U.S. Marine faces boot for anti-Obama Facebook posts

Originally posted by hapablab
Yep the OP and SD got it right, No matter what you think you cannot talk bad about your commander and Chief, seems to me this marine is not trying to prove a point, he's just trying to cause trouble, follow the rules Marine.

Since when can you not talk bad about the president?

What is this Germany Pre ww2?

YOu can say whatever you want........

HOWEVER you cannot attend any political events while in uniform......

This Marine can say whatever he wants, and he is under oath TO the constitution and the PEOPLE of the US

He is not under oath the the president...........

Infact he is obligated under his oath to defend against enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC, that is ....enemies of the people......

IMHO it is our obligation as men and women in uniform to speak out against tyranny in our own country, TO UPHOLD OUR OATH

reply to post by cerebralassassins


He is not allowed to voice his political opinion while in uniform, or if away from his Military duties, he can not identify himself as a member of the Military while voicing it. There is some gray area though, in that he can voice his political opinions as long as he does not speak against anyone in his chain of command, I.E the President and SECDEF. In other words, off duty he can be openly supportive of Ron Paul, but can't specifically say anything negative about Obama.

He stated that he would not follow order's that broke the constitution.
The oath that he was sworn in by .
He also stated that he would not fire [if ordered] on us citizens or would he [if ordered] would try to take us citizens guns.
that's why there is such a big stink about this...

Originally posted by braindeadconservatives

So what is the specific reason they should go to DC and break apart the Constitutional United States
with military occupation?

If their job is to defend the constitution, and all the folks that are trying to destroy it live in the same city, destroy that city.

Sad to say it but the solider is the one at fault in this situation. once you sign that contract with the military you are pretty much giving up your civilian rights to free speech. not only that but its very unprofessional to be criticizing your boss on facebook regardless of what your job is.

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

enough said.

Originally posted by MastaShake
Sad to say it but the solider is the one at fault in this situation. once you sign that contract with the military you are pretty much giving up your civilian rights to free speech. not only that but its very unprofessional to be criticizing your boss on facebook regardless of what your job is.

you got that right.

Soldiers are meant to do a simple thing
follow orders and stfu.

I don't care if its GWB or Obama, you keep your lip shut about your commander and chief while working for him/us.

No, I don't want half our military starting to walk off, saying they won't follow orders because of whatever wacko partisan nonsense is going on...don't like it, get out.

Can you imagine a military that worked like the citizens do, with half demanding they won't do their job because their favorite side of the political money show isn't in office curently?

Soldier...shut up, get out, or be locked away and made an example of.

Let me guess though, lots of right wingers here are cheering him on because they side with him...but, of course if this happened 8 years ago with their god GWB, it would have been treason and the commie liberal soldier refusing to follow orders should be shot on sight.

Its straight forward enough, i have read 4 pages and its seems to be a 50/50 issue. But as one member pointed out and its black and white to me. If you dont like get out, go become a civilian and begin your journey down the protest road, otherwise boot up get back to business. Sure there is a grey side to everything, but in this case and as pointed out in page 1 or 2, jag will have a say in this one and i honestly hope the guy hasn't emailed anything weird through his accounts as it could go from bad to nightmarish in simple keystroke.

Believe me, I do honestly think he deserved it. If I'm a big business owner, I don't wanna employ someone who's gonna go spill all the beans out just because I don't let him go on Facebook during work hours.

S&F to what you stated, If you don't like it then GTFO.

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


What there trying to use against him is a department of defense directive from February 19, 2008. Before this his actions would have been fine.DoD Directive 1344.10, “Political Activities by Members of the Armed
Forces on Active Duty,” August 2, 2004 (hereby canceled) in the previous one this directive wasnt there:

4.1.2.4. Serve in any official capacity with or be listed as a sponsor of a partisan political club.

Though this also applies again newly added:

4.1.2.3. Allow or cause to be published partisan political articles, letters, or endorsements signed or written by the member that solicits votes for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause. This is distinguished from a letter to the editor as permitted under the conditions noted in subparagraph 4.1.1.6.

The new directive went further in not allowing military personnel to create a political group which is exactly what he did. And thats why hes in trouble had he posted these comments on another web site he would have been fine.Military personnel can disagree with the commander in chief publicly without retribution. This does not however give them the right to refuse a direct order.

An Officer on active duty cannot or may not under any circumstance influence, interfere, campaign or solicit votes for a particular issue weather it's about the current election or topic regarding "the freedom of speech". Once you sign those dotted lines you are acknowledging that you are giving up some of your civil rights to be a subordinate or someone who is under such commands. He should know better.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by TreadUpon
The Marines, and the rest of the armed forces, swore an oath to defend the Constitution, not the president. The real question is why aren't they marching on D.C. instead of the middle east.

Actually the President does take that oath.

Secondly the military is not taking his rights away from him, nor anyone else. Before you join up you sign a contract. That contract contains the terms of enlistment as well as explaining the restrictions placed on members of the military, including speech.

By signing that contract they are freely agreeing to the terms, which includes a restriction on their speech / activities. If they dont like the terms, then dont sign on the dotted line.

There is an article in the UCMJ that deals specifically with Contemptuous words - UCMJ Article 88 as well as UCMJ - Article 89. Also in UCMJ - Article 91

The Marine signed on the dotted line so it shouldn't be a surprise to him that the military is investigating his comments.

None of those UCMJ articles apply to him. First of all, Article 88 only applies to commissioned officers. The other two don't apply because Obama is not a commissioned officer nor a warrent officer.

When I was in the USMC, this topic came up a few times. Only Officer's can be charged for this.

Interestingly enough, the source article states that he is being charged for violating a Pentagon Policy.

Originally posted by PFCStryker
An Officer on active duty cannot or may not under any circumstance influence, interfere, campaign or solicit votes for a particular issue weather it's about the current election or topic regarding "the freedom of speech". Once you sign those dotted lines you are acknowledging that you are giving up some of your civil rights to be a subordinate or someone who is under such commands. He should know better.

edit on 22-3-2012 by PFCStryker because: (no reason given)

That's just wrong on all levels.

Originally posted by WhatAreThey

Originally posted by PFCStryker
An Officer on active duty cannot or may not under any circumstance influence, interfere, campaign or solicit votes for a particular issue weather it's about the current election or topic regarding "the freedom of speech". Once you sign those dotted lines you are acknowledging that you are giving up some of your civil rights to be a subordinate or someone who is under such commands. He should know better.

edit on 22-3-2012 by PFCStryker because: (no reason given)

That's just wrong on all levels.

how is that wrong? everything he said is 100% correct. what this guy did is clearly political i support the message hes putting out but it doesnt change the fact that he is in the wrong in this situation. very bad judgement on his part in my opinion.

well here is wht the bosses think of marines:

"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy."

SOURCE: Henry Kissinger, quoted in "Kiss the Boys Goodbye: How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW's in Vietnam"

That's what our leaders think about the troops. This is what the elite think about the troops. Here's what senator John Kerry said about the troops . . .

“Education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart ... you can do well. If you don't, YOU GET STUCK IN IRAQ.”
— Senator John Kerry

www.jesus-is-savior.com...

did they get the boot?

Haha hating on Obeezy gets you a free tricket out of being a tool for the military. Hopefully, others follow suit.

@what they are:
I see that you're a veteran as well, Please accept a pat on the back comrade and I do apologize that the truth doesn't appease you at all. but you and I both know the vile reality of the establishment that we both signed in.

Originally posted by cerebralassassins

In my opinion if he wanted to voice his political beliefs he should have resigned from the armed forces and entered the civilian life that allows such conduct as a civilian.

...until the mindless, killing machine is turned on you and your family someday. Then you will be wishing your lucky stars SOMEBODY in the military would have stood up for what was right instead of goosestepping you off to a prison camp somewhere.

Shhhh. Listen close. Can you hear it?

That's the sound of the Nuremburg Night.

I'd also like to add that i've enlisted with the navy a couple of weeks ago and one of the first things they told us was to be careful what we post online because if it is inflammatory it can and WILL come back to bite you in the ass. if he made this group off base and didnt mention his affiliation with the military there would have been no problem but by posting his rank and so on he brought this on himself.