Sgt. Benderman is Not A Traitor
This post originally appeared in Feb of 2005:
In this writer's opinion, it takes just as much courage to put down the sword as it does to pick it up. Sergeant Benderman is definitely a courageous man. (A chronology of events surrounding Sgt. Benderman's case appears below his article. ) -- Patricia deVarennes
Right To Life
by Sgt. Kevin Benderman
I have come to the conclusion that the Creator does not want us to fight wars or to leave our brothers to die in hunger or disease for we have been given the things we need to provide all men on the planet what he needs to get by in the world. I have been lead to question some things about myself that I could change to better myself as a man.
Why should I not help another human being that needs what I can help them with? I have ignored that for far too long. I have turned my head when the homeless person asks for a little help. I have taken advantage of others when I should have been offering a hand up. I have done things in my life that I am not proud of. I have not lived a perfect life so I do not claim to have the authority to tell anyone else how to live his or hers.
Some people are asking me why is it now that I have come to this conclusion that I can no longer take part in an organization whose primary purpose is to kill. People are asking how I can spend ten years in the military and now want to get out or how I can abandon the people that I have served with. I have to tell them that I have seen the wrong way that I had been living and that I need to make some changes. Changes that will hopefully let me live a better life and that will allow me to be a better part of the human society.
I have learned that I have done things that are not to the benefit to mankind and that to continue in that vein would be detrimental to my growth as a human being. And now that I have seen the errors of my ways, wouldn’t it be prudent to change the way I conduct myself? Why should I continue with what I see as self-destructive behavior? And why should I continue a way of life that does nothing to alleviate some problems that have plagued humanity far too long? If a drug addict learns that the drugs are killing him then he is expected to stop using drugs. That leads me to ask the question, "If what I am doing is killing me spiritually, why should I continue?
Some people claim that war brings peace; if that is the case then why do we not have peace in the world? There have been wars as long as I have been alive and yet we still have no true peace in the world. We are taught in school that we have had the American Revolution and the two world wars, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Grenada, Beirut, Persian Gulf War, and now the Operation Iraqi Freedom, and my point is, "When will it be enough?"
Do we want our grandkids to learn the "art" of war? Should we teach them to throw hand grenades and learn how to shoot center mass of a human being in order to kill them? Or should we be teaching them to hit home runs and to catch fly balls? We should teach them to throw the winning pass at the super bowl, anything but how to kill other humans. There are many things that should be shown to our young besides the "honor" of killing.
War should be left behind us in the memories of history. The people of the world should practice it no more. Better results in peace could be realized if we were to reach out to our fellow man with an understanding instead of aligning them in our rifle sights. I know that this is a concept that will take time for people to understand, but isn’t it time to start trying?
We have recently observed the day that honors Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and shouldn’t we remember his words and try to live them? "I have a dream that one day that all the children of the world can live together" That may not be the exact quote but I believe that is the essence of what he wanted to see in our world. When will we try to attain that goal?
"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.' I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today."
Why can’t we take that view for peace in our country and expand it to the nations of the world? It made sense then and it makes sense now. ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.
And if is the case that all men are equal, why I am facing the possibility of seven years in Federal Prison because I do not want to kill another human being?
January 25, 2005
Kevin Benderman [mdawnb@coastalnow.net] is an Army Sergeant in the 3rd Infantry Division, Ft. Stewart, GA.
Copyright 2005 Kevin Benderman
The above article first appeared on Lewrockwell.com (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/benderman2.html) on January 25, 2005. Sgt. Benderman has graciously given me his permission to reprint it.)
Chronology of Events Beginning February 07, 2005
provided by The Kevin Benderman Defense Committee
www.BendermanDefense.org
As you know, combat veteran Army Sergeant Kevin Benderman was charged by his command at Fort Stewart on January 19th with: 1) Desertion with the intent to avoid hazardous duty and 2) Missing Movement by design. He faces 5 years in prison if found guilty on the first charge; and up to 2 years on the second charge.
Faced with the prospect of having to submit to the Army's equivalent of a pre-trial hearing (called an Article 32 investigation) less than 48 hours after the charges were read, SGT Benderman, through the military defense counsel provided to him, submitted a request for a reasonable delay of the hearing. A delay in the case was granted until February 7th by Lt Col. Linda Taylor, the investigating officer.
Meanwhile, the military attorney representing Kevin challenged the appointment of the Article 32 investigating officer, Lt.Col. Linda Taylor. They based their objection on the fact that Ms. Taylor served as the chief military prosecutor at Ft. Stewart, where Kevin is being tried. Reportedly, Lt.Col. Taylor served in that capacity for over six months in 2003 and actually provided legal advice on criminal matters to the current Convening Authority, Lt.Col. Kidd. The request for recusal was denied by the appointing authority prior to the Article 32, and again by Lt.Col. Taylor at the beginning of the hearing.
The Article 32 spanned about six hours. Telling testimony from various witnesses revealed the negative reception SGT Benderman endured by his command from the time he submitted his Conscientious Objector claim in December 2004. Without even reviewing the governing regulation, his company commander at the time informed SGT Benderman that he intended to recommend disapproval of the application based on his belief that it could only be a reuse to avoid deployment. The first military chaplain SGT Benderman sought to meet with shunned him despite the fact that a chaplain's interview is a required step in the application process.
This chaplain later emailed SGT Benderman from Kuwait and told him he was ashamed of him. SGT Benderman's unit first sergeant called him a coward. Fortunately, SGT Benderman was able to meet with another Fort Stewart chaplain who understood the process, conducted a thorough interview with SGT Benderman, and concluded that SGT Benderman's beliefs are "sincere" and that "his lifestyle is congruent with his claim of conscientious objection."
Article 32 testimony also confirmed that on January 6th, within days of SGT Benderman submitting his application, the company commander called SGT Benderman in for a separate counseling session based on allegations of Disrespect to a Commissioned Officer and Disloyal Statements to the United States. This counseling proved atypical.
SGT Benderman was brought into a conference room where 15-20 others from the unit were present. The commander chastised SGT Benderman in front of the group citing various articles he had read from the internet and which he assumed were directly attributable to SGT Benderman. The commander informed SGT Benderman that he fully intended to prosecute him, that he considered him a security risk, that he intended to have SGT Benderman's security credentials pulled for the remainder of his career, and that SGT Benderman was to be excluded from all access to company and battalion operations centers. The counseling was reduced to writing.
The Findings and Recommendations of the Article 32 Investigation are pending at this time. Less than 18 hours following completion of the Article 32, SGT Benderman had to report for his Conscientious Objector hearing. SGT Benderman had timely requested a brief delay the previous week, but the Investigating Officer denied the request. The hearing officer was clearly hostile and not the detached, neutral, and impartial officer required by the regulation.
Over objections by representative counsel, the IO persisted in asking SGT Benderman potentially incriminating questions, including whether or not SGT Benderman had ever brought an unregistered weapon on Fort Stewart. Countless other questions pertained to articles alleged to have been written by SGT Benderman. These questions persisted despite the IO's assurances at the beginning that he did not intend to consider any articles.
The hearing was not recorded, although we were informed the previous week that it would be. SGT Benderman's representative counsel, who is also his detailed defense attorney, immediately objected to the legitimacy of the entire proceeding and to the continued appointment of the IO. The numerous objections were reduced to writing and sent to the appointment authority on Wednesday, February 9th. To date, we have received no response.
As if the marathon events of the 7th and 8th were not enough for one week, other developments ensued. Following the CO Hearing on the 8th, SGT Benderman reported to his rear detachment commander for further guidance. The commander informed SGT Benderman that he intended to sit SGT Benderman down within a day or two to issue him a new order to deploy to Iraq. The commander stated that the decision was based on the guidance he received from the prosecution and that it would all be summarized in a counseling statement.
SGT Benderman promptly informed his attorney, who promptly sought confirmation with the prosecutors. Our understanding is that while the prosecutors admitted to having a discussion with the command, they indicated that they would not likely follow through with such a course of action.
The Kevin Benderman Defense Committee
In this writer's opinion, it takes just as much courage to put down the sword as it does to pick it up. Sergeant Benderman is definitely a courageous man. (A chronology of events surrounding Sgt. Benderman's case appears below his article. ) -- Patricia deVarennes
Right To Life
by Sgt. Kevin Benderman
I have come to the conclusion that the Creator does not want us to fight wars or to leave our brothers to die in hunger or disease for we have been given the things we need to provide all men on the planet what he needs to get by in the world. I have been lead to question some things about myself that I could change to better myself as a man.
Why should I not help another human being that needs what I can help them with? I have ignored that for far too long. I have turned my head when the homeless person asks for a little help. I have taken advantage of others when I should have been offering a hand up. I have done things in my life that I am not proud of. I have not lived a perfect life so I do not claim to have the authority to tell anyone else how to live his or hers.
Some people are asking me why is it now that I have come to this conclusion that I can no longer take part in an organization whose primary purpose is to kill. People are asking how I can spend ten years in the military and now want to get out or how I can abandon the people that I have served with. I have to tell them that I have seen the wrong way that I had been living and that I need to make some changes. Changes that will hopefully let me live a better life and that will allow me to be a better part of the human society.
I have learned that I have done things that are not to the benefit to mankind and that to continue in that vein would be detrimental to my growth as a human being. And now that I have seen the errors of my ways, wouldn’t it be prudent to change the way I conduct myself? Why should I continue with what I see as self-destructive behavior? And why should I continue a way of life that does nothing to alleviate some problems that have plagued humanity far too long? If a drug addict learns that the drugs are killing him then he is expected to stop using drugs. That leads me to ask the question, "If what I am doing is killing me spiritually, why should I continue?
Some people claim that war brings peace; if that is the case then why do we not have peace in the world? There have been wars as long as I have been alive and yet we still have no true peace in the world. We are taught in school that we have had the American Revolution and the two world wars, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Grenada, Beirut, Persian Gulf War, and now the Operation Iraqi Freedom, and my point is, "When will it be enough?"
Do we want our grandkids to learn the "art" of war? Should we teach them to throw hand grenades and learn how to shoot center mass of a human being in order to kill them? Or should we be teaching them to hit home runs and to catch fly balls? We should teach them to throw the winning pass at the super bowl, anything but how to kill other humans. There are many things that should be shown to our young besides the "honor" of killing.
War should be left behind us in the memories of history. The people of the world should practice it no more. Better results in peace could be realized if we were to reach out to our fellow man with an understanding instead of aligning them in our rifle sights. I know that this is a concept that will take time for people to understand, but isn’t it time to start trying?
We have recently observed the day that honors Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and shouldn’t we remember his words and try to live them? "I have a dream that one day that all the children of the world can live together" That may not be the exact quote but I believe that is the essence of what he wanted to see in our world. When will we try to attain that goal?
"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.' I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today."
Why can’t we take that view for peace in our country and expand it to the nations of the world? It made sense then and it makes sense now. ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.
And if is the case that all men are equal, why I am facing the possibility of seven years in Federal Prison because I do not want to kill another human being?
January 25, 2005
Kevin Benderman [mdawnb@coastalnow.net] is an Army Sergeant in the 3rd Infantry Division, Ft. Stewart, GA.
Copyright 2005 Kevin Benderman
The above article first appeared on Lewrockwell.com (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/benderman2.html) on January 25, 2005. Sgt. Benderman has graciously given me his permission to reprint it.)
Chronology of Events Beginning February 07, 2005
provided by The Kevin Benderman Defense Committee
www.BendermanDefense.org
As you know, combat veteran Army Sergeant Kevin Benderman was charged by his command at Fort Stewart on January 19th with: 1) Desertion with the intent to avoid hazardous duty and 2) Missing Movement by design. He faces 5 years in prison if found guilty on the first charge; and up to 2 years on the second charge.
Faced with the prospect of having to submit to the Army's equivalent of a pre-trial hearing (called an Article 32 investigation) less than 48 hours after the charges were read, SGT Benderman, through the military defense counsel provided to him, submitted a request for a reasonable delay of the hearing. A delay in the case was granted until February 7th by Lt Col. Linda Taylor, the investigating officer.
Meanwhile, the military attorney representing Kevin challenged the appointment of the Article 32 investigating officer, Lt.Col. Linda Taylor. They based their objection on the fact that Ms. Taylor served as the chief military prosecutor at Ft. Stewart, where Kevin is being tried. Reportedly, Lt.Col. Taylor served in that capacity for over six months in 2003 and actually provided legal advice on criminal matters to the current Convening Authority, Lt.Col. Kidd. The request for recusal was denied by the appointing authority prior to the Article 32, and again by Lt.Col. Taylor at the beginning of the hearing.
The Article 32 spanned about six hours. Telling testimony from various witnesses revealed the negative reception SGT Benderman endured by his command from the time he submitted his Conscientious Objector claim in December 2004. Without even reviewing the governing regulation, his company commander at the time informed SGT Benderman that he intended to recommend disapproval of the application based on his belief that it could only be a reuse to avoid deployment. The first military chaplain SGT Benderman sought to meet with shunned him despite the fact that a chaplain's interview is a required step in the application process.
This chaplain later emailed SGT Benderman from Kuwait and told him he was ashamed of him. SGT Benderman's unit first sergeant called him a coward. Fortunately, SGT Benderman was able to meet with another Fort Stewart chaplain who understood the process, conducted a thorough interview with SGT Benderman, and concluded that SGT Benderman's beliefs are "sincere" and that "his lifestyle is congruent with his claim of conscientious objection."
Article 32 testimony also confirmed that on January 6th, within days of SGT Benderman submitting his application, the company commander called SGT Benderman in for a separate counseling session based on allegations of Disrespect to a Commissioned Officer and Disloyal Statements to the United States. This counseling proved atypical.
SGT Benderman was brought into a conference room where 15-20 others from the unit were present. The commander chastised SGT Benderman in front of the group citing various articles he had read from the internet and which he assumed were directly attributable to SGT Benderman. The commander informed SGT Benderman that he fully intended to prosecute him, that he considered him a security risk, that he intended to have SGT Benderman's security credentials pulled for the remainder of his career, and that SGT Benderman was to be excluded from all access to company and battalion operations centers. The counseling was reduced to writing.
The Findings and Recommendations of the Article 32 Investigation are pending at this time. Less than 18 hours following completion of the Article 32, SGT Benderman had to report for his Conscientious Objector hearing. SGT Benderman had timely requested a brief delay the previous week, but the Investigating Officer denied the request. The hearing officer was clearly hostile and not the detached, neutral, and impartial officer required by the regulation.
Over objections by representative counsel, the IO persisted in asking SGT Benderman potentially incriminating questions, including whether or not SGT Benderman had ever brought an unregistered weapon on Fort Stewart. Countless other questions pertained to articles alleged to have been written by SGT Benderman. These questions persisted despite the IO's assurances at the beginning that he did not intend to consider any articles.
The hearing was not recorded, although we were informed the previous week that it would be. SGT Benderman's representative counsel, who is also his detailed defense attorney, immediately objected to the legitimacy of the entire proceeding and to the continued appointment of the IO. The numerous objections were reduced to writing and sent to the appointment authority on Wednesday, February 9th. To date, we have received no response.
As if the marathon events of the 7th and 8th were not enough for one week, other developments ensued. Following the CO Hearing on the 8th, SGT Benderman reported to his rear detachment commander for further guidance. The commander informed SGT Benderman that he intended to sit SGT Benderman down within a day or two to issue him a new order to deploy to Iraq. The commander stated that the decision was based on the guidance he received from the prosecution and that it would all be summarized in a counseling statement.
SGT Benderman promptly informed his attorney, who promptly sought confirmation with the prosecutors. Our understanding is that while the prosecutors admitted to having a discussion with the command, they indicated that they would not likely follow through with such a course of action.
The Kevin Benderman Defense Committee
posted by Pat deV | 10:13 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home