Oily Titz and her really bad legal advice
The head Birther nutjob, Oily Titz, or Orly Taintz, or whatever, is giving really bad legal advice in an attempt to destroy the military careers of some more service members. Somehow she thinks that the Pentagon’s decision to allow military personnel to wear their uniforms at the gay pride event in San Diego this weekend also allows them to wear their uniforms at a protest at the Democrat National Convention this summer;
Breaking news: members of the military can demonstrate in uniforms in front of the DNC convention against usurper Obama with forged papers
Until now members of the military were not allowed to demonstrate in uniforms. Now this ban was lifted, when members of the US military were allowed to march in their uniforms in a gay pride parade.
Here is a new line of attack: “American patriots against the usurper pride parade” in military uniforms. We need members of the military in their uniforms demonstrating in front of the DNC, RNC conventions and in front of the American Bar association convention in Chicago. We need signs “Proud Americans against the Usurper”. “End usurpation of the US Presidency, send Obama to prison” “Prison for Obama and accomplices for forgery”.
Important: if members of the military can demonstrate in uniforms in gay pride parade, they can demonstrate in their uniforms in front of the DNC convention and demand prosecution of Obama for usurpation of the Presidency using forged papers.
PS. If someone is not given permission to demonstrate in a uniform in American pride against the usurper parade, let me know, we will sue the military for the discrimination. what’s good for the goose, good for the gander.
Yeah, Titz is a self-promoting shyster. Three officers have trashed their careers in her name when they refused to deploy to the wars until the president shows his birth certificate, and now she wants you to trash your career so she can lose your case when you protest at a political event in your uniform.
Since I’m most familiar with the Army Regulation 670-1, that’s the one I’ll quote. I’m sure the other services have similar regulations;
j. Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian
employment.
(2) When participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or public demonstrations, except
as authorized by competent authority.
(3) When attending any meeting or event that is a function of, or is sponsored by, an extremist organization.
(4) When wearing the uniform would bring discredit upon the Army.
(5) When specifically prohibited by Army regulations.
So, Orly Taintz doesn’t care about you or career, she wants you to martyr yourself for her and her intellectually stunted minions.
ADDED: Someone sent us a copy of the letter that was meant for interim guidance pertaining to the wear of a military uniform in public from the Department of Defense;
Category: General Whackos, Military issues, Shitbags
Still, I would consider marching in uniform in a gay rights parade in violation of 1,3,4,& 5. As for #2, I question the definition of a “competent authority.”
#4 above is really the only one we need and the Army gets to decide when it might bring discredit, not Gnarly Taint or whatever her name is.
Told ya so, lol.
Wow, she really is bat sh*t crazy, ain’t she?
That woman is really asking for a tap dance in front of the Bar, isn’t she? At what point does all of this bring her law license under review?
This is why the move by DoD is a bad call. The subject area is simply too vague to be allowed or restricted by 670-1 with any specificity.
This event in San Diego can clearly fall under provision #2, except that local Commanders have had the authority to disregard that provision for civic functions in their geographic areas.
Yep, the UNIFORM makes you a tool for these so called protestors to exploit. What do they care – they’re not the ones risking career going up in smoke. To them the troops are nameless faceless product to be used and discarded.
If a soldier gets sent to the DB for chanting “Obama & prison” or “Romney & evil money grubbing Mormon” in same sentence – oh well…
If you’re in the service and you’re dumb enough to follow this retard, step forward and identify yourself, please. In uniform.
Man, I hate this. It’s not a matter of ‘free speech’. It’s a matter of preserving the impartiality and discipline of the United States Armed Forces, and to prevent their misuse in ‘protests’ to intimidate political opponents. If I was giving a speech somewhere and 3500 uniformed Marines showed up to ‘protest’, I’d sure as hell be intimidated. The overarching purpose of not allowing protests in uniform is to ensure that the United States Armed forces are never perceived as a threat to the Republic, just like the Second Amendment isn’t intended for personal defense, it’s intended as a final check on the powered of the Federal government by the citizenry.
Gawddamn. Some people (this lawyer included) need to pick up a damn history textbook.
Any military professional who listens to Orly Taintz is a fool, and deserves whatever they get. IMO the lady is playing politics for publicity and doesn’t give a damn what damage she does to people’s lives.
and “approving” Soldiers to go to a gay pride parade which is pretty much covered by 1, 3, 4, and 5 (just like was stated) is the same thing as she’s doing. “The They” are using the military to further their political ideologies and agendas more so than anything else.
If it were a “we like football and beer!” parade, they’d get spanked for wearing uniforms, but because its a political sensitivity situation, oh its perfectly fine to attend.
Someone’s lips are seriously chapped from all the ass kissing going on here, I’m sure of it.
ok, so 670-1,j(2) covers the gay parade I guess but can you tell my why this is not a violation of 670-1,j(1) as this is surely political and there is no disclaimer like in (2) for authorization?
@12 – For an event to be definable as political, there is the reasonable requirement of advocacy of a party or politician.
@Arby and Eric: A gay pride parade is a terrorist organisation? Homophobe much? Two is the only one the parade would fall under.
I noticed that the banner on her website names her as Dr. Orly Taitz Esquire.
As a Brit, I find the Wikipedia interesting on this matter:
Esquire (abbreviated Esq.)is a term of West European origin. In the United Kingdom, it is a title of respect previously accorded to men of higher social rank, but which has since come to be used as a general courtesy title for any man in a formal context, usually appended to the name as in “John Smith, Esq.”, with no precise significance.
“Esquire” seems to be used solely in the realm of self aggrandizement these days. Seems to be appropriate for Taitz’s psychological profile…….as we perceive it anyway.
I think Mr. Panetta is operating under the misconceived notion a gay pride parade is something you can take your kids to. An independence day parade it certainly is not.
Clowns.
OK, spoken in simple terms:
ATTENTION ALL ACTIVIST MILITARY PERSONNEL: IF YOU BELIEVE OR HAVE A DEEP SEEDED FEELING AND OR DESIRE TO MARCH GAY PRIDE (POLITICAL) PARADES IN UNIFORM OR IF YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU NEED TO AND OR SHOULD DEMONSTRATE AT POLITICAL EVENTS IN UNIFORM – GO FOR IT. IT WILL MAKE PROMOTION, ADVANCEMENT AND CONTINUATIONS BOARDS EASIER FOR VOTING MEMBERS.