"...do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."

"For the good of the Air Force, for the good of the armed services and for the good of our country, I urge you to reject convention and careerism..."
- Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Maxwell AFB, April 21, 2008

"You will need to challenge conventional wisdom and call things like you see them to subordinates and superiors alike."
- Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, United States Air Force Academy, March 4, 2011

Monday, May 19, 2014

United States of Secrets

The new PBS Frontline documentary, United States of Secrets, is available in two parts for free online.  It should be required viewing for every military officer.  It is an excellent look at the unconstitutional law breaking that a military officer may very well be ordered to engage in.  General Michael Hayden provides a perfect example of a politician who wears a uniform but is the antithesis of a military officer or public servant, who is more than willing to violate his oath of office and hurt the American people solely to please his boss and serve his own ambitions.

This documentary provides an excellent look into what oath breaking politicians masquerading as military officers look like.  Every military officer should watch this outstanding documentary.


  1. You often write about people neglecting their oath of office. Do you think that there is never gray area? Do you think that "I will support and defend the constitution of the United States" is the same thing as "I will never do anything that even vaguely goes against the constitution of the United States". Is there no room for interpretation? I only ask because you have questioned the patriotism of men like General Hayden and Lt Colonel North ( a man who earned a Silver Star and two Purple Hearts) for something that amounts to them doing what they thought was in the best interest of the United States.

    I am glad Anwar al-Awlaki was killed. He was a dangerous enemy of the United States. I respect the fact that you feel strongly about the constitution but my assessment is that the pros outweighed the cons. In the end, killing Anwar al-Awlaki supported and defended the Constitution for the rest of the 360 million citizens that do not wish to hurt, kill, and terrorize the American people. One man's rights versus the alienation of 360 million people's rights. You disagree with my assessment but that doesn't make me some type of fascist. Somehow, you feel that anyone who agrees with or executes the policies of the US government that you personally deem unconstitutional are bad people. This doesn't make any sense to me.

    1. Are glad that they killed his son? Another American citizen murdered without due process, just because he was associated to him?

  2. Let me answer your questions before giving your the verbal tar-and-feathering you so richly deserve.

    You asked if I thought there was every gray area in the Constitution and therefore our oath to support and defend it. I do think there is. I also think there are areas that are clear. The Fifth Amendment tells us that government can't deprive us "of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." The Constitution makes that due process of law clear in Article Three when it defines treason and then describes the open trial that is required to convict for it. Treason is the ONLY crime covered in the Constitution itself, because it's so often used by fascist governments to spread tyranny. There is no gray area there.

    You ask if I think that supporting the constitution is the same thing as never doing "anything that even vaguely goes against the constitution of the United States." Yes, it is required to not do anything that vaguely goes against the Constitution. You are familiar with chain of command, correct? The Constitution is the very top, it's the marching orders the People who pay our bills gave us. They might have said, "Alright, we're gonna timidly and nervously give you military guys these powers and this technology to defend us, but you can NEVER do these things against us...." So yes, if you vaguely ever so slightly violate the constitution, then you are not defending it.

    You ask is there room for interpretation. Of course there is. If you have some amazing interpretation of how it's constitutional to assassinate Americans without charge or trial, please spill it. But you and I both know you do not - you just want to throw the word "interpretation" out there like it's some academic shrug. "Who knows, it's all debatable." But you have no argument, you just want people to think you have one. That fact is, you don't care about the text or interpreting it. You only care about you and your convenience, rather than the supreme law of the land and your purchased and paid for duty to it.

    You say, "In the end, killing Anwar al-Awlaki supported and defended the Constitution for the rest of the 360 million citizens that do not wish to hurt, kill, and terrorize the American people." You are a fucking clown and yes, you are a fascist clown at that. You pronounce judgment on Awlaki and impose the death penalty. You have no evidence of course and you are unconcerned that an American was on the assassination list for nearly two years and how many Americans died as a result during that two years? And let's not forget the fact that we could have just as easily picked Awlaki up and arrested him, charged him, and tried him as simply unlawfully execute him.

    You are a fascist tool bag and if given the opportunity, you will betray your nation and your oath. You would be just as happy serving in North Korea's military as ours. You have no honor, you are stupid, and you are a fucking coward. Happy Memorial Day.

  3. You have a child's perspective of right and wrong. The Constitution is not some magical document. There are things that fall outside of what the Constitution was designed for. A dual citizen that renounced his citizenship and was actively waging war against the United States from Yemen is one of them. If he wasn't such a serious threat, the United States would have most likely not have used lethal action. There are many other US citizens that are currently affiliated with terrorist organizations but we don't actively target them. Anwar al-Awlaki was someone that was a very serious threat that we couldn't easily have access to. I am really confused how you think it would have been easy to capture him. I really understand how civilians are ignorant about these things but when I read a blog by an Air Force pilot, specifically someone with experience in the RPA community, I am shocked. I am also shocked that the Air Force allows you to be in the same aircraft as a CGO student. I trust that with your long history of filing IG complaints, fighting the Air Force, and generally doing things that are against the grain, you are capable of separating politics and work. You have every right to your political views but it really leaves me wondering why you serve in an organization that you so clearly hate for a government that you so clearly distrust.

    The government does not go around assassinating people on a daily basis. A leader of AQAP that had aided in numerous plots against the United States in the homeland. We could not have "easily" picked up Awlaki and charged him. That is why the US government made the extreme decision to kill a leader of an organization that posed serious and imminent threats to the United States. The decision wasn't made lightly. Do you have any doubts that Anwar al-Alwaki's action were not treasonous? You say that there is no evidence of al-Awlaki’s affiliation with AQAP and call me the clown. Should we have just asked Anwar to turn himself in? Should we have just let him go about his business of actively planning attacks against our homeland? He was an operational leader. Not a figure head....not a low level soldier, but the operational leader of the terrorist organization that poses a serious threat to the United States.

  4. But since you disagree with me, the fascist US government, and all of the officers of the US military that betray our nation and our oath....Why don't you resign your commission, run for office, and make some legislative changes that would stop this from happening in the future? Maybe you could form some type of militia with all of the others that feel the same way you do. You could run on the platform of all the traitors in the military with silver stars and purple hearts are useless yes men. All the traitors that you served side by side with during a time of war are fascist. While running for office, you can boast about all of your leadership experience as a Captain and Major when you filed all of those pointless IG complaints about things like Air Force PT and people laughing at your hilarious point of views at PME. People will be in awe of the excellent research you performed in, "The Smartest Guys in the Room and the Best of the Best" about how shitty F-15C guys are. You can talk about all the times that you have defended the US Constitution by whining in your car and filming it while the Government illegally "detained" you. I hope you understand that no one will ever follow you because you will never be a leader. It is sad that an FGO in the Air Force doesn't have the capabilities required to be a leader. That is why you hate people like Tony Carr, someone that actually is a leader. Someone that left the Air Force in his prime because he wanted to make a difference that could only be done on the outside. You on the other hand, struggled to stay in the Air Force while your reputation was passed on from commander to commander. As you PCSed from base to base, you only became more useless. You are known all around the Air Force. 2d Lts at NAS Pensacola were making jokes about you before you even arrived because any authority the Air Force has given you, you compromised by being the type of person you are.

    The worst thing is, you have valid points. Your cause is real and everyone understands the slippery slope argument. Everyone understands that the importance of the US Constitution and the need for documents that are capable of withstanding the test of time. The problem is, you have no skill at making an unemotional argument. If people do not agree with you, they are fascist traitors that have no honor. I don’t think you know what honor or serving your country truly is.

    "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

  5. Jesus, you are so full of shit your eyes must be brown. I have a child's perspective of right and wrong? News flash, I'm not talking about what is right or wrong. I'm talking about the law that I as a public servant swore to uphold, the law of the masses distilled through their representatives. I did not take an oath to uphold what I think is right or wrong, but to uphold the law and to be restrained by it.

    As to other bullshit you parrot like the moronic mouthpiece that you are. No, Awlaki didn't renounce his citizenship (at least not legally). He remained an American citizen until the day he was murdered by people like you.

    "If he wasn't such a serious threat, the United States would have most likely not have used lethal action." Nice, way to hedge your bets. Most likely. Well, our constitution requires that government follow it, not most likely follow it.

    "There are many other US citizens that are currently affiliated with terrorist organizations but we don't actively target them." Oh, fantastic. Reminds me of a child molester who raped a little boy and then shrugged it off saying, "There are a lot of boys I haven't yet raped."

    "Anwar al-Awlaki was someone that was a very serious threat that we couldn't easily have access to." Okay, way to show just how not an authority you are. We invaded Panama and lost service members lives to capture Noriega and put him on trial for drug trafficking and he sits in prison now. We went into a city in nuclear equipped Pakistan and pissed their government off, to capture/kill OBL. But you maintain that we couldn't easily have captured Awlaki in the middle of nowhere in third world Yemen. You show that you have no earthly clue what the fuck you're talking about.

    Politics? What does politics have to do with anything? The only person here talking about politics is you.

    Serving in an organization I hate? A government I distrust? Decades of faithful public service by me, and the "rewards" such service comes with at the hands of douche bags like you, is hardly indicative of hating a service. It's evidence that I want to make the service better. Don't confuse my hatred of bad government and treasonous military types as hating government. It's you that don't have the character of a fly on shit that I hate, who make others hate our government. You say, "But since you disagree with me, the fascist US government, and all of the officers of the US military that betray our nation and our oath....Why don't you resign your commission..." which just shows your childish white/black guilt by association thinking. I don't think all in the military are fascists, I think many are and the fact that a fascist like you feels comfortable spreading your anti-American, anti-rule of law tripe just shows how acceptable it unfortunately is today.

  6. "You say that there is no evidence of al-Awlaki’s affiliation with AQAP and call me the clown." Where did I mention no evidence of Awlaki being affiliated with AQAP again? Take your time.

    And if you had an ounce of the authority or insight you pretend to have on this issue, you wouldn't ask me why I don't resign my commission. You clearly do not know what you're talking about, and you clearly don't know who I am. Your reverence for a politician like Tony Carr and your Tony-Carr-esque touting of popularity as some kind of measuring stick only demonstrates how out of touch you are. Your oath said nothing of being popular and fitting in, but it did say a little something about bearing true faith and allegiance to the constitution without mental reservation. That was too much for you to hack. You think "vague" ever so slight violations of the Constitution (you know small shit like assassinating Americans without charge or trial rather than simply scooping them up on a road in the middle of nowhere and putting them on trial as is required by the Constitution) is perfectly fine. No wonder you like Tony Carr, his viewpoint empowers your own insomuch as he has states there are no inviolate rights in our Constitution.

    But you bring up a good point. It is sad that guys like you are not drummed out of service by those butter bars you mention, for being un-American oath-breaking frauds who can't even get the basics right. Whether it was military fixing bayonets and rounding up 70,000 American citizens in World War II without charge or trial or individual suspicion and sending them to concentration camps, or disarming Americans after Hurricane Katrina, or celebrating the assassination of American men and teenagers where once we would have sent brave men to capture them and give them their due process in court, there will always be a great many cowards like yourself.

    It's too bad you feel so comfortable being so completely unworthy to wear the uniform. You're like a child molester in a seedy chat room who feels comfortable espousing your lack of character and your mental disease. That's something I hope to help change, and it won't be done by telling the likes of you that we can agree to disagree on your view that it's sometimes okay to touch Timmy.

    Some viewpoints do not deserve any semblance of civil debate. At any rate, enjoy Memorial Day tomorrow and enjoy the memory of a great many Americans who gave their last breaths fighting the fascism that you so proudly defend here and now.