Gutsy soldier in uniform is censored and 'escorted' out of convention. Why is this acceptable?

Question

See the following:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=054_1186261860

I do not and never did support this bogus "war" in Iraq, but to display such disrespect to a man in uniform is absolutely reprehensible, to me.

And, for what it's worth, I felt similarly turned off when Fred Thompson's handlers threw out a lady who was asking about Thompson's connections to NAU.

What do you think? Do you think it's acceptable to demonstrate the strength of a democracy by censoring fellow Americans?

Ah-ha: Please try to keep up with the substance of the question. Thanks.

Answer 1

Though it may be deplorable, that soldier was about to put himself into trouble. One cannot attend any partisan political gathering in uniform, let alone rise to ask a question at such a gathering. It's against Federal law and has been for many years. I doubt if the organizers of this gathering of Democrat contenders for that party's Presidential nomination will make much more of it. After all, a young soldier named Albert Francis Gore, Jr. returned from Vietnam and campaigned for his father's re-election to the Senate while wearing his uniform.

Answer 2

I agree that it's wrong to suppress free speech! However, there is another aspect to consider. Members of the military are forbidden from attending meetings, rallies, protests, etc. that promote a political or religious position while they are IN UNIFORM.

In civilian clothes, it's not a problem; in uniform the soldier represents their country. Attending church in uniform on a military base is OK because the soldier is among peers, not in the general civilian population. They actually did the soldier a favor by escorting him out, otherwise he could face charges under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). That regulation is also the same reason that several other military members are in trouble for participating in an evangelical video.


Sorry, I's missed desertviking's post when replying. the viking is correct and has 19 more service years than I to prove it.

Answer 3

While it is against policy to get involved in political events or speeches while in uniform, this guy surely was not doing anything radical. I wish more people would see what the actual soldiers have to say. All the ones I have talked to believe in what they are doing. even if they perhaps dont like how some of it is being handled.

Answer 4

As you are, I am also against our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan for the sole purpose of revenge for 9/11. As a democracy with the entire reason for our country to exist, our men and women in arms have every right to speak at ANY convention. I do believe the terrorists want America divided over our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. If we are divided then it won't take as long to finish dividing us and making us fall. How awful these politicians are with absolutely no respect for ANYBODY especially those that have fought in that god-awful war - and for what?

Answer 5

The soldier spoke - that's not censorship. The panelist left the room, and several minutes later the soldier came out to speak with him - that's not escorted. They disagreed on whether it was appropriate for the soldier to be saying whatever it was he was saying while in uniform, and went off to argue about it.

Answer 6

Free speech must not be curtailed as long as the person is an a threat to national security.

Answer 7

No..no matter which side of the aisle you are on, if candidates want to represent people and get paid well to do it, they should have to answer questions from everyone.

Answer 8

hes certainly entitled to his opinion but realistically politics and uniforms arent supposed to cross paths. He should set up a convention of like minded individuals across the street.

Answer 9

Did you demand John Kerry, Harry Reid, and Jack Murtha apologize when they say the war is lost, the troops are dumb, and calling them cold blooded murderers?

Answer 10

No. It is not acceptable in the least.