Since no one is paying attention their outrageous blather about their mythical exploits in Iraq, Veterans for Peace and Iraq Veterans Against the War have decided that they’ll just complain about anything. An article last month in Sir! No Sir! (the same rocket scientists who think that Robin and I are one and the same are now ConLaw experts) decries a local Army commander’s publishing pictures of DWI arrestees on his post;
One of the bedrock principles of our criminal justice system is the presumption of innocence. This means that when someone is accused of a crime he or she has the right to try to prove their innocence by challenging the prosecutor’s evidence and offering their own witnesses and/or evidence to rebut the charges before a jury of their peers.
Commanding General Michael Oates has undermined this fundamental right by publishing the photographs and identities of Ft Drum soldiers who’ve been arrested for drunk driving in the four most recent issues of the base newspaper, “The Blizzard.” The paper has carried photos and news notes about each Drum soldier who’s been arrested for drinking while driving. Oates has told reporters that he is doing this to combat a growing tendency among soldiers to drink and drive. He apparently believes that by humiliating those accused of drunk driving others will be deterred from this behaviour [sic]. He also hasn’t stated whether the newspaper will publish retractions or apologies for those soldiers who are eventually acquitted of DWI charges or have their convictions overturned on appeal.
Well, when you put it like that…but wait. Don’t thousands of local papers across the country do the same thing in their “police blotter” features? Like my hometown paper, the Wayne County Times, coincidently in a county near Fort Drum, which, in the paper edition publishes pictures of the suspects in all of their inebriated, disheveled glory. So this commander is doing nothing that other communities have done to combat this dangerous behavior. So what’s the beef?
Members of the Iraq Veterans Against War (IVAW) at Ft Drum noted that many of the 48 soldiers who had their photos printed in the first Blizzard story, had returned from Iraq combat last November with the Second Brigade. “When you return to the base after a month or so of leave, that’s when PTSD often starts to kick in,” commented Sp/4 Eli Wright.
[…]
Citizen Soldier attorneys have been researching the possiblity of a federal lawsuit to challenge Oates’ policy as an unconstitutional abridgment of due process rights. They are also discussing the problem with the New York State Civil Liberties Union, based in Syracuse.
Ahh, now I see…it’s an affirmative action and employment drive for local attorneys. The Left is always demanding that soldiers be treated as civilians in matters like fraternization, but not when it’s used as a crime deterrent. This is just the VFP and IVAW trying to undermine the order and discipline of the military.
The article says “many of the 48 soldiers” who were included in the first publication of the blotter report had just returned from Iraq. It’s been my experience that “many” in the IVAW actually means “few”. If there were indeed “many” we’d have seen a real number, but since there weren’t enough to be convincing of their argument, we don’t get to see an actual count. How about praise for the hundreds of others who returned from Iraq and didn’t drink and drive? Now that’s “many”.
The VFP and IVAW claim that they’re only concerned with the mental health of the troops, that the rise in alcoholism is a symptom of their PTSD. Well, I’m no medical professional, so I have no opinion on that subject. What I do know, after living in the Fort Drum community during and after my military service is that alcoholism has always been a problem at the remote post located near Canada (where the drinking age is 18) and where were these activists when Fort Drum deployed 50% of it’s population every day for the Clinton years – when every soldier on that post was either deployed or preparing to deploy for the entire time I lived there (from 1992 until 1999)?
Fort Drum is sorely in need of better medical facilities, but that need has been there since the post became an active post in 1985 – where have these “advocates” been for the last 23 years?
All I’m asking for is consistency.
