Comments on: “Malignant Nature” Deconstructed by a Current Serving West Pointer Who Served With the 82nd Airborne.

By: R.E.Massey

R.E.Massey — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:08:38 +0000

Those who would be tyrants are arrayed in high places to implement inhumane and unholy horrors on us all. This LTC seems to have made his choice to obviously further his military career, and has either been compromised by those who would be tyrants, or has forgotten, or lost his conscious to the extent of actually working and using his great intellect to further a completely un-American, unconstitutional ideal which is to make America a Socialist utopia replacing the very principals that made America so great.
I am sorry that men and women like this person are entrusted with Americas defense. They will ,if they do not come to their senses soon be the very ones who will be giving those unlawful orders that will have to be disobeyed by men and women of good conscience.
R.E.Massey 12AC
Savannah, GA.

By: Anon

Anon — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 06:02:52 +0000

Law and order do not always equate “justice”…in fact it is often necessary to disobey orders,policies,law, in order to establish true peace and justice.

It is very posable to refuse to “line-up” and still remain civil and patriotic…Especially when what you are being asked to do is unconstitutional, ethically wrong,morally burdoning to self and others, and inhumain…

Lets not forget; the drafting of the Declaration of Independence was very much an act of civil disobedience, and up until the Brittish attacked us, “most” of our protest were through nonviolent acts of noncoopperation, and sabatage.

By: old guy

old guy — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:41:04 +0000

No one is required to have blind obience to illegal oe unconstitutional orders. Read the UCMJ and the constitution. The oath of military office or of enlistment and the oath of public office all give the oath taker the right to reserve obedience.

By: Seneca

Seneca — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 05:00:49 +0000

Y’all are missing a salient point to this debate. The Constitution states the Supreme Court is the arbitrator of the constitutionality of law. That authority is specifically denied to the states. The idea of an individual citizen deciding whether a lawful order is unconstitutional would be abhorrent to the founding fathers.

The Enlisted Oath has been the same since 1962 and the requirement to obey the orders of the President and officers dates back to the 1789 version.

By: james

james — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 03:06:18 +0000

As I read over this seen one key thing missing our oath is to follow lawful orders orders. Not all orders are lawful just look at the mayor in Shreveport LA has order his office to take any gun they come across. Even if the man/woman has a CWP they are to take it. This is a mayor giving unlawful orders but worst yet he is setting his officers up to go to jail. Just because you have a side arm and badge dose not many you are not subject to the law. for if a office was to follow this order the one who lost the there gun should file gun theft complaint by a person with a gun and bullet proof vest these make that officer subject to 3 fed. charges, and now becoming a criminal them self. So if he follow the order blindly he can go to jail or if he has a group to stand behind him ie “oath keepers” he might get send home without pay but will be able to fight it and get his back pay. But say the mayor told us will not keep him out of jail.
Next what make the US arm force so deadly is we teach out troops to think and follow orders. I have a PVT running a deal tail one time when our LTC seen it a called me over asking why is that PVT in charge I told him he a medic he said this is the INF and we do not put PVT integer. I stated back to him your CP takes a hit he’s your medic now he has to pick who lives and who dies and that not the time he need to learn how to lead. He looks at go’s carry on doc. I was not be a smart ass but to the LTC I just train my men different. At camp they trained to be medics and leaders in the field they trained to be grunts tell some got hurt. So as you see think is part of our army.

By: Winston N. Martin

Winston N. Martin — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:22:02 +0000

The LTC says, “When you take the oath of office as a member of the Armed Forces you do not take on the character of a freelance constitutional scholar.”

I disagree. You might remember the “following orders” defense of Adolf Eichmann, a former Nazi Lt. Col. who during WWII had been in charge of transporting Jews for Hitler’s “final solution” to the “Jewish problem.” Eichmann swore his oath to Adolf Hitler, as did, I believe, every other German soldier. The “following orders” defense is called the “Nuremberg Defense,” after the trials of Nazi war criminals in Nuremberg, Germany. Before the end of the war, figuring the Nazis might use such a defense at trial, the allies issued the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal, which stated that following unlawful orders is not a valid defense for war crimes.

It might interest you to know that this past week Chief Justice John Roberts, in a Q&A period after his talk at the Univ. of Alabama, said: “A decision “should be accessible to intelligent lay people . . . they don’t have to be lawyers. If they want to find out, if it’s an important decision, what does the Supreme Court say, they should be able to pick it up and read it, and understand it. . . They should be able to follow the reasoning . . . it should give an adequate explanation.”

Understanding whether a law is legal or constitutional is not reserved to officers and lawyers, or even to the President of the United States. Each of us has a brain and a conscience, and we are expected to use them.

I wanted to say a great deal more about the LTC’s comments. Alas, I haven’t the time to do so. I believe the LTC is an honorable man. Please don’t dishoner him and yourself by name-calling. It’s often a tempting short-cut, but it won’t get you anywhere.

Best regards,
Winston N. Martin

By: steve bridges

steve bridges — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 21:50:12 +0000

As a twelve year veteran of the US Army (I left for family reasons with the rank of 1ltp after having risen to sgt as a enlisted) I believe my oath was open ended but the sole law I swore to serve, defend and otherwise obey was the Constitution. Just as a officer can give or recieve a unlawful order, a president also can issue a order violating the constitution. Any such unconstitutional order even if issued by the president is a unlawful. And I would argue that the provision in our oath to oppose domestic enemies would include even the president if the president seeks to overthrow the constitution.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 01:37:59 +0000

it never once said anything about the UCMJ, but the UCMJ states that you will not follow an illegel order from anyone.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 01:08:39 +0000

the oath has been changed,that is not the oath i gave during my 20 years of service as an enlisted.

By: JudgeMental

JudgeMental — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 07:46:36 +0000

The citizens shouldn’t worry about the neo-cons. The should look around and see the neo-COMS the POTUS has around him. They should worry that at one time Obama suggested a civilian security force that would be funded as well as the Dept. of Defense. What was that all about? As a retired judge with a C.I.B., I find it comforting that some people have awakened before it is too late.
I llok forward to becoming a member soon.