Following up with the ACLU.
About a month ago I sent a email to the ACLU chapter in Colorado in concerning the ruling on the Stolen Valor Act with our favorite impostor. I got this reply about a week later that raised a few points that I wanted to address. I was going to post this sooner but I was hoping to get a second reply from them.
Hello Mr. Andrews,
Thank you for a thorough and well-written argument on the Stolen Valor Act case. I appreciate the time you took to contact us with your concern. To be clear, no one at the ACLU supports Strandlof’s despicable lies, nor wishes to minimize the insult they can cause for all members of our country’s armed forces, decorated or not. Ultimately, however, insulting another person–no matter how heroic the target of the insult may be–is not illegal.
Our argument is strictly an analysis of the law itself, and the dangers we see in terms of it outlawing verbal falsehoods of all kinds, regardless of measurable injury. The government’s position was that the First Amendment doesn’t apply to any speech that isn’t true- something that would extend even to people saying things they believed to be true, but were not. If those lies are used to defraud others, than that in and of itself is already illegal, and should be prosecuted as fraud.
Here is a link to a PDF file of the judge’s decision- if you have the time you can read the his reasoning for yourself:
This being a nuanced legal argument, there are indeed respected legal minds who disagree: Eugene Volokh, a First Amendment expert and UCLA law professor, agrees with you, though for slightly different reasons- you can find his argument here:
As to your parting image, let me just say, please continue to expose any all military posers you can. We absolutely support efforts to expose and shame those who pretend to claim honors they did not earn nor will ever understand what it means to serve. That is one of the best examples of “countering bad speech with more speech.”
Thanks again for you time and concern,
-Erik Maulbetsch
It seems that the way that the Law is being viewed by the ACLU is that the Stolen Valor Act will go after anyone with the same level of punishment for wearing fake medals regardless of if it was a National Defense Medal or the Congressional Medal of Honor. But we know that we are not going to throw someone in Jail for wearing a Army Service Ribbon they did not earn. Yes the person is guilty and punishment is recommend. But the level of punishment varies. Also reinforced that this Act will some how lead to laws that will make lying about anything at all. I mean if that were true we would all be in jail.
It also is confusing when he takes about going after fake Vets when a solid case of fraud has been done. But with the lack of a stricter punishment combined with a esoteric standard of what is considered fraud with each case makes this much harder.
But one thing that I also wanted to talk about is what happened with with former Admiral Jeremy Michael Boorda This happened before the net came to full swing and I did not think about it until recently. I remember seeing this video when this first happened on the news.
But this is my reply if anybody is wondering. I have yet to get a reply as of this writing.
I am writing in reply to the court’s ruling that the Stolen Valor Act is unconstitutional. I strongly disagree that is is a matter of free speech. In the case of Strandlof in Colorado. The argument that nothing was gained or no one was hurt makes it freedom of speech is wrong. In every case of posers it does offer personal gain and injury to others.
Personal gain:
In the case of Strandlof he claimed the Silver Star and the Purple Heart while serving in Iraq as a Marine Officer. Because how these conflicts have affected so many, those who have faced the dangers of combat with heroics and valor are highly respected. So because of this many people lie about this to receive this attention. I have read a reply that this is just a law to protect the integrity of the Awards. It is, but there is more to that. Each award represents something that each person has gone through or gone without. To claim such awards like Iraq Campaign Medal without having spending time away from home is a insult. So consider that when he claims medals that can only be awarded by being in combat and never been in combat.
Also when a person is highly decorated people are more willing to listen to them. Strandlof used his fake military service and awards to be started among different Veteran and Anti-War groups as key speakers. While doing these things they can and do receive additional awards and honors based on their lies. One thing that sees to keep coming up is that those that are proven to be fakes always claims elite units such as Special Forces, Ranger, SEALs, and Marine Recon. Hardly ever does it come out that a poser fakes being a cook, pad clerk or supply MOS (job). Because of the very demanding training and duties people who have done well. So people often want the glory of these people with out having to work for it. Also these awards are used to advance professional advancements in and out of the military, There are more then one story about people faking awards to get to the next rank.
People who are hurt.
First thing that comes to mind is his claim of a Purple Heart, the medal that is given for being wounded or killed by enemy actions. By claiming to have a Purple Heart without being wounded taking someone else pain and using it. When it is found out that you have fakes this it not only puts into question anything else you said, but anybody else who has a Purple Heart. Also people use the Purple Heart to get VA benefits and medical treatment. When at this time it is challenging to get VA medical care because of the numbers of claims. Fake and fraudulent claims steal from those who have honestly earned this and these fake awards only help this happen.But what I find it be damaging is when people like Strandlof are viewed as experts on what is happening in Iraq/Afghanistan despite the fact that he was never there. Often they make claims about atrocities that did not happen and sabotage the work and image of those that are serving honorably. Jesse Macbeth is a good example of this when he claimed to be a decorated Ranger that was Iraq vet that had been wounded in combat. His claims about killing women and children in a alleged terror campaign was sent around the web and even with the knowledge of the fact that he never got past basic the damage is still present if you go to youtube or similar sties. Now Strandlof was involved in the same group as Macbeth.
Category: Military issues, Phony soldiers, Support the troops
ah , you used logic on the ACLU, the are more about *feelings*.
You pointed out how breaking the law harms people, they are after “What ifs?”
And you endanger the left’s primary weapon: phony soldiers with tales of horror.
Their response to you seems to be somewhat reasonable. More reasonable than I would have really expected, given that they’re the ACLU.
BUT … I agree with the outcome of that case, actually. I think the law was – although well-intentioned – written far too broadly.
Well then, LT–how would you address it? If someone wears awards they didn’t earn, or claims to be something they’re not and in so doing obtains something they wouldn’t have received otherwise, should we put some sort of enhanced penalty on it?
Better yet, how about all the phony SEAL’s, Deltas, Marines, what have you, who claim they murdered in cold blood, ate babies, etc., in order to “enhance” their credibility and in so doing do harm to those who have actually served, not to mention harm the credibility of the institution as a whole?
Stradlof/Duncan used false pretense to affect the outcome of an election–why is he not charged with election fraud? If I were running for public office and made outrageous claims, would that not damage my credibility and throw into question my competence to hold public office?
Sorry, but the judge and the ACLU are wrong–this is NOT a “free speech” issue because direct and indirect harm is being done as a result of these statements.
The ACLU is an iron fist inside a steel glove. Actions speak louder than words. I don’t care what they say, or how nicely they say it — they’re poison.
I meant that to be “silk glove,” folks. See what happens when you don’t proof before you post! : )