Deny Global Warming, Dishonorable Discharge and Prison – It’s The Law

I was a little bit astounded to watch this clip.

All I can figure is that Obama has no clue what ‘dereliction of duty’ really means.

http://www.jordanucmjlaw.com/Articles/Article-92-Failure-to-Obey-Order-or-Regulation.aspx

Article 92 Failure to Obey Order or Regulation

Article 92 deals with the failure to follow orders or regulations and violation of orders/ regulations. Different situations are covered under Article 92 as follows: violating general order or regulation, violating other written regulation or order, failure to obey lawful order and dereliction of duty.

There are several variations of the charge of Article 92, violation of the UCMJ. These changes require slightly different elements of each charge to prove and are discussed as follows:

a) Violating general order or regulation

Elements:

That a lawful general of order or regulation existed .
That the accused was duty bound to obey this regulation or order .
That the accused disobeyed or violated this order/ regulation by an act, behavior or alleged intent.

Maximum Punishment: The accused faces dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all allowances and pay and 2 years confinement as maximum punishment.

b) Violating other written regulation or order

Elements:

That a lawful regulation or order existed
That the accused was fully aware of this order/ regulation
That the accused was bound by duty to obey the regulation/ order
That the accused disobeyed this order/ regulation

Maximum Punishment: The accused faces bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of all allowances and pay and 6 months confinement as maximum punishment.

c) Failure to obey lawful order

Elements

That a specific lawful order was issued by a member of the United States armed forces .
That the accused was fully aware of the order .
That the accused was duty bound to obey the order .
That he failed to do so .

Maximum Punishment: The accused could get a bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of all allowances and pay and up to 6 months confinement if found guilty of this offense.

d) Dereliction of duty

Elements

That certain duties were assigned to the accused.
In case of willful dereliction, the prosecution must prove that the accused had knowledge of the duties assigned to him.
In case of negligence/ inefficiency leading to dereliction of duty, the prosecution must prove that there are reasonable grounds to show the accused should have known about his assigned duties and that he failed to carry them out.

Maximum Punishment: For deliberate dereliction of duty, the accused shall receive bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of all allowances and pay and 6 months confinement as maximum punishment. For dereliction of duty through inefficiency or neglect, the maximum punishment is 2/3rd of a month’s pay for 3 months and three months confinement.

To learn more about this punitive article refer to the Manual for Courts Martial.

Points to Note about Article 92

Willful dereliction of duty attracts a more serious punishment than negligence leading to dereliction.
Circumstantial evidence can be used to show that the accused had knowledge of his duty and, in cases of willful dereliction, circumstantial evidence can be used to show the accused intended to avoid duty.
The serviceman is not guilty of violating this article if the duty is self- imposed.
The lawfulness of the order is an important aspect to consider in these cases.
When the order carries exceptions, the prosecution has to prove that the accused is not subject to the terms of the exception.

From this article at Iceagenow.info:

http://iceagenow.info/2015/11/obama-warns-coast-guard-graduates-it-is-negligence-to-deny-climate-change-video/

During his commencement address to the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, President Barack Obama warned that it’s a “dereliction of duty” to deny the existence of climate change.

Any Service Member that votes to support the Democratic Rush to embrace Global Warming is assuring more of this crap, and dishonorable discharges for anyone not PC enough about it. Any military family member who votes for a Democrat (or Republican Dem-Lite) that supports the Climate Change Mantra is putting their family at risk of a Court Martial.

Think about it, please. With ISIS on their way here (dressed in Refugee Sheep’s Clothing), you can be court-martialed for saying “Seems cold to me, where’s global warming?”… The Commander In Chief has so ordered.

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in AGW and GIStemp Issues, Political Current Events and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Deny Global Warming, Dishonorable Discharge and Prison – It’s The Law

  1. omanuel says:

    WAS THE ORIGIN OF CONSENSUS AGW “SCIENCE” REVEALED?

    Did the Smithsonian’s Dr. Kenneth M. Towe reveal the real reason for lock-step, consensus AGW “science”?

    https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/11/16/a-despotic-barack-obama-and-new-york-times/#comment-552923

  2. omanuel says:

    If so, FRIGHTENED leaders of nuclear nations (China, England, France, India, Iran, Israel, Japan, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, South Africa, USA, etc.) are trying to

    1. Limit their membership,
    2. Avoid nuclear annihilation with
    3. False “information” about E = mc^2 and the energy (E) stored as mass (m) in cores of:

    Heavy atoms, some planets, ordinary stars, galaxies, etc.

  3. BobN says:

    The man is totally delusional.
    What about all the immigration laws that are not enforced?
    What about the welfare laws that are not enforced?
    There is a long list of laws that are not enforced or enforced wrong as written, a big portion of government could be charged with dereliction of duty.

    At what point do individuals quit obeying the law?

  4. Terry Jay says:

    The most dangerous man in the world is the glib incompetent.
    Terry

  5. philjourdan says:

    Sorry, he is just effing clueless! And of course our governor, like yours, has their head up his butt so support him. There is NO WAY that you can vet refugees from a country you are at war with. So anyone claiming they are going to “Vet” these refugees is a liar. Worse, they are a traitor. Obama has one duty – to defend this nation. instead, he is trying to outdo Benedict Arnold. But the idiots of today are not the founders of yesterday, and so he is succeeding.

    I would not go anywhere near DC. Not because I do not like the company, but because he is daring them to do something. And this regime is not even right most of the time.

  6. Glenn999 says:

    obam the destroyer
    can you say tray-tor?

  7. John Robertson says:

    I used to think your President was impossible to parody, except we just elected a Prime Minister in Canada who makes Obama look coherent.
    Both are insisting we need more refugees and that they can be vetted by the UN.
    Bureaucrats.UN bureaucrats, their checkup is check the box, therefor those with documents go to the head of the line.
    Such a shame that ISIS has a thriving business churning out Syrian IDs.

    So any of these fine young refugees of military service age, who are well documented, so “vetted” by the UN, have a real high probability of being ISIS.

    That said listening to your president and our PM after Paris, they are both idiots.
    Brain Dead Stoners.
    But the media thinks they are both so cute.

  8. p.g.sharrow says:

    Those military aged refugees should be conscripted into Army Units and used to protect moderates as well as liberate their home lands. This is the only solution that will result in a permanent result ..pg

  9. J Martin says:

    Perhaps Obama is practising for his next job once he leaves the White House. Stand up comic.

  10. Glenn999 says:

    J Martin
    I’ve always thought he would make a good “game show” host. I think his goal may be Late Nite with…

  11. Power Grab says:

    Game show host…LOL…

    There’s a show called “Family Feud”. He’d probably have them tied up in bare knuckle brawls!

  12. Hifast says:

    The key qualifier in Article 92 is “failure to obey lawful order.” It is an officer’s duty to distinguish a lawful order from an unlawful one. One could rightly make a case (or defense) that this order is not lawful.

Comments are closed.