Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #552236 > unrolled thread
| Started by | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-11 07:46 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-02-13 00:55 -0500 |
| Articles | 19 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
The Navy Is Gay HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 07:46 -0800
Re: The Navy Is Gay benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 13:57 -0500
Re: The Navy Is Gay jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-11 19:08 +0000
Re: The Navy Is Gay HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 11:30 -0800
Re: The Navy Is Gay benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 20:12 -0500
Re: The Navy Is Gay jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-12 01:49 +0000
Re: The Navy Is Gay benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 23:15 -0500
Re: The Navy Is Gay jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-12 05:49 +0000
Re: The Navy Is Gay jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-12 13:54 +0000
Re: The Navy Is Gay HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 10:57 -0800
Re: The Navy Is Gay benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 19:29 -0500
Re: The Navy Is Gay jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-12 01:01 +0000
Re: The Navy Is Gay benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 22:50 -0500
Re: The Navy Is Gay jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-12 05:57 +0000
Re: The Navy Is Gay HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 01:35 -0800
Re: The Navy Is Gay benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:24 -0500
Re: The Navy Is Gay jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-12 19:43 +0000
Re: The Navy Is Gay HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 13:52 -0800
Re: The Navy Is Gay benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 00:55 -0500
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 07:46 -0800 |
| Subject | The Navy Is Gay |
| Message-ID | <8cd1550e-5477-4800-a745-f95f1bb7a749@googlegroups.com> |
Harlow's Notebook. Dateline: 11FEB16 Since the end of WW2 the US Navy had been the branch of the military most infested with homosexuals. This normally doesn't matter since the navy rarely is involved with direct combat. However this captured sailor who fucking CRIED should be given at the very least an Article 15. His tears have brought shame to not only the navy, but to all branches of the military. Now look, there are some seamen (lol) who aren't gay and in fact the navy seals are one of the world's elite forces. But this guy. Gtfo. Our response should be another 'accidental' shoot down of an Iranian airline ---------- Iranian state TV showed video Wednesday of one of 10 captured U.S. Navy sailors in tears while the group was being held by the country's Revolutionary Guard last month. The footage, which was shown on the official Islamic Republic of Iran News Network, was condemned by the Navy, who called the sailors' captivity "outrageous and unacceptable." On Thursday, social media users reported that the sailors' capture was being re-enacted as part of celebrations marking the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution that ousted the U.S-backed Shah.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 13:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <SQ4vy.7621$Op4.5469@fx08.iad> |
| In reply to | #552236 |
On 02/11/2016 10:46 AM, HVAC wrote:
>
> Harlow's Notebook. Dateline: 11FEB16
>
> Since the end of WW2 the US Navy had been the branch of the military most infested with homosexuals. This normally doesn't matter since the navy rarely is involved with direct combat. However this captured sailor who fucking CRIED should be given at the very least an Article 15. His tears have brought shame to not only the navy, but to all branches of the military. Now look, there are some seamen (lol) who aren't gay and in fact the navy seals are one of the world's elite forces. But this guy.
> Gtfo.
>
> Our response should be another 'accidental' shoot down of an Iranian airline
> ----------
>
>
> Iranian state TV showed video Wednesday of one of 10 captured U.S. Navy sailors in tears while the group was being held by the country's Revolutionary Guard last month.
>
> The footage, which was shown on the official Islamic Republic of Iran News Network, was condemned by the Navy, who called the sailors' captivity "outrageous and unacceptable."
>
> On Thursday, social media users reported that the sailors' capture was being re-enacted as part of celebrations marking the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution that ousted the U.S-backed Shah.
>
Harlow now only answering and referencing his own posts. He gets more
and more irrational as time goes one. The van and shit bucket can't be
far off.
The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state
they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used
against citizens in the US.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 19:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sp2voc-ckg.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #552292 |
benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: > The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state > they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used > against citizens in the US. No, the Marines are not Navy. Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree. If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 11:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c45c83b8-d325-4cad-aa13-fab4a7ad9277@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #552312 |
ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com benj <no...@gmail.com> wrote: > The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state > they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used > against citizens in the US. No, the Marines are not Navy. Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree. If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized. --------------- BJ claimed that he served in Vietnam. He never answered my question as to which branch of the service he was in. Every person that has served in the military knows that the marines are not the navy. Perhaps he's the exception that proves the rule?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 20:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <%javy.44192$qE.11614@fx37.iad> |
| In reply to | #552320 |
On 02/11/2016 02:30 PM, HVAC wrote:
> ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com
> benj <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state
>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used
>> against citizens in the US.
>
> No, the Marines are not Navy.
>
> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical
> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree.
>
> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would
> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized.
> ---------------
>
> BJ claimed that he served in Vietnam. He never answered my question as to which branch of the service he was in. Every person that has served in the military knows that the marines are not the navy.
>
> Perhaps he's the exception that proves the rule?
>
Marines are under the Department of the Navy.
As usual you are ignorant.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 01:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4bqvoc-m1j.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #552418 |
benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/11/2016 02:30 PM, HVAC wrote: >> ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com >> benj <no...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state >>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used >>> against citizens in the US. >> >> No, the Marines are not Navy. >> >> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical >> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree. >> >> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would >> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized. >> --------------- >> >> BJ claimed that he served in Vietnam. He never answered my question as to which branch of the service he was in. Every person that has served in the military knows that the marines are not the navy. >> >> Perhaps he's the exception that proves the rule? >> > Marines are under the Department of the Navy. > As usual you are ignorant. The U.S. Department of the Navy, the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Marine Corps are three separate things. The U.S. Department of the Navy provides a government organizational structure to the United States Navy, the United States Marine Corps and when directed, the United States Coast Guard. Each, i.e. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard are independent service branches. Go find a Marine and ask him to his face how he likes being in the Navy. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 23:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <E%cvy.18137$Xw2.13967@fx33.iad> |
| In reply to | #552423 |
On 02/11/2016 08:49 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <none@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 02/11/2016 02:30 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>> ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com
>>> benj <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state
>>>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used
>>>> against citizens in the US.
>>>
>>> No, the Marines are not Navy.
>>>
>>> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical
>>> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree.
>>>
>>> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would
>>> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized.
>>> ---------------
>>>
>>> BJ claimed that he served in Vietnam. He never answered my question as to which branch of the service he was in. Every person that has served in the military knows that the marines are not the navy.
>>>
>>> Perhaps he's the exception that proves the rule?
>>>
>> Marines are under the Department of the Navy.
>> As usual you are ignorant.
>
> The U.S. Department of the Navy, the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Marine Corps
> are three separate things.
>
> The U.S. Department of the Navy provides a government organizational
> structure to the United States Navy, the United States Marine Corps
> and when directed, the United States Coast Guard.
>
> Each, i.e. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard are independent service
> branches.
>
> Go find a Marine and ask him to his face how he likes being in the Navy.
>
Ask a Marine how he likes being in a military run by civilians. His
opinion doesn't count. The marines are not a democracy bub. In America
the military is under civilian control. Just what do you think the words
"governmental organizational structure" mean?
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 05:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sb80pc-tek.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #552446 |
benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/11/2016 08:49 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 02/11/2016 02:30 PM, HVAC wrote: >>>> ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com >>>> benj <no...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state >>>>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used >>>>> against citizens in the US. >>>> >>>> No, the Marines are not Navy. >>>> >>>> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical >>>> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree. >>>> >>>> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would >>>> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized. >>>> --------------- >>>> >>>> BJ claimed that he served in Vietnam. He never answered my question as to which branch of the service he was in. Every person that has served in the military knows that the marines are not the navy. >>>> >>>> Perhaps he's the exception that proves the rule? >>>> >>> Marines are under the Department of the Navy. >>> As usual you are ignorant. >> >> The U.S. Department of the Navy, the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Marine Corps >> are three separate things. >> >> The U.S. Department of the Navy provides a government organizational >> structure to the United States Navy, the United States Marine Corps >> and when directed, the United States Coast Guard. >> >> Each, i.e. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard are independent service >> branches. >> >> Go find a Marine and ask him to his face how he likes being in the Navy. >> > > Ask a Marine how he likes being in a military run by civilians. His > opinion doesn't count. The marines are not a democracy bub. In America > the military is under civilian control. Just what do you think the words > "governmental organizational structure" mean? Your wandering, babbling response has nothing to do with the subject. Of course the military is under civilian control; ever heard of Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 13:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00052B930D78DDA0@aca41049.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #552423 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 02/11/2016 02:30 PM, HVAC wrote: >>> ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com >>> benj <no...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state >>>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used >>>> against citizens in the US. >>> >>> No, the Marines are not Navy. >>> >>> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical >>> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree. >>> >>> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would >>> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized. >>> --------------- >>> >>> BJ claimed that he served in Vietnam. He never answered my question as to which branch of the service he was in. Every person that has served in the military knows that the marines are not the navy. >>> >>> Perhaps he's the exception that proves the rule? >>> >> Marines are under the Department of the Navy. >> As usual you are ignorant. > > The U.S. Department of the Navy, the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Marine Corps > are three separate things. > > The U.S. Department of the Navy provides a government organizational > structure to the United States Navy, the United States Marine Corps > and when directed, the United States Coast Guard. > > Each, i.e. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard are independent service > branches. > > Go find a Marine and ask him to his face how he likes being in the Navy. <GRIN> /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 10:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dae29b45-9156-40f2-803a-7363f8d683af@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #552423 |
Jim wrote Go find a Marine and ask him to his face how he likes being in the Navy. ------------ I'd advise asking that question from a good distance. Like from another country
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 19:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <HH9vy.31240$OT2.10433@fx39.iad> |
| In reply to | #552312 |
On 02/11/2016 02:08 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <none@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state
>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used
>> against citizens in the US.
>
> No, the Marines are not Navy.
>
> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical
> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree.
They both have representatives on the Joint Chiefs and today, the Marine
Corps is considered a distinct branch of the military. The civilian
oversight of it is provided by the Department of the Navy. The
Department of the Navy and the Navy are not one and the same. Certain
equipment used by the Marine Corps does, in fact, come from the Navy. But...
The key item here being if the Posse Comitatus law accepts the
Department of the Navy as being the exempt "navy" in the law.
> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would
> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized.
By Police state I'm not referring to marital law which normally implies
a total breakdown of civilian rule. I'm referring to the use of the
standing military forces for policing of civilians. Under the Posse
Comitatus act (1878) the navy was exempted because presumably naval
ships would have no credible role in civilian enforcement. The Air Force
was added to the act (1956) it does not apply to the coast Guard
presumably because of the same reasons as the Navy plus the fact that
the Coast Guard is a government agency as well as a service.
So that leaves the question of the Marines open. Can marines be used to
police Detroit?
Note that the courts have determined that the national guard is really
just a "reserve unit" of the standing army that can be loaned to
governors to use in case of emergencies etc. However governors have NO
final say. There is no "federalization" it's ALWAYS under the Army. Just
ask the Ohio Governor who brought the case to court! This is why in Ohio
we REALLY DO have a state militia! It's called the OHMR (Ohio Military
Reserve") and is volunteer and under state not Army control as any state
militia (until called up by Congress). Such a military does not fall
under Posse Comitatus.
So clearly if one sees National Guard troops policing cities and they
have NOT been turned over to the state governors for command (as you
call it "federalized") then without martial law that is a clear
violation of the law preventing the use of military (army) for civilian
policing. IN fact, Marines policing cities may be more legal than using
the Guard (which is a reserve unit of the army) depending upon how
courts would interpret the role of "Department of the Navy".
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 01:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ifnvoc-poi.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #552402 |
benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/11/2016 02:08 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state >>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used >>> against citizens in the US. >> >> No, the Marines are not Navy. >> >> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical >> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree. > > They both have representatives on the Joint Chiefs and today, the Marine > Corps is considered a distinct branch of the military. The civilian > oversight of it is provided by the Department of the Navy. The > Department of the Navy and the Navy are not one and the same. Certain > equipment used by the Marine Corps does, in fact, come from the Navy. But... > > The key item here being if the Posse Comitatus law accepts the > Department of the Navy as being the exempt "navy" in the law. > >> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would >> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized. > > By Police state I'm not referring to marital law which normally implies > a total breakdown of civilian rule. I'm referring to the use of the > standing military forces for policing of civilians. Under the Posse > Comitatus act (1878) the navy was exempted because presumably naval > ships would have no credible role in civilian enforcement. The Air Force > was added to the act (1956) it does not apply to the coast Guard > presumably because of the same reasons as the Navy plus the fact that > the Coast Guard is a government agency as well as a service. > > So that leaves the question of the Marines open. Can marines be used to > police Detroit? > > Note that the courts have determined that the national guard is really > just a "reserve unit" of the standing army that can be loaned to > governors to use in case of emergencies etc. However governors have NO > final say. There is no "federalization" it's ALWAYS under the Army. Just > ask the Ohio Governor who brought the case to court! This is why in Ohio > we REALLY DO have a state militia! It's called the OHMR (Ohio Military > Reserve") and is volunteer and under state not Army control as any state > militia (until called up by Congress). Such a military does not fall > under Posse Comitatus. > > So clearly if one sees National Guard troops policing cities and they > have NOT been turned over to the state governors for command (as you > call it "federalized") then without martial law that is a clear > violation of the law preventing the use of military (army) for civilian > policing. IN fact, Marines policing cities may be more legal than using > the Guard (which is a reserve unit of the army) depending upon how > courts would interpret the role of "Department of the Navy". > Your understanding of how the military works is a jumble of misconceptions and errors. The National Guard is under the control of the applicable state governor until federalized, which means the active service (FYI there is more than the Army National Guard) issues orders putting the National Guard units and/or members on active duty. The National Guard is not a "reserve unit of the army (sic)", the reserve units of the Army belong to the Army Reserve. I'm not going to even bother with all the rest of your errors. Note signature. -- Jim Pennino USAR - Ret
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 22:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <2Ecvy.16556$zB4.15592@fx27.iad> |
| In reply to | #552416 |
On 02/11/2016 08:01 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <none@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 02/11/2016 02:08 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> benj <none@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state
>>>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used
>>>> against citizens in the US.
>>>
>>> No, the Marines are not Navy.
>>>
>>> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical
>>> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree.
>>
>> They both have representatives on the Joint Chiefs and today, the Marine
>> Corps is considered a distinct branch of the military. The civilian
>> oversight of it is provided by the Department of the Navy. The
>> Department of the Navy and the Navy are not one and the same. Certain
>> equipment used by the Marine Corps does, in fact, come from the Navy. But...
>>
>> The key item here being if the Posse Comitatus law accepts the
>> Department of the Navy as being the exempt "navy" in the law.
>>
>>> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would
>>> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized.
>>
>> By Police state I'm not referring to marital law which normally implies
>> a total breakdown of civilian rule. I'm referring to the use of the
>> standing military forces for policing of civilians. Under the Posse
>> Comitatus act (1878) the navy was exempted because presumably naval
>> ships would have no credible role in civilian enforcement. The Air Force
>> was added to the act (1956) it does not apply to the coast Guard
>> presumably because of the same reasons as the Navy plus the fact that
>> the Coast Guard is a government agency as well as a service.
>>
>> So that leaves the question of the Marines open. Can marines be used to
>> police Detroit?
>>
>> Note that the courts have determined that the national guard is really
>> just a "reserve unit" of the standing army that can be loaned to
>> governors to use in case of emergencies etc. However governors have NO
>> final say. There is no "federalization" it's ALWAYS under the Army. Just
>> ask the Ohio Governor who brought the case to court! This is why in Ohio
>> we REALLY DO have a state militia! It's called the OHMR (Ohio Military
>> Reserve") and is volunteer and under state not Army control as any state
>> militia (until called up by Congress). Such a military does not fall
>> under Posse Comitatus.
>>
>> So clearly if one sees National Guard troops policing cities and they
>> have NOT been turned over to the state governors for command (as you
>> call it "federalized") then without martial law that is a clear
>> violation of the law preventing the use of military (army) for civilian
>> policing. IN fact, Marines policing cities may be more legal than using
>> the Guard (which is a reserve unit of the army) depending upon how
>> courts would interpret the role of "Department of the Navy".
>>
>
> Your understanding of how the military works is a jumble of misconceptions
> and errors.
>
> The National Guard is under the control of the applicable state governor
> until federalized, which means the active service (FYI there is more
> than the Army National Guard) issues orders putting the National Guard
> units and/or members on active duty.
>
> The National Guard is not a "reserve unit of the army (sic)", the reserve
> units of the Army belong to the Army Reserve.
>
> I'm not going to even bother with all the rest of your errors.
>
> Note signature.
Sorry Jimp, but the opinion of what the National Guard is was decided in
Federal Court not by me. You can look up the case and the decision.
It's precedent in the law now. You can choose to believe your own
stories the way HVAC does, but that won't change the legal ruling.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 05:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <tq80pc-tek.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #552438 |
benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/11/2016 08:01 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 02/11/2016 02:08 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The Navy is special because during the implementation of a police state >>>>> they are the only service (Marines are navy) that can legally be used >>>>> against citizens in the US. >>>> >>>> No, the Marines are not Navy. >>>> >>>> Being a small service the Marines use the Navy for much of their logistical >>>> support just as the Army uses the Air Force to a lesser degree. >>> >>> They both have representatives on the Joint Chiefs and today, the Marine >>> Corps is considered a distinct branch of the military. The civilian >>> oversight of it is provided by the Department of the Navy. The >>> Department of the Navy and the Navy are not one and the same. Certain >>> equipment used by the Marine Corps does, in fact, come from the Navy. But... >>> >>> The key item here being if the Posse Comitatus law accepts the >>> Department of the Navy as being the exempt "navy" in the law. >>> >>>> If by "implementation of a police state" you mean martial law, it would >>>> mostly be done by the Army National Guard after being federalized. >>> >>> By Police state I'm not referring to marital law which normally implies >>> a total breakdown of civilian rule. I'm referring to the use of the >>> standing military forces for policing of civilians. Under the Posse >>> Comitatus act (1878) the navy was exempted because presumably naval >>> ships would have no credible role in civilian enforcement. The Air Force >>> was added to the act (1956) it does not apply to the coast Guard >>> presumably because of the same reasons as the Navy plus the fact that >>> the Coast Guard is a government agency as well as a service. >>> >>> So that leaves the question of the Marines open. Can marines be used to >>> police Detroit? >>> >>> Note that the courts have determined that the national guard is really >>> just a "reserve unit" of the standing army that can be loaned to >>> governors to use in case of emergencies etc. However governors have NO >>> final say. There is no "federalization" it's ALWAYS under the Army. Just >>> ask the Ohio Governor who brought the case to court! This is why in Ohio >>> we REALLY DO have a state militia! It's called the OHMR (Ohio Military >>> Reserve") and is volunteer and under state not Army control as any state >>> militia (until called up by Congress). Such a military does not fall >>> under Posse Comitatus. >>> >>> So clearly if one sees National Guard troops policing cities and they >>> have NOT been turned over to the state governors for command (as you >>> call it "federalized") then without martial law that is a clear >>> violation of the law preventing the use of military (army) for civilian >>> policing. IN fact, Marines policing cities may be more legal than using >>> the Guard (which is a reserve unit of the army) depending upon how >>> courts would interpret the role of "Department of the Navy". >>> >> >> Your understanding of how the military works is a jumble of misconceptions >> and errors. >> >> The National Guard is under the control of the applicable state governor >> until federalized, which means the active service (FYI there is more >> than the Army National Guard) issues orders putting the National Guard >> units and/or members on active duty. >> >> The National Guard is not a "reserve unit of the army (sic)", the reserve >> units of the Army belong to the Army Reserve. >> >> I'm not going to even bother with all the rest of your errors. >> >> Note signature. > > Sorry Jimp, but the opinion of what the National Guard is was decided in > Federal Court not by me. You can look up the case and the decision. The only part you got even close to correct is that governers don't have any say in the Guard being federalized, which should have been obvious but I guess some governers are so dense it had to be spelled out to them by the Federal Court. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 01:35 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b732592d-5a0e-415f-b497-e4fe5dc058a4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #552469 |
> Sorry Jimp, but the opinion of what the National Guard is was decided in > Federal Court not by me. You can look up the case and the decision. The only part you got even close to correct is that governers don't have any say in the Guard being federalized, which should have been obvious but I guess some governers are so dense it had to be spelled out to them by the Federal Court. ----------------- I find it amusing how BJ has changed the subject yet again. He claimed that he served in Vietnam. I simply asked him which branch of the service he was in. Then began his Hillaryesque doubletalk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 14:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ckqvy.50461$qE.38002@fx37.iad> |
| In reply to | #552479 |
On 02/12/2016 04:35 AM, HVAC wrote:
>> Sorry Jimp, but the opinion of what the National Guard is was decided in
>> Federal Court not by me. You can look up the case and the decision.
>
> The only part you got even close to correct is that governers don't
> have any say in the Guard being federalized, which should have been
> obvious but I guess some governers are so dense it had to be spelled
> out to them by the Federal Court.
> -----------------
>
> I find it amusing how BJ has changed the subject yet again.
>
> He claimed that he served in Vietnam. I simply asked him which branch of the service he was in.
>
> Then began his Hillaryesque doubletalk
HEY HVAC! How are things down there in fantasy land? I might as well not
even post since you make up all the things I have "said" and "believe".
You are quite irrational.
I love the way you and jimp just go on and on about the court case you
never even looked up. Ain't being nuts great! You end up ALWAYS right!
Dance Kook DANCE!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 19:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <b8p1pc-lmp.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #552573 |
benj <none@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/12/2016 04:35 AM, HVAC wrote: >>> Sorry Jimp, but the opinion of what the National Guard is was decided in >>> Federal Court not by me. You can look up the case and the decision. >> >> The only part you got even close to correct is that governers don't >> have any say in the Guard being federalized, which should have been >> obvious but I guess some governers are so dense it had to be spelled >> out to them by the Federal Court. >> ----------------- >> >> I find it amusing how BJ has changed the subject yet again. >> >> He claimed that he served in Vietnam. I simply asked him which branch of the service he was in. >> >> Then began his Hillaryesque doubletalk > > HEY HVAC! How are things down there in fantasy land? I might as well not > even post since you make up all the things I have "said" and "believe". > You are quite irrational. > > I love the way you and jimp just go on and on about the court case you > never even looked up. Ain't being nuts great! You end up ALWAYS right! The mentioned court case has little to do with anything and you failed to understand what it actually meant. For all practical purposes, all that court case means is that a governor can not stop the Guard from being called to active duty. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 13:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1a446ccf-e327-4723-a75c-35cbf3973ec1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #552586 |
BJ squawked > HEY HVAC! How are things down there in fantasy land? I might as well not > even post since you make up all the things I have "said" and "believe". > You are quite irrational. > > I love the way you and jimp just go on and on about the court case you > never even looked up. Ain't being nuts great! You end up ALWAYS right! ---------------- When you start off right, ending up right is much easier. And I want involved in the discussion of court battles. I think you're in love with me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-13 00:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Mzzvy.36370$J36.26234@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #552614 |
On 02/12/2016 04:52 PM, HVAC wrote:
> BJ squawked
>> HEY HVAC! How are things down there in fantasy land? I might as well not
>> even post since you make up all the things I have "said" and "believe".
>> You are quite irrational.
>>
>> I love the way you and jimp just go on and on about the court case you
>> never even looked up. Ain't being nuts great! You end up ALWAYS right!
> ----------------
>
> When you start off right, ending up right is much easier.
>
> And I want involved in the discussion of court battles.
>
> I think you're in love with me.
>
True. But I have to warn you I'm a male bird. Perhaps even never
married. Use your superpowers to know for sure.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web