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.
Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
Recent revelations on Above Top Secret have lead to information that states that Paid government information agents are unable to post falsehoods, under penalty of the Universal Code of Military Justice.
Originally posted by byteshertz
Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
Recent revelations on Above Top Secret have lead to information that states that Paid government information agents are unable to post falsehoods, under penalty of the Universal Code of Military Justice.
Can you please provide a source to where this is stated in the Universal Code of Military Justice - it sounds about as real as the old wives tale that a police officer has to tell the truth when he answers if he is a policeman.
Besides even codes can be bypassed in matters of 'national security' and all that rubbish.
For the record I will state I am not a agent sponsored by any agency in any form when I post on here - but I doubt it is going to really provide those in the know much security.
IF THIS WERE TRUE - ATS could simply have their terms layed out like below - but they dont.
Do you accept the ATS terms and condition
Yes (I also swear I am not here representing or gathering info on behalf of any 3rd party)
No
edit on 28-2-2011 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)
In 1950, Congress passed the Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ),3 providing a comprehensive system of military justice applicable
to all the armed forces. Through this landmark legislation, Congress spe-
cifically addressed offenses involving falsehoods by service members.
Such falsehoods have always proven contrary to the ideals of trust and
integrity vital to the maintenance of military discipline.
Falsehoods and false statements by service members are “condemned by military law as
much for [their] unsoldierly qualities as for the deceit and fraud [they] may
accomplish. A falsehood can never be interpreted as an innocent act.”
.... Service members often make false statements. Not all such state-
ments, however, violate Article 107. In establishing Article 107, Congress
provided that, “[a]ny person subject to this chapter who, with intent to
deceive, signs any false record, return, regulation, order, or other official
document, knowing it to be false, or makes any other false official state-
ment knowing it to be false, shall be punished as a court-martial may
direct.”
Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by backinblack
nor am I, so how does this work? will this be part of my sig?
not that there are but you never know.
8) Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces.
whoa....you expect people to open that file lol
Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by loves a conspiricy
whoa....you expect people to open that file lol
It's a PDF from www.loc.gov...
Nice try though.
Last month, security firm F-Secure revealed that Adobe Reader had overtaken Microsoft Word as the number one target for targeted attacks, with nearly half of all attacks in 2009 having being directed at Adobe's PDF-reading software.
could you add a snippet? the last time i got a troj vir from a uk site.
Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by loves a conspiricy
whoa....you expect people to open that file lol
It's a PDF from www.loc.gov...
Nice try though.
So your saying you cant get a virus from a PDF file hahahahahaha
I suggest you look at this....its not a file you have to download
www.itpro.co.uk...
I am not now, nor have I ever posted on ATS for any reason other than personal interest. I have never received recompense for posting here nor have I ever done so at the behest of any agency, government, or corporate entity.
Good, bad, or otherwise, I take ownership of every single word.
~Heff
Service members often make false statements. Not all such statements,
however, violate Article 107. In establishing Article 107, Congress
provided that, “[a]ny person subject to this chapter who, with intent to
deceive, signs any false record, return, regulation, order, or other official
document, knowing it to be false, or makes any other false official statement
knowing it to be false, shall be punished as a court-martial may
direct.”7
“[a]ny person subject to this chapter who, with intent to deceive:
signs any false record, return, regulation, order, or other official
document, knowing it to be false
OR makes any other false official statement
knowing it to be false, shall be punished as a court-martial may
direct
The officiality of a certain statement depends on the facts of each case.
OR makes any other false official statement
knowing it to be false, shall be punished as a court-martial may
direct
They are not making an official statement or signing an official document. Good idea, but we didnt really think it would be that simple did we?
The officiality of a certain statement depends on
the facts of each case. Consider the following five scenarios:
1. In order to be excused from her apartment lease, a Marine lance
corporal falsely tells her landlord that her father was killed in the September
11, 2001 terrorist attack on the Pentagon .11
2. An airman tells another airman that he was a star running back on
his high school football team when, in fact, he was only the water boy.
3. A soldier lies to a civilian police officer during a state investigation
concerning his involvement in a fight and shooting involving a senior non
commissioned officer at an off-post bar and trailer park.12
4. In order to impress a civilian girl, a corporal falsely alters his leave
and earnings statement to reflect a higher salary than he really receives.
5. A military recruiter lies to a civilian police officer during a state
In each of the five scenarios, the service member made a false statement.
The issue, however, is whether or not each false statement is “official”
and thereby capable of sustaining a conviction under Article 107.
Today, service members face a continually expanding application of the
term “official” under Article 107. This article examines the scope of Article
107. Specifically, the article focuses on the first element of the offense,
which limits proscribed conduct under Article 107 to “official” statements.
Although the article reviews cases involving the so-called “exculpatory
no” doctrine, that doctrine is not discussed in this article.14
An “official” statement can only be made while acting in a military capacity or pursuant to military authority
Not all false statements by service members are “official.” Courts must not
hesitate to strike down those statements that are legally insufficient to sustain
an Article 107 conviction.
The actual act of altering a military identification card may, in itself, constitute a violation of the UCMJ.300
The presentation of that falsified identification card to one’s mother, however, does not mean that statement (made at the time the document is presented to mom) is “official.”
I am 99.9% sure that posting on an internet forum is not an official statement. Considering they did not have to even tell the truth to civilian investigators investigating a crime:
Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
All of this truly means nothing, if i were a disinfo agent i would just not post in this article.
It is truly simple as that.
They could however read it.