I wanted to bring this issue back up top here because I think it is an important one.

Yesterday, Kevin Benderman was sentenced to 15 months in prison, a dishonorable discharge and loss of rank for following military procedure to request a status of conscientious objector. It is interesting, and important, to note that there is no crime in being a CO and he wasn’t charged with that. But his effort to follow procedure, not just run to Canada, was attacked by the military with all kinds of trumped up charges, from theft of pay (because the Army screwed up) to desertion, all because he asked for CO status.

Now, the military could have just dealt with the request, made sure they also followed procedure scrupulously, and then simply denied the request. It is the military after all and the military is famous for twisting the rules to get the result it wants. But they did not do that, they attacked the man, his honor and his integrity and they tried to intimidate him with threats and phony charges.

That’s what has always puzzled me about this case. Monica and Kevin Benderman have been regular participants in our forums (see TheWar [register to post]) and Kevin has always been willing to live with whatever legitimate decision the military made. All he wanted was to make his case and let it stand or fall on its merits.

The military obviously can’t allow that. For nothing threatens the fragile fiction of Iraq like the truth and an honest soldier, speaking forcefully, is the most threatening bearer of truth in the world from the military’s standpoint.

So they convict him on trumped up charges, throw the book at him and then hope he goes away. As I mentioned before there’s one aspect of military law that disturbs me when it comes to this case. My first thought, when I considered the absurdity of the charges for which he was convicted and the severity of the punishment for a relatively minor offense, was that the most logical option for Kevin to keep this in the public awareness would be to appeal his conviction. But unless and until the Convening Authority, Col. John Kidd, signs off on his conviction no appeal is possible.

Col. Kidd, as the Convening Authority, has some impact on the sentence, he can reduce it, he can ignore it, but he can’t increase it. The colonel has been hostile to Kevin from the beginning and the likelihood of his reducing the sentence is nil, he’d probably like to increase it but he can’t. So what may actually happen is that he simply won’t sign off on the sentence at all, maybe not until Kevin has served most or all of it, and by doing so will deny Kevin his right to appeal.

And here I thought this was a war being fought for freedom, democracy and the rule of law. Silly me.

Here’s a list of current articles on Kevin’s case.

• The Guardian
• WTOC-TV
• Weekend America on Public Radio
• Not In Our Name
• IndyBay
• Jonah House
• US Labor against war
• FreePress
• ZNet
• Voices in the Wilderness
• CounterPunch: an article by Norman Solomon