Moony Times: Generals should be "promptly and severely sanctioned."

[TexasLawyer]

Whoa-- so not only should the president/decider and Rummy ignore all expert military advice and criticism, such advice and criticism should also be punished to the furthest extent possible. Chimpy and friends love yes-men, but this is taking things to extremes, wouldn't you say?

If steps are taken to punish the generals, I hope that even bigger howls of protest will be heard-- from the military, from the press, from everyone.



Court of Inquiry

By Tony Blankley
April 19, 2006

<snip>

if The Washington Post thinks -- as I do -- that we are seeing before our eyes a coordinated act of multiple insubordination by a group of generals, then such action should not go unsanctioned. The dangerous precedent must not be permitted to stand -- whether or not one agrees with their substantive criticism of their civilian superiors.

<snip>

The obvious answer to their question is yes -- unless the current insubordinations (if that is what they be) are promptly and severely sanctioned. Once generals start getting selected for their personal loyalty to a president, we are a dangerous step closer to the plague of Caesarism that not only corrupts governments around the world today but ended the Roman Republic and brought on Rome's Imperial Age.

<snip>

{T}he real responsibility for vindicating the principle of military subordination to the civilian government lies with the president and secretary of defense. Politically unpleasant as it may be, they should promptly order a court of inquiry pursuant to Article 135 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to determine if, as is widely suspected -- or if not -- the current military clamor for Mr. Rumsfeld to be fired involves any acts of insubordination.

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/tblankley.htm

The selection of possible crimes:
http://www.google.com/search?hs=Ag4&hl=en&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&q=Article+135+Uniform+Code+of+Military+Justice&btnG=Search

[tabasco]

1. They're CIVILIANS now !

Retired military, even if they are in the IRR, are CIVILIANS.

This country was BEGUN by people speaking out against the government, and anyone suppressing the right of citizens to criticize the government is UN-AMERICAN. Criticizing the government is an American institution. Only fascists believe that criticism of the government is wrong.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

3. Yes I wonder if he even understands that distinction, or willfully ignores

it.

What law, pray tell, would they be charged under?

There's no "insubordination" unless they don't take out the garbage when their wife says.

[Patchuli]

2. We must all hit the streets

and we must take back our America.

[Neil Lisst]

4. Tony Blankney reminds me of those instrument playing toads of Mexico

The ones that are all blown up, full of air.

He's such a Bush shill!

[TexasLawyer]

6. LOL!!!

I love that image!

[flyarm]

5. Tony Blankley is an ugly whore!..he is a pig!

I WOULD LOVE TO MEET HIM AND SPIT RIGHT IN HIS FILTHY FACE!


yes i am sick and tired of filthy stinking pond scum like that asshole!

i hope he cokes while he is stuffing his face!

or when he looks into the mirror in the morning it breaks..all over him!

gosh i hate that pig!

fly

[TexasLawyer]

7. Don't hold back, fly...

How do you REALLY feel?!? :rofl: :rofl:

[IndyJones]

8. I read the second link and it looks like they could be in some hot water.

"(4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay."

They are entitled to their retirement pay, right? Does that make them fall under that rule?

No, I don't think they should be in trouble for speaking the truth, especially when every American knows it's time for Rummy to retire.

But I have to admit, when I read about the generals speaking out, I wondered if they could get into some sort of trouble.

[TexasLawyer]

11. yes, I was surprised to see that

the rules could still be applied to retired officers.

[davidinalameda]

9. how flipping stupid

this moran doesn't understand the difference between retired and active duty

[MiniMe]

10. Its called Freedom of Speech , try reading the constitution and the

bill of rights Tony. You big fat windbag.