informazione dal medio oriente
    information from middle east
    المعلومات من الشرق الأوسط

[ home page] | [ tutte le notizie/all news ] | [ download banner] | [ ultimo aggiornamento/last update 28/08/2019 00:45 ] 22016

english italiano

  [ Subscribe our newsletter!   -   Iscriviti alla nostra newsletter! ]  


Uruknet on Alexa

End Gaza Siege
End Gaza Siege


:: Segnala Uruknet agli amici. Clicka qui.
:: Invite your friends to Uruknet. Click here.

:: Segnalaci un articolo
:: Tell us of an article

A Manís Word

Monica Benderman

March 28, 2006

When a soldier no longer wants to fight, when his conscience tells him that he can no longer believe in the mission and commanders order that soldier back to combat against his will, there is something wrong. There is something very wrong when commanders send that soldier to jail simply because they cannot control what he believes, and what he believes scares them.  

In Afghanistan, we are witnessing a tragic violation of basic human rights -- rights given to all people simply for being alive. A man has made a choice -- a personal choice -- and he is being threatened with death because of his choice. 

Our government officials have stepped in and offered their thoughts on how the Afghan government should proceed in their treatment of this man. Members of our administration have publicly stated that freedom of religion is a personal choice, one afforded all human beings; the man should be set free and allowed to practice his religion as he chooses. This is the same administration that allowed my husband to go to jail for making a choice -- a personal, moral choice based on his ethical beliefs. 

My husband, Sgt. Kevin Benderman, chose to no longer participate in war. He followed the Army regulations, filed a Conscientious Objector application, and acted honorably every step of the way. His unit commanders chose to punish him for not allowing them to control him with their threats, and my husband went to jail simply because his commanders had no integrity, no honor and no respect for the very constitution they had given a sworn oath to uphold.

Sadly -- the military administration has sided with my husbandís commanders to this point. At any time, any member of the military hierarchy could have stepped in and ordered the command to abide by the regulations. Instead, the military powers that be chose to turn a deaf ear to the truth and the facts, and allow the continued mistreatment of one of their own -- a veteran who has served with distinction for ten years. 

The sworn testimony given verbatim in the Record of Trial from my husbandís court martial clearly shows an incompetent command; a command that lied, mishandled their administration of my husbandís request, and fabricated evidence after the fact. It shows a command that had no knowledge of the regulations, no idea how to respond to my husbandís request and admittedly made no effort to learn.

The company commander stated for the record that "Sgt. Benderman is just one soldier out of 191 that I command. I did not have time to worry about him." He went on to admit that he "was not aware of the proper procedures for handling Sgt. Bendermanís request, but if he had been he would have taken steps to correct his actions."

On five separate occasions, the Command Sgt. Major of the battalion gave sworn testimony regarding a meeting he requested with my husband to discuss his Conscientious Objector application. These sworn testimonies contradicted each other with regard to several of the facts that, had the truth been told, would have exonerated my husband before there ever was a court martial. On the witness stand, this Sgt. Major was questioned about the fact that his sworn statements contradicted each other, and was asked if they were indeed his statements.  He confirmed that he had made each one, and went on to state that none of those had been the truth; that he was telling the truth in the courtroom that day. The first statement given was most accurate, having been made right after the meeting with my husband. Subsequent statements appeared to change as the prosecutors needed to bend the rules to make their allegations fit. The "truth" on the stand was remembered seven months later, noticeably altered from the original testimony, also given under oath. 

Also included in the Record of Trial for my husbandís court martial was a statement made by the Convening Authority overseeing the court martial -- the Acting Commander of Ft. Stewart, Georgia.  During the first week of February 2006, this commander had a meeting with the Staff Judge Advocate at Ft. Stewart. He stated that he would not accept a plea bargain, and he wanted to make sure that my husband went to jail for "no less that 18 months." This is the man who would ultimately determine whether all procedures and regulations had been properly followed during the court martial process, and approve the final outcome of the trial. The question here -- why had he already determined my husbandís guilt -- and for what crime was he expecting to sentence my husband? There was not even an investigation into the charges that they would consider bringing against my husband until a week after the commander held this meeting. 

My husband has now served eight months in jail, apparently because the commanders of the US military are not bound by the oaths they take. The commanders of the US military have a choice -- they can abide by their personal integrity and lead by following the rules, or they can make up the rules as they go along -- so much for integrity.

My husband was eligible for parole on January 27, 2006. According to the Dept. of the Army Regulations 190-47, the rules governing the operations of military corrections facilities, the command of the correctional facility where he is incarcerated should have held a hearing regarding my husbandís request for parole in December 2005; no later than 30 days prior to his eligibility date. The command did not set the date for his hearing until mid-January, and it was finally held on February 15, 2006. Three weeks later they got around to sending their recommendations to the Parole Board in Virginia. 

Apparently, it does not matter where the commanders of the US Army are stationed, or what their assignment -- few of them seem bound by the oaths they take. 

For ten years, Sgt. Kevin Benderman served the Army of this United States with honor and integrity.  He received nothing but commendations and outstanding evaluations, and not one derogatory counseling statement. Kevin went to Iraq and performed his duties with the same integrity and honor that he gave to all aspects of his service. After firsthand experience, knowing that he could no longer participate in war, recognizing it as "the greatest form of manís inhumanity to man" he prepared to leave the military when his enlistment expired. The US Army refused to let him go peacefully and issued him a stop/loss order. 

Following regulations, and staying true to himself and his beliefs, Kevin submitted a Conscientious Objector application in spite of a Company chaplain who would rather "debate" Kevin than assist him in his legal request and a Company commander who believed that threats, intimidation and character attacks would convince my husband to bend to his will. 

The actions of the command make a statement loud and clear. It is not the statement they would like us to believe however. While their public statements mentioned that the sentencing of my husband was meant to "show other members of the military that they could not use Conscientious Objection as a way to avoid service in Iraq," their actions show nothing more than cowardice in the face of moral courage and personal integrity; two character traits sorely lacking in many of the commanders my husband has been forced to serve with for the past three years. 

When called to hold themselves accountable to the oaths they took, these men failed miserably. At a time when leadership at all levels is sorely needed these men showed clearly why this country is in the mess weíre in. 

The RULES are there for a reason, and an oath taken is one that is meant to be kept unless the party to whom the oath is given has broken their word. Perhaps that is the problem in a nutshell. The oath that is taken relies on the integrity of an individual to keep his word. For the commanders in the military to understand the meaning of keeping their word, they would require an example in those who lead them. 

Every member of the military and our government has taken an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. My husband went to jail because he refused to compromise on the oath he took, nor on his personal principles, and continues to defend the right to freely choose how he will live. 

Integrity -- the true measure of a man is in the word he keeps. 

Monica Benderman is the wife of Sgt. Kevin Benderman, Conscientious Objector to war and the current status of this country, and currently serving a prison sentence at the RCF at Ft. Lewis, WA. To learn more, please visit www.BendermanTimeline.com and www.BendermanDefense.org. Kevin and Monica may be contacted at mdawnb@coastalnow.net.

Other Articles by Kevin and Monica Benderman

* From Chaos to Conscience to Peace
* Moral Courage
* The Roller Coaster Ride
* Where is Peace
* Open Letter to President Bush and Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
* An Open Letter to My Husbandís Chain of Command: The Players of the Game
* The Freedom of Choice
* A Matter of Conscience

* One Man Has Stopped Killing: Hope for More to Do the Same
An Open Letter to Our Leaders From a Concerned Iraq War Soldier

Related Articles

* In Praise of Kevin Benderman by Norman Solomon
* CO Status for Army Sgt. Kevin Benderman Denied by Robert Finnegan
* Army Sgt. Benderman Steps Up to Plate, CO Status Pending by Robert Finnegan
* US Army Sergeant Kevin Benderman Charged With Desertion by Robert Finnegan
* Army Sgt Refuses Redeployment to Iraq; 2 Soldiers Attempt Suicide, 17 Go AWOL by Robert Finnegan
* Kevin Benderman, Alvin York, and the Voice of Conscience by Joel T. Helfrich
* To War or Not to War, That is the Question by Jack Dalton

:: Article nr. 22016 sent on 29-mar-2006 03:40 ECT


Link: www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar06/Benderman28.htm

:: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website.

The section for the comments of our readers has been closed, because of many out-of-topics.
Now you can post your own comments into our Facebook page: www.facebook.com/uruknet

Warning: include(./share/share2.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/content/25/8427425/html/vhosts/uruknet/colonna-centrale-pagina-ansi.php on line 385

Warning: include(): Failed opening './share/share2.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/local/php5_6/lib/php') in /home/content/25/8427425/html/vhosts/uruknet/colonna-centrale-pagina-ansi.php on line 385

[ Printable version ] | [ Send it to a friend ]

[ Contatto/Contact ] | [ Home Page ] | [Tutte le notizie/All news ]

Uruknet on Twitter

:: RSS updated to 2.0

:: English
:: Italiano

:: Uruknet for your mobile phone:

Uruknet on Facebook

:: Motore di ricerca / Search Engine

the web

:: Immagini / Pictures


The newsletter archive

L'Impero si è fermato a Bahgdad, by Valeria Poletti

Modulo per ordini


:: Newsletter

:: Comments

Haq Agency
Haq Agency - English

Haq Agency - Arabic

AMSI - Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq - English

AMSI - Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq - Arabic

Font size
1 2 3

:: All events


[ home page] | [ tutte le notizie/all news ] | [ download banner] | [ ultimo aggiornamento/last update 28/08/2019 00:45 ]

Uruknet receives daily many hacking attempts. To prevent this, we have 10 websites on 6 servers in different places. So, if the website is slow or it does not answer, you can recall one of the other web sites: www.uruknet.info www.uruknet.de www.uruknet.biz www.uruknet.org.uk www.uruknet.com www.uruknet.org - www.uruknet.it www.uruknet.eu www.uruknet.net www.uruknet.web.at.it

:: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
::  We always mention the author and link the original site and page of every article.
uruknet, uruklink, iraq, uruqlink, iraq, irak, irakeno, iraqui, uruk, uruqlink, saddam hussein, baghdad, mesopotamia, babilonia, uday, qusay, udai, qusai,hussein, feddayn, fedayn saddam, mujaheddin, mojahidin, tarek aziz, chalabi, iraqui, baath, ba'ht, Aljazira, aljazeera, Iraq, Saddam Hussein, Palestina, Sharon, Israele, Nasser, ahram, hayat, sharq awsat, iraqwar,irakwar All pictures

url originale


I nostri partner - Our Partners:

TEV S.r.l.

TEV S.r.l.: hosting


Progetto Niz

niz: news management



digitbrand: ".it" domains


Worlwide Mirror Web-Sites:
www.uruknet.info (Main)
www.uruknet.us (USA)
www.uruknet.su (Soviet Union)
www.uruknet.ru (Russia)
www.uruknet.it (Association)
www.uruknet.mobi (For Mobile Phones)
www.uruknet.org.uk (UK)
www.uruknet.de (Germany)
www.uruknet.ir (Iran)
www.uruknet.eu (Europe)
wap.uruknet.info (For Mobile Phones)
rss.uruknet.info (For Rss Feeds)

Vat Number: IT-97475012153