Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
The same rules DO NOT APPLY to enlisted:
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.
If you look closely at the uniforms in the photos, none of these are commissioned officers.
Therefore--while keeping themselves annonymous is smart to keep themselves out of trouble, they are not violating any laws or their oath to support and defend the Constitution.
I believe Article 92 of the UCMJ is used in these cases.
I agree. There are the political and corporate elites who want an end to all privacy so that it will shut down the Jeffersonian instincts that made our country great, but now makes the elites squirm. When everything you say is public it stifles freedom of speech. Had it all been public then our 1776 would have never occurred.
Should commissioned officers have used contemptuous words against McNamara and LBJ who laughed when they misrepresented the aggression of the North Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin incident, so as to falsely justify the need to expand the Vietnam War? My growing concern is the growing lack of institutional ethics.
The youth today have not yet lived long enough to become as cynical of the crooked politics, unethical governmental ambitions and the lack integrity as have many. Hopefully they will.