Iraq war veteran jailed over 'violent' rap song
Soldier says hip hop lyrics were protest against 'unending war' and military's forced extended service policy
Chris McGreal, in Washington - guardian.co.uk, Wed. January 2010 17.52 GMT
Marc Hall, a junior member of an infantry unit, wrote the song in protest at the US army's unpopular policy of involuntarily extending soldiers' service and forcing them to return to Iraq or Afghanistan.
Hall completed a 14-month spell in Iraq last year, expecting to be discharged next month, but was told he would have to go back to Iraq under the policy known as stop-loss.
The army has charged Hall with threatening to "go on a rampage" and has ordered him to be held in a military prison in Georgia to await trial.
But the soldier's civilian lawyer, James Klimaski, said Hall was using the hip-hop genre, which often includes violent lyrics, to legitimately voice disgruntlement among troops at stop-loss. The stop-loss policy has forced 185,000 service personnel to stay in the military beyond their contracts to meet the demand over two wars. Klimaski said: "These lyrics don't mean anything. Gangsta rap songs are always talking about killing people. If you listen to what the song's about, not the specific lines, it's against stop-loss. And it's the anger of troops who go over and come back and go over again and come back in an unending war." .
Hall, who sings under the name Marc Watercus, directs his anger at officers. "Fuck you colonels, captains, E-7 and above. You think you so much bigger than I am? …" The song suggests he will round up the officers and put them against a wall. "I got a … magazine with 30 rounds, on a three-round burst, ready to fire down. Still against the wall, I grab my M-4, spray and watch all the bodies hit the floor. I bet you never stop-loss nobody no more."
Hall has issued a statement from military prison describing the song as free speech. He said he explained that the hardcore rap song "was a free expression of how people feel about the army and its stop-loss policy". He added: "The song was neither a physical threat nor any threat whatsoever … it was just hip-hop."
Kilmaski said Hall wrote the song last summer, a few months after returning from Iraq and about the time that soldiers in his unit became aware they would have to return to the Middle East. "The song was around the unit for a long time. They all talked with him about it. They didn't seem threatened before. But then it got close to going back to Iraq and they decided to put him in jail." .
What prompted Hall's arrest was his sending the song to the Pentagon, Klimaski said.
Hall's arrest came during a period of heightened sensitivity to threats within the army after officers were accused of ignoring warning signs before the killing of 13 people by Major Nidal Hasanin at Fort Hood in November.
The military said it had an obligation to investigate Hall's behaviour.
The Bush administration introduced stop-loss to ensure it had enough service personnel to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without enforcing a draft that would have been politically unpopular and brought home the true cost of the war to many people. Critics have described the policy as "involuntary servitude" and as a severe blow to morale. The military has said it will end stop-loss next year.
Obama, rather than changing Bush policy, appears comfortable with continuation of the stop-loss policy, making it his.
The option of a draft, after the Vietnam experience, probably has Pentagon brass and civilian upper crust there indisposed to suggest Obama change things in such a direction, yet with a surge, boots are required on the ground.
So the government's answer is continue stop-loss and deal with the disenchantment and PTSD fallout later. Postpone the reckoning and if any grunt is loud enough in voicing displeasure, jug the guy.
However, if they stick you in jail and keep you there, it will be other boots on the ground elsewhere -- and the risks and benefits can be weighed on an individual basis, as well as protest being "speech" that does have Constitutional safeguards.
It's interesting to guess how this will end. If a deal is cut on something less than a fully honorable discharge; will there be others in a queue for similar avoidance of stop-loss redeployment risk?
How many hip-hop infantry protester members can the Pentagon tolerate before it becomes a "movement?" Before someone gets jumped on with spurs? It may be even one will not be tolerated, and Marc Hall might be made a poster child of how not to mess with the brass.
I expect there are particular deployments in Afghanistan or Iraq that are more hazardous than others and if Hall is not prosecuted but shipped to dire surroundings it might resonate in the ranks as a message against a movement.