Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Colonel suspended for calling Bush "a joke"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:07 PM
Original message
Colonel suspended for calling Bush "a joke"
Edited on Fri Mar-24-06 05:14 PM by tocqueville
No freedom of speech in this case

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The Air Force has suspended a colonel who wrote a letter in which he ridiculed President Bush for his response to terrorism, accusing chief executive of allowing the 9/11 attacks to happen and labeling him "a joke."

The letter from Lt. Col. Steve Butler was published May 26 in The Herald of Monterey County.

Butler apparently violated a military law that prohibits "contemptuous words" against the president and other political leaders.

"He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism," Butler wrote. "His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere. ... This guy is a joke."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/06/05/colonel-suspended.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. Suspend/terminate truth-tellers, promote liars
That's the motto of this administration.

Sure, the Colonel should have been more circumspect, but damn.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yup...lets keep suspending, retiring and kicking out
the experienced military personel....

In the article it's mentioned that it happened during the Clinton years also.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EstimatedProphet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. Mistake in the subject-Colonel, not General
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. oops, fixed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shain from kane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. He should be promoted to General. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LA lady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
4. not new
As a person from a many-military family, there is a world of difference between a LTC and a General!

Also, this isn't new, it happened under Democratic Presidents, also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ToolTex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. He is still a Joke, LA Lady. Colonel, General, Old, or New.
A joke is a joke, no matter how cruel the joke may be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prisoner_Number_Six Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. Unfortunately for him, that was the proper thing to do
as much as it galls me to say it. It's the same as if a buck private were to flip off a General. The UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) is very clear on the subject, and the brass is as bound to it as a shiny new recruit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
6. He does deserve to be promoted for making that statement.
His thinking may be close to that of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/17/172417/205
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
8. in an unrelated story, the man responsible for mosque and parked car
security in Iraq was given the Presidential Medal of Perpetual and Glorious Heroic Freedom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
9. Article 88 of the UCMJ - 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.”

In case anyone was wondering

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reichstag911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Ultimately, however, their oaths are sworn...
...to protect and defend the Constitution, and they've all been issued illegal orders (which, according to the UCMJ, they have no obligation to obey) by this administration in violation of US treaty obligations, the supreme law of the land. They are going to have to decide eventually: the president or some equally corrupt successor, or the Constitution. I like the way this guy's leaning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. I agree with the Col. in his assessment of Bush


- but I'm not an officer and I can't be held under article 88 - he can. That's the reality. It's ugly but that doesn't change the fact that just as easily as Bush will break a law, he will also use a law that serves his advantage. And I assure you, Article 88 is being stressed - strongly - these days within the military. Simply because so many are speaking out.

This officer is being held up as an example to all others who speak out.











Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrightKnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. Could Bush be charged under Article 88?
He has made a lot of "contemptuous words" while acting as commander in chief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #26
34. No. He does not fall under the UCMJ
Bush abuses the title of CinC. He places more emphasis on it than there practically exist - when Bush says "in his authority as CinC, it means - "I'm about to break the law and claim the authority to do so as CinC"

Bush must be charged under the Constitution(impeachment/conviction) and US CODE 18 & the 1996 War Crimes Act (and any other law we can throw at him)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Double T Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:18 PM
Response to Original message
11. Only YES MEN and WOMEN ALLOWED........
all reasonable, sane, responsible truth tellers need NOT APPLY!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_U_L8R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
13. They're gonna run out of people to fire soon.
EVERYONE thinks Bush is a joke....
and most are unafraid to say it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
15. He should go and
change that law so that he can continue to speak out. If * can do it why not him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
17. Thanks, Lt Colonel Steve Butler for
telling the truth even though it got you suspended!

People like you are going to be remembered as the Heroes of this Piece..and gargoyles like bush and dick are going down in history as mutant aliens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
18. The UCMJ is a bunch of paper, which, like the Constitution, has been
torn up by this junta. And we have yet to see the end of the consequences of THAT! They are enormous--including exposure of our soldiers and other government representatives to torture, with no international legal or moral sanctions by which to prevent it, or punish it; the demoralization and ruined careers of a whole generation of military lawyers who have sought to protect, and be guided by, the principles of the UCMJ; the advancement of toadies and yes-men; the contempt with which the U.S. is now held throughout the world, with far-reaching implications for US diplomacy and the well-being of US citizens at home and abroad, as well as the citizens of other countries who might need our assistance (if we had a decent gov't); the spreading of unlawfulness and contempt for the law; the use of soldiers as cannon fodder, the contempt for our soldiers expressed in so many ways including the "chickenhawk" Bushite political assaults on anyone with medals; the complete undermining of any basis of respect between the military and the president, so critical to maintaining civilian control. The list of consequences of Bush's violation of the UCMJ and his, Cheney's and Rumsfeld's contempt for military and international law is very long, and gravely serious.

Their tearing up of the Constitution is equally bad, for it not only is the law of the land that the military is sworn to uphold and protect, but it lays out the "balance of power" with regard to war and all other government action. That "balance of power" has been on tenuous enough grounds as it is, with the onset of nuclear weapons (power to destroy all life on earth) and the imperial presidency (untouchable sacred emperor). With regard to this, as well as to civil and human rights, and Congressional war, budget and lawmaking powers, the Bushites truly have just ripped the Constitution to pieces, with impunity--with virtually no consequences from a Diebold/ES&S elected (equally illegitimate) Congress. How long can military personnel or anyone else respect the law or chains of command? The trend is toward CHAOS, toward no rule of law at all. Our civilization hangs on a slender thread of consent. When you mess with that, you are threatening mayhem.

To me, the worst of it is NON-TRANSPARENT elections, with Bushite corporations gaining control of the tabulation of our votes, using 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, with virtually no audit/recount controls, by means of the $4 billion "Help America Vote Act" electronic voting boondoggle, engineered by the two biggest crooks in Congress, Tom Delay and Bob Ney.

Because non-transparent elections mean that we cannot bring about democratic change. Non-transparent elections are not elections. They are tyranny.

To the military, since it is not a democratic organization, although it is sworn to supporting democracy, the UCMJ is the guiding document for humane and just behavior, and for the President of the United States to treat it--just as he treats elections--as something arbitrary and manipulable that the powerful can ignore or twist to their own will, is seriously destabilizing and threatening.

To call Bush a joke is about as mild as you could be. He has made the US government AND its military INTO a joke. He has treated WAR as a joke--with that infamous video of him looking under the oval office carpet for WMDs--incredible!

I would say that Lt. Col. Steve Butler deserves a medal--a Peoples' Medal. Perhaps we should call it the "Emperor's News Clothes" medal, for speaking the truth. And when we get our democracy back, we should award it to him.

----------------------------

Throw Diebold and ES&S election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor' NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
19. A descendant of general Smedley Butler, perhaps?
Major General Smedley Darlington Butler, USMC

1881 - 1940

double recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor

"I spent 33 years and 4 months in active service as a member of our country's most agile military force--the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from second lieutenant to Major General. And during that period I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism. I suspected I was part of a racket all the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all members of the military profession I never had an original thought until I left the service."

Smedley D. Butler (1935)

http://warisaracket.org/dedication.html
http://warisaracket.org/


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #19
37. it would be grandson then
Butler was married in 1905 to Ethel C. Peters, of Philadelphia. He had a daughter, Ethel Peters, and two sons, Smedley Darlington and Thomas Richard.<1>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_D._Butler

his career is truly amazing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
20. And the coup continues to gather steam
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
21. the Col. ROX
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrightKnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
22. He should run for office.
Edited on Fri Mar-24-06 07:44 PM by BrightKnight
General Clark, Wes PAC or some other heavy hitter should have a talk with him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
23. Is this a great dictatorship or what :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
24. Oh, but...but...He always listens to his military people...
Dontcha know?

Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContraBass Black Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
25. He violated an explicit rule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
27. He broke the law - what are you guys bitching about?
Hope he runs for office tho - I'd vote for him in a heartbeat!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
28. There is no free speech in the military...
The military is apolitical and should remain so no matter how a person feels about the commander in chief.

Nobody has to like it...that's the way it is and has been for a hell of a long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
29. The emperor has no clothes!!!
You're not supposed to notice this in the military. And if you do, you're not supposed to announce what you're observing.

Hurray for Lt.Col. Butler for noticing and announcing, And you know that for each officer brave enough to speak, there are many more who feel the same way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tsiyu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
30. How is the truth contemptuous?
If we say ** is a cocaine-addled dry drunk who went AWOL during Viet Nam rather than serving his nation in time of war, this is the TRUTH. If we say he is a stupid fucking asswipe who should rot in hell, this also is the truth.

Seems to me a contemptuous comment would be a lie or a purposefully fabricated statement about that nitwit. Like, "I wish that cocksucker would choke on his silver spoon." We don't know for a fact that he sucks mens' organs, nor do we know if he only has one silver spoon or many.

I get the difference; it's the SPIRIT of the law, you see ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
31. And when military people said such things about Clinton?
Nothing, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #31
38. this is actually not true, to be fair
The only known Article 88 court-martial took place in the mid-1960s, according to the July 1999 edition of The Army Lawyer.

In that case, a second lieutenant dressed in civilian clothing during off-duty hours left Fort Bliss to take part in a demonstration against the Vietnam War in nearby El Paso. He carried a sign that read "Let's Have More Than a Choice Between Petty Ignorant Fascists in 1968" and "End Johnson's Fascist Aggression in Vietnam."

During the Clinton administration, several military officers were disciplined for bad-mouthing the president, according to the article in The Army Lawyer.

Among them was an Air Force general who was fined, reprimanded and forced into early retirement for referring to Clinton as "gay-loving," "womanizing," "draft-dodging" and "pot-smoking."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/06/05/colonel-suspended.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minnesota_Lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
32. "....and other political leaders." Yeah, unless that political leader...
...is a Dem, then the offending officers get promoted. Freaking hypocrites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
33. Under that rule
any military person who has spoken with contempt about any democratic member of congress - including Kerry during the campaign - should have been suspended. Did that happen?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. It Means Congress As A Whole, Not An Individual Member Of Congress.
It refers to Congress as a body, a collective. It does not explicitly say 'member of congress' as it does for the other titles that are referenced to individuals. It only holds up when the contempt is made towards congress as a whole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
many a good man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 07:54 PM
Response to Original message
35. Four year old story
He's the guy who remembered seeing one of the 911 hijackers in his classroom at the Defense Lanaguage Institute in Monterey. This is from June 2002:


A US Air Force officer in California recently accused President Bush of deliberately allowing the September 11 terror attacks to take place. The officer has been relieved of his command and faces further discipline. The controversy surrounding Lt. Col. Steve Butler’s letter to the editor, in which he affirmed that Bush did nothing to warn the American people because he “needed this war on terrorism,” received scant coverage in the media.

Universally ignored by the press, however, was that the officer was not merely expressing a personal opinion. He was in a position to have direct knowledge of contacts between the US military and some of the hijackers in the period before the terrorist attacks that destroyed the World Trade Center and damaged the Pentagon.

Lieutenant Colonel Butler, who wrote in a letter to the editor of the Monterey County Herald charging that “Bush knew about the impending attacks,” was vice chancellor for student affairs at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California—a US military facility that one or more of the hijackers reportedly attended during the 1990s.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ISA206A.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maraya1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
36. Note to military: "Most of your people believe the way Col Butler does."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-24-06 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
40. I Knew Something About This Sounded Awfully Familiar. Then I Saw The Date
in the link.

Did you know this was ancient news or was it an innocent oversight?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC