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.

 

America, Land of the Upside Down Fruitcake

page: 1
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2019 @ 05:20 PM
link   
www.cbsnews.com...

U.S. service members attending a Memorial Day address by President Trump during his overseas trip to Japan were photographed wearing patches inspired by his campaign slogan, and this may have violated the Pentagon's strict rules barring soldiers from showing political preferences.


Navy spokesman Samuel Boyle said in a statement to CBS News, "Navy leadership is currently reviewing this instance to ensure that the wearing of the patch does not violate DoD policy or regulations."

[SNIP]

"All military personnel will avoid the inference that their political activities imply or appear to imply DoD sponsorship, approval or endorsement of a political candidate, campaign or cause," the policy states.

Examples of banned political activities include actively campaigning for a candidate, soliciting contributions, marching in a partisan parade or wearing uniforms to a partisan event. Certain political activities are allowed and encouraged — like voting in an election and making personal campaign donations.


How ridiculous is this rule in the face of recent revelation of exactly how all the other branches of government work clandestinely, behind the scenes, to influence, change, reward, and even penalize politicians and political movements they harbor strong positions on? I mean seriously... a soldier can't display support of a candidate. OK, that's fine when the rules are evenly enforced and we have all levels of the government following the same rules, but we don't. We're seeing the pristine example of low hanging fruit here, with draconian rules applying to the lowest individuals on the ladder as more of an exercise in public virtue signalling from an organization (DOD) which is part of an overreaching cess pool of political quid pro quo and Cointelpro which is clearly directed within the government and the election system, itself. We have high ranking commanders and clearance holding individuals not simply making public motions of support for politicians and policies they approve of, but manipulating the entire system from the darkest corners to artificially constrain the goddamned game...

but yeah, a couple of squids with patches on their arm at a presidential speech and Katie bar the damn door, because *gasp* protocol has been mildly violated!!! Hypocrisy is absolutely the grease that has lubed up DC's gears for generations.




posted on May, 28 2019 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Two wrongs dont make a right. Peeps should know better. We military folks hold ourselves to a higher standard than politicians, or other agencies mentioned in your OP.

I agree with the rule.....fix the other orgs.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Just more sucking the fun out of a hard job... been going on for at least a decade.

Once upon a time every flier would have what was called a morale patch and it would be raw, borderline obscene and probably offensive to someone.

But those days are gone as the perpetually offended continue to destroy anything resembling fun to the majority of people.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: lakenheath24

Showing support for the Commander and Chief would be the least of worries for the Brass. I wouldn't want to be the brass member to punish them for it. Talk about a career killer.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: lakenheath24
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Two wrongs dont make a right. Peeps should know better. We military folks hold ourselves to a higher standard than politicians, or other agencies mentioned in your OP.

I agree with the rule.....fix the other orgs.


Here's my problem with that, you're not dealing with folks that hold any measurable degree of influence when you're talking about basic soldiers. The rule literally is geared, as it presently is enforced with only the lowest levels being told "STFU," towards silencing those whose voices are their only real exercise of their Rights. Now I can understand having rules that discourage troops loudly vocalizing their unrest with those above them in the chain, but rules prohibiting the public support of those above them? That's not in line with the founding principles of the USA.

Further, the law they based these rules off of is the Hatch Act. My point is, when a law has been so utterly ignored and routinely violated without consequence (and by both parties) shouldn't codes based off that law be equally tossed aside? Fairness is justice. Applying one set of laws to some while permitting the others to totally ignore it is not justice in any way. In that regard, and based on the Constitutional preamble, justice is a defined part of this country's founding principles. Conversely, the Constitution primarily serves as a set of "Shall nots" directed at the government to restrict the scope of any laws they pass and keep them constrained, in the name of justice. Therefore, it can be inferred that Justice trumps The Law in cases where the law is unevenly applied.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
www.cbsnews.com...

U.S. service members attending a Memorial Day address by President Trump during his overseas trip to Japan were photographed wearing patches inspired by his campaign slogan, and this may have violated the Pentagon's strict rules barring soldiers from showing political preferences.


Navy spokesman Samuel Boyle said in a statement to CBS News, "Navy leadership is currently reviewing this instance to ensure that the wearing of the patch does not violate DoD policy or regulations."

[SNIP]

"All military personnel will avoid the inference that their political activities imply or appear to imply DoD sponsorship, approval or endorsement of a political candidate, campaign or cause," the policy states.

Examples of banned political activities include actively campaigning for a candidate, soliciting contributions, marching in a partisan parade or wearing uniforms to a partisan event. Certain political activities are allowed and encouraged — like voting in an election and making personal campaign donations.


How ridiculous is this rule in the face of recent revelation of exactly how all the other branches of government work clandestinely, behind the scenes, to influence, change, reward, and even penalize politicians and political movements they harbor strong positions on? I mean seriously... a soldier can't display support of a candidate. OK, that's fine when the rules are evenly enforced and we have all levels of the government following the same rules, but we don't. We're seeing the pristine example of low hanging fruit here, with draconian rules applying to the lowest individuals on the ladder as more of an exercise in public virtue signalling from an organization (DOD) which is part of an overreaching cess pool of political quid pro quo and Cointelpro which is clearly directed within the government and the election system, itself. We have high ranking commanders and clearance holding individuals not simply making public motions of support for politicians and policies they approve of, but manipulating the entire system from the darkest corners to artificially constrain the goddamned game...

but yeah, a couple of squids with patches on their arm at a presidential speech and Katie bar the damn door, because *gasp* protocol has been mildly violated!!! Hypocrisy is absolutely the grease that has lubed up DC's gears for generations.




Ummm...CLAP
CLAP
CLAP
...

Well said...brutha... well said...

Whew...that was a damned fine read...amazingly concise and refreshingly...unminced...





YouSir



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

What high ranking (currently serving) officers have been playing in partisan politics?



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6



So if we all "basic soldiers" supported Obama outwardly..in a very public manner...that would have been OK? No...it would not have been.

The duty and commitment of a soldier/sailor/airmen/marine is to the country...not the individual in charge. That is how coup's are formed.

I just helped the pre-team unload the Presidents limo's and helicopters at my work...I love and support the US...not one Person.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: highvein

Showing support is OK....MAGA hats....NO. And for the same reason that any Obama propaganda would have been forbidden. The military supports America, not a person. There are rules for a reason....see the Roman Empire.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: burdman30ott6

What high ranking (currently serving) officers have been playing in partisan politics?


A handful of them participated in the manipulated narrative that was used to manufacture backlash against Trump in the wake of Charlottesville.
www.haaretz.com...

Collin Powell was always quite partisan and vocal while still holding his position within the military. Same can be said for the simple fact that both parties run veterans out there at every campaign stop in an attempt to stroke their patriotism in view of the public.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: lakenheath24
a reply to: burdman30ott6



So if we all "basic soldiers" supported Obama outwardly..in a very public manner...that would have been OK? No...it would not have been.


LOL, well, that would have required some manner of fantasy land to have happened. Obama was possibly the most unpopular POTUS in the eyes of the military in recent history.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I thought support of the commander and chief was kosher.

I kind of understood the light talking those seals got for driving down the highway with a Trump flag before the election (I think it was before). But support of the sitting president shouldn't be a big deal. Are their pictures not in almost every brass office?



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 07:29 PM
link   
The patches said "Make Aircrew Great Again"

So while it may have gone against the intent of the policy, it didn't violate it. In my opinion as an active duty service member with 18+ years in.

It may result in a more thoroughly worded policy and they'll probably have to sit through additional training. But I think that'll be about it.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: lakenheath24

You are not allowed to go to a political rally in uniform, you cant campaign for a political candidate in uniform things like that.


A morale patch is not actively campaigning or supporting a political candidate.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 07:37 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

There's something wrong in this world when some Swabbies get a harsher punishment for showing support of a president than any of the rat-bastards who staged the coup against Trump.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Bingo! You get it.



posted on May, 28 2019 @ 11:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf




A morale patch is not actively campaigning or supporting a political candidate.


It wasn't a "morale" patch. It was a fealty patch.

And, when was the Aircrew not great? Not a good message for our troops to be sending oversees, in my opinion.






edit on 28-5-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 02:23 AM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I do not recall that sentament. Many of us were not happy his name was going to be on our retirement orders.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 03:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Irishhaf




A morale patch is not actively campaigning or supporting a political candidate.


It wasn't a "morale" patch. It was a fealty patch.

And, when was the Aircrew not great? Not a good message for our troops to be sending oversees, in my opinion.






The problem with your comment is rather simple. While you're certainly free to decide for yourself what the patch is, others can do the same. Your -opinion- of what the patch is means absolutely nothing, when talking to someone of a differing opinion.



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 05:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Irishhaf




A morale patch is not actively campaigning or supporting a political candidate.


It wasn't a "morale" patch. It was a fealty patch.

And, when was the Aircrew not great? Not a good message for our troops to be sending oversees, in my opinion.




HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Fealty patch... make aircrew great again was swearing fealty, seek help.

Also like any job in the military its hit or miss, you have good leadership its great... bad leadership it sucks.

or it could have just been someone thought it was funny, their pals agreed and they wore it.




top topics



 
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join