Posted on 04/25/2012 11:34:36 AM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
SAN DIEGO (AP) - The Marine Corps said Wednesday it has decided to discharge a sergeant for criticizing President Barack Obama on Facebook.
The Corps said Sgt. Gary Stein will be given an other-than-honorable discharge for violating Pentagon policy limiting speech of service members.
(Excerpt) Read more at wvva.com ...
Well the “unorganized militia” is looking for a few good men.
Let’s hear from “Oath Keepers” There certainly ought be several PATRIOT groups willing to keep this Patriot busy .
Clearly the officer’s oath can never be kept. The military will always be just as corrupt as the one who leads it. Just a fact of life; better to accept it.
I’m praying that God will let our end come quickly and with relatively little suffering for the innocent. It’s coming; there is no one willing to stop it.
Everyone needs a good weather report.
What happened to the military folks who criticized Joe Bite-Me (the acting President, according to the 20th Amendment)?
By that I guess you mean that every officer violate the rest of his oath when he makes an independent judgement regarding the fitness of the political leadership of the country. Is that correct? Or is this more hyperbole?
I’m praying that God will let our end come quickly and with relatively little suffering for the innocent. It’s coming; there is no one willing to stop it.
I pray for that as well, but for different reasons. We have a political process in this country, use it and quit crying about hoping some military officer will save you from your fellow citizens. Be a citizen, the ballot box and the soap box haven't been exhausted. The cartridge box is still full, but not required as yet.
Somebody posted the guidelines for political speech for military personnel when this issue first surfaced and political discourse is not forbidden in any way. What is forbidden is wearing your uniform while you do it, or doing it when publicly representing the US military. That’s why Stein was twice given the all-clear for what he was doing - since he had a disclaimer saying that his site was not associated with the US military.
Tell me exactly how an officer is able to “protect and defend the US Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic”. Give me specifics. If there was a foreign or domestic enemy (and at this point we don’t know for sure which it is) acting as commander-in-chief, what would a sworn officer be able and required to do to protect the US Constitution? Specifically.
If it can’t be done then whoever administers oaths to officers right now needs to be jailed for entrapment.
As for political processes, tell me who owns the company who counts the votes - the only position which counts - and what I can do to make sure that any political process obeys any laws whatsoever.
I have 3 nephews in the USMC - 2 of them officers. I’m not crying for myself. If I’m crying, it is for them.
I’m working my tail off trying to save this country and if you don’t know that by now, then you need to start asking some people about it.
I can’t believe that this warrants and OTH. When I was in the Navy I had several criminals that I couldn’t get OTH’s for despite them being guilty of theft and fraud. I would think once this has died down a bit that he would be able to appeal the disposition and get it upgraded to general.
That's the facts and if his superiors say he's out he's out.
I don't have any respect or tolerance for anyone in uniform who brings dishonor to the fine men and women we have serving this nation.
Our military has become political.
It is the epitome of being gullible, to think that an enlisted person is going to be fairly and judiciously assessed.
An example of the political double standard.
All of the homosexual military members who violated “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Do you really believe they were all tossed as this guys was?
I know they weren’t, because some of the scumbags were on the news in uniform. A much clearer violation of the said Article, this man is accused of violating.
More hyperbole. Since you have no 'specific' facts, there are no 'specific' actions. In general, the officer is charged to fulfill whatever his MOS requires of him.
If it can’t be done then whoever administers oaths to officers right now needs to be jailed for entrapment.
Please put out the fire on your head! The military in this country is under civilian political control. They are not independent contractors. Don't like it, pass a Constitutional amendment to change it.
I have currently have members in all branches, Officer and enlisted and spent 21 years in the Corps myself. This debate isn't their job, and I'd bet that your nephews agree. They vote, they are participating in the process. That is their duty at this point.
I’m working my tail off trying to save this country
Great, continue, this particular path (military) isn't the way. Do you hammer you nephews about taking their oaths? Do you share your vision of an officer revolt with them? I'd be interested in their response if you do.
As another poster has said (paraphrased), if you want to be vocal about you political views, then get out. If you are in talk about it with your buddies, stay out of print and when required STFU.
Be that as it may, if you want to serve then serve and shut up...
The military and military life is not, nor should it be, for everybody. If politics is more important to a person than their love and fidelity to this country they should not serve..
I don’t accept your premise that this man didn’t love and have fidelity to his country.
He also qualified his statement that was the focus of the charge.
“Stein later clarified that statement saying he would not follow unlawful orders.”
During a hearing, a military prosecutor submitted screen grabs of Stein's postings on one Facebook page he created called Armed Forces Tea Party, which the prosecutor said included the image of Obama on a "Jackass" movie poster. Stein also superimposed Obama's image on a poster for "The Incredibles" movie that he changed to "The Horribles," military prosecutor Capt. John Torresala said.
You: political discourse is not forbidden in any way. What is forbidden is wearing your uniform while you do it, or doing it when publicly representing the US military.
While it passes for political commentary in the civilian world, what idiot in uniform would think it is a sensible take on 0bama for a military guy to advocate. Belongs in a bar.
At the hearing this month at Camp Pendleton, Torresala argued that Stein's behavior repeatedly violated Pentagon policy and should be dismissed after he ignored warnings from his superiors about his postings.
What an idiot! No sympathy.
Was that the 'Screw 0bama' or somthing else?
From the article: At the hearing this month at Camp Pendleton, Torresala argued that Stein's behavior repeatedly violated Pentagon policy and should be dismissed after he ignored warnings from his superiors about his postings.
Nobody has to follow unlawful orders, so that isn't a big deal. He ignored the counseling, hoping to score a political victory. Didn't make it.
That is not my premise, my premise is that if politics is more important to an individual than their love and fidelity to this country they should not serve.
Its a simple concept that simple grunts like me, my father and my grandfather and millions of others before were able to understand and nothing has changed to make the concept suddenly incomprehensible.
Absolutely. He knew exactly what the price he would pay would be. He has no basis for complaint now.
He knew what the result would be and obviously did not care. Every soldier/sailor/marine...knows.
“Was that the ‘Screw 0bama’ or somthing else?”
Silly hyperbole. I find it funny that a rant like that is believed to be a violation of Article 34.
“Nobody has to follow unlawful orders, so that isn’t a big deal. He ignored the counseling”
You’ve got this mixed up. It is the superiors that ignored the content of what the counseling was related to. His qualification of “unlawful orders”, is critical to the charges.
Superiors, even in the military, are sometimes wrong. So, are courts. Initially, I thought he was obviously wrong, due to the warnings from his superiors. But, I’d like to see how the “unlawful orders” was refuted by the prosecutor. That should have changed things. I’ll bet the refutations were weak at best.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.