• Kilauea Gym • Military actions in Iraq prison • Wilcox nurses Kilauea Gym I am thoroughly puzzled by the recent article on the ongoing “controversy” about the roof of the Kilauea Gym. Hurricane ‘Iniki destroyed the building. The county
• Kilauea Gym
• Military actions in Iraq prison
• Wilcox nurses
Kilauea Gym
I am thoroughly puzzled by the recent article on the ongoing “controversy” about the roof of the Kilauea Gym.
Hurricane ‘Iniki destroyed the building. The county hired contractor(s) to rebuild it. The building’s plans called for a roof. It generally goes without saying that a roof is not supposed to leak.
The building was built, a contractor installed the roof, and it then leaked.
If I had someone install a roof, and it leaked, I would demand that it be fixed (at no additional charge) and would consider filing a suit if it were not.
The county, on the other hand, seems to have accepted the leaky roof and after several years agreed to pay the same contractor an additional $100,000 to “fix” the leak. It seems the contractor claimed that it was the lack of insulation that “caused” the leak. So, insulation was added and a new roof built over the top. And it still leaks. It seems obvious to me (admittedly not an engineer) that it is not “lack of insulation” that caused the leak.
And yet, the county council now has to meet in secret “executive session” because they fear a suit against the county. Logically, the county should be filing a suit for non-performance of the implied guaranty that a roof will keep out water.
What did our county officials do that they fear is actionable? What sort of incompetence has led to the likelihood that we might have to pay out more money and still have a useless gym building that cannot be used in the rain? This might be acceptable in the Mojave Desert but not in Kilauea. No more secret meetings. Let’s hear what has been done, and perhaps remove incompetence from the county administration.
Stan Godes
Hanalei
Military actions in Iraq prison
As a Vietnam veteran (USCG Combat Squadron One, ‘65-’69) and former military instructor in Special Services, I have been observing with deep sadness the revelations regarding actions of MP’s and other U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib and other locations that are in clear violation not only of the Geneva Convention, but of the Uniform Code of Military Justice itself.
Article 92 of the UCMJ states:
Any person subject to this chapter who is guilty of cruelty toward, or oppression or maltreatment of, any person subject to his orders shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
Article 93 states:
Any person subject to this chapter who—
(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;
(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by any member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or
(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
Article 92 is self-explanatory—very clear. The operative word in Article 93 is “lawful.” Any order given that violates Article 92 or the Geneva Convention is unlawful. Any person who has been in the military for any length of time at all, and particularly someone assigned to an MP unit, should know this. Any soldier, sailor, marine, airman, or coast guardsman who is given an unlawful order is not obligated to obey it…they are, in fact, obligated to not obey it, and to report the incident to the next higher superior or the Judge Advocate General (JAG).
Only one soldier in this instance did that, after the fact, and then by referring to the photographs taken. It took a lot of courage, I’m sure, for him to even do that.
What I’m hearing from Spc. Spivits’ and Pfc. England’s families and attorneys…that they were “only following orders…” is unacceptable ethically, morally, and militarily.
I am old enough to remember the aftermath of the Nuremburg Trials of Nazi war criminals. “Only following orders” didn’t fly at Nuremburg, and it shouldn’t be allowed to in this instance.
On the other hand, those who gave those unlawful orders…and the ones above them, and above them, and so on…who became aware of, or perhaps participated in the instigation of the actions and either allowed them to continue or indirectly perpetrated them, cannot be allowed to escape either.
Elaine Albertson
Waimea
Wilcox nurses
Hawaii Pacific Health (HPH), the O‘ahu owners of Wilcox Hospital, have found an excuse to ignore the agreement they made with Kaua‘i’s nurses. They’ve found a way to avoid negotiating the long overdue contracts they promised to make. It saves them a lot of money. And in the process they’re trampling all over the nurses at Wilcox Hospital. It’s not hard to abuse nurses. After all, they’re hardly going to walk out on the neighbors, families and friends they care for all day.
Kaua‘i’s nurses negotiated their working contract in good faith with HPH. Now HPH won’t honor it. Dr. Bill Evslin, hospital president, says he recognizes nurses rights, but there are parts of the contract he can’t honor at this time. No doubt there’s a great future for a man like that in the world of politics, but in the real world of people who honor their word and stand by their name you can’t get away with that. When you have a contract you honor it, not just the parts you like. All 185 nurses at Wilcox immediately recognize when someone is honoring a contract or not. All 185 Wilcox nurses are bound by the American Nurses Association code of ethics. Ethics is what guides all of those nurses. So they stand by their word. If only Dr. Evslin, the well regarded, but naive temporary CEO (they don’t last long at Wilcox), had a similar standard of ethics.
Ravida M. Benjamin
RN, BSN
Honolulu
