Stolen Valor, should not be ignored!

[ConHog]

Last time I checked the courts were ALL part of the government. Or didn't you ever learn even that in school.-

Reversal is not the same as being stricken unconstitutional. IT was removed , not reversed.

I see though that you are unwilling to actually defend your thought, preferring instead to attack the poster who points out your error.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/popup?id=3631779


Operation Stolen Valor


The VA says it's in the midst of a crackdown on phony military heroes.

SEE THE LINK LISTED ABOVE....

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Today, 11:54 AM<input type="checkbox" class="postimod" id="post_imod_checkbox_609992" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: 10px; top: 5px;">
ConHog
I'm in YOUR head

<label>This message is hidden because ConHog is on your ignore list.</label>

View Post

Remove user from ignore list

View Post

Doing exactly as Jim suggested, Jim is a very wise man!!!!!
Very wise suggestion Jim....-Tyr

[ConHog]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/popup?id=3631779


Operation Stolen Valor


The VA says it's in the midst of a crackdown on phony military heroes.


SEE THE LINK LISTED ABOVE....

No actually what your link says is that the VA is in the midst of cracking down on people who fraudulently try to use their services.

Good for them, and that is not a first amendment violation. It was already illegal to try to fraudulently obtain government services of any kind. All agencies should crack down.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So you use as example pretenders being "allowed" instances where they are charged, convicted, and publicly called out? And SCOTUS declaring unconstitutional is not the government reversing; there's quite a difference.

Yes, I presented cases where the pretenders were caught and action was taken. Something wrong with my linked source? -Tyr

[fj1200]

Yes, I presented cases where the pretenders were caught and action was taken. Something wrong with my linked source? -Tyr

No, just your logic and lack of support for the rest of your comments. Define "countless" and point out how those who served "take no interest."

[ConHog]

No, just your logic and lack of support for the rest of your comments. Define "countless" and point out how those who served "take no interest."

He actually did NOT present a link to any case where a person what caught and or punished for lying about service. What he DID present is a link to a case where a man was caught and punished for fraudulently trying to obtain VA services.

[fj1200]

^There were at least three links in the OP.

[ConHog]

^There were at least three links in the OP.

I was speaking of his second post, the one where he linked to the article about the VA. you know the one that happened after Stolen Valor was correctly, and conservatively, ruled unconstitutional.

[fj1200]

^OK.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://themongoosetrick.blogspot.com...-stealing.html

I detest, too, the “perfumed prince” who shows up on television before a national audience – to testify before congress, for instance – wearing a chestful of infantile merit badges, sometimes not one of which amounts to a Boy Scout Merit Badge in value that has to do with what it means. Often all but one or two of these “ribbons” says merely that the wearer was someplace. The four stars on this wannabe Leonidas were all too often earned in a college classroom or while training to fight - not fight.

There are four medals (and their ribbons) which connote valor: the Bronze Star with “V for Valor,” the Silver Star, the Distinguished Service Cross, and the Medal of Honor. Services other than the U.S. Army have medals equivalent to the DSC, medals which include the Navy Cross. I sincerely respect those medals and ribbons, but as one who doesn’t festoon his car with bumpers stickers or wear “message” tee-shirts, I haven’t much time for men who wear their honor on their sleeve – or chest. When it is a woman who shows up wearing a uniform sporting a "stack" of ribbons, I want to puke.

But this is about “Stolen Valor,” and The Stolen Valor Act of 2006 (18 US Code Section 704). As someone who has made a lifelong study of the science of propaganda – which is a form of lying – I see what is going on here. So – unless we are even stupider as a society and nation than I have reason to believe - does the Marine Colonel who this morning on FoxNews pontificated indignantly about a court having ruled the Stolen Valor Act of 2006 unconstitutional.

Trust me, this isn’t about "stolen valor." The government of the United States is not only arguably the biggest liar in human history, it is the biggest thief ever in history of the honor and credit – “valor." This unctuously phony Stolen Valor Act is about propaganda enhancement, a means of silencing “enemies of state” – anyone who disagrees with our colossally criminal, corporately owned and administered, government.

Who controls the record upon which everything concerning this kind of “valor” depends?

[fj1200]

^What was the point of that rant?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

^What was the point of that rant?

If you can not be bothered to click the link provided to read (and possibly find out), then I see no purpose to answering that question myself. Just remain in the darkness....-Tyr

[fj1200]

If you can not be bothered to click the link provided to read (and possibly find out), then I see no purpose to answering that question myself. Just remain in the darkness....-Tyr

I clicked it and found it to be a borderline incoherent rant about government for the sake of being a rant... Oh, now I see.

[ConHog]

I clicked it and found it to be a borderline incoherent rant about government for the sake of being a rant... Oh, now I see.

That's called being a "conservative" you dummy