I saw a pertinent posting from the Facebook page Stolen Valor today. There have been several people who have publicly criticized (interesting how none of them send a message, but just blast in public) saying it is wrong to expose Sergeant Frazier because he has impersonated a commissioned officer, worn numerous US Army medals which he did not earn and inflated his military service beyond his honorable service. Its wrong because hes an old man they say. Make no mistake. Frazier has made a tidy profit over the years by wearing a uniform and proclaiming himself a colonel of the United States Army, A retired US Army Colonel. For those not sharp enough to realize all of the fruit salad and decorations and medals he claims and represents as his own (for less than 4 years of military service) should be a warning flag. Marine General Lewis B. Chesty Puller he wasnt. Lieutenant Audie Murphy (the most highly decorated WWII veteran) he was not either. So before you forget the morality your mother, your father, your grandparents, your Sunday school teacher (or wherever you developed your own moral compass) and tell us we are wrong, peruse Bulldog 1s thoughts on the subject: PLEASE READ!!!! I get tired of having to respond to the very few who always comment on the pictures we post with something like He didnt gain anything by wearing the uniform, so why is this picture here? He is not breaking the law. So I am going to address this in this post. In part you are correct, if they didnt gain anything of value by wearing the uniform, or medals/tabs they didnt earn they arent breaking the law.(Stolen Valor Act of 2013 to be exact) But they are still wearing something they DID NOT EARN. When the Supreme Court overturned the original SV Act of 2005, saying it was free speech to lie about Military service, they also made it clear that the answer to false speech was truth. Also in the ruling as it pertained to Alvarez (charged with falsely claiming to have been awarded the Medal of Honor), the justices stated, “…and it has not shown, and cannot show, why counterspeech, such as the ridicule respondent received online and in the press, would not suffice to achieve its interest… The “counterspeech” referenced in the Supreme Court ruling involves voluntary, unofficial, social efforts by citizens and veterans’ organizations to focus the spotlight of public awareness on military imposters, to enlist the participation of the press in the effort, and to shame the fake warriors into ceasing their disgraceful charade. WE ARE A PART OF THE SUPREME COURT’S ANSWER!!! So if you dont like what we post, the ridicule of those that pretend they earned the uniforms of the armed services, feel free to unlike our page. ~Bulldog1
Posted on: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:23:18 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015