I know I'm just a lowly member of the unorganized militia 'n all, but would someone please mind telling me just what in bloody freaking hell Command SGT Major Daniel Luke is doing posing on a world government-lobbying gungrabber site, in uniform, in blatant violation of Army Regulation 670–1, Uniforms and Insignia, Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia, Part One General Information and Responsibilities, Chapter 1 Introduction, 1–10. When the wear of the Army uniform is required or prohibited:
j. Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:?
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian employment
You guys are still under civilian authority, right? So why is one of your noncoms out there exploiting the uniform and insignias of service, and undermining the unalienable right of sovereign American Citizens, by appealing to international authorities to regulate arms in contravention of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights--especially after the representative designated by the Commander in Chief has specifically repudiated global gun control as the administration's official position?
Note: I tried to check up on Sgt. Luke on the off-chance that someone posted his picture on the IANSA site without his authorization, or God forbid, that he died in service and a relative posted it. There's not much out there, but as this is a violation regardless, the Army should investigate.
UPDATE: The name tag on the above photo looks like it says "Diaz," not "Luke." I have been able to find some search hits for a Command SGT Major Daniel Luke Diaz, and if this is the same person, some of the posts ostensibly made by him say he is retired. I have no idea if the Army has recourse in this--I'm not sure what authority they would have to do anything but request that IANSA remove the picture. Whether or not--assuming this is willful--they would have any ability to pursue this with a retired sergeant is a matter for people knowledgeable in such matters.
UPDATE 2: Here we go. Hey Sarge, did you post your picture on the Million Faces website or is somebody doing this without your consent?
UPDATE 3: The Army just arrived.
12 comments:
You are correct David. And, I might add, anyone who knowingly violates regulations may be punished as a courts martial may direct, as AR-15 punishment is non- judicial, as in minor or misdemeanor. As a CSM in the Army, there is no way he could claim ignorance( except that his assumptions are) and senior NCO's are held to higher standards of accountability. In this case, the Secretary of the Army's office should be notified, as the CSM has embroiled himself in International affairs.He is also in violation of the Security Regs. 350-1 and so on, as he posseses at least a Secret Clearance and is involved in International Affairs, not necessarily involving the best interests of the United States. His clearance should be pulled immediately.
So...how about an address to send it to.....who would that be?
I jumped off this site as fast as I could to notify someone in authority. hotline@dodig.osd.mil. Skip last dot after mil Couldn't raise the website so I called 800-424-9098 and got a guy to listen. They aren't allowed (hahahaha) to access civilian internet, according to him, so I told him to get somebody on a civilian computer with internet access and get on David's or the linked site, both of which I gave him, with my name, address, phone yadayada. Hope it don't bring no heat on Davids' head, but they have to know where to find it.
Sean, good point about security clearances. And bring on the heat.
Chris, in answer to your question, I looked around on their contact page for a few minutes until it became apparent it was a pain in the a...neck designed to give you FAQ links and not much more, so I ended up using their "Contact the Army Web Team" form to send them a request for comment on this story:
Please forward this to the Office of the Chief of Public Affairs:
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2007/11/question-for-secretary-of-standing-army.html
I am seeking a for-the-record comment about the article appearing at the above url, including whether the Army will investigate and demand removal of the photo from the IANSA website, and what actions, if any, will be pursued if a willful violation is confirmed.
Everyone interested, feel free to follow suit, and also to give us other ways to ask the brass to get to the truth of this.
Thanks david,message sent.
Based on what's on his blog:
"That was a real wake up call for me. Thugs wanting to train on how to kill, (anyone for that matter, and professionally), and then when they were done with the Army would retain said training and reinsert themselves back into their former gang neighborhoods."
he did indeed send his picture up there. He says "Until the day I breathe my last breath, I will fight for my nation and for freedom." but yet, the ONLY freedom he's apparently advocating is that of the thugs that he was so worried about he resigned.
Notice he is NOT out advocating anything be done to strengthen the family, to discourage the reasons kids join gangs, or to prevent more people from becoming criminals. He's simply trying to make a notch in these thugs belts a bit easier when they do indeed get out. His favorite movies include "anything michael moore puts out." Frankly I'm surprised he wasn't (or isn't) in psyops. He makes you wonder just how much scraping they had to do and how many waivers he got.
Sean wrote:
> anyone who knowingly violates regulations may be punished as a courts martial may direct, as AR-15 punishment is non- judicial, as in minor or misdemeanor.
Any bets on whether or not some convenient excuse will be found to not prosecute, or on whether or not the prosecution will be selective, or on whether or not the court-martial judges will 'divine' in advance which verdict is not career-limiting for them?
Mark Odell
David, check your hotmail please.
Nicki
I am retired. I do not have any recent pictures of me out of uniform. Therefore, I am not violating any regulations. Check that if you want, but I am not representing the Army. If I had a picture of me in a Spiderman costume would you be so offended? I think not. So, if I am retired and the picture is a couple of years old, the regulations do not apply to me. That is sufficient an answer as you are going to get regardless of whether you all think you know the regulations or not.
Sincerely, retired Senior Non-Com
You will also note that I do not condone gang members in my former line of endeavor. I want all gun owners to be responsible members of a lawful society. And if you open you eyes you will see on my old uniform that I have the Army Lapel Pin on my lapel. Meaning, I am either a. retired, or have been Honorably discharged. And judging by my former rank, (which I get to keep the title long after I am retired), I am long past my contractual obligations to the Army or the Armed Forces. And you are right, you are just a simple little militant who knows nothing about anything except how to attack persons you should damn well leave alone for voicing their "earned" rights of free speech as opposed to those who feel entitled by birth or racist affiliations. I hope next time you check your facts before you find the NSA at your door asking you questions. You pathetic little turd.
Retire that.
A couple of points here. "Therefore, I am not violating any regulations. Check that if you want, but I am not representing the Army. If I had a picture of me in a Spiderman costume would you be so offended? I think not. So, if I am retired and the picture is a couple of years old, the regulations do not apply to me." You are wrong...eventhough you are retired you are still obligated to observe the standards set forth in AR 670-1. In fact the issues of retirees in uniform are specifically adressed in AR 670-1. Second...the right of free speech is not earned. It is guaranteed to all citizens of the US. Get a life.....
Moved the discussion to here. Closing comments on this thread to continue them where more people can join in.
Post a Comment