[flopay]

Interesting stuff.





This was posted on the RON PAUL IS THE CHOICE OF THE TROOPS Facebook event page by Kevin Audrain, who claims to be active duty Navy and was leaked to me by multiple unconfirmed sources.
—–Original Message—–
From: Weger, Joel A CIV OGC, Ethics [mailto:joel.weger@NAVY.MIL]
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:17
To: ETHICS@LISTSERV.LAW.NAVY.MIL
Subject: [ETHICS] Partisan Political March
Importance: High
It has come to our attention that a partisan political march targeting
military personnel is being organized for February 20, 2012. See link
below:
http://www.facebook.com/events/19267...t=event_invite
As a reminder, active duty personnel are prohibited by DoD Directive 1344.10
paragraph 4.1.2.10 from marching in a partisan political parade regardless
of whether they are in uniform or civilian clothes. Reservists not on
active duty and retirees may not march in uniform pursuant to paragraph
4.1.4. Reservists not on active duty and retirees may march in civilian
clothes provided that they do not otherwise act in a manner that could
reasonably give rise to the inference or appearance of official sponsorship,
approval, or endorsement.
The directive is a lawful general regulation. Violations of paragraphs 4.1.
through 4.5. of the Directive by persons subject to the Uniform Code of
Military Justice are punishable under Article 92, “Failure to Obey Order or
Regulation.”
In addition, DODI 1334.01, paragraph 3.1.2 prohibits the wearing of the
uniform by members of the armed forces (including retired members and
members of reserve components) during or in connection with political
activities.
You may wish to advise your command regarding this particular event because
of the apparent solicitation of active duty personnel.
Joel A. Weger
Senior Attorney
Department of the Navy
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Ethics)
703.614.XXXX

[dasneycomrov]

Have they also issued a 'lawful general regulation' that military people can't make contributions to Ron Paul's campaign?

Using that word 'lawful' hides the fact that they are doing something completely contrary to the human rights of the people who serve in the military. What makes it lawful to prohibit people who work for you from expressing their political preferences? Aren't they American citizens too? Where does the military get a right to do this?

Hatha

[FourEsters]

Thanks for posting this General! I was going to because I just watched the vid and damn does it ROCK!

[Senasivar]

... What makes it lawful to prohibit people who work for you from expressing their political preferences? Aren't they American citizens too? Where does the military get a right to do this?

Hatha

Military members are not 'People' who work for the .gov - they are government property. Once enlisted, there's a huge difference between being a citizen and being a soldier, sailor... etc.

[FourEsters]

You either have principles and balls or you have nothing and I don't give a shit whose property you are.

[clapsoewmred]

This administration is stomping all over the Constitution and thumbing it's nose at the Law. Need I mention operation Operation Fast and Furious and Holder's perjury? Obama has given $billions in graft to his political supporters to start failed companies and line their pockets with taxpayer dollars. But the soldiers must obey the letter of the law? Bullshit. Let them march in support of Ron Paul, the Commander-in-Chief they want and deserve. Who will arrest these soldiers? I dare them to try!

[Trercakaressy]

Military members are not 'People' who work for the .gov - they are government property. Once enlisted, there's a huge difference between being a citizen and being a soldier, sailor... etc.

This is true. I've had servicemen tell me that people who start fights with them have been charged with "destruction of government property" after the fact.

[Pinkman]

I



Lets see if they refuse unlawful orders

[pKgGpUlF]

Oh, so it's "illegal" for them to do this. I get it, this is illegal and it matters but the illegal things they do are totally fine and for "national security"

No double standard to be found.