35 replies to this topic

[ThreePi]

Note, when you start each paragraph of your article with "Is it a coincidence that..." its usually a sign that you have no proof to anything you say and you're just using some random collection of facts to connect dots that don't connect.

http://www.ammoland..../#axzz1ywNdiu2M

[Fizzzzle]

I thought Boy Scouts were supposed to be a Mormon conspiracy?

[Occam's Chainsaw]

Yeah, he's pretty nuts. I remember a few years back, a club at West Point invited him to come speak. The auditorium was packed, and the following book signing had a huge line. Anyways, during his spiel, he ended up talking about his support for Mike Huckabee, and he and his wife went on to encourage us all to support Huckabee for all the good he's doing for America. Chuck then threatened to roundhouse kick liberal politicians.

It threw us all off in the auditorium, since we're taught, as members of the military, to keep our personal political beliefs to ourselves, as the Army is supposed to be an apolitical organization. It was just a weird experience, getting exposed to Norris' political craziness like that.

[freneticburn]

Occam, on 26 June 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

It threw us all off in the auditorium, since we're taught, as members of the military, to keep our personal political beliefs to ourselves, as the Army is supposed to be an apolitical organization. It was just a weird experience, getting exposed to Norris' political craziness like that.

Where if you say Obama sucks you get dishonorably discharged?  Yea.  Real apolitical .

People need to face the fact that we do live in a free country where you are free to say things even if other people dislike it.  The second we are no longer able to freely speak our opinions is the second our country fails to be free.  Just because it's a military gathering it doesn't mean the President or Democrats don't suck.  We aren't fucking China or Iran.

[Lopez]

Saying Obama sucks is completely political. In fact, I can't think of anything that is less apolitical.

[BIGBISCUIT]

Occam, on 26 June 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

It threw us all off in the auditorium, since we're taught, as members of the military, to keep our personal political beliefs to ourselves, as the Army is supposed to be an apolitical organization.

That's a laugh.

[freneticburn]

Lopez, on 27 June 2012 - 01:37 AM, said:

Saying Obama sucks is completely political. In fact, I can't think of anything that is less apolitical.

Agreed.  But criticizing the President or any political figure should lead into an argument or debate, not paperwork to be discharged from the military.  That's China style shit right there to negatively affect someone's life because of their political beliefs.

[ThreePi]

freneticburn, on 27 June 2012 - 04:33 AM, said:

Agreed.  But criticizing the President or any political figure should lead into an argument or debate, not paperwork to be discharged from the military.  That's China style shit right there to negatively affect someone's life because of their political beliefs.

I don't think the military exists for debate and honest discourse.

[ort]

When you are in the army, the president is your boss. It would be like saying your general or sergeant sucks. The army is not about being fair, it's a whole different ball of wax. You give up a lot of your rights as a citizen when you serve.

[Jason]

old

[zero-]

ThreePi, on 27 June 2012 - 09:31 AM, said:

I don't think the military exists for debate and honest discourse.

He doesn't know how the military operates due to the highly abnormal and intense nature of his stupidity.

In the military, if you criticize your superior, you will get fucked in the ass. The president is your commander-in-chief. You don't do that shit. Nothing to do with politics. It's the military and that's how you operate.

And you're not in the military to spread or have a discourse on your political beliefs. No one gives a shit. You just do your job.

[Jason]

zero-, on 27 June 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

He doesn't know how the military operates due to the highly abnormal and intense nature of his stupidity.

In the military, if you criticize your superior, you will get fucked in the ass. The president is your commander-in-chief. You don't do that shit. Nothing to do with politics. It's the military and that's how you operate.

And you're not in the military to spread or have a discourse on your political beliefs. No one gives a shit. You just do your job.

I guess we should have listened to the conservatives about keeping gays out of the military...

[freneticburn]

Jesus Christ.  I never realized so many people thought we lived in China.  No wonder nobody gives a shit about freedom anymore.

[zero-]

freneticburn, on 28 June 2012 - 12:57 AM, said:

Jesus Christ.  I never realized so many people thought we lived in China.  No wonder nobody gives a shit about freedom anymore.

The military is pretty much fucking China. Freedom is restricted in the military. Military is not a democracy. Jesus Christ. How are you this dense?

[Kaitlyn_Bykova]

LOL @ the military being a democracy.

In what universe has any military on this planet not been a dictatorship?

[zero-]

Kaitlyn_Bykova, on 28 June 2012 - 01:03 AM, said:

LOL @ the military being a democracy.

In what universe has any military on this planet not been a dictatorship?

Seriously. You'd have to be a real dumb fuck to go on about "freedom" and "military."

[Kaitlyn_Bykova]

zero-, on 28 June 2012 - 01:04 AM, said:

Seriously. You'd have to be a real dumb fuck to go on about "freedom" and "military."

Yeah I really don't know what he's going on about.

Ordinary Chinese citizens have more freedom than a US soldier and that's not even debatable.

[RileyLewis]

And it should stay that way, too.  The military exists to serve the civilian leadership.  If the military was allowed to hold its own opinions on issues then they might start to question decisions and our democracies might not be so free any more.

[Kaitlyn_Bykova]

RileyLewis, on 28 June 2012 - 01:39 AM, said:

And it should stay that way, too.  The military exists to serve the civilian leadership.  If the military was allowed to hold its own opinions on issues then they might start to question decisions and our democracies might not be so free any more.

Yup!

[freneticburn]

Maybe I'm not entirely clear about what I am bitching about.  I'm bitching about stuff like the Marine who was discharged from service because he said something on Facebook.  He said something.  He DID NOT disobey a reasonable order or put the President in danger.  That kind of shit is absurd.  In a non-combat situation there is no reason someone, soldier or not, should be punished for disagreement.  If they were in a combat situation and a soldier ignored or delayed an order in favor of debating or arguing it then I totally understand the need for discipline.  That's justified.  That's punishment for not following orders, not punishment for disagreement or criticism.  See the difference?  You can disagree with something and still do your job as you're told.

[Kaitlyn_Bykova]

You can't say shit about your boss on Facebook.

[zero-]

Kaitlyn_Bykova, on 28 June 2012 - 03:16 AM, said:

You can't say shit about your boss on Facebook.

This.

Do you have a job? I'm assuming you don't because most jobs have a social media policy in place. You can't say anything disparaging or criticize your workplace or boss on Facebook. It's harsh in both private and public sector.

[freneticburn]

Are you fucking serious?!  I actually had no idea.  I don't join those stalker sites.  I've talked plenty of shit about my boss in the past to their face and never got fired.  Your job isn't liking your boss, it's working for them.  I can't believe a policy like that would exist.  It sounds quite un-American really.  Also I've been employed since I was 16 (12 years and going) and have never been fired from a job.  Every single place actually loved me because I am a great employee.

[Kaitlyn_Bykova]

Not sure if serious..

[zero-]

It's actually pretty American. The Constitution protects you from being gagged by the government, not a private entity.

[Kaitlyn_Bykova]

zero-, on 28 June 2012 - 04:45 AM, said:

It's actually pretty American. The Constitution protects you from being gagged by the government, not a private entity.

And you cannot slander people publicly

[freneticburn]

it's only slander if it's not true

Also is your Facebook considered public even if you only allow friends to see it?

[Kaitlyn_Bykova]

freneticburn, on 28 June 2012 - 04:59 AM, said:

it's only slander if it's not true

Since you said you dont use social media... Ever read YouTube comments?

That's about the quality of your average Facebook or twitter post. You can see why it would only reflect poorly on a company

[freneticburn]

I understand this article is old but are you sure about the Facebook policy deal?  http://abovethelaw.c...eech/��It's a year old but seems to contradict what you are saying.

[Jason]

Kaitlyn_Bykova, on 28 June 2012 - 03:16 AM, said:

You can't say shit about your boss on Facebook.

A good comparison I saw was that that marine was dishonorably discharged, while McChrystal or whatever general it was who mouthed off about Obama to the media was allowed to quit and thus retain his pension and other benefits.

[brucoe]

freneticburn, on 28 June 2012 - 03:08 AM, said:

Maybe I'm not entirely clear about what I am bitching about.  I'm bitching about stuff like the Marine who was discharged from service because he said something on Facebook.  He said something.  He DID NOT disobey a reasonable order or put the President in danger.  That kind of shit is absurd.  In a non-combat situation there is no reason someone, soldier or not, should be punished for disagreement.  If they were in a combat situation and a soldier ignored or delayed an order in favor of debating or arguing it then I totally understand the need for discipline.  That's justified.  That's punishment for not following orders, not punishment for disagreement or criticism.  See the difference?  You can disagree with something and still do your job as you're told.

While I don't disagree with you about how soldiers should have the freedom to say whatever they want to say, I just thought I'd address the justification for why they crack down on this kind of behavior. It's not because a Marine states he or she likes or dislikes the president but because that Marine quite often puts forth an illusion that he or she represents the military and that the military is criticizing the president. In most cases, that's not the case, but in most of these cases the soldier is represented in uniform, or is known to be a soldier so that the perception is that he or she represents the military and that his or her representation is negative towards the president. That is where the majority of these problems stem.

Where it becomes problematic for me is when a soldier has a blog that does nothing to connect himself to his military service, but just so happens to be a soldier with a blog and then gets hammered for an opinion. Those cases, unfortunately, make their way through the system as well.

But I totally understand the need to keep soldiers from making political statements, much as we have the Hatch Act and other such rules to keep federal employees from participating in political discourse as a part of their federal service. When I was in the service, I had huge opinions that I wanted to air, but I knew that I wasn't allowed to as an officer commissioned by the president. I waited until I got out of the service to make the comments I wanted to make. Not that it made much of a difference, but you lose a bit of freedom in order to be in the service, and it's not something a soldier suddenly discovers out of the blue one day (they know it going into it from the beginning).

The idea is that you surrender some of your freedom now so that you have the right to exercise it when you are done with your military service meanwhile protecting the right of everyone else to always have that freedom.

[Brother_Tempus]

ThreePi, on 26 June 2012 - 05:27 PM, said:

Note, when you start each paragraph of your article with "Is it a coincidence that..." its usually a sign that you have no proof to anything you say

That's 90% of the statists on this board

[Kaitlyn_Bykova]

freneticburn, on 28 June 2012 - 05:07 AM, said:

I understand this article is old but are you sure about the Facebook policy deal?  http://abovethelaw.c...eech/��It's a year old but seems to contradict what you are saying.

I've never heard of a self respecting company that lets you talk about them in the media.

If you work at McDonald's feel free

[freneticburn]

Kaitlyn_Bykova, on 28 June 2012 - 01:07 PM, said:

I've never heard of a self respecting company that lets you talk about them in the media.

Because you don't live in America where freedom is respected and revered... at least for now

[Kal-El814]

freneticburn, on 28 June 2012 - 04:37 AM, said:

Are you fucking serious?!  I actually had no idea.  I don't join those stalker sites.  I've talked plenty of shit about my boss in the past to their face and never got fired.  Your job isn't liking your boss, it's working for them.  I can't believe a policy like that would exist.  It sounds quite un-American really.  Also I've been employed since I was 16 (12 years and going) and have never been fired from a job.  Every single place actually loved me because I am a great employee.

At will employment, baby.