I know this probally isn't the wright place butt ??

duner said:

I think a poster in this thread should remind themselves of the following before making any more comments.

Chapter 47. Uniform Code of Military Justice
Sub Chapter X. Punitive Articles

888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the 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 he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

http://www.military-network.com/main_ucmj/SUBCHAPTERX.html#888.88

http://www.constitution.org/mil/ucmj19970615.htm#X

Click to expand...

Holy hell! hehe, forgot about that, but it is true.

It's been a while since I was in the military, so I don't remember much UCMJ specifics -- I wonder what it has to say about enlisted folks. 'Cause I think that the someone in question may not have his commission yet...

Dave

Darkness said:

If you cant see further than what they feed you, well your also of "semi inteligence" (no offense)

Paul

Click to expand...

None taken, I didn't write it. I threw it just to stir up the pot. I'm nuts like that.

HairyCanary said:

'Cause I think that the someone in question may not have his commission yet...

Dave

Click to expand...

You think right my friend.

duner said:

I think a poster in this thread should remind themselves of the following before making any more comments.

Chapter 47. Uniform Code of Military Justice
Sub Chapter X. Punitive Articles

888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the 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 he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

http://www.military-network.com/main_ucmj/SUBCHAPTERX.html#888.88

http://www.constitution.org/mil/ucmj19970615.htm#X

Click to expand...

Did anyone remind Kerry of this.

And by the way all of the stuff that has happened in the the last four years was all caused because Clinton was to busy screwing eveything in high heels. Bush has been cleaning up the US and keeping terrorists out. So if you think the US is going the wrong way go then live in another country and see how bad the rest of the world really is.

stevstum said:

Did anyone remind Kerry of this.

And by the way all of the stuff that has happened in the the last four years was all caused because Clinton was to busy screwing eveything in high heels. Bush has been cleaning up the US and keeping terrorists out. So if you think the US is going the wrong way go then live in another country and see how bad the rest of the world really is.

Click to expand...

Puhhlease, you make no sense in what you're saying....have you lived in any other country to say something like that? What? Let me guess you went to Tijuana once!

HairyCanary said:

It's been a while since I was in the military, so I don't remember much UCMJ specifics -- I wonder what it has to say about enlisted folks. 'Cause I think that the someone in question may not have his commission yet...

Dave

Click to expand...

Darkness said:

You think right my friend.

Click to expand...

Article 88 does specify Commissioned Officers. However, the UCMJ does have language in Article 2 indicating enlisted as well as reserve personal are subject to United States Code, Title 10, Chapter 47 (UCMJ). There are D.O.D directives that cover the “CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS” issue. Whether or not these directives are applicable to reservists is debatable. I was unable to find a direct order to enlisted or reserve personal against this activity.

I would not want to find out the hard way.

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
United States Code, Title 10, Chapter 47

SUB CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
802. ART. 2. PERSONS SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER

802. ART. 2. PERSONS SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER (Chapter 47, Title 10, United States Code)
(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:
(1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.
(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.
(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.

(b) The voluntary enlistment of any person who has the capacity to understand the significance of enlisting in the armed forces shall be valid for purposes of jurisdiction under subsection
(a) and change of status from civilian to member of the armed forces shall be effective upon the taking of the oath of enlistment.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person serving with an armed force who--
(1) Submitted voluntarily to military authority;
(2) met the mental competence and minimum age qualifications of sections 504 and 505 of this title at the time of voluntary submissions to military authority:
(3) received military pay or allowances; and
(4) performed military duties: is subject to this chapter until such person's active service has been terminated in accordance with law or regulations promulgated by the Secretary concerned.

DOD Directive 1344.10 - POLITICAL ACTIVITIES BY MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES ON ACTIVE DUTY, extend these same (888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS) requirements to all individuals on 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.

SUBCHAPTER X. PUNITIVE ARTICLES
888. ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS

Wow, Keith, you're just a regular fountain of military justice knowledge tonight.

So does that mean if you are in the military you have to vote for GWB?

SVTdriver said:

So does that mean if you are in the military you have to vote for GWB?

Click to expand...

The law doesn't disallow you from having opinions, it disallows you from expressing them publicly (if they are disparaging to the president). Voting is not public.

Dave

HairyCanary said:

Voting is not public.
Dave

Click to expand...

I suppose that all depends on where you vote. I used to work for the elections dept up here. And a great many people can't keep there votes to themselves. That's part of why there are all those exit polls on the news.

Darkness said:

Puhhlease, you make no sense in what you're saying....have you lived in any other country to say something like that? What? Let me guess you went to Tijuana once!

Click to expand...

I have done missions in Mexico with my church and I have seen mexico for what it really is. You do not have any idea how unjust it really is. For instance I watched a man loose his business that he had for 16 years. The man who owned the store he was leasing sold it to get out of debt. The new owner came with the police and said he had 2 hours to get out. He did not even get to take out all the counters and belongings him self. There were men ripping out everything in the store. They piled everything on the side walk and locked the door. We had to move everything that night to the their church so nothing would get taken. And that is only one of the stories I saw while my wife were there. Even crossing the street in some of the large streets is rough because you do not have the right of way.

stevstum said:

I have done missions in Mexico with my church and I have seen mexico for what it really is. You do not have any idea how unjust it really is. For instance I watched a man loose his business that he had for 16 years. The man who owned the store he was leasing sold it to get out of debt. The new owner came with the police and said he had 2 hours to get out. He did not even get to take out all the counters and belongings him self. There were men ripping out everything in the store. They piled everything on the side walk and locked the door. We had to move everything that night to the their church so nothing would get taken. And that is only one of the stories I saw while my wife were there. Even crossing the street in some of the large streets is rough because you do not have the right of way.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that really broke my heart, but what's your point? It doenst mean that other countries in the world are like that! You were in a developing country not a developed one, so your comparison to the US is not applicable.

All i have to say to this entire thread is, He is the President and you should support him, if you thik you can do a better job then stop running your opinions on the internet and run for president... I DIDNT THINK SO.. This is the most pathetic thread ive ever seen on stangnet. Bush may have made pretty bad decions, but he is not an idiot by any means. If you think you can do better jump on up on your soap box and have a try. Jesus people suport your ****ing country for christ sake. Im not going to make any replies to who ever tries to bash me/ own me. I just think this thread should be shut down. ****on LMAO yeah thats what we need a coke head who cant even stay loyal to his wife let alone his country. Bush seems to have done an ok job in my eyes, he has eliminated a huge threat to the U.S.A. I just think people should support the president, If you dont agree with soeme of their decisons thats fine no one can please everyone let alone is anyone out to please everyone. No matter who the president is he is going to get bashed. I dont find it necat all. It is a huge display of disrespect to your county.
U.S.C.G.!!

RiceEatingStang said:

Jesus people suport your ****ing country for christ sake.

Click to expand...

Exactly, lets not let ppl govern it to a 5hit hole.
BTW, its not a disrespect to the country to be arguing about an administration's performance, its actually otherwise, it means you care for it, instead of some bumbs that dont even know that this country is a republic!!!

RiceEatingStang said:

U.S.C.G.!!

Click to expand...

Darkness said:

Click to expand...

Coast Guard

ZeroCool said:

Coast Guard

Click to expand...

lol I know, but he's not in the coasties yet.

Actually....... Yes. Yes i am. On the resrves, waiting for the freakin people to take active duty.

Are you sworn?