http://www.thestar.com/…

The first American war resister deported from Canada – where he had fled after refusing to be deployed to Iraq – was sentenced to 15 months in jail yesterday at a court martial hearing in Colorado.

Pte. Robin Long, 25, of Boise, Idaho, was also given a dishonourable discharge after pleading guilty to charges of desertion.

The sentence was the longest any convicted army deserter had received since the beginning of the 2003 Iraq war, said retired U.S. Army Col. Ann Wright, a former diplomat who resigned from her post out of protest at the war’s outset.

Wright testified against the legality of the Iraq war on Long’s behalf.

Of the thousands of soldiers sentenced for desertion or going AWOL – and the estimated two dozen tried for protesting the war – only former army sergeant Kevin Benderman received an equal sentence in 2005.

About two-dozen anti-war supporters gathered around the courthouse at Fort Carson in Colorado Springs, Colo., yesterday afternoon as a military judge handed down Long’s sentence.

Though initially sentenced to 30 months in prison, that time was reduced to the 15-month maximum military prosecutors had agreed on when arranging a plea deal last week.

Long, 25, came to Canada in 2005 to flee a scheduled deployment to Iraq. While here, he was briefly engaged to an Ontario woman – with whom he had a child last year – before he moved to British Columbia, supporters have said.

He was deported and taken into the custody of the U.S. Army last month following a series of failed attempts to gain refugee status or permanent residency in Canada.

Late last week, Long’s lawyers reached an agreement with prosecutors that would see him plead guilty on charges of desertion with the intent to stay away permanently.

In return, prosecutors agreed not to move forward on the most serious charges of desertion with the intent to shirk hazardous duty.

Standing calmly and waiting for his sentence after three hours of testimony at yesterday’s hearing, Long appeared stoic and ready to serve his time in a military jail, supporters said.

“He was very calm and very measured,” said Wright. “He fully anticipated that he would be serving the entire 15 months.”

The dishonourable discharge he received could also go down as a felony offence and could restrict his future right to vote or carry a firearm, his lawyer said.

“(He) would pretty much become a second-class citizen,” his Oklahoma-based civilian lawyer, James M. Branum, told the Star earlier this week.

Like many of the other roughly 200 other American war resisters currently living in Canada, Long has said he opposed the conflict in Iraq on legal and moral grounds.

13th Amendment of the United States Constitution:

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Unlike property, a man’s will is inalienable and therefore intransferable. Should a contract provide for payments upfront then breaking the contract would constitute theft which the person breaking the contract and therefore commiting the theft would be expected to pay back. However, that person would still be free to exit without the threat of violence against them.

Murray Rothbard covers this in better detail in The Ethics of Liberty.

It’s been about two weeks since I last sent an email to the ANSA.

To Whom this May Concern

My last two emails have gone unanswered by your organization.
I would appreciate a response to the questions I have listed below.

Editing your website is not an acceptable alternative.

Thank you.

As intended, I will continue to contact them until I receive a reply.

After not receiving a reply from the ANSA to my first letter and after noticing them changing their website a few times, I decided to send them another email:

To Whom This May Concern:

I see that your website has changed to accommodate inquiries on:

• those that wish not to participate in mandatory service
• is mandatory service constitutional?

I have a few questions:

You fail to explain the consequences of not participating in mandatory service.

1. What do YOU think should happen if I or others chose not to participate?

You also say that mandatory service is constitutional, alluding to Supreme Court cases that held civic obligations over individual rights. Just because the Supreme Court has ruled in favor, it doesn’t make it constitutional: Roe v Wade, Jim Crow Laws, Brown v Board of Education. The Supreme Court has changed their opinion before.

The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution makes involuntary servitude illegal under any US jurisdiction whether at the hands of the US government or in the private sphere, except as punishment for a crime.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. What crime are you accusing me of committing and finding me guilty for?

I also noticed that your organization recently added that they do not prefer either means of national service; voluntary or mandatory.

Americans for a National Service Act supports whichever program works best and gets the job done.

I find the indifference of this statement alarming. Your organization’s vision for this country shows complete disregard for the individual rights and freedoms of the people that inhabit it–the same people that you wish to put into mandatory service if it is “determined” the best program available.

You also mention “gets the job done.”

3. What exactly is the end goal?

4. And what scale will you use to measure when your vision has been attained?

We also believe that in order to sustain that involvement there needs to be a system.

5. Can you elaborate more on this “system” and explain how it would enforce and sustain said involvement?

I’d like to thank you in advance for answering all my questions.

I’ll continue to send them emails until I hear back from them.
As far as I’m concerned, edits to their website are not acceptable responses to my questions.

http://nationalserviceact.org/10.html

I had noticed this the other day but thought I just hadn’t paid close enough attention to it originally. xyz this morning independently noticed new sections on their FAQ. It appears to have been updated the 1st or there abouts:

What if I don’t want to do any service?

This is a superb question.

Hopefully, enough people will volunteer to serve so that individuals not interested in National Service can be accommodated. How many people is enough? That’s tough to say. How many more good teachers and tutors do we need to make American education globally competitive again? The Iraq War may have been a war of choice but the next war may not be. What happens if the volunteer force isn’t big enough? If global climate change is what some scientists say it is, how many Americans need to be involved in conservation and disaster relief? How much time should you devote to your community so it’s the type of place your family is happy to live in?

There is a simple choice here. We can do these things or we can pay someone else to do it for us (which typically means higher taxes and putting more trust in bureaucracies). And don’t be surprised if you don’t like the results when you relinquish your opportunity to make a difference to someone or something else.

Some people feel affronted by the idea of National Service because they view it as surrendering to government. Obviously, we don’t agree. We see it as average citizens taking back their civil institutions and actualizing government “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” At present, we’re having a difficult time keeping Americans (particularly young people) interested in and focused on the affairs of local, state, and federal government. This inattention has resulted in many abuses in the last few years. Our solution is to get more Americans involved via National Service (more ‘skin in the game’ if you will). Implied in this idea is a lack of faith that voting alone provides adequate accountability, responsiveness, and results. After all, what is casting a vote compared to doing?

All that being said, if you don’t want to serve then we hope you understand that American democracy will be poorer and less effective without the direct participation of your talent, intellect, and abilities.

Is mandatory National Service constitutional?

Yes.

The United States has practiced several forms of mandatory National Service throughout its history. The Militia Act of 1792 and the Selective Service System (a.k.a. the Draft) are the two most referenced examples. Probably the most commonly experienced form of mandatory service is jury duty. Also, it can be argued that paying taxes is a form of mandatory National Service.

One can reference dozens of US Supreme Court Cases that weighed individual rights versus civic obligations. The most prominent case on this matter is Butler v. Perry (1916). In this instance the Court ruled that the 13th Amendment does not apply to mandatory national service. For further information on the legal precedence of National Service click HERE.

So I checked Google Cache and found that as of June 24th, 2008 12:41:40 GMT the above two sections were not on the site. I’ve uploaded a snapshot from Google Cache here in case Google updates.

Notice they don’t answer the first question and the second question makes the assumption that just because something is constitutional it’s OK. It also assumes that just because the US Supreme Court says it’s constitutional it is. While in the legal system that may be true the 13th Amendment seems pretty clear to me.

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

If I must participate in some service against my will it seems to me to be by definition involuntary servitude/slavery. The 13th Amendment forbids that. I don’t care what some people in black dresses say. Conscription is both unconstitutional in that it violates the 13th Amendment and it goes against the concept that government is created at the consent of the governed to protect their rights. If the 13th isn’t enough you can take a look at the 5th and 14th too.

The reason these additions are noteworthy is that xyz had emailed them directly requesting what would occur if an individual refused to serve. She has yet to receive a personal reply but the FAQ as we have seen has been updated with a poor answer.

If there is no punishment for failing to participate in the “mandatory service” then it’s not mandatory just like “mandatory” participating in the census is in fact not.