History Man Posted May 16, 2012 Share #51 Posted May 16, 2012 Glad to see that soldier is getting some recognition for his actions and sacrifice. Philip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyrocket Posted June 3, 2012 Share #52 Posted June 3, 2012 This is well worth a listen to: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=hxlcVAEj0sM&vq=large johnny R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajbUSWM Posted June 3, 2012 Share #53 Posted June 3, 2012 This is well worth a listen to: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=hxlcVAEj0sM&vq=large johnny R. Another great post. The family was in the 3rd row... and fat cats in the first row. Why am I not surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack's Son Posted June 3, 2012 Share #54 Posted June 3, 2012 This is well worth a listen to:johnny R. Johnny, I'm surprised your post has lasted this long!! It is nothing but a political statement!! :thumbdown: .......Doesn't belong on the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
History Man Posted June 3, 2012 Share #55 Posted June 3, 2012 +1 with JS. It is also sad that they had to include politics (and a political attack) in this situation! :thumbdown: Philip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajbUSWM Posted June 3, 2012 Share #56 Posted June 3, 2012 As for political statements, the Stolen Valor Act is a political statement by Senator Konrad and Representative Salazar. Code Pink is a political statement (notice how they stopped protesting in 2009?). It is difficult nowadays to seperate politics from military discussions since the two are more entwined now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
History Man Posted June 3, 2012 Share #57 Posted June 3, 2012 You would prefer the family was in the 5th row? No, but I think they could have honored the man recieving the MOH without making political statements and insulting politicians. Philip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajbUSWM Posted June 3, 2012 Share #58 Posted June 3, 2012 No, but I think they could have honored the man recieving the MOH without making political statements and insulting politicians. Philip The politicians (in both parties) insult themselves ... we just highlight it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack's Son Posted June 3, 2012 Share #59 Posted June 3, 2012 AJ, I agree with your thinking, and politics does overflow in situations like this. However, the pointing of fingers at a politician or a party is where I believe we are overstepping our bounds. I'm not a fan of our current administration, but I see no reason to add it into a discussion of the importance of including the family and soldiers in a MoH ceremony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom2001 Posted June 3, 2012 Author Share #60 Posted June 3, 2012 No matter what side of the political divide you're on, I think it's important that broadcasters relate the facts of the event, rather than some fictional account of the award ceremony. Here's the YouTube video of the ceremony: You can clearly see: To the President's left is the CMOH Society, with Giunta's fellow team members sitting directly behind them Directly in front of the President is his wife, Robert Gates, Mike Mullen, George Casey, and John McHugh To the President's right (in the front row) is Giunta's wife, parents, grandparents, and siblings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack's Son Posted June 3, 2012 Share #61 Posted June 3, 2012 Thanks Tom. This is the best yet......truth and accuracy. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajbUSWM Posted June 3, 2012 Share #62 Posted June 3, 2012 The only thing worse than bad news is twisted "news"... I should have investigated before commenting. That twisted "news" story should be removed as well as my comments. That is a sick joke. Thanks for setting the record straight Tom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyrocket Posted June 3, 2012 Share #63 Posted June 3, 2012 I agree 100%—it's always good to have facts and set the records straight. Please delete the posting. I like this Forum for getting to the truth, even though it's hard to find these days. I tried to track this down for verification, but to no avail, thanks Tom. Johnny R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack's Son Posted June 3, 2012 Share #64 Posted June 3, 2012 I think this deserves a bump for more members to read the evolution of yesterdays conversation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyrocket Posted June 21, 2012 Share #65 Posted June 21, 2012 Justices Take On Medal Lies Respect for Military Honors Competes With Worries About Government's Reach http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...0547805116.html Johnny R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 21, 2012 Share #66 Posted June 21, 2012 Justices Take On Medal Lies Respect for Military Honors Competes With Worries About Government's Reach http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...0547805116.html Johnny R. It says the decision is expected before July...I wonder what the status is now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyrocket Posted June 21, 2012 Share #67 Posted June 21, 2012 Nothing is as it seems today Dave, deception and deceit abounds. I'm hearing the last week of June should be the announcement time.The Supreme Court usually announces these things at 10:00 a.m. on the last week of June of the their 2012 session. Johnny R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajbUSWM Posted June 21, 2012 Share #68 Posted June 21, 2012 Nothing is as it seems today Dave, deception and deceit abounds. I'm hearing the last week of June should be the announcement time.The Supreme Court usually announces these things at 10:00 a.m. on the last week of June of the their 2012 session. Johnny R. I didn't realize a SVA decision was pending ... WOW .... big week ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack's Son Posted June 21, 2012 Share #69 Posted June 21, 2012 It sounds as though the justices will strike it down for first amendment purposes only. Leaving congress to tighten it up in areas such as procession or wearing of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyrocket Posted June 28, 2012 Share #70 Posted June 28, 2012 Just heard that the "SVA" has just been declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Johnny R. :think: :crying: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 28, 2012 Share #71 Posted June 28, 2012 Just heard that the "SVA" has just been declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL.Johnny R. :think: :crying: Why the sad faces? Not to delve into politics, but I'm very glad that the Supreme Court decided that people have freedom of speech. If they limit the ability to make harmless lies, what's next? Talking about religion? Different political points of view? We live in a free country and even though we might not agree with everything everyone says, they have the right to say it. This is why the people whose items we collect (and many of us) fought for our country for the last 200+ years...to protect these freedoms. Thank you, Supreme Court. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 28, 2012 Share #72 Posted June 28, 2012 Link to their findings: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-210d4e9.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nack Posted June 28, 2012 Share #73 Posted June 28, 2012 Why the sad faces? Not to delve into politics, but I'm very glad that the Supreme Court decided that people have freedom of speech. If they limit the ability to make harmless lies, what's next? Talking about religion? Different political points of view? We live in a free country and even though we might not agree with everything everyone says, they have the right to say it. This is why the people whose items we collect (and many of us) fought for our country for the last 200+ years...to protect these freedoms. Thank you, Supreme Court. Dave Bingo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyrocket Posted June 28, 2012 Share #74 Posted June 28, 2012 How does this apply to the purchase of a MoH.—or is this yet another law separate from the SVA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nack Posted June 28, 2012 Share #75 Posted June 28, 2012 How does this apply to the purchase of a MoH.—or is this yet another law separate from the SVA. The SVA has many provisions, the ruling today only apples to the claiming-of-decorations part (I think - I haven't read the whole opinion as of yet). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now