Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Army Capt. Helps Smear Obama

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Army Capt. Helps Smear Obama

    Straight out of the Marine Corps Times and AFP:

    Officer: Part of anti-Obama e-mail was wrong

    By Matthew Cox and Rick Maze - Staff writers
    Posted : Friday Jul 25, 2008 19:36:40 EDT

    An Army officer’s negative e-mail account of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s visit with the troops in Afghanistan that set the blogosphere ablaze prompted Army officials to correct aspects of the e-mail and resulted in a statement from the message’s author that “some of the information that was put out in my e-mail was wrong.”

    The e-mail, signed by Capt. Jeffrey S. Porter at Bagram Airbase, characterized Obama’s July 19 visit with soldiers there as contrary to the positive portrayals of the mainstream press.

    “As the soldiers where (sic) lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and didn’t say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the general,” the e-mail said.

    Porter wrote that Obama then went straight to the base’s “Clamshell” or recreation facility to pose for “publicity pictures playing basketball” and “shunned the opportunity to talk to soldiers to thank them for their service. I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States. I just don’t understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-in-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country.”

    Army Times sent an e-mail to Porter, a Utah Army National Guard member assigned to the 142nd Military Intelligence Battalion, asking if he could verify that he wrote the controversial e-mail and requesting an interview.

    Porter’s reply declined the interview request, but said:

    “I am writing this to ask that you delete my e-mail and not forward it, after checking my sources some of the information that was put out in my e-mail was wrong. This e-mail was meant only for my family. Please respect my wishes and delete the e-mail and if there are any blogs you have my e-mail portrayed on I would ask if you would take it down too.”

    When contacted at her Charlottesville, Va. home, Tiffany Porter who identified herself as his wife, said: “There were discrepancies in the e-mail, but I am not at liberty to say more.”

    The Army refuted the accuracy of the account of the Obama visit.

    “These comments are inappropriate and factually incorrect,” Bagram spokesman Lt. Col. Rumi Nielson-Green told the New York Daily News.

    Obama didn’t play basketball at Bagram or visit the Clamshell, she said.

    “We were a bit delayed ... as he took time to shake hands, speak to troops and pose for photographs,” Nielson-Green said.

    Opinion aside, Obama campaign officials cited factual errors in the e-mail. Porter said Obama had gone to play basketball; Obama aides said that during the trip he only played basketball in Kuwait, not during stops in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    An Obama campaign Web site, called “Fight the Smears,” labels it a “lie” that Obama refused to meet with the troops. It includes links to news stories and videos showing Obama interacting with crowds of service members as evidence.
    "Against the machinations of your enemies you can take defense, but against the stupidity of fools, the very gods themselves fight in vain" ~ Johann C.F. Von Schiller


    "Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck."
    --Thomas Jefferson

  • #2
    Looks like it is court martial time... What this capt did is the career equivalent of shouting 'bomb' at the airport.

    Comment


    • #3
      lol....

      Wow... just goes to show there are idiots on both sides willing to say and do anything to help their guy or hurt the other.
      1*

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by cmr164 View Post
        Looks like it is court martial time... What this capt did is the career equivalent of shouting 'bomb' at the airport.
        Court martial for what? This guy did not utter disrepectful language toward the President.
        "First of all, then we have to say the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama." - Al Sharpton, March 21, 2010

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by equinox137 View Post
          Court martial for what? This guy did not utter disrepectful language toward the President.
          I'm no UCMJ expert but I think that lying to intentionally smear a member of the United States Senate and a candidate for the Presidency might fall under "Conduct Unbecoming". Might not though.
          Last edited by Chief Wiggum; 07-26-2008, 06:43 PM.
          Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead.

          Comment


          • #6
            As far as I know, its only contempt towards the commander in chief'. Senators, like the proud hyphenated American socialist racist, command NOTHING. They are in no ones legal chain of command

            Comment


            • #7
              How about BHO's lie by omission? They talked about the 200k person rally he spoke at, but, what they didn't say was it was also a FREE rock concert put on by one of Germany's most popular bands. They also left out all the free beer served before hand. According to one reporter there were quite a few drunks in audience before BHO even came on.
              A Veteran is someone who at one point in their life wrote a blank check made payable to The United States of America, for an amount up to, and including their life. That is honor, and there are way too many people in this country today, who no longer understand that fact!

              Comment


              • #8
                Sieg Heil!

                (just sayin....)
                1*

                Comment


                • #9
                  Cannot use contemptuous words against the officeholders described in 10 U.S.C. 888 (10 U.S.C. 888 lists the following officeholders: 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 the military member is on duty).

                  It's interesting to note at this point that Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) makes it a crime for commissioned officers to use contemptuous words against the above officeholders. Commissioned officers who violate this provision can be court-martialed for a direct violation of Article 88. But, what about enlisted members and warrant officers?

                  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. 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.

                  Article 134, known as the catch-all article, makes criminal those acts of speech that are prejudicial to good order and discipline or that could bring discredit upon the Armed Forces. This is pretty broad and explains why it is often called the catch-all article. If your chain of command thinks your political involvement has affected your unit or the military, you could be punished under this article.
                  Last edited by cmr164; 07-26-2008, 08:50 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by cmr164 View Post
                    Looks like it is court martial time... What this capt did is the career equivalent of shouting 'bomb' at the airport.
                    Pffffttttt.......

                    He sent out a private email to friends/family with a little disinformatin he heard from some buddies......and the email got out....

                    Big freaking deal.......

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by cmr164 View Post
                      Cannot use contemptuous words against the officeholders described in 10 U.S.C. 888 (10 U.S.C. 888 lists the following officeholders: 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 the military member is on duty).

                      It's interesting to note at this point that Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) makes it a crime for commissioned officers to use contemptuous words against the above officeholders. Commissioned officers who violate this provision can be court-martialed for a direct violation of Article 88. But, what about enlisted members and warrant officers?

                      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. 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.

                      Article 134, known as the catch-all article, makes criminal those acts of speech that are prejudicial to good order and discipline or that could bring discredit upon the Armed Forces. This is pretty broad and explains why it is often called the catch-all article. If your chain of command thinks your political involvement has affected your unit or the military, you could be punished under this article.
                      1.) The above office-holders that Article 88 applies to do not include members of any legislative body.

                      2.) As Bearcat357 pointed out, this was a private e-mail that became public. This was not "political activity."

                      3.) Charging him under Article 134 will get quashed in civilian federal court before it would ever head to a court-martial for reasons of both vagueness and a First Amendment violation. Don't think so? Civilian federal courts have intervened when it appeared the military justice system was ignoring due process. Google the name "Lt. Ehren Watada" for reference.
                      "First of all, then we have to say the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama." - Al Sharpton, March 21, 2010

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Chief Wiggum View Post
                        I'm no UCMJ expert but I think that lying to intentionally smear a member of the United States Senate and a candidate for the Presidency might fall under "Conduct Unbecoming". Might not though.
                        From the story I read, the CPT didn't lie or intentionially smear Senator BHO - he repeated hearsay information in a private e-mail to family and friends that that turned out to be incorrect.

                        Below is Article 133, the reg that deals with "conduct unbecoming." It generally covers offenses of moral turpitude.
                        Article 133 - Conduct Unbecoming
                        Explanation.

                        (1) Gentleman. As used in this article, “gentleman” includes both male and female commissioned officers, cadets, and midshipmen.

                        (2) Nature of offense. Conduct violative of this article is action or behavior in an official capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the person as an officer, seriously compromises the officer’s character as a gentleman, or action or behavior in an unofficial or private capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the officer personally, seriously compromises the person’s standing as an officer. There are certain moral attributes common to the ideal officer and the perfect gentleman, a lack of which is indicated by acts of dishonesty, unfair dealing, indecency, indecorum, lawlessness, injustice, or cruelty. Not everyone is or can be expected to meet unrealistically high moral standards, but there is a limit of tolerance based on customs of the service and military necessity below which the personal standards of an officer, cadet, or midshipman cannot fall without seriously compromising the person’s standing as an officer, cadet, or midshipman or the person’s character as a gentleman. This article prohibits conduct by a commissioned officer, cadet or midshipman which, taking all the circumstances into consideration, is thus compromising. This article includes acts made punishable by any other article, provided these acts amount to conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. Thus, a commissioned officer who steals property violates both this article and Article 121. Whenever the offense charged is the same as a specific offense set forth in this Manual, the elements of proof are the same as those set forth in the paragraph which treats that specific offense, with the additional requirement that the act or omission constitutes conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman.

                        (3) Examples of offenses. Instances of violation of this article include knowingly making a false official statement; dishonorable failure to pay a debt; cheating on an exam; opening and reading a letter of another without authority; using insulting or defamatory language to another officer in that officer’s presence or about that officer to other military persons; being drunk and disorderly in a public place; public association with known prostitutes; committing or attempting to commit a crime involving moral turpitude; and failing without good cause to support the officer’s family.
                        "First of all, then we have to say the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama." - Al Sharpton, March 21, 2010

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by equinox137 View Post
                          From the story I read, the CPT didn't lie or intentionially smear Senator BHO - he repeated hearsay information in a private e-mail to family and friends that that turned out to be incorrect.

                          Below is Article 133, the reg that deals with "conduct unbecoming." It generally covers offenses of moral turpitude.
                          Article 133 - Conduct Unbecoming
                          Explanation.

                          (1) Gentleman. As used in this article, “gentleman” includes both male and female commissioned officers, cadets, and midshipmen.

                          (2) Nature of offense. Conduct violative of this article is action or behavior in an official capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the person as an officer, seriously compromises the officer’s character as a gentleman, or action or behavior in an unofficial or private capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the officer personally, seriously compromises the person’s standing as an officer. There are certain moral attributes common to the ideal officer and the perfect gentleman, a lack of which is indicated by acts of dishonesty, unfair dealing, indecency, indecorum, lawlessness, injustice, or cruelty. Not everyone is or can be expected to meet unrealistically high moral standards, but there is a limit of tolerance based on customs of the service and military necessity below which the personal standards of an officer, cadet, or midshipman cannot fall without seriously compromising the person’s standing as an officer, cadet, or midshipman or the person’s character as a gentleman. This article prohibits conduct by a commissioned officer, cadet or midshipman which, taking all the circumstances into consideration, is thus compromising. This article includes acts made punishable by any other article, provided these acts amount to conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. Thus, a commissioned officer who steals property violates both this article and Article 121. Whenever the offense charged is the same as a specific offense set forth in this Manual, the elements of proof are the same as those set forth in the paragraph which treats that specific offense, with the additional requirement that the act or omission constitutes conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman.

                          (3) Examples of offenses. Instances of violation of this article include knowingly making a false official statement; dishonorable failure to pay a debt; cheating on an exam; opening and reading a letter of another without authority; using insulting or defamatory language to another officer in that officer’s presence or about that officer to other military persons; being drunk and disorderly in a public place; public association with known prostitutes; committing or attempting to commit a crime involving moral turpitude; and failing without good cause to support the officer’s family.
                          He very well could get hit with Art. 134. And him saying 'I am writing this to ask that you delete my e-mail and not forward it, after checking my sources some of the information that was put out in my e-mail was wrong." is pretty much an admission to the fact or just shows gross negligence on his part. You can defend this man till the cows come home equinox, which I know you will, but you and I both know this email went straight to the milblogs before it ever went to his family. Active duty officers refrain from talking politics and know better. You dont stick your nose into politics as an active duty member. Not saying politics are present in the upper echelon, but IMO that is the downfall of the military.
                          "Against the machinations of your enemies you can take defense, but against the stupidity of fools, the very gods themselves fight in vain" ~ Johann C.F. Von Schiller


                          "Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck."
                          --Thomas Jefferson

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I'm just curious as to why BHO didn't meet with any infantry troops. The units he met with were all support units... wonder why he didn't meet with the combat arms guys....
                            “The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed."

                            "You go for a man hard enough and fast enough, he don't have time to think about how many's with him; he thinks about himself, and how he might get clear of that wrath that's about to set down on him."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by justhomp View Post
                              I'm just curious as to why BHO didn't meet with any infantry troops. The units he met with were all support units... wonder why he didn't meet with the combat arms guys....
                              You, as a combat arms guy, should know this one. I know I hated when VIPs came around. 1) it meant higher security (AKA..more fire watch and more patrols) 2) stupid "make your uniforms look pretty and shave" in the middle of a war orders 3) they tend to be like magnets for mortars and bullets. It was probably more of a blessing than anything that he didnt see infantry guys. That goes for all idiot politicians and people of the like. Stay in the rear. Fiiiiiiiiiine by me.
                              "Against the machinations of your enemies you can take defense, but against the stupidity of fools, the very gods themselves fight in vain" ~ Johann C.F. Von Schiller


                              "Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck."
                              --Thomas Jefferson

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 4800 users online. 265 members and 4535 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X