Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Remark by Obama Complicates Military Sexual Assault Trials

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
What was the Britney Spears song. Oh yea! "Oops! I did it again".

www.nytimes.com...




When President Obama proclaimed that those who commit sexual assault in the military should be “prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged,” it had an effect he did not intend: muddying legal cases across the country.


This is just another example of how this President is influencing things, and not in a good way because he speaks emotionally, not rationally. Maybe it's intentional?



In at least a dozen sexual assault cases since the president’s remarks at the White House in May, judges and defense lawyers have said that Mr. Obama’s words as commander in chief amounted to “unlawful command influence,” tainting trials as a result. Military law experts said that those cases were only the beginning and that the president’s remarks were certain to complicate almost all prosecutions for sexual assault.


I thought that he was a lawyer?




posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


#1. Open Mouth

#2. Insert Foot

#3. Shove down oral orifice to maximum extension.

I believe Obama and Biden have been in the same place too often. Biden needs to be like Cheney and stay in undisclosed locations. His level of intelligence is rubbing off on Obama and the poor guy didn't have much to lose in the first place.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


It's not an "oops". It's not a "my bad" a mistake, a misinterpretation.

This is a clear indicator that Obama is not qualified to hold the position. He has never been qualified. He is not a leader.

He was a community organizer who still acts as one. A divider. An opinionated professional instigator.

Just my humble opinion.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I’ve referred to him the past couple of years as the Amateur in Chief. One who is still cowed by his on the job training regime.

And I look at your “humble opinions” with a lot more respect than I do Obama’s. Yours actually seem to be thought out and to the point.

I don’t always agree with them, but I at least see your point almost every time and you actually clarify when asked.

Clarity? That’s something I would love to see this Government do from time to time.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:24 AM
link   
This.....Can't..........Be........ He's a Constitutional professor, an attorney, a genius, the messiah, perfect father, oh wait he's none of that, just another tool politician doing more harm than good.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
When President Obama proclaimed that those who commit sexual assault in the military should be “prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged,” it had an effect he did not intend: muddying legal cases across the country.


Why? Obama is a Christian. The Old Testament says it is legal to engage in felony rape as long as you marry the girl afterwards.

Isn't there something in the Bible about those or a man who would change the law?

Christ said he didn't come to do away with Old Testament law.

According to Old Testament law in the Bible (and I assure you the men who founded this country, many of them were Christian) it's only a violation of Old Testament law to fail to marry the girl.

The military fights to uphold freedom of religion, therefore it stands to reason and logic that if you fight to guarantee UNLIMITED religious freedom that you guarantee the laws, conduct, and norms promoted by those religions you fight to protect.

But here is the next hum-dinger. If felony rape is wrong, and the Bible both condones it and in opposition to condoning rape that as a tenet of the Christian faith that you are supposed to obey the law in which you live, how can the Bee Tea (felony internet downloading of felony sexual material) cause earthquakes and meteors.

It seems to me if one felony sexual behavior is promoted by the Bible another felony sexual behavior or ANY felony behavior shouldn't get people killed.

edit on 14-7-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-7-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Miracula

Originally posted by TDawgRex
When President Obama proclaimed that those who commit sexual assault in the military should be “prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged,” it had an effect he did not intend: muddying legal cases across the country.


Why? Obama is a Christian. The Old Testament says it is legal to engage in felony rape as long as you marry the girl afterwards.

Isn't there something in the Bible about those or a man who would change the law?

Christ said he didn't come to do away with Old Testament law.

I kinda missed where this had anything remotely to do with the Bible, let alone another Religious Bash? What did I miss and what the heck does Christianity have ANYTHING to do with what Obama said regarding the Military Justice System and Rape in uniform?



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   
the "white house" (aka president and his people), need to STAY OUT of the judicial system, be it civilian or military, they have no place trying to place their influence in them as we have seen both with this and the just ended George Zimmerman trial. just as religion and politics should be separate so to should be politics and justice, as there can be no true justice when politicians bring their influence into the courts, to try to "pressure" things in the direction they want them to go. even comments from the white house (be it the president, vice president or a staffer) can easily taint the proceedings by letting it be known how they want things to go. the same can be said of other government bodies and politicians such as state governors, can easily taint proceedings with just comments made to the public.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by Miracula

Originally posted by TDawgRex
When President Obama proclaimed that those who commit sexual assault in the military should be “prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged,” it had an effect he did not intend: muddying legal cases across the country.


Why? Obama is a Christian. The Old Testament says it is legal to engage in felony rape as long as you marry the girl afterwards.

Isn't there something in the Bible about those or a man who would change the law?

Christ said he didn't come to do away with Old Testament law.

I kinda missed where this had anything remotely to do with the Bible, let alone another Religious Bash? What did I miss and what the heck does Christianity have ANYTHING to do with what Obama said regarding the Military Justice System and Rape in uniform?


Because our president is a Christian. Isn't it a conflict of interest to attend religious services which promote felony sexual conduct, send the military to defend religious freedom and rape, and then punish military members for engaging in a behavior they shed their blood to protect.

Why not throw the Christian priests in jail and the members of congress who refuse to revoke the Bill of Rights line that defends religious freedom and Old Testament rape which Christ indicated was still legitimate as he said he didn't come to do away with Old Testament law?

I mean I could understand the Bible if it said you that Christians had the right to rape, Babylon or spiritual Egypt that might rape those with the Holy Spirit, therefore fair would be fair. But the Bible doesn't specifiy that you might have a right to rape heathens. The Bible doesn't make chaste females who are devoted to God in faith off limits.

Isn't it a public safety issue at that point that the Bible doesn't get specific about who it is legal to rape and who it isn't? Even if your daughters were devout Christians you could expect that Christian military men might rape them because the Bible doesn't specify that you can only rape Egypt.
edit on 14-7-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-7-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-7-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-7-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by beezzer
 


I’ve referred to him the past couple of years as the Amateur in Chief. One who is still cowed by his on the job training regime.

And I look at your “humble opinions” with a lot more respect than I do Obama’s. Yours actually seem to be thought out and to the point.

I don’t always agree with them, but I at least see your point almost every time and you actually clarify when asked.

Clarity? That’s something I would love to see this Government do from time to time.


My grandmother always said, "If you always tell the truth, you never have to remember what you said."

We can't always agree with one another. But that is how we learn. Lord knows too many people here have taught me a thing or two.

Politicians seem to have forgotten this.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Miracula
 


Um....uh...*scratches head*...How did Religion come into play here? This is about unlawful command influence. He is the Commander in Chief after all.

Have you ever heard of the phrase, "I serve at the pleasure of my Commander"?

Yep, that phrase could be utilized in a religious manner, but that is not the topic here.

The topic is that once again, he is using his office to initiate more trouble for the legal system.



At Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina last month, a judge dismissed charges of sexual assault against an Army officer, noting the command influence issue. At Fort Bragg in North Carolina last month, lawyers cited the president’s words in a motion to dismiss the court-martial against Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair, who is accused of forcing a lower-ranking officer to perform oral sex on him, among other charges.


The guy can't keep his personnal opinions to himself. The POTUS is supposed to be above this.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
Um....uh...*scratches head*...How did Religion come into play here?



Hello!

Macfly!

The Constitution! The Bill of Rights!

Freedom of religion.

Soldiers fight to protect religious law.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Miracula
 


Ookey-Dokey!

What about the seperation of church and state. Meaning the seperation between Religious and Federal/State laws. Man created laws being the issue here.

Please stay on topic. Why's everything gotta be about religion with you?



edit on 14-7-2013 by TDawgRex because: Fat Paws



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Seems Obama is more of a Commenter in Chief then commander of anything.

How's about he spend some time in quite reflection on things that actually does deserve his attention. Like for starters, the state of this country.

The office of the president has become a joke. Seems it's more about personality then actions & ethics.

What a nightmare.

(And just so it's clear. I firmly believe he was re-elected on personality alone and not for his ability to lead this country)



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Miracula

Originally posted by TDawgRex
Um....uh...*scratches head*...How did Religion come into play here?



Hello!

Macfly!

The Constitution! The Bill of Rights!

Freedom of religion.

Soldiers fight to protect religious law.

You do understand that not every single thread on Above Top Secret has a connection or tie to running down religion or a particular Faith right? I mean..this one for instance...has absolutely nothing whatever to do with Faith or any practice of it. (As the OP indicates as well).

It takes exceptional creativity by agenda to see otherwise, IMO.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Carreau
This.....Can't..........Be........ He's a Constitutional professor, an attorney, a genius, the messiah, perfect father, oh wait he's none of that, just another tool politician doing more harm than good.





Your clarification skills are spot on!




posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by OneisOne
 


I so very much agree. I've tried to explain to others in RL discussion that life wasn't always like this, where our nation as run by what is coming to be a cult of personality. Growing up and for most of my adult life, the President was not often seen OR heard, much less every single day, somewhere, giving a speech on something across national if not world wide TV broadcasts.

We don't have a commander in chief, we have a player in chief. He plays at the job. He plays at fundraising. He plays at delegation. More than anything else, he seems to just kinda play at life in general and let others run the little details HE was elected to manage...

Then comments like a high school kid with diarrhea of the mouth with absolutely no personal control over what flows out.


(This is what we get for electing a rank amateur, literally off the streets of Chicago for professional background. We get someone with street level sophistication and street level depth of thinking)



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
What about the seperation of church and state. Meaning the seperation between Religious and Federal/State laws. Man created laws being the issue here. :
edit on 14-7-2013 by TDawgRex because: Fat Paws


Then why is freedom of religion even mentioned in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.

It seems to me that one's religious beliefs are IMMATERIAL in the face of United States law.

However, should Christians who support rape be allowed to serve in the military?

And if they do serve in the military and are granted religious freedom is it reasonable to expect them not to rape anyone?

And if they do, and their religious freedoms are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights is it reasonable to prosecute them?

Next question if we have separation of church of state why do many military bases have Christian chapels on them, and if they do have chapels on base is it reasonable to expect those people who attend religious services on base not to rape when the Bible doesn't specify who it might be legal to rape or not?

Schools aren't allowed to have religious service because schools are operated by the government and paid for by taxpayers therefore doctrines which promote felony sexual behaviors like rape are off limits.

Military bases are tax payer funded, are they not?

edit on 14-7-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-7-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


what utter twaddle

his statement " complicates " nothing

as - in case no one has noticed - the UCMJ proscribes exactly the same treatment



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Awesome!

Really!

Considering Obama's aid of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt where hundreds of women were sexually assualted means Obama should be prosecuted from his own words.

As he aided that criminal activity.






top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join