Reserve Corporal Could Face Discipline After Paul Rally, but Candidate's Support Within Military Is

Reserve Corporal Could Face Discipline After Paul Rally, but Candidate's Support Within Military Is Strong

www.foxnews.com

Cpl. Jesse Thorsen spoke at Paul's post-Iowa caucuses rally to give his support for the Texas congressman and his non-interventionist -- critics say isolationist -- policies calling for strict limits on the use of U.S. military power.

But Thorsen, 28, a reservist who preceded his appearance at the rally with an interview on CNN, was wearing his fatigues, and that is a violation of military code.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
US Army - Ron Paul supporter cut off from CNN
Ron Paul brings back soldier that was cut off from CNN

Mod Edit: Comprehensive 'Breaking Alternative News' Forum Posting Guidelines – Please Review This Link.

My question to you is this...Would this be happening if this man were to support any of the other candidates? Is this a showing of force meant to quiet the military backing of Ron Paul.

This is going to backfire big time if that's the plan.
Here's another important quote:

However, they may not "participate in partisan political fundraising activities ... rallies, conventions (including making speeches in the course thereof), management of campaigns, or debates, either on one's own behalf or on that of another, without respect to uniform or inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement."

Well, I'm sure the ATS members will be able to find many instances of this very thing happening without any type of reprisal.

I'm off to work at the moment but will be happy to search for such links/videos when I get a free moment.

Don't give me stuff about the source please. This news is just as important coming from Fox as anywhere else. It just happens to be where I saw it first.

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

He's being punished for violating the military code of conduct, NOT for supporting Ron Paul.

FFS you RP junkies are taking this too far. Every news piece that even mentions his name is showing a conspiracy to you guys!

OP, if you have bothered to check your facts before throwing accusations, there are rules you need to follow in the military.

4.1.2. A member of the Armed Forces on active duty shall not:

4.1.2.1. Participate in partisan political fundraising activities (except as permitted in subparagraph4.1.1.7.), rallies, conventions (including making speeches in the course thereof ), management of campaigns, or debates, either on one’s own behalf or on that of another, without respect to uniform or inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement. Participation includes more than mere attendance as a spectator. (See subparagraph 4.1.1.9.)


4.1.2.5. Speak before a partisan political gathering, including any gathering that promotes a partisan political party, candidate, or cause.


4.1.4. Subject to any other restrictions in law, a member of the Armed Forces not on active duty may take the actions or participate in the activities permitted in subparagraph 4.1.1., and may take the actions and participate in the activities prohibited in subparagraph 4.1.2, provided the member is not in uniform and does not otherwise act in a manner that could reasonably give rise to the inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement.



..I guess that as long as you got your daily EVERYONE-IS-OUT-TO-GET-RON-PAUL fix, everything's okay.

/thread

Sometimes rules have to be broken to make change. I commend the guy for putting himself on the line and taking one for the team. Now, an opportunity presents itself. Do we as citizens just let this slide into the depths of obscurity, or do we support this man so that his actions were not in vane. This man just took a proverbial bullet for us, now how do we pay him back.

reply to post by freakjive


Yes it would happen...it is illeagal to appera at a political function...a rallly...a protest...or other civic event in your uniform....he knows this...and as a reservist he was not on duty most likely so it was a blatant violation of the regulation and the soldier knows it...Mr. Paul and handlers should have know this to be against the military's regulation and should have had him dress in civilian clothes. We cannot as a military show a prefrence to any canidate....not in uniform...it is wrong!

For those that say there is not any conspiracy in this, fair enough. You're entitled to your own opinion.

I'm simply posing a question to a discussion forum. We are here to discuss the matter.

My question again is this: Would this have happened if the gentleman was up there speaking in support of Romney? Would it have been overlooked?

Personally, I see room for this.

As I stated above, I'm sure we can even find evidence of this very thing taking place. I'll be happy to research it when I have more time, but for now, I need to get to work.

Thanks for your input either way.

I have to say that you have a very misleading thread title. From what i read and from what i understand (and as others above me have posted) he is NOT going to be punished for supporting ron paul. If you have any "facts" showing he is, then please post them. If not you really should change the title.

Originally posted by DJMSN
reply to post by freakjive

 

We cannot as a military show a prefrence to any canidate....not in uniform...it is wrong!

Why not? what is "wrong" about an individual showing support for their possible future commander in chief?
I've never understood this. What does it matter what he is wearing? (besides from obvious attire that would be disrespectful)

If the Armed Forces as a whole endorsed a certain candidate than that I would see as wrong, but as individuals it should not matter.

Originally posted by NoNameBrand
I have to say that you have a very misleading thread title. From what i read and from what i understand (and as others above me have posted) he is NOT going to be punished for supporting ron paul. If you have any "facts" showing he is, then please post them. If not you really should change the title.

That's seriously laughable. Tell me what is misleading about the word "MAY"? Please refer to a dictionary for the meaning of the word.

On top of that, it's ATS policy to use the title from the article. Please see:

From Your Link:

Paul has been lambasted by his GOP competitors for what they say is a naive approach to Iran and for other policies that rivals like Newt Gingrich say are "stunningly dangerous for the survival of the United States." 

But the conservative with a libertarian streak has refused to back down from his view that the Constitution never says anything about the U.S. being "the policemen of the world."

"We're not supposed to start pre-emptive war and go in and occupy countries," he told Fox News. 

Paul noted that U.S. forces agree with him, as demonstrated in their contributions. 
"Just think of the soldiers. I mean, why don't they have an opinion? They have to risk their lives. And they give me more money than the rest, twice as much as all the other candidates. Why is that ignored? Don't they have a say? Shouldn't they be able to reverse ... you know, give us an opinion? 

"So if you ignore that, you do it at risk because this is endless and our country is bankrupt. We can't afford it," he continued. "We didn't beat the Soviets with a nuclear war. We beat the Soviets because they were ruined economically and that's what we're on the verge of doing to ourselves."


www.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by jtap66
He's being punished for violating the military code of conduct, NOT for supporting Ron Paul.

Exactly....

According to the Defense Department directive on political activities by military members, active duty forces are encouraged to vote and can sign petitions, serve as polling volunteers, contribute to campaigns and display political bumper stickers on their private vehicles.

However, they may not "participate in partisan political fundraising activities ... rallies, conventions (including making speeches in the course thereof), management of campaigns, or debates, either on one's own behalf or on that of another, without respect to uniform or inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement."

They also may not "speak before a partisan political gathering, including any gathering that promotes a partisan political party, candidate, or cause" or "participate in any radio, television or other program or group discussion as an advocate for or against a partisan political party, candidate or cause."


Read more: www.foxnews.com...

I dont feel sorry for him at all. He broke the rules, now he will be held responsible.

Dont try and spin this for something it is not.....

reply to post by freakjive


I'm a veteran and I support Ron Paul. But I am smart enough to know that I cannot wear my uniform at a partisan rally. I am allowed to freely express my opinion, just not using my military service (uniform) as a soapbox.

Even if I supported President Obama in his campaign, I would not wear my uniform to one of his rallies even though he is my Commander-in-Chief. That is, of course, unless I was ordered to.

In that case, I'd throw a really big fit and use the regulations to tell my superior that that is an unlawful order.

We are to remain NON-partisan in our professional circles and when we wear the uniform.

this kinda reminds me of that idiot that got arrested in NYC for carrying a firearm. Ignorance may be denied but it can't be a scapegoat!

reply to post by freakjive


Do me a favor. Go to your opening post and click on the link. You know what i will make it easy for you. Here is your link it does NOT have the headline you have as your thread title.

Im not trying to argue with you, im just pointing out that it does not say he "may" be punished for suporting ron paul.

reply to post by Skewed


Dude, it does not matter WHO you support.
You are NOT allowed to express political views while in UNIFORM.

Take your uniform off, put on civies.....your fine.

Originally posted by Vardoger

Originally posted by DJMSN
reply to post by freakjive

 

We cannot as a military show a prefrence to any canidate....not in uniform...it is wrong!

Why not? what is "wrong" about an individual showing support for their possible future commander in chief?
I've never understood this. What does it matter what he is wearing? (besides from obvious attire that would be disrespectful)

If the Armed Forces as a whole endorsed a certain candidate than that I would see as wrong, but as individuals it should not matter.

edit on 5-1-2012 by Vardoger because: (no reason given)

While you are in that uniform you are a representative of the US armed forces. If you want to be an individual fine, just remove your uniform first. (it is THAT simple)

I'm hoping for a Ron Paul victory, but I don't think there is any conspiracy here. Upon first reading about this today, it crossed my mind. However he did break the rules. I don't think he should be punished too harshly though.

I'm sure the other Sociopaths...erm...candidates will leap on this to attack Ron Paul with.

But then again I wonder....if the soldier in question was praising the military and everyone was cheering and flag waving, would the military consider taking judicial action? Would there really be a big controversy about it? Something tells me probably not...

Originally posted by jtap66
He's being punished for violating the military code of conduct, NOT for supporting Ron Paul.

On the surface, but as the OP pointed out, there are examples of this in support of the "establishment" that go ignored.

It is because He supports RP that His misstep is being aggressively pursued.

Originally posted by vogon42
reply to post by Skewed

 

Dude, it does not matter WHO you support.
You are NOT allowed to express political views while in UNIFORM.

Take your uniform off, put on civies.....your fine.

I am well aware of that. But the point being, the corporal sent a powerful message to the masses. Was he wrong, absolutely, according to the UCMJ. Morally, he was spot on and even with punishment I would have to say I could possibly do the same thing if I felt it was the right thing to do, so yes, to hell with the consequences, dude.