It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bowe Bergdahl, once missing U.S. soldier, charged with desertion

page: 8
25
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: kosmicjack

BY all means, opinion on.

But, if you must share your opinion, for everyone's sake, please know what you are talking about.




posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan
You are right. When I joined the navy I had to sign my enlistment papers, which clearly tell you that you no longer have the same rights as a civilian. I'm not sure of the other branches of the service but I think it is probably the same.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

really?? Tit for tat is sooo unbecoming.

I have demonstrated that the Right to free speech does not carry over to the Military.

Now, to demonstrate another point, I shall ask again. Does the service member while on active duty have the Right to Bear Arms?

We can go down the list in this demonstration if you like. It will only prove my point.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

American are not the only ones in the world with "rights" you know.

Some rights may be different. And wording of different constitutions and bill of rights may vary but its not a case of USA and only Tyranny.


Shoosh dude! We can't have those pesky Americans thinking that they aren't the only ones in the world with freedom, their heads will explode.

Actually, having now said that, carry on


P.S. That poster uses that "You're not American so shut up" regularly whenever he/she/it/undefined feels threatened or isn't automatically agreed with "just because".



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: macman

But yet in 2003 the guy that protested in uniform was found in the right, so guess it does carry over huh?
First time for everything huh.


I'll play your tit for tat game that you started when you answer my first question. Or you just going to answer it with another question like you did the first time?

And this isn't even about the first, this is about the 5th and the right to a trail before being pronounced guilty.
Are you done going out of context or can we keep it there?
edit on thWed, 25 Mar 2015 15:24:40 -0500America/Chicago320154080 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)

edit on thWed, 25 Mar 2015 15:30:59 -0500America/Chicago320155980 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: IAMTAT
If he's found guilty...put him in Gitmo; Ironic Obamaesque justice.

If he is found guilty then good idea.

If he ran off to join terrorists jail him with terrorists.


Good idea. But, by the time the trial is over, Obama will have released all the terrorists.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties



P.S. That poster uses that "You're not American so shut up" regularly whenever he/she/it/undefined feels threatened or isn't automatically agreed with "just because".


So, I have either turned into the "one that shall not be named", which is pretty cool in its self.
Or, you don't have the spine to make a direct statement about me, which is pretty sad.


And if you really think that I am threatened by you....a forum poster from the other side of the world, you have now thrust yourself into the world of comedy.

And trying to relate with CrazyEwok in that fashion is funny as well. Craze and I have had this discussion many times over. Maybe they will enlighten you.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: IAMTAT
If he's found guilty...put him in Gitmo; Ironic Obamaesque justice.

If he is found guilty then good idea.

If he ran off to join terrorists jail him with terrorists.


Good idea. But, by the time the trial is over, Obama will have released all the terrorists.


You mean all those people in Guantanamo who have been there for over a decade without trial or any real proof that most of them did anything more wrong than being in the wrong place at the wrong time - as has been proven with many cases already?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

No, no he was not found to be in the right. The Military chose not to pursue it.

I shall ask again, does the service member while on active duty have the Right to Bear Arms?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: macman

I don't name names, I just point out the faults and let others figure out who it is. You're nothing special, I've been doing that since I joined 7 or 8 years ago. Sorry to burst your little bubble.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: macman

Answering a question with a question.
Fantastic.

Does the UCMJ supersede the Constitution?
Simple question.
I have no problem with your reduced rights angle that you are pushing.
But at the end of the day, when push comes to shove, a US citizen is covered by the bill of rights.

Now again, lets keep this in context of how this started.

This man had the right to a trial, by both sets of laws, he is now getting that and once convicted we can call him a guilty man.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

Enough to have you single me out, without using my name.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: macman

The fact is I have a right to post on this website in any forum I like and there is not a damn thing you can do about it - except claim I'm a coward for not 'naming' you and attempt to mock me for 'relating' to crazyyewok (without knowing, of course, that crazy and I ALSO have an extensive posting history)

But yeah, keep trying to pick that fight mate, I'll just continue to point out the nonsense as I please without caring about what you think, say or do.


edit on 25/3/2015 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

So, a reduction of rights doesn't mean it supersedes?

I guess just a little bit'o not following them is okay, and doesn't mean anything.

If even one right is changed or removed, then it does in fact get superseded.


Shall I ask again? Or are you worried that this demonstration will prove you wrong?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Reduced being the key word there don't ya think?

You asked if service members have the same constitutional rights.
The answer is 'no'. Freedom of speech is effected. It's not nearly the same.



originally posted by: Sremmos80
Does the UCMJ supersede the Constitution?
Simple question.

Yes. I've shown it. Service members volunteer to serve our country and they know they have reduced rights as outlined by the UCMJ. So yes, UCMJ supersedes the Constitution and Bill of Rights for US Servicemen.



edit on 3/25/2015 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: macman

a reply to: Kryties



Hey guys stop fighting over me this is embarrassing


There is enough of the ewok to go around for all



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

Nothing I can do.......except show that you are full of crap and don't know half of what you portray to know.


Continue on



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

But but, I want that furry fuzzball goodness all to myself! I shall love you, and hug you and I shall call you George!



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: macman

Lol, ok. I'm happy for you.

I shall always take exception to hypocritical garbage and point it out for all to see. Some make it easier than others.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join