• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Air Force colonel suspended after bad-mouthing Bush

i was under the impression that, even in the millitary, your still a citizen of the US of A and are still backed by the constitution which gives you Freedom of Speech.
 
People in the military don't have full constitutional rights AFAIK. There are certain restrictions placed on some freedoms. I don't really know for sure - surely someone in here is active or retired military and will know for sure.
 
Originally posted by: zayened
i was under the impression that, even in the millitary, your still a citizen of the US of A and are still backed by the constitution which gives you Freedom of Speech.
Click to expand...

In a sense, I agree. OTOH, I'd probably get sacked for trash-talking the CEO of my company, which is what the President basically is from a military perspective, so it seems somewhat sensible.
 
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
People in the military don't have full constitutional rights AFAIK. There are certain restrictions placed on some freedoms. I don't really know for sure - surely someone in here is active or retired military and will know for sure.
Click to expand...

What if this person was drafted in the military? (Let's pretend it's the 1960s) Can the government take away your right to free speech without your consent? They already enlisted you to fight in thier war, now they can throw you in jail if you complain?

Even if it is law, it's still a load of BS.
 
Originally posted by: zayened
i was under the impression that, even in the millitary, your still a citizen of the US of A and are still backed by the constitution which gives you Freedom of Speech.
Click to expand...

Military law specifically prohibits "contemptuous words against the president" and other political leaders. The prohibition against anti-government speech goes back to 1776, when soldiers were forbidden from using "traitorous or disrespectful words." The rules were updated several times and "traitorous or disrespectful" changed to "contemptuous." The president, vice president, Congress and state governors also were specifically banned as targets of bad-mouthing.

In 1950, Congress enacted the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the prohibition against contemptuous language survived intact as Article 88, and, for the first time, applied only to commissioned officers.

[Edit] Just so no one gets on the "bash-Bush" bandwagon, this isn't new.

In fact, an Air Force general was fined, reprimanded and forced into early retirement for referring to Clinton as "gay-loving," "womanizing," "draft-dodging" and "pot smoking," Ryan said.

Another Air Force general was reprimanded for telling an inappropriate joke about Clinton at an Air Force base in Texas. Two Marine Corps officers also were administratively punished for published letters to newspapers that were disrespectful of the president. That led to military officials warning military members against engaging in similar conduct.
 
What if this person was drafted in the military? (Let's pretend it's the 1960s) Can the government take away your right to free speech without your consent? They already enlisted you to fight in thier war, now they can throw you in jail if you complain?

Even if it is law, it's still a load of BS.
Click to expand...
According to the article, the law only applies to commissioned officers. If you're a conscript or an enlistee, you could bitch at will 🙂

 
Thanks, HotChic. To clarify, I wasn't saying it was right or wrong, I was just trying to get the facts straight.

Edit: If memory serves, the idea behind it was to prevent military overthrown of the civilian government. Laws like that are reason we have a civilian government in control of the military. It is also illegal for any elected official to be active military, as I recall.
 
What if this person was drafted in the military? (Let's pretend it's the 1960s) Can the government take away your right to free speech without your consent? They already enlisted you to fight in thier war, now they can throw you in jail if you complain?
Click to expand...
Funny!
I was drafted in 1965 and I used to snicker to myself when some 90 day wonder told me to shine my boots or polish my brass belt buckle. I'm thinking - you drafted me, pay me $78 a month, handed me a rifle and plopped my ass in a rice paddy in Nam, what the hell are you going to do to me, send me to my room?

 
888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
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.


 
Originally posted by: zayened
i was under the impression that, even in the millitary, your still a citizen of the US of A and are still backed by the constitution which gives you Freedom of Speech.
Click to expand...

Not everything is applicable to the military

Classified information and keeping the integrity overrule first amendment rights
 
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
People in the military don't have full constitutional rights AFAIK. There are certain restrictions placed on some freedoms. I don't really know for sure - surely someone in here is active or retired military and will know for sure.
Click to expand...

ahh, I see. So the people who are to fight for freedom, are the ones getting the least freedom?

Thanks, just clarifying.
 
or think the Crusader program is good
Click to expand...

The crusader is a kick arse weapons systems, but competely impractical to transport. It weighs in at more than an m-1 abrams since it requires 2 40 ton peices to operate. It would be great to deploy in europe if we were still waiting for the russians to invade there. But it would require over 60 c-5 trips to deploy a battlegroup of these things. The crusaider is dead for a reason, because money is better spent elsewhere.
 
Originally posted by: Qosis
Originally posted by: Heisenberg People in the military don't have full constitutional rights AFAIK. There are certain restrictions placed on some freedoms. I don't really know for sure - surely someone in here is active or retired military and will know for sure.
Click to expand...
ahh, I see. So the people who are to fight for freedom, are the ones getting the least freedom? Thanks, just clarifying.
Click to expand...

Well... not the least, but less in that there are constraints on their behavior. Commissioned officers know the rules. They do have the option of resigning that commission. Then they are free to be openly critical. As a practical matter where people are in an organization dedicated to killing, and face it, that is why they have bombs and tanks and guns, everyone had better be with the program.
 
ahh, I see. So the people who are to fight for freedom, are the ones getting the least freedom
Click to expand...

Yeah but we get to play with some really cool toys. 😉

Seriously though I've never served with anyone who felt that way. We all understand that we must operate under a different set of rules in order to remain effective. A unified chain of command is essential to the success of the military. The people listed in that article are or are potentially in that chain of command.
 
Originally posted by: zayened
i was under the impression that, even in the millitary, your still a citizen of the US of A and are still backed by the constitution which gives you Freedom of Speech.
Click to expand...


If your in the military you are not allowed to show dissent to your commander in chief. Imagine how many military people had to bite their tongues during the Monica Lewinsky days.

I saw the guys editorial, he is an idiot and how he ever made lt. col. is beyond me. Saying Bush knew of the attacks and let them happen because the economy was slumping. What a frickin idiot.


Military law specifically prohibits "contemptuous words against the president" and other political leaders. The prohibition against anti-government speech goes back to 1776, when soldiers were forbidden from using "traitorous or disrespectful words." The rules were updated several times and "traitorous or disrespectful" changed to "contemptuous." The president, vice president, Congress and state governors also were specifically banned as targets of bad-mouthing.

 
When I was in the military, I use to tell people that I gave up my rights to defend your rights. You do loose a lot of freedoms when joining the military, but that is a price you have to pay.
 
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the term "Clear and Present Danger" could apply to his statements. The nation doesn't need that kind of talk right now, because... it just isn't true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top