does that." - Pat Buchanan "I admit it," he said. "The liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures." - William Kristol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.