Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, my, God. You know anyone can write whatever they want to in their blogs, dont you?!
Who would write something as...amateurish as this?:
"The President feels that the military has been too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism. By removing an oath to the American society, the soldiers are less likely to commit atrocities like those at Abu Ghraib."
The oath administered to both officers and enlisted personnel is codified by law, not presidential edict. In order to change the oath, Congress, not the President, would have to amend USC 10 - US CODE 10 - U.S. Code - Title 10: Armed Forces.
So, please take this rumor back down the rabbit hole that it first came out of.
Horrible if true.....I would like to see more hard evidence, though.
But if it were true I would think we all will be unindated with lots and lots of proof (i.e. leaks) the military and the Pentagon will not take that laying down.
They took the "gag order" under slick willy laying down. They were not permitted to express a negative opinion about the *******.
It wouldn't surprise me. They were selling Obama nazi-style armbands after the election for $10 bucks.
The media promotes this guy like he's the messiah. They receive memos directly from the White House every morning for propaganda talking points. Then schools are promoting him with chapters in their books devoted strictly to Obama, Obama handouts, making kids draw Obama, making kids sing songs about Obama (even in Canada), making kids say the pledge with a picture of Obama in front of the flag, etc. And don't forget, Obama himself said, "We must have a civilian security force that's just as well funded and equipped as the military." All of this is documented but you won't see it on MSM because they're owned by Obama.
Conservative News and Reporting "News for the Rest of Us"
Michele Chang
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is extremely frustrated with orders that the White House is contemplating. According to sources at the Pentagon, including all branches of the armed forces, the Obama Administration may break with a centuries-old tradition.
A spokesman for General James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, states that the Obama Administration wants to have soldiers and officers pledge a loyalty oath directly to the office of the President, and no longer to the Constitution.
"The oath to the Constitution is as old as the document itself." the spokesman said, "At no time in American history, not even in the Civil War, did the oath change or the subject of the oath differ. It has always been to the Constitution."
The back-and-forth between the White House and the Defense Department was expected as President George W. Bush left office. President Obama has already signed orders to close Guantanamo and to pull combat troops from Iraq. But, this, say many at the Defense Department, goes to far.
"Technically, we can't talk about it before it becomes official policy." the spokesman continued. "However, the Defense Department, including the Secretary, will not take this laying down. Expect a fight from the bureaucracy and the brass."
Sources at the White House had a different point of view. In a circular distributed by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, the rationale for the change was made more clear.
"The President feels that the military has been too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism. By removing an oath to the American society, the soldiers are less likely to commit atrocities like those at Abu Ghraib."
"We expect a lot of flak over this," the classified memo continues. "But those that would be most against it are those looking either for attention or control."
The time frame for the changes are unknown. However, it is more likely that the changes will be made around the July 4th holiday, in order to dampen any potential backlash. The difference in the oath will actually only be slight. The main differences will be the new phrasing. It is expected that the oath to the Constitution will be entirely phased out within two years.
This is very bothersome, I am not sure what to think of it. It seems that this is the sort of thing that could put the military in a must choose situation and I am not sure they would or should pledge loyalty to the POTUS instead of the constitution.
IF is a real BIG word.
Your post is baloney stuff. That's BS to you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Surprised?
