Bradley Manning on Veteran’s Day: an abysmal insult

I would customarily have posted an article in direct reference to Veteran’s Day in honor of the men and women who have served the United States of America.

Veterans Day is a U.S. legal holiday dedicated to American veterans of all wars. In 1918, on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, an armistice, or temporary cessation of hostilities, was declared between the Allied nations and Germany in World War I, then known as “the Great War.” Commemorated in many countries as Armistice Day the following year, November 11th became a federal holiday in the United States in 1938. In the aftermath of World War II and the Korean War, Armistice Day became legally known as Veterans Day.

Happy 242nd Birthday to the US Marine Corps as well, on November 10th, in this message from the Marine Corps Commandant.

Today, instead, I want to point to an item deemed “newsworthy” by a number of outlets in order to illustrate the depths to which we have plummeted as a nation and — in another illustrative post following this one — the depths with which individuals believe they have no responsibility or accountability whatsoever for their predicaments whilst, conversely, everyone else is responsible.

Bradley Manning, whom I refuse to quantify as “Chelsea,” served seven years for leaking over 700,000 secret US military and diplomatic documents to Wikileaks during the Iraq War. He was arrested in 2010. On January 17, 2017, President Obama commuted all but four months of Manning’s remaining time from his original 35-year sentence.

This effeminate, gender-neutral, politically-correct, confused, entitled, arrogant, betraying, self-centered, naive, haughty, esteem-ridden POS joined the military?

From the UKDailyMail.com:

Chelsea Manning speaks out on Veterans Day to tell lawmakers to stop sending soldiers overseas for their ‘to support their nationalist fairy tales’

by Abigail Miller

  • Chelsea Manning took to Twitter to hit out at lawmakers early on Veterans Day  

  • She wrote that support would be to ‘stop sending us overseas to kill or be killed for your nationalist fairy tales’  

  • The 29-year-old is likely referring to how she feels that the military disregards the effects of war on civilians 

  • She made that opinion clear in 2013 when she was convicted of publishing more than 700,000 classified military and diplomatic documents via Wikileaks 

Chelsea Manning hit out at lawmakers on Veterans Day on Twitter with her opinion on how to best support former soldiers. 

‘Want to support veterans?! stop sending us overseas to kill or be killed for your nationalist fairy tales. we can do better,’ she tweeted. 

The tweet is likely referring to her opinion about the state of the military, which she made clear when she published more than 700,000 classified military and diplomatic documents via Wikileaks in 2013.

The move saw her sentenced to 35 years in prison, which was later commuted to seven years beginning with the date of her arrest by President Obama just days before he left office. 

After she was convicted she said she was proud of what she’d done, because she wanted to expose what she considered to be US military’s disregard of the effects of war on civilians.

Stop. We know how the US government has abused our veterans and how it continues to do so because of underfunding, poor management and overwatch. Granted. The Underground Professor, Dr Michael Jones, documented on my Thursday night show (listen and watch here) the continuing challenges and problems faced by veterans today up to and including inordinate and onerous wait times and demands, abuse and even deaths.

But that is no reason to kneecap the US military and the strength of our nation. We should always be circumspect prior to the application of the US military around the planet. Never forget it was the Demorats under Barack Hussein Obama who decided to literally overthrow countries in the Middle East. Obama became known as the Drone Strike Master yet received no scrutiny from the American Media Maggots over this. He lied about the application of forces and lies about sacrificing American lives for his

Listen to this cut from Fox News and Bradley Manning.

That said, there are a few things that I immediately conclude.

First, Manning didn’t mind getting paid by the very same US military that hired him and trained him in the first place. His base motivation was to receive GI Bill money for education and to use the Army as personal social engineering. Service and sacrifice didn’t factor in the slightest.

Does this not seem like another Leftist demanding free shite from the American Taxpayer and then biting the hands that provided same?

You must realize it was your tax dollars that paid for Manning’s hormone therapy. As far as he was concerned, he was due this. It was owed to him. He also believed that gender reassignment surgery was due to him as well.

Luckily, the American Taxpayer did not have to pay for Manning’s GRS and now that bill will have to be paid when affordable. Note this:

On May 22, 2017, Manning’s 2014 lawsuit seeking a federal court to order the Defense Department to provide hormone therapy and other treatment for her gender identity condition was dismissed because, her ACLU attorney explained, “she is free.”

Confirmed from the UKIndependent.com:

Chelsea Manning will lose transgender benefits after leaving military prison, says US Army

by Maya Oppenheim

The former soldier was a candidate for gender-reassignment surgery funded by the Pentagon’s new policy for transgender troops

The Army have said Chelsea Manning will lose her military healthcare benefits following President Barack Obama’s decision to free her from prison.

In his final days in office, the outgoing President has issued 64 pardons and 209 commutations, including granting the release of Manning. The transgender US Army private, who was jailed in 2010 after handing thousands of secret documents to WikiLeaks, will now be freed on 17 May instead of her scheduled 2045 release.

A spokeswoman for the Army said Manning, who came out as transgender a day after her 2013 sentencing, would relinquish her entitlement to military transgender benefits.

Damn. I would submit those are dollars well saved.

  • Consider this: what happens to this nation when the parasites outnumber the hosts?
  • What happens when those who demand Free Cheese outnumber those who produce said cheese?
  • What happens when no one can repair those Free Cheese machines because they have been so focused on being the recipients?

What happens when there is no more felt duty to serve one’s country?

BZ

 

Steven Gern USMC takes his stand against Islam

You may remember this man from his rather insightful video included with my post regarding Trump’s travel stay and Judge Robart.

He said this in February.

The video subsequently went viral and he was simultaneously excoriated. Gern spoke from the heart.

He lost his job. He had to regroup. Mentally. He had to adjust. Shift gears. Ask himself: where am I, and where do I want to do now?

I believe he has sorted himself out. With reality.

And with regard to Islam.

I submit that we as a nation need likewise to sort ourselves out. And listen to him.

BZ

 

Who is General James Mattis?

general-james-mattisUSMC General (four star) James Mattis (ret.) has been selected as Donald Trump’s nominee for the new administration’s Secretary of Defense.

People ask: who is James Mattis?

Ladies and gentlemen, this is James Mattis.

A General Mattis Christmas Story

Featured from the National Museum of the Marine Corps Museum’s Facebook Page

A couple of months ago, when I told General Krulak, the former Commandant of the Marine Corps, now the chair of the Naval Academy Board of Visitors, that we were having General Mattis speak this evening, he said, “Let me tell you a Jim Mattis story.” General Krulak said, when he was Commandant of the Marine Corps, every year, starting about a week before Christmas, he and his wife would bake hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of Christmas cookies. They would package them in small bundles.

 Then on Christmas day, he would load his vehicle. At about 4 a.m., General Krulak would drive himself to every Marine guard post in the Washington-Annapolis-Baltimore area and deliver a small package of Christmas cookies to whatever Marines were pulling guard duty that day. He said that one year, he had gone down to Quantico as one of his stops to deliver Christmas cookies to the Marines on guard duty. He went to the command center and gave a package to the lance corporal who was on duty.

 He asked, “Who’s the officer of the day?” The lance corporal said, “Sir, it’s Brigadier General Mattis.” And General Krulak said, “No, no, no. I know who General Mattis is. I mean, who’s the officer of the day today, Christmas day?” The lance corporal, feeling a little anxious, said, “Sir, it is Brigadier General Mattis.”

 General Krulak said that, about that time, he spotted in the back room a cot, or a daybed. He said, “No, Lance Corporal. Who slept in that bed last night?” The lance corporal said, “Sir, it was Brigadier General Mattis.”

About that time, General Krulak said that General Mattis came in, in a duty uniform with a sword, and General Krulak said, “Jim, what are you doing here on Christmas day? Why do you have duty?” General Mattis told him that the young officer who was scheduled to have duty on Christmas day had a family, and General Mattis decided it was better for the young officer to spend Christmas Day with his family, and so he chose to have duty on Christmas Day.

General Krulak said, “That’s the kind of officer that Jim Mattis is.”

The story above was told by Dr. Albert C. Pierce, the Director of the Center for the Study of Professional Military Ethics at The United States Naval Academy. He was introducing General James Mattis who gave a lecture on Ethical Challenges in Contemporary Conflict in the spring of 2006. This was taken from the transcript of that lecture.

Frankly, as I read that, I choked up a bit and my eyes began to water.

To me, this provides all the information I need to know about a true leader.

BZ

george-smith-patton-quote

Female Marines Not Required To Do 1 Pull-Up

Female Combat DiscriminationNow that’s the way to assure the survival of females in combat — since females can now serve in combat positions within the US military services.

From CNSNews.com:

by Barbara Boland

(CNSNews.com) — Females in the Marine Corps currently are not required to do pull-ups as part of their physical training, and a deadline mandating that they do at least 3 pull-ups by Jan. 1, 2014 as part of their  training has been delayed for at least a year, the Corps quietly announced on social media.

Unlike their female counterparts, male Marines have long been required to do at least 3 pullups as part of the Physical Fitness Test (PFT). That’s the minimum requirement for males.

Currently, “women aren’t able to make the minimum standard of three pull-ups,” Marine spokesman Capt. Eric Flanagan told CNSNews.com. Fifty-five percent of female recruits tested at the end of boot camp were unable to do three pull-ups (1 percent of male recruits also failed).

Marine officers told NPR off-the-record that, given the three-pull-ups rule,  they were afraid of losing “not only new recruits, but also current female Marines who can’t pass the test.”

Women in the Marine Corps will be allowed into ground combat in 2016. The delay in meeting men’s physical standards has raised questions about “whether women have the physical strength to handle ground combat,” reported NPR.

“‘If you can’t pull yourself up, have the decency to pull yourself out,’  Ralph Peters, a retired Army officer and military historian, told Time.com. “‘The military, despite all the post-modern technology, is still essentially physical.’”

With that in mind, I recommend the exchange between Time Magazine and retired Army Lt Col Robert Maginnis in reference to his book “Deadly Consequences: How Cowards Are Pushing Women into Combat.”  It turns out he is completely correct in his fears:

Time: What’s the key thing you learned in writing Deadly Consequences: How Cowards Are Pushing Women into Combat?

Pentagon brass are kowtowing to their political masters and radical feminists to remove exemptions for women in ground combat in defiance of overwhelming scientific evidence and combat experience. This craven behavior is terribly dangerous for our armed forces, our national security, and especially the young women who will be placed in harm’s way.

Pentagon officials insist they won’t lower standards to enable more women in combat units. Do you believe them?

I don’t believe them, and neither should the American people.

The Obama Administration and the Pentagon say they will maintain high standards “to ensure that the mission is met with the best-qualified and most capable people, regardless of gender,” in the words of former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.

Personnel policy, however, is driven by the “diversity metrics” outlined in the 2011 Report of the Military Leadership Diversity Commission.

Diversity, not military readiness, is the highest priority.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has admitted as much. In the press conference announcing the rescission of the 1994 rule excluding women from ground combat units, he said, “If we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high?”

The proper question is “Do we have the personnel we need to meet the current high standards for combat units?”

The answer right now is yes.

There is no shortage of able-bodied male volunteers who meet the existing, battle-tested standards for ground combat positions.

So why ask the services to consider changing the standards? Because this has become more about politics than fielding the most capable fighting force.

I thought Marines were the toughest of the tough.  Apparently not.

If women want to be in combat, they should pass the same requirements as men.

If women want to be cops, they should pass the same requirements as men.

If women want to be firefighters, they should pass the same requirements as men.

You want equality?  That is true equality.

BZ

P.S.
Perhaps the most insightful exchange between Time and Lt Col McGinnis?  The following:

What do you think will happen, given the push to let women serve in combat, if the nation ever needs to reinstitute the draft?

Lifting all combat exclusions for women virtually guarantees that the Supreme Court will declare male-only conscription unconstitutional.

And a return to the draft is far more likely than most people realize. The unsustainably high cost of the all-volunteer force, especially with $17 trillion in national debt, and the expected requirements of future military operations will probably lead to a resumption of the draft, however politically unpopular it might be.

When that happens, women will be drafted and forced into ground combat roles.

How about it, young little urban Baby Mommas and Valley Girl chickies?  Ready for your being drafted into the US military for combat?

Gird thy thongs.