Is There Anything the First Amendment DOESN’T Protect?

Other than talk radio, campaign contributions and religious expression within 2 parsecs of a public building, that is.

The retard “investigators” of the various Agencies of Incompetence dig themselves ever deeper into a Mountain of Momentous Stoopid™ as they desperately claw about for a excuse for sitting on their asses, rotating on their thumb while whacking their puds with their free hand.

Investigators would have been “crucified” over First Amendment rights if they had launched a full-scale probe into e-mails Fort Hood massacre suspect Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly sent to a radical imam, a government investigator told Fox News.

That one has to count as the most pitifully pathetic excuse we’ve ever seen. Not since Nuremberg has anybody managed to come up with that retarded of a defense for the indefensible. Would the Usual Leftist Suspects™ have been screaming bloody murder about the First Amendment and would the American Communist Litigation Unit have joined up with them? Most assuredly, but once they’d even tried to take it to court, they’d have been thrown out of it on their ears.

Since when, exactly, does the First Amendment protect the right of members of our armed forces to communicate with our enemies in a time of war? Prove us wrong, but we somehow don’t think that officers of the 3rd Armored Division, just to name an example, would have gotten away with sending love letters to Field Marshal von Rundstedt or, for that matter, anybody in the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht. At the very least we don’t think that anybody would have been screaming bloody murder about First Amendment rights as they were being marched off to the firing squads. If Patton hadn’t ripped their guts out and strangled them with them first.

And if the First Amendment DOES protect exchanging mushy letters with enemies of the United States in times of war, then how come our own troops are censored in what they can send to their own families, most of which, one may fairly assume, AREN’T terrorist enemies of our nation?

Sure, our fifth column would have been up in arms as they always are when they smell a hint of “unfairness” to our enemies, but is that REALLY an excuse for sitting on your hands until 14 members of the Armed Forces are brutally murdered and another 40 injured? Aren’t officers supposed to, we don’t know, exhibit bravery? Aren’t they supposed to be responsible for and care for the safety of the men and women under them? At least to the point where a vague threat of unkind newspaper editorials doesn’t paralyze them with fear?

If our officers are so afraid of the ACLU and various and sundry other unwashed communist hippies that they’d rather let their own charges be murdered than lift a finger to protect them, then we really worry about how they might fuck up in the face of an actual dangerous enemy.

Actually, we don’t. We know full well that the pogue REMFs who decided to look the other way here wouldn’t be caught dead anywhere near actual danger. They’re the kind of shitbirds who blanch at the thought of a paper cut, award themselves a Purple Heart if they get one and then end up representing Pennsylvania in the House of Reps for the rest of their lives.

Facing danger and conquering it is what we have front line officers, NCOs and enlisted men and women for, and they do a damn fine job of it too.

We think maybe we should deploy all of our rearguard parade ground desktop warriors to Afghanistan and send our REAL men and women home for a spot of R&R while the Talib have their fun with the pasty-faced fuckheads.

Fuck their disgusting, cowardly excuses. We learned, way back in Basic, that MEN DON’T MAKE EXCUSES.

Of course, we were talking about men.

Thatisall.

49 comments

  1. 1

    Whatever.

    Let that coward nutbag enjoy his death by firing sqad.

    I hope they startwith his toes and work their way up one bone at a time.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

    (oh BTW … FIRST!!)

  2. 2

    Fuck their disgusting, cowardly excuses. We learned, way back in Basic, that MEN DON’T MAKE EXCUSES.

    There is a HUGE fucking difference between “Free Speech” and obvious threat.
    Stupid motherfuckers had no common sense, no ability to see the consequences of their inaction.

  3. 3
    Boryon says:

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but ISTR that members of the US armed forces give up certain rights when they join. In particular, I thought that the first amendment is restricted.

    If this were not the case, then how could secrecy be enforced?

    I agree though, this does stink of bureaucrats covering their fat arses.

  4. 4

    Fuck their disgusting, cowardly excuses. We learned, way back in Basic, that MEN DON’T MAKE EXCUSES.

    Yep, all real men do is to ask for hard and just punishment if they fuck up.

    And having 1A rights hinder the prosecution of a crime (of which the investigation of the motive forms an integral part) is just plain stupid and/or bad justice. The lawyer who made that statement should be summarily

    Let’s just assume for the sake of argument that some white supremacist asshole had shot and killed 13 black people and had been in contact with some religious-racist organization of a certain influence. I somehow don’t think that the same 1A considerations would have applied to searching his past communication.

  5. 5

    No, they would not. Just fuck a whole bunch of this pc bullshit. :em12: :em72:

  6. 6

    Boryon sez:

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but ISTR that members of the US armed forces give up certain rights when they join. In particular, I thought that the first amendment is restricted.

    As someone who regrettably never served, I to am confused. I thought all members of the military operated under the UCMJ, and as such were not afforded the same constitutional rights as civilians. Am I missing something?

  7. 7

    Not exactly. You were somewhat required to watch your P’s and Q’s, to avoid speaking of certain things in certain places. Security, revelation of stuff people weren’t supposed to know, attitudes, military concerns. By and large you were free to speak or do, but some stuff no. You had to be there to understand what I’m saying.

  8. 8
    LC TerribleTroy, Imperial Centurion says:

    Well the only positive that could (I emphasize the word “could”) reduce some of this PC bullshit of not calling a piece of shit a POS. How is it a religious right to communicate with known enemies of the US? AQ is not a religious organization. They are a terrorist group that practice Islam. Or more exactly use Islam to justify thier behavior.

    Lets say the Aryan Nation changes its name to the Aryan Church of God. And part of thier religious doctrine says that all people of color are evil non-beleivers and thier bible says its the duty of each church member to eliminate “evil.” So now we can change the name of Major Fucknugget Hassan to Major William Whiteman, would the same model apply? Cause if it would… then I hereby declare myself the head religious leader of the Church of God Hates Socialists, and declare that GOD has spoken to me, and it is the religious duty of every church member to kill all dems/socialists/communists inorder to get to heaven.

    Go forth and be fruitful my flock….. be very fruitful….. and if you need a place to start… DOG has a list….. :em96:

  9. 9
    Lc Ohio Right Wing Nut says:

    LC TerribleTroy, Imperial Centurion sez:

    DOG has a list…..

    Sir, if you would be so kind as to fax me a copy of that list, I’ll be happy to get a head start.

  10. 10
    Bright Eyes says:

    Don’t know how far an insanity or PTSD plea will go for Hasan Chop, but a psychiatrist would know how to fake both.

    He gamed the doctrine of political correctness just as the 9-11 jihadis gamed the airline’s “non confrontational” and “de-escalatory” hijacking response doctrine.

    We still agonize over whether to use the “military” or “law enforcement” models when dealing with Islamic radicalism. I propose we look at a third alternative.

    The Zombie Infestation Model proposes that we treat moderate Muslems as “The Bitten” and radicals as “The Turned” If the wound is light or the victim’s immune system is strong, some people can resist the zombie virus, but they must be watched VERYclosely. We also know that the families of a zombidied individual often harbor them and cover for them and are also not to be trusted.

    Zombies fear only fire, Muslims only fear pigs. The reason the Hispanic diet is so heavy in pork products dates back to the Christian reconquest of Spain, when they did their best to make their taquiyya-spewing former occupiers uncomfortable. Revisionist historians cite this as motivated anti-semitism, and the Jews took a lot of collateral damage during the Inquisition, but there was never any question who the primary targets were.

    As much as I would love to see a Jawa commentator’s proposed method of execution used “Shoot them out of a circus cannon, into a wood chipper, that empties into a pig trough.” That’s just not the way we roll here in the civilized world. Just like a zombie, two taps of .45 hydrashock to the ol’ medula oblongata should do the trick.

    And be sure to fill up those hollow points with bacon fat, and maybe a shred of used tampon from the rag box of the local synagogue

  11. 11
    LC PrimEviL says:

    DOG sent me This. Nice DOG.

  12. 12
    LC PrimEviL says:

    This bullshit of cowering behind the 1st Amendment isn’t flying. They have the “Patriot Act” in place to cover security contingencies. These simpering shit-whistles need to be
    belly-dragged through a stand of prickly pear, then given a bath in turpentine.

  13. 13
    Shaitana says:

    THe Leftards can scream all they want. I have one reply.

    UCMJ.

    ya know.. that set of rules you agree to when you enlist.

  14. 14

    there hasn’t actually been a declaration of war.

    Well, maybe they just didn’t post it loud enough (not everybody considers 911 an attack), or demand we countersign the document.
    If the declaration isn’t countersigned,, then it’s not a war, right? :em01:
    I, see, a, war,, and you don’t? :em95:
    Ok,, here’s the Official declaration,, first part. just to prove that there was IN FACT a declaration of islamic war.

    This from ’98 (snip islamogibber)

    On that basis, and in compliance with God’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims

    The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, “and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,” and “fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God.”

    Saying that this is not rally a war,,, wellllll WTF izzit then?

  15. 15
    Grammar Czar says:

    Misha, if I may…just one slight correction to your first sentence:

    Other than [conservative] talk radio, campaign contributions and [christian] religious expression within 2 parsecs of a public building, that is.

  16. 16

    In regards to LC PrimEviL’s comment @ 11: Good DOG! :em99:

  17. 17
    Sinon says:

    As a veteran of the U.S. ARMY (which backwards does stand for Yes My Retarded Ass Signed Up) it was made VERY clear to me stationed in D.C. that we PROTECT the Constitution, though it doesn’t apply to us. We had to adhere to the Military Code of Conduct, and other rules set forth that superceded our Constitutional rights. One glaring example is having to get approval from our superiors to even get married.

    When I first arrived at Ft. Myer I was told by our CO under no circumstances was I to talk to the press. Apparently some ex-Old Guard member had gone apeshit and wiped out his wife in Texas and the press was all out on some witch hunt.

    Bottom line is, Ft. Hood never should have happened, and the first ammendment arguement is total bullshit. In many ways, when you enlist, your citizenship is put on hold while you defend your nation.

  18. 18
    Pengor says:

    The First is great for protecting CNN when they tell us we are making too much money and should be poor like the third world. Well, I am sure we are working on that.

    http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/11/news/international/global_american_wages.breakingviews/index.htm?cnn=yes

  19. 19
    wyseguy says:

    The reality is that there is a line between some jackass just spouting their mouth off to get a psych discharge and a real threat. Obviously this guy from Ft. Hood crossed that line. What should be done is an objective line in the sand should be established. Sure, you can say what you like, but speech has consequences and if you start talking the way Hasan did, we’re going to take a closer look at what and where you’re communicating.

    What I find amusing is that before McVeigh was known to have an accomplice, the media was all atwitter about “domestic terrorism” but when it is a Muslim, it is “tragic workplace violence”.

    We’re losing this war because we don’t have the balls to stand up to the religion of the perpetually outraged. They back up their offense with action (right or wrong) and don’t wait for a milquetoast judge to churn out a gutless decision. Their continued success is hinged entirely on our passive PC bullshit and until we change, they’ll continue to win because we lack the testicular fortitude to do anything other than piss ourselves every time something like this happens. Perhaps mailing some Pampers to the clowns in the media whenever the refuse to call this an act of terrorism will get the point across.

  20. 20
  21. 21
    Shaitana says:

    GUYS! It doesn’t matter if we are “AT WAR” or NOT. ALL active military members are subject to UCMJ. Period. End of story. Once you are in, that’s it.

    Why is this even a debate?

    :em98: :em98: :em98: :em98: :em98:

  22. 22

    I so love it when someone who has all the details at their fingertips, or at least knows where to look quickly, has the appropriate answers. Subotai, you’re very highly thought of by me and mine! :em69:

  23. 23
    LC Don_M says:

    Shaitana sez:

    GUYS! It doesn’t matter if we are “AT WAR” or NOT. ALL active military members are subject to UCMJ. Period. End of story. Once you are in, that’s it. Why is this even a debate?

    Amen to that. The First Amendment isn’t absolute because:

    • You don’t have the right to yell “FIRE!” in a crowded place when there is neither smoke nor flames.

    • You don’t have the right to 1) insult another person so badly that he punches you in the mouth, then 2) press a criminal complaint or sue your assailant, regardless of how many teeth you may lose in the process.

    • It doesn’t say your employer has to put up with your opinions or anything else you say, do or wear, regardless of whether you’ve sworn the Oath or work in the private sector. I may be free to shout “Nice boobs!” every time a shapely 20-something in a tight sweater walks by my cube, but if I do, nothing prevents the employer from punishing me — or firing me for cause. See “harassment, sexual” for more details.

    Let’s hope this is handled under the UCMJ. I wouldn’t put it past the Regressive powers that be to come up with some lame-ass justification for prosecuting this prick in a civilian setting.

  24. 24
    Lizard says:

    U.S. military doctors overseeing Hasan’s medical training reportedly had been worried he was “psychotic” and possibly capable of killing other American soldiers.

    All I have to say is WTF…….because if I believe that you have the ability to lock someone in mental institution if they are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others.

  25. 25
    Slightly to the right of Gingis Khan says:

    In regards to LC cmblake6, Imperial Black Ops Technician’s comment @25 :

    I so love it when someone who has all the details at their fingertips, or at least knows where to look quickly, has the appropriate answers. Subotai, you’re very highly thought of by me and mine!

    +1 I find myself saving your post to use when I’m confronted with leftist nonsense. You Sir are a Scholar and a Gentleman! :em69:

  26. 26
    LC Jon Imperial Hunter says:

    In regards to LC Subotai Bahadur’s comment @ :
    In regards to LC Subotai Bahadur’s comment @ :

    Compared to the inestimable perspicacity and fortitude of Subotai Bahadur, not to mention hie interwebtubes kung fu…

    I am but an egg.

    Thank you, Sir. I remain in awe and with gratitude.

    Jon

    III

  27. 27
    Dragineez says:

    LC Subotai Bahadur; thanx! A truly royal rebutal!

    DAMN! We need a “Tips and Notes” link on the ROTT like the Reverend Anthony has on WUWT! Every time I see this gal I love her more!

  28. 28
    Cannon Fodder says:

    I actually long for the days when a person signed a contract with Uncle Sam he HAD to honor it. He HAD to follow orders regardless. He couldn’t ask for a reason he was chosen for a particular assignment or even refuse to obey. It was, do your job until your contract is up! End of story. No one cared what any outside civil rights group thought. Now all a soldier has to do is to go while to the ACLU or NAACP or whomever and the so-called brass drops ’em and bends over. It is sickening to hear the stories.

    We should start a campeign to have this terrorist piece of shit charged with treason.

  29. 29
    LC Xystus says:

    Death to Peter Charlie.

  30. 30
    Elephant Man says:

    Speaking of the 1st Amendment:

    Beaver Urinates on Correspondent

    I’m waiting to see if that beaver will get charged with a “hate crime”… :em99:

  31. 31
    LC FreedomFighter says:

    DJ SAYS:

    “So we aren’t “in a time of war” right now. We are in a military action that currently has no real parameters set.”

    Thats a big negetive ghost rider. It’s hard do justify declaring war against an Ideology, especially with the congress we’ve had and still have. Not to mention there are those who share the same religion of the one’s we would declare war with, but do not share their sentiment. It would push them to the other side, then we would have more enemys.

    Cannon Fodder says

    I actually long for the days when a person signed a contract with Uncle Sam he HAD to honor it. He HAD to follow all Lawful orders regardless

    .

    There, fixed it for you :em04:

  32. 32
  33. 33
    Light29ID says:

    Well knock me down with a feather….Jugears is bringing 5 of the 9/11 conspirators to New York to stand trial. For those of you who missed the OJ trial this is going be a circus of epic proportions. Every camel/sheep fucker who still wipes his ass with their left hand is going to be there screaming, shooting, bombing and smelling up the g-tdamn place.

    If I was a New Yorker, I’d be stocking up on ammo, food and life insurance…fast.

  34. 34
    Shaitana says:

    NEWS UPDATE:

    Lawyer confirms that Fort Hood shooting suspect is paralyzed

    Retired Col. John P. Galligan, a Belton lawyer specializing in military criminal defense, said medical staff told Hasan days ago that he will never walk again.

    The Army psychiatrist has some feeling in his hands and told his lawyer Thursday that he is in “significant pain” from injuries sustained Nov. 5, when two police officers shot him to end the rampage that claimed 13 lives on the Army base.

    Don’t bother reading the rest of the article, its full of ‘feel so sorry for him crap’. I hope his pain lasts forever (Which it will once he is in hell).

    :em03:

  35. 35
    Shaitana says:

    Oh and itsn’t it funny as the preliminary grumblings show a major Dem shakeup in November 2010.. that all of a sudden you see things like the 9/11 guys being tried, a bunch of mosques and financial sources to Iran being seized… Obama telling Asia not to count on US purchases to keep them afloat… et al…

    And what better way to keep us all distracted from the Senate trying to ram their bill down our throats before xmas.

  36. 36
    Shaitana says:

    Despite evidence that Maj. Hasan had contact with a radical Muslim cleric, the decision to file the murder charges against him in military court, rather than in a civilian one, reflects the Army’s belief that the suspect acted alone and without any assistance from foreign or domestic terror groups.

    AMEN MotherFuckers. Lets hope they stick with the military trial.

  37. 37
    LC FreedomFighter says:

    Shaitana says:
    November 13, 2009 at 10:31 amReply | Quote
    Oh and itsn’t it funny as the preliminary grumblings show a major Dem shakeup in November 2010.. that all of a sudden you see things like the 9/11 guys being tried, a bunch of mosques and financial sources to Iran being seized… Obama telling Asia not to count on US purchases to keep them afloat… et al…

    And what better way to keep us all distracted from the Senate trying to ram their bill down our throats before xmas.

    Good point! lets hope our Brothers and Sisters across the country see it too!

  38. 38
    LC Draco says:

    Shaitana sez:

    GUYS! It doesn’t matter if we are “AT WAR” or NOT. ALL active military members are subject to UCMJ. Period. End of story. Once you are in, that’s it.
    Why is this even a debate?

    In addition, so are retirees who can draw retirement pay.

    Military Retirees and the UCMJ

    What may be surprising to those military retirees who rushed through their out processing appointments is that retired members of the regular components of the armed forces, who are entitled to pay, are also subject to the UCMJ. That means that if you are entitled to a military retirement pay you are also subject to the criminal law as prescribed by the UCMJ for the duration of your entitlement.

    HERE

  39. 39
    Cannon Fodder says:

    FreedomFighter:

    Yes, you can throw in the word LAWFUL now days. Back in the 40’2 and 50’s, how much that you were told wasn’t considered a lawful order? Back then, you were told when to come and go and so on and so forth. Now days, there has to be a reason or some such nonsense before it is considered lawful or even one that has to be obeyed. You try to push an issue these days and get a complaint against you, then it is your career that you have to defend as well as why you did whatever upset the subordinate.

    My brother had an incident like that once. Someone that forged signatures on his submarine qualification card. When they caught up with him, he claimed that he did it because no one would help him with what he needed to learn and basically treated him like shit. So, pretty much everyone whose signature he forged (including the captain) ended up defending themselves and their careers because of that crap. Forty years ago, they would just have laughed him out of the room.

    My brother said in his last few years he had subordinates tell him, “I’m not going to do it and you can’t make me.” Another asked why he was being asked to do a particular job and not someone else, then refused to do it unless he could be given a good reason. It goes on and on and on in todays military.

  40. 40
    Lizard says:

    Cannon Fodder sez:

    FreedomFighter:
    Yes, you can throw in the word LAWFUL now days. Back in the 40?2 and 50’s, how much that you were told wasn’t considered a lawful order? Back then, you were told when to come and go and so on and so forth. Now days, there has to be a reason or some such nonsense before it is considered lawful or even one that has to be obeyed. You try to push an issue these days and get a complaint against you, then it is your career that you have to defend as well as why you did whatever upset the subordinate.
    My brother had an incident like that once. Someone that forged signatures on his submarine qualification card. When they caught up with him, he claimed that he did it because no one would help him with what he needed to learn and basically treated him like shit. So, pretty much everyone whose signature he forged (including the captain) ended up defending themselves and their careers because of that crap. Forty years ago, they would just have laughed him out of the room.
    My brother said in his last few years he had subordinates tell him, “I’m not going to do it and you can’t make me.” Another asked why he was being asked to do a particular job and not someone else, then refused to do it unless he could be given a good reason. It goes on and on and on in todays military.

    WTF….course this just goes towards the whole issue of what public education produces.

  41. 41
    Lizard says:

    Just read that Ft. Hood shooter’s lawyer is “unhappy” that his client was charged without his lawyer being present. Ahh….mad that you were not in the spot-light.

  42. 42
    LC HJ Caveman82952 says:

    Paralyed, huh? Para or quad I wonder? Well, maybe a company or two could use him for first base at their next game…

  43. 43
    LC hilljohnny says:

    LC HJ Caveman82952 sez:

    Well, maybe a company or two could use him for first base at their next game…

    come on Caveman, you’re not allowed to slide into first.

  44. 44
    LC FreedomFighter says:

    Cannon Fodder sez:
    Yes, you can throw in the word LAWFUL now days. Back in the 40?2 and 50’s, how much that you were told wasn’t considered a lawful order? Back then, you were told when to come and go and so on and so forth. Now days, there has to be a reason or some such nonsense before it is considered lawful or even one that has to be obeyed. You try to push an issue these days and get a complaint against you, then it is your career that you have to defend as well as why you did whatever upset the subordinate.

    What i had meant by my comment wasnt so much that people try to get away with crap under the guise of an unlawful order, but rather that if the order was lets say to round up americans because they disagree with the president then that would be an unlawful order right?

  45. 45
    Cannon Fodder says:

    Ummm, I don’t know if the round ’em up part would be an illegal order or not to be honest. Now, round ’em up and shoot ’em would definitely be. It is really not always as clear cut as you think it is. Some people in opposition to the pREsident might actually be terrorists and the gov’t wants to determine whether or not these people are a real threat or not, so rounding them up may not qualify as illegal. Just like you might consider it an illegal order to be told to run across an open field and charge the enemy, but is it really? As a soldier, your duty is the fight the enemies of your country in time of war, but is it your duty to just throw yourself into a situation where you are simple cannon fodder just because a superior officer thinks so? But, in WW1 and 2 if you were told to do such and you refused, you’d be shot on the spot. Not in today’s military, you might be arrested and tried, but then you’d have that illegal order issue to argue.

    Anyway we are getting too far into this particular issue. The real thing here is that this guy pulled off a terrorist attack as well as committing treason against his country. Wasn’t he running around shouting “Allahu Akbar” while shooting people? Terrorists like shouting that while they are committing their atrocities too. Sounds like a terrorist to me. By doing so he is aiding the enemy. Trying to contact them is number two in the treason list. What comes next on his list?

  46. 46
    Spatial Ed says:

    BTW, for our brothers and sisters who aren’t necesarilly up on the lingo: “pogue” is an Americanized bastardization of the Korean (Han-gul) word “Pogi”, or “pussy”.

    The females in our unit always wondered why the old sergeants laughed whenever they said they were taking “Pogi-bait” to the field. Maybe because we’re Special

    Ed

  47. 47
    philmon says:

    Is There Anything the First Amendment DOESN’T Protect?

    Conservatives.

  48. 48

    In regards to Light29ID’s comment @ 36: Yes, and this is bad because… Let those idiots learn what it is they’re embracing so wholeheartedly.
    Shaitana sez:

    Retired Col. John P. Galligan, a Belton lawyer specializing in military criminal defense, said medical staff told Hasan days ago that he will never walk again.

    Sooo, they’ll have to lift him out of one chair to put into the other? Or, can they just stick him while he’s strapped into the wheeled one?
    In regards to Shaitana’s comment @ 38: Gosh! You don’t think they’d try the “smoke and mirrors routine again, do you?/sarc
    In regards to LC FreedomFighter’s comment @ 47:Point! Those who refuse a LAWFUL order do so at risk of their career. Those who obey an UNLAWFUL order are just as fucked as the one who gave it. What Cannon Fodder said at 42 was an example of # 1. And the troop/sailor that said same can be legally detained, and tried, and potentially discharged. There are an awfully large number of employers who will still look at your military records. They don’t want people that got booted for disobedience.
    In regards to Cannon Fodder’s comment @ 48: Depends on the numbers. And it also depends on the sympathies of the military. If the military knows that the people they are ordered to detain are merely Patriots bitching about the communization of America, they would be in violation of their OATH. If, in fact they followed that same order, they would once again be following an unlawful order and could justifiably be accused of treason.
    In regards to philmon’s comment @ 50: Indeed.

  49. 49

    Prove us wrong, but we somehow don’t think that officers of the 3rd Armored Division, just to name an example, would have gotten away with sending love letters to Field Marshal von Rundstedt or, for that matter, anybody in the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht.

    Of course – but that was back when we, as a nation, still possessed the will to defend ourselves.

    … and before we found out that a ‘new administration’ would also mean ‘new prosecutions’ – and that for speaking harshly to current, active terrorists – nevermind one that’s only quequed-up.

    – MD

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.