This advocacy campaign has expired. Please do NOT send any more letters to General Dubik. Thank you for your interest in speaking up for Lt. Watada. Stay tuned for more opportunities to lend your support.

Write to General Dubik at Fort Lewis. Use your own words and include this message:

Lt. Gen. James M. Dubik,

I urge you to drop all charges against Lt. Watada and to respect the constitutional prohibition on double jeopardy by not attempting to court martial him again. I also urge you to allow Lt. Watada to resign; he has now completed his initial service agreement with the Army.

Sincerely, _____________

Commanding General
Fort Lewis and I Corps
Lt. Gen. James M. Dubik
Bldg 2025 Stop 1
Fort Lewis, WA 98433

Fax: Fort Lewis Public Affairs Office (253) 967-0612
Phone: General Dubik's Aide 253-967-0022
and E-Mail Army Public Affairs: Mr. Paul Boyce, Office of the Chief Army Public Affairs, Paul.Boyce@hqda.army.mil

Educate your community by writing to the editor of your local newspaper -

You can choose one or more of these talking points to help increase public understanding of Lt. Watada's mistrial and why he should be allowed to resign. Click here for more information.

1.  An officer does not swear to blindly obey the orders of the commander in chief.

• A commissioned officer does not take the same oath as an enlisted person.
• An enlisted person swears to obey the orders of the president and officers above them.
• An officer swears to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic" and "bear true faith and allegiance to the same," i.e., the Constitution.

2.  Lt. Watada followed military protocol and went to his chain of command before going public with his statement.  Lt. Watada followed protocol and advice from the affairs officer at Fort Lewis before making his public statement on June 7, 2006.

3.  Officers are taught to be critical thinkers. Whether their conclusions are right or wrong, it is their duty and right to question orders. 

• Professor Richard Swain, of US Military Academy, West Point, was called by the prosecution as an expert in officership and traditions and customs of officers.  Swain testified that he teaches officers to be critical thinkers, and they should think for themselves.
• Professor Swain outlined the professional conduct for an officer who disagrees with a commanding officer.  According to the testimony of his commanding officers, Lt. Watada followed proper procedures.

4.  Lt. Watada's actions have not affected the morale of his company. Lt. Col. Williams James and Lt. Antonia of Fort Lewis both testified that Lt. Watada's actions caused discussion and controversy.  Lt. Antonia said that Lt. Watada's actions did not negatively impact the soldiers in his unit.

5.  The army court martial was not a fair and impartial trial.

• In a letter dated October 20, 2006 to U.S. Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, Lt. General Dubik stated that the military justice system "affords Soldiers extensive rights to ensure fair and impartial investigations and trials, just as in the civil system.  If this case goes to trial, 1Lt Watada will have an opportunity to present all relevant evidence."
• Decisions from the pre-trial hearing and the court martial were intended to prevent Lt. Watada and others from testifying regarding the legality of the Iraq War.  This prevented Lt. Watada from presenting any defense witnesses.

6.  The mistrial places Lt. Watada in double jeopardy if a new trial is recommended by General Dubik. The judge's abuse of judicial discretion and the mistrial that resulted have created a situation of double jeopardy should the government attempt to re-try Lt. Watada.

 7.  It's time for the army to accept Lt. Watada's resignation. Lt. Watada has conducted himself with honor and courage. It's time for the U.S. Army to do the same.