Posted on 03/01/2007 11:15:31 AM PST by standingfirm
Just breaking....no more yet.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Fire this SOB too!
I've seen up close what a family has to go through to get treatment for a soldier that had a serious head wound. The VA and the DOD have been screwing up!
Every one of these kids that have been seriously injured should have as much in their pockets as the 911 families do.
If we cannot take care of the families of our dead and for our wounded and their families bring them all home!
Some give with their lives, some give for the rest of their lives.
They went outside their chain of command and talked to the media. Probably without all the information...jsut what they saw.
The CSM was within his right to tell them that.
I'm PAO myself and would have said the same thing to the soldiers.
Newsflash - they've been in a sad state for years, but now that we're actually in a protracted military conflict, this sorry fact is finally making the headlines.
Another thing to keep in mind too is that WRACH is scheduled to be closed...combined with Bethesda and a new larger and more modern facility is to be built at Ft. Belvoir as well.
Obviously it's necessary to prohibit military servicepeople from speaking to the media or anyone else about anything even remotely related to military operations, or communications/transport/weapons systems. However, the only possible outcome from gagging them on other matters, such as the conditions under which they're receiving medical care here in the US while not serving in any active capacity, is to protect wrongdoers who outrank them.
I don't think the American taxpayers as a whole approve of this sort of restriction. Not only does it leave wounded soldiers with no recourse if their superiors choose to ignore their very valid complaints, but it leaves the rest of the taxpayers deceived about how their tax dollars are being spent. All the reports I've seen say this situation has been ongoing for a very long time, and I have to think that plenty of soldiers had tried registering complaints through the right channels before going to the media. Apparently squealing to the media has gotten corrective action underway, where going through official channels failed.
Less-critical?
Weren't there wounded servicemen being treated there? How could that be anything less than very critical?
You're correct. This is a clear abuse of power in this case.
That's why the military has the Inspector General system and allows military members to complain directly to their Congressional representatives. From what I understand about his attitude, I think the Army took the right action by relieving him of his Command. I can't understand why it took over two years to fix this, though.
I'm a 40% disabled vet. I work across the street from the VA clinic and still elect not to use it. I agree with everything you said. I tried using the VA a few years ago and it took me six months to get an appointment. I had a reaction to the medication they put me on and tried to get back in to see the doctor and it was going to take six more months to be seen.
The military/VA medical system has been a disaster since long before this war. No one gave a crap then. The only reason that anyone printed that report is because it was convenient to their cause, which is making our military look bad. Officers get relieved of command all the time over much smaller things than this. It's just what they do to make it publicly look like things will change. This should have happened long ago. I'm glad it's happening now, but I won't hold my breath until I see real changes. Right now, it's just symbolic.
Your original question was whether they got their rights back. I was just pointing out that there was nothing to "get back". The rules about speaking to the press have always been there.
You got that right. My husband's uncle died at WRAMC many years ago. My in laws couldn't believe that a military hospital was so awful. They still talk about how awful the hospital was many years later.
Generally speaking, Congress may make laws abridging the freedom of speech, religion and assembly for members of the military, pursuant to its Art. I, Sec. 8 authority to "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces". See generally Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 (1974); Goldman v. Weinberger, 475 U.S. 503 (1986). The courts have upheld military orders proscribing speech in a number of contexts, and they have also upheld the UCMJ provisions making it a crime to disparage our nation's political leaders. Likewise, the courts have upheld federal regulations requiring pre-publication review (known to lawyers as "prior restraint") of manuscripts written by DOD and CIA personnel, something that is very tightly regulated in the civilian 1st Amendment context. So while I think there's a general freedom of speech issue here, there probably isn't a viable legal claim here. The maintenance of "good order and discipline" in the ranks trumps the right to free speech, at least according to the U.S. Supreme Court and its concepts of ordered liberty.
"Weren't there wounded servicemen being treated there? How could that be anything less than very critical?"
My understanding is that this was temporary housing for outpatients that needed to stay in the area for continuing outpatient treatment at WRAMC, which has pretty decent facilities. I know WRAMC has just opened a beautiful outpatient treatment clinic for severely disabled (i.e., quadriplegics and paraplegics) active-duty here in the Pentagon. I believe the staff is so overburdened by the very high numbers of casualties from VBIEDs and suicide (homicide) bombers that there just isn't the capacity to worry about facilities maintenance.
I'm not involved in any way with the medical side of the house, so to a degree I'm speculating based on what I see every day here...
TC
see 53......you are correct.
According to Fox News he had only been there for six months and the guy who was before him was there for a much longer time and got a promotion!
Someone also said Hillary was just there a while ago and might of lit a fire
Your a hundred pct right but congress is more concerned with protecting the airlines
I don't think he could have moved much higher.
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.