TexasCHLforum.com

His crime? He shot back at the Chattanooga terrorist. Now he's being charged with illegally discharging a firearm on federal property. You can't make this stuff up folks. No one would believe you.

Is this source reliable?

Charlies.Contingency wrote:Is this source reliable?

Yes

Allen West is generally reliable.

WOW!

If anyone has the ability to make enough of the right kind of noise on this issue, it's Allen West. He is my #1 pic for SecDef come 2017.


jd

mojo84 wrote:

Charlies.Contingency wrote:Is this source reliable?

Yes

I was hoping it wasn't. I really don't like it, that guy is a Hero in my book, but now we're going to prosecute him.

Will this be in regular federal court or military? If civilian, he should ask for a jury trial.

Already covered:

viewtopic.php?f=108&t=78891

baldeagle wrote:His crime? He shot back at the Chattanooga terrorist. Now he's being charged with illegally discharging a firearm on federal property. You can't make this stuff up folks. No one would believe you.

This was inevitable. The Brass at pentagon cannot allow subordinates to challenge their authority. even if the order was, "Go into work everyday and helplessly wait for someone to kill you"

Just like the General Ham go sacked because he tried to stop Bengazhi.

No one in the pentagon has a spine when it comes to doing the right thing anymore, and I am pretty sure this is by design. If I was prez I would fire them all on my first day. The generals that are there now have been irrevocably tainted by the politics of hope and change

If ever a "cover up" was needed it is now!! Just look the other way!

I've said this before, but I'll say it again. The "brass" are risk adverse. They operate under a concept called "risk management". For those not familiar with the concept, it's core is to accept no unnecessary risk and to do whatever possible to reduce necessary risk to the absolute minimum. If that is all done, "by the book", whatever bad stuff happens will be considered "acceptable", but will still be studied as to how to minimize that bad stuff without incurring more risk. Now, that's not to say the brass are happy about that bad stuff, just that they accept it. The thought of large numbers of military personnel carrying loaded firearms is an unacceptable risk, especially to the careers of some officers. They cannot afford Private Joe having an accidental/negligent discharge of a firearm. It will go onto someone's performance evaluation as a "failure to establish and maintain proper training standards/lack of leadership/lack of attention to detail", etc. And bye-bye cushy headquarters slot. Now, a terrorist attack that kills a few Joes, well, that is an acceptable risk (though once again, I'm not saying they are happy about it, just that they accept it). Don't believe me, please listen to General Odierno on the subject.

"I think we have to be careful about over-arming ourselves, and I'm not talking about where you end up attacking each other," Odierno said during a morning breakfast. Instead, he said, it's more about "accidental discharges and everything else that goes along with having weapons that are loaded that causes injuries."

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/07/17/a ... tary-bases

Does anyone actually have any factual evidence of him indeed being charged, or are we all just getting fired up over West's blog post?

Just saw an article that the Navy is denying that charges will be filed.

In think West was hoping to influence the decision about whether or not to charge him.

eureka40 wrote:Just saw an article that the Navy is denying that charges will be filed.

The United States Navy is denying this on Facebook

... stories of Navy personnel being charged with an offense are not true. There is still a long way to go in reviewing the facts of this tragic incident, but at this time we can confirm no service member has been charged with an offense.

Note that they're not denying that they're GOING TO charge him, only that they HAVE NOT ALREADY charged him.

The statement is not very far from a "no comment".