VFP: Please look at us
After years of being ignored while they “occupied” the National Archives (or more accurately occupied the outside of the building – links and pictures here and here), the Geezers for Sitting on Our Hands have decided the Newseum, down the street from the Archives might generate more attention. Their small actions and the arrival of the police seem to excite them in this video;
Of course, any opportunity to get out of “the home” on a field trip probably excites them.
Thanksto someone for the video.
Category: Antiwar crowd
Ok, the one chucklehead claimed he was in the Navy for 30 years and the last sub he was on could wipe out millions of people. Now he’s protesting against war, etc. Did he not think of that in the 30 years he spent in the military? I can see a person having a change of heart in the first year, but to go 30 years, get your nice retirement and then start bitching??
Whatever.
Well, Old Trooper, people do need to make a living somehow…
Debra; that’s worse yet! Stay in something that supposedly goes against your morals for 30 years just for a paycheck? Then, when you’re done and get your monthly check, start railing against it??
No, if he wanted to get out, he had many opportunities, but now he chooses to start bitching.
He met his obligations, is now retired, and is exercising his freedom of speech. You’re saying he doesn’t have the right?
By your reasoning, everyone who is currently serving in the military who doesn’t support President Obama should just get out right now. Is that what you meant?
No, Debra, you’re putting words in my mouth. Plus, you have no clue what my reasoning is.
I never said that he doesn’t have the right to free speech, I was merely pointing out what a blithering idiot and hypocrit he is. Also, his “obligation” doesn’t span 30 years. If he was drafted, then his obligation was a couple years. He volunteered for the rest of it; so it didn’t seem to bother him for the next 28 years, eh?
Debra,
When did Trooper say anything about not having the right to free speech?? He’s calling him out for being a jackwagon, or don’t you believe OldTrooper has the same right to free speech?
Old Trooper, what I meant in saying that he met his obligations – or rather, I am assuming that he met his obligations – was simply that he fulfilled the obligations that he did voluntarily take on. Obvioiusly after every time you re-up, you do have that obligation lying ahead of you.
I don’t know anything about this guy, however, on the principle of it, I don’t see anything wrong with serving your country even if you don’t agree with everything that Congress and the President choose to do. Even military members and federal employees have the right to have their own opinions. While their conduct, speech, and political involvement may be reigned in to some degree while they are actively serving, there is nothing wrong with holding personal opinions about politics and other matters. I think it’s very important that those who serve this country come from a cross-section of the real populace, warts and all, if you will. Good grief, the military will take in people who are actually neo-Nazis and still accept them and train them and use them as long as they toe the line and submit to military discipline.
However, I acknowledge that you did not in any manner indicate that he does not have the right to free speech, and of course you also have the right to free speech, so if you wish to call him a jackwagon for letting loose after he retired, well then, carry on…
I understand the words that these “anti-war” protestors are saying, and I understand that they have every right to speak. However, I question their reasoning for doing so. Whom does their protest benefit? I do not personally know anyone in any branch of the U.S. military, but I would much rather offer my support to the men and women serving your country than stand with these “protestors”.
Spockgirl,
I believe that is the crux of the problem when dealing with these organizations. They feel that these actions will somehow result in some action to serve their cause. This is partly due to the fact that it is easier (and cooler) to stage a protest or hang a banner instead of actually helping veterans through volunteering, petitioning Congress, or forming interest groups.
Um? People, the next time you see one of these “retired military” anti-war protesters and (out of courtesy for Debra too) you may smile, look ’em in the eyes, and say this:
“Do you understand that you are still accountable for your actions under 47 UCMJ Section 802, Article 2(A), paragraph (4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.”
Then watch their expression change, real fast.
Link: http://www.constitution.org/mil/ucmj19970615.htm
You can also research the UCMJ on Thomas and Cornell School of Law…
Happy embarrassing the hell out of ’em, troops!
garrowen
For that matter, they are subject to local, state, and federal laws as well. Is there a particular charge that you’re concerned with and, if so, what?
Daniel #9 said: They feel that these actions will somehow result in some action to serve their cause.
Some of these nitwits may actually feel that, but I have to look at the post-Vietnam track record of such groups and say ‘not so much’.
From GoE-I til now this lot has been out numbered and berated.
There MUST be another motive. Your guess is as good as mine, but transformational it’s not.
Um, Debra? Not especially corncerned but…..In case you missed the point ma’am. Pay close attention darling, I’ll only repeat this one more time, ma’am.
It’s rhetorical for retired military personnel
“Do you understand that you are still accountable for your actions under 47 UCMJ Section 802, Article 2(A), paragraph (4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.”
Retired military can be recalled to active duty and answer summary charges, ma’am. Why? Because….you still collect a regular paycheck from the US Gumermint!
*DING DONG*
It’s not Avon calling…Jesus jumping H Christopher and I always thought this woman was a reasonable, intelligent retired military cop?
*snort*
Go re-study the UCMJ, Debra…How the H E double toothpicks did you make it through MP School without studying it? Wait, maybe I don’t want to know the answer that one.
Uh, Ponsdorf? How the hell do you spell *communism”?
garryowen
I’m not retired from the military. I got out well before retirement to be a full-time mom-at-home and was an officer’s wife; not that it matters. And I still don’t follow your point. I’ve never looked into it myself, however, I’ve know retired military officers who researched this subject pretty carefully before actively engaging as a speaker or writer in the activist political realm, and they do not feel they are putting themselves at risk. On the other hand, they are not violating any laws. So you’ve pretty well lost me.
As far as my military schoolS go, I made it through them the same way everybody else did.
And what your last comment concerning communism is supposed to mean, I have no idea. I am not even remotely a communist; about as far to the ideological polar opposite as you can get.
I think we have here a classic case of engaging keyboard before engaging mind. And I don’t know why you’re suddenly attacking me, but I don’t really appreciate iit.
And what your last comment concerning communism is supposed to mean, I have no idea. I am not even remotely a communist; about as far to the ideological polar opposite as you can get.
==========
I interpreted the last comment to be directed to ponsdorf since he started the comment with “Uh, Ponsdorf?”.
And I interpreted his statement about Communism to be in response to ponsdorf’s comment: “There MUST be another motive. Your guess is as good as mine, but transformational it’s not.” In other words, he was saying that the motive was Communism.
Street #13:
Sorry, I used ‘transformational’ instead of communism on purpose, but perhaps I wasn’t clear at that.
VFP and their close cousins are about as revolutionary as kittens playing with a ball of yarn. Spiro Agnew used a phrase in 1970 (or so) that still fits – A spirit of national masochism prevails, encouraged by an effete core of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals.
It’s the folks in the OTHER big buildings in DC are of far more concern.
My apologies to Debra. It was not an intentional attack, ma’am and I regret that you take it as such. I was being a little bit over-frustrated (nothing to do with you) so please, accept my apology.
Pons – No problem bro!
Ah….this “A spirit of national masochism prevails, encouraged by an effete core of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals.” was said in the 70-71 timespan.
My American History teacher and me got in to it over Agnew and a few others on a regular basis. Then, he bashed the troops and my oldest bro’s service in Nam, I removed the gloves and kicked out of school for a few days after, lol.
My first encounter in education with a real deal moonbat!
Dang, MichaelMI! Cruised your blog, very well done! I be stopping by it more often, too!
I’d love to know what boat(s) this douchenozzle supposedly served on. Something tells me there’s a bit of phony goings on there as well.