UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > May > May 16

Re: Officials At Andrews AFB Bomb First Amendment!

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 11:06:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 09:56:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Officials At Andrews AFB Bomb First Amendment!


>From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 09:06:12 -0400
>Subject: Officials At Andrews AFB Bomb First Amendment!

>To: ghosttroop.nul

Larry, Errol, List, All,

I find this highly inflammatory, biased, and more importantly,
that it has nothing to do with UFOs!

>Like Their Counterparts at Wright-Patterson, Langley, and
>Lackland Air Force Bases, Officials at Andrews AFB Have No Right
>to Bomb the First Amendment!

>By Larry W. Bryant

<snip>

>A group of current/former U. S. servicemembers - known as the
>Ghost Troop (http://geocities.com/onlythecaptain/ ) - has found
>the "bloody knife" exposing the OFFICIALLY UNRELEASED number of
>Americans who died during the fierce battle at Iraq's capital in
>the spring of 2003. That number, of course, dwarfs the
>officially released count. To help determine the discrepancy's
>cause/perpetuators/accountability, the group is seeking all
>related documentary evidence and sworn testimony from all BOBCUP
>whistleblowers brave enough to come forward. Armed with your
>accounts, the group can help persuade Congress to exercise its
>oversight authority in this matter. Contact: Larry W. Bryant
>at:...

>At this point, were I the U. S. attorney assigned to represent
>the defendant in Bryant v. Rumsfeld, et al., I'd submit my
>resignation forthwith - rather than countenance any form of
>viewpoint discrimination.

>What's worse for Amerika: being "anti-military," or being
>anti-First Amendment?

This is not a First Amendment issue. The base newspaper is the
commander's instrument for communication with the soldiers. It
operates under many of the same restrictions that a civilian
newspaper uses, but the commander is the publisher. Just as
civilian newspapers have the right to reject advertising they
find offensive, so does the base newspaper. We have all heard
stories that one network decided not to run an ad that another
found acceptable. No one retreated to First Amendment arguments
at that time.

Second, that ad is anti-military, especially after you read the
allegations raised on the web page that Bryant provides for us.
There certainly is no obligation for the base newspaper to run
an ad with that "spin" in it. (Even without the additional
information, the ad certainly seems to be anti-military.)

Finally, I notice that the man Bryant cites by pointing us to
the web site was not in Baghdad. His allegations are so much
speculation. However, I spent a great deal of time on the
Baghdad International Airport (known to the soldiers as BIAP)
and I saw nothing to support these claims of huge American
casualties. (I wonder here if the term casualties isn't
confused! It means wounded and missing as well as killed.) I
had the opportunity to review a great deal of information (some
of it classified) about the battle of Baghdad, and is simply
does not bear out these allegations.

I would suggest that Bryant take his fight with the government
about this into a different forum and leave this one to UFOs.


KRandle




[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com