1st Lt Guard Makes Radio Address

[Mr.Vicchio]

The 1st lt, guard type that made the radio address slamming President Bush... do you guys realize how much trouble he is in? I don't mean from Bush, I mean from the UCMJ. You cannot do that sort of thing. Thats a no-no that goes WAY back, and is not up for debate.

My only fear is those that let him make that radio address were WELL aware of what is going to happen to him, and when he does get slmmed, they are going to try and paint that as a Bush attack on free speech or something...

Memebers of the Military cannot make public statements slamming the CINC... its just how it works.

[dotcoma]

Good for him. He knows he's in hot water but he speaks his mind anyway. What a badass...

i don't think he should be punished so long as he released no national or tactical secrets or threatened anyone directly.

that is a reason i would not like to join the military. i enjoy free speech and truth. to think that i might be forced to join the military and have my free speech taken is offensive to me.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Sad... really guys sad.

Its not free speech. You have certain responsibilities in the military. One of those, is to follow the rules of the UCMJ. Read up on WHY that is the way it before you speak.

Its called good order and discipline.

Now take this "badass", imagine he is sent back to iraq. Now take a gung ho lets finiosh the job unit, and the people under him suddenly have a guy that trashed talked the president. What do you think that is going to do for unit moral? What is that going to do to others when they are told to "charge the hill?" Its going to make some people hesitant, reluctant, its going to get people DEAD.

Yes, lets cheer this badass on.

if he said nothing but the truth and wants the truth then it should cause no problems. we don't need to whitewash the president just to make him look good. he's a bitch in several ways and that's backed up with fact.

i cheer on the truth and goodness. i am disinterested in other things.

what are the rules of the ucmj? and what does ucmj stand for? educate me.

[Mr.Vicchio]

UCMJ Uniformed Code of Military Conduct, which is THE law behind the US military, those of us in the military must follow this. Period.

Here is the FULL article. article 88.

Article 88—Contempt toward officials:


“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Elements.

(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;

(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;

(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and

(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element

(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.

Explanation. The official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither “Congress” nor “legislature” includes its members individually. “Governor” does not include “lieutenant governor.” It is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, ad-verse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article.

Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not rdinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.

Lesser included offense. Article 80—attempts

Maximum punishment. Dismissal, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year.

Note: While only commissioned officers can be charged under this article, DOD Directive 1344.10 - POLITICAL ACTIVITIES BY MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES ON ACTIVE DUTY, extend these same requirements to all individuals on active duty. Enlisted members and warrant officers who violate these provisions can be charged under Article 92 of the UCMJ, Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation.
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinf...fo/mcm/bl88.htm

i read the address on cnn.com and i think it is one of the best and most telling articles i've read about the war on iraq. i'll link you all to it right now.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/01/...adio/index.html

thank you for your information about whatever the US army says it soldiers can and can't say. i'm glad i heard this statement.

[Mr.Vicchio]

What about otehr members of the military that have made positive statements about the situation, tottaly contradicting this mans word? Do you heed those as well or dismiss them as propaganda?

And your welcome.

I really though, belive he is being used by the DNC ina crass way. He puts this out,t hey can use it to bash Bush, when he gets the UCMJ treatment for his actions, they can claim Bush is trying to "silence dissent" and artifically creat another hassle for Bush. Which is dumb cause.. he has no control over such.

i do think bush is trying to wag the dog about the war in iraq. if he censors the media and public information about the ongoing war in iraq to make it look like he's doing a good job then he will be more likely to get reelected. that seems to be exactly his strategy.

and i have heard other reports about things going very badly in certain ways in iraq. the soldier mentioned shortage of supplies, extension of deployment, chaos and anarchy, and mismanagement and misplanning of the war effort.

the incidents i have heard about do indicate that the war has been misplanned. why would i disbelieve this soldier's candid address when nothing in it clashes with reported events?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Depends on your source of news and what YOU want to hear I suppose.

Is it going all flowery roses? No. Is it a tottal mess? No. Is it "un winnable?" No.

Were there errors sure. Do you really expect there to be such a thing as a perfect military operation? If so you watch too many movies.

Wag the dog... man did you say the same thing when Clinton did such to distract the public from Monica hearings and such?

Why do I doubt it?

[Zeebadee]

Mr.Vicchio would be correct if the guard had been on active duty when he made the statements. Whew! That was a close one! I almost found myself in the unenviable position of having to agree with Mr. Vicchio.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Doesn't matter if he was active duty or not, as long as he is in. I.E. not retired, not out, he is still "in the military" and he still draws his guard reserve paycheck. Thus the UCMJ still applies.

[Zeebadee]

Nope, you're wrong.

"The UCMJ applies to reservists while on active duty and on inactive duty training." He was neither.

http://www.sldn.org/templates/get/record.h...n=19&record=739

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio, UCMJ Uniformed Code of Military Conduct, which is THE law behind the US military, those of us in the military must follow this. Period. http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinf...fo/mcm/bl88.htm

Gee, is that something like the Geneva Convention, maybe the UN Charter, maybe even the Consitution of the United States. All of which have probably been breached by the commander and chimp and his minions. So, want to talk about *must* some more? Want to talk about prisons?

While I understand your point, in reality, it's about time the truth was spoken, cause you sure aren't going to be hearing it from Bush. He sets a precedent, it's OK to lie. He is after all, the commander in chief, the war president, the liar.

[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by PeterWolf, Bush. He sets a precedent, it's OK to lie. He is after all, the commander in chief, the war president, the liar.

Funny for bushbashers, Bush lovers don't go: http://www.angrycandy.org/dubyadoll/

[Mr.Vicchio]

The last president we had that lied in office was impeached.

Bush isn't a chimp, isn't a liar, sour grapes man sour grapes, get over flordia all ready and be thankful Algore ain't prezident. You anna talk about a corrupt for oil kinda guy go look him up.

Gee for all his bad evil, Teror Attacks in America since 9/11 = 0. I think that says alot.

[dotcoma]

Bush may not physically be a monkey, but anyone with a brain knows that he takes orders and contributes nothing to the decision making process whatsoever. He is a liar for the people that spoon-feed him his instructions. Florida was rigged, it's ALL OVER the foreign press. THE PEOPLE (Doctors, lawyers etc..) that were BARRED from voting are ALL OVER THE ALTERNATIVE DOMESTIC media. You're just regurgitating what the Roman Centurions are telling you to think. And I'm not sticking up for the Dems. We all know about Gore and his links to drug profits and China. THE SAME WITH BUSH. WAKE THE F#CK UP...

[jcgadfly]

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio, The last president we had that lied in office was impeached. Bush isn't a chimp, isn't a liar, sour grapes man sour grapes, get over flordia all ready and be thankful Algore ain't prezident. You anna talk about a corrupt for oil kinda guy go look him up. Gee for all his bad evil, Teror Attacks in America since 9/11 = 0. I think that says alot.

Another terrorist strike would not be in their best interest. So Bush & Co. won't arrange for one to happen yet.

[Suburbanite]

Does no one remember the fucking Etiquette on this website anymore?

[Gorgo]

This statement is not contemptuous. To be contemptuous would be to say that Bush is filthy bug scum. He simply said that the President should own up to his mistake.