You are freeking blind. Thanks to the privilege to withhold source of information, journalists can ask "frank opinion" of militaries and (in USA only mind you) some officers could voice their opinion. On the condition of anonymity. See the difference?Name=troubles. Anonymity=concern. Fly low- get far. Or stay silent. That also works.
Originally Posted by CassiveMock
In other countries state workers have to go through Malaysia, organizing on the way VPN and crap, just to open some closed doors and "struck some bells". For example to complain about "guild'ization" of education or of engineering force.
But lets not pretend the punishment is always to other than honorably discharge them, because I posted several instances earlier of Marines and soldiers refusing orders and still getting honorably discharged during the Bush admin. That's the problem I have, consistency.
Originally Posted by Laconian
Read the first page. Jumped to the last. Typical.
Hmm, May be marins have some secret special extras, but I don't think so. Directive 1344.10 should be sufficient for everybody I think.
Originally Posted by Dominique
What is interesting this directive is quite liberal. Approval of your superior to speak up (i.e. necessity to talk to him first) is not necessary anymore. Sissies.
220.127.116.11. Write a letter to the editor of a newspaper expressing the member’s personal views on public issues or political candidates, if such action is not part of an organized letter-writing campaign or a solicitation of votes for or against a political party or partisan political cause or candidate. If the letter identifies the member as on active duty (or if the member is otherwise reasonably identifiable as a member of the Armed Forces), the letter should clearly state that the views expressed are those of the individual only and not those of the Department of Defense (or Department of Homeland Security for members of the Coast Guard)."
Public web sites and social media are de facto equated to the public statements. I am too lazy to find correct citation now.
Anyway calling names doesn't fit into "acceptable behavior" frame and should lead to the application of the UCMJ. Just like it did happen. Good riddance.
Duuude, when will people understand that simply because you disagreed with a certain decision it doesnt automatically make you left or right.
Either way, that dude got what was coming to him.After 10 years he should have known better.Like your school teacher who told everyone not to swear, was going to let you simply walk up to her and yell "**** you all!" and get away with it.FB and people is a stupid mixture.
Like that Birther dude who was a surgeon who said he simply would not accept orders from the CINC because he didnt believe he was legitimately a US born citizen.Numpty got axed proper and rightly so.Thousands of other Marines,Soldiers, Sailors and Aviators dont get their aces canned for this.
it doesn't matteri
Originally Posted by Dirtydiaper
if a cop , nurse, doctor, teacher or any licensed professional violates certain regulations, they can lose their license at any point in time
he should've known better to voice his opinion at the wrong time and wrong forum while he was an enlisted marine (if comments were made after discharge, as a civilian, it would've been ok)
he got discharged, he isn't put on trial for treason or anything
a real marine wouldn't disobey an order from their commanding officer...who takes their orders all the way up to the commander-in-chief