Man in Kaepernick jersey attacked by dogs

[Eldorado]

"The U.S. Navy SEALS have announced an investigation into a video showing a man wearing a Colin Kaepernick jersey being attacked by dogs at a demonstration at a Florida museum with links to several former SEALs.

"The first video shows a man in protective clothing and a Kaepernick jersey being bitten by SEAL attack dogs as part of a demonstration in front of a crowd of spectators.

"Another video of the same event shows men in military clothing performing a mock capture of the man after the dogs have been removed.

"As he lies on the ground, he says “Oh man, I’ll stand,” eliciting laughter from the watching crowd."

Full monty at CBS: https://abcnews.go.com/US/navy-seals-investigating-event-seal-museum-man-wearing/story?id=72142173

[+OverSword]

Oh boy.  

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

Oh boy.  

SEALs huh?  They'd better watch their privilege, boy oh boy... Antifa might come and school them  

[GoldenWolf]

18 minutes ago, and then said:

SEALs huh?  They'd better watch their privilege, boy oh boy... Antifa might come and school them  

Are you condoning dishonorable conduct from members of the armed forces?

Edited August 4, 2020 by GoldenWolf

[+OverSword]

58 minutes ago, and then said:

SEALs huh?  They'd better watch their privilege, boy oh boy... Antifa might come and school them  

JAG is who they need to be concerned about.

[Guyver]

Getting attacked by dogs would really suck.  I could fight off one dog...but two or more? Hard fight without a weapon.

[Michelle]

I suppose the dog knows his name and number.

It's fairly common for people to use whatever symbol they consider offensive during target practice. Hell, I wore out a dart board with my ex-husband's picture on it. 

Edited August 4, 2020 by Michelle

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

7 hours ago, GoldenWolf said:

Are you condoning dishonorable conduct from members of the armed forces?

Of course he is. He’s all for violence when it’s against people he doesn’t like, but pull down a statue and OHH BOY it’s on for young and old. 

[aztek]

nothing wrong with it, freedom of speech,  you can destroy us flag legally, same goes for anyone shirt. 

[GoldenWolf]

4 hours ago, aztek said:

nothing wrong with it, freedom of speech,  you can destroy us flag legally, same goes for anyone shirt. 

I don't think anyone is going to buy what you're peddling.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

4 hours ago, aztek said:

nothing wrong with it, freedom of speech,  you can destroy us flag legally, same goes for anyone shirt. 

While they’re wearing it?!

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

4 hours ago, aztek said:

nothing wrong with it, freedom of speech,  you can destroy us flag legally, same goes for anyone shirt. 

I can legally buy and legally burn just about anything I own. Moment I burn someone else’s stuff that’s what we in sensible countries call a crime.

[aztek]

19 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I can legally buy and legally burn just about anything I own. Moment I burn someone else’s stuff that’s what we in sensible countries call a crime.

,lmao, so whose shirt was it?   what exactly do you mean by someone else's stuff?  

Edited August 5, 2020 by aztek

[aztek]

19 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

While they’re wearing it?!

depends what they are doing while wearing it.

[GoldenWolf]

Navy SEALs cut ties to national museum after Colin Kaepernick K-9 demonstration video.

The Navy SEALs will suspend their support of the National Navy SEAL Museum after videos showing dogs attacking a man wearing a Colin Kaepernick jersey during a demonstration last year went viral last weekend, according to the Associated Press.

https://sports.yahoo.com/navy-seals-suspend-support-museum-colin-kaepernick-videos-dog-attack-003506180.html

[Myles]

20 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I can legally buy and legally burn just about anything I own. Moment I burn someone else’s stuff that’s what we in sensible countries call a crime.

I assume it was just a jersey that anyone can buy.  

I don't really see the issue with this.      They could have used an outfit to resemble anyone.  They just chose Kaep at the time.  

[Agent0range]

6 hours ago, Myles said:

I assume it was just a jersey that anyone can buy.  

I don't really see the issue with this.      They could have used an outfit to resemble anyone.  They just chose Kaep at the time.  

Well, when you are in the military, it is illegal to do anything that will make the military look bad.  Taking this video, sharing this video in the nation's current climate makes the military look bad.  Conduct unbecoming of a Soldier.  Or semen..whatever they are.

[Grim Reaper 6]

51 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

Well, when you are in the military, it is illegal to do anything that will make the military look bad.  Taking this video, sharing this video in the nation's current climate makes the military look bad.  Conduct unbecoming of a Soldier.  Or semen..whatever they are.

You are correct, and we can only hope others posting here can understand what you have tried to explain. 

Best post in this thread so far.

[aztek]

if military was concerned about image, they would do something about their 1%, who are active gang members,  this cutting of ties, is nothing more than virtue signaling, and pc stunt.

[Buzz_Light_Year]

On 8/5/2020 at 7:12 PM, Manwon Lender said:

You are correct, and we can only hope others posting here can understand what you have tried to explain. 

Best post in this thread so far.

You do realize that being retired military you are still under the UCMJ and contemptuous speech of your president and other leaders is not allowed under the UCMJ.

[Grim Reaper 6]

13 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

You do realize that being retired military you are still under the UCMJ and contemptuous speech of your president and other leaders is not allowed under the UCMJ.

You are as foolish as your comments  it's a dam shame that you know so little about the regulations of a service you have said you were once a member of. However you do make one point very clear you were never a Leader, and you have also obviously forgotten your oath, concerning protecting America from all Enemies both foreign and DONESTIC.

So please save your BS for those who may think you are important enough to listen too, because I am certainly not one of them. 

[Grim Reaper 6]

On 8/4/2020 at 10:58 AM, and then said:

SEALs huh?  They'd better watch their privilege, boy oh boy... Antifa might come and school them  

Here is your reward for such an ignorant statement.

[Buzz_Light_Year]

2 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

You are as foolish as your comments  it's a dam shame that you know so little about the regulations of a service you have said you were once a member of. However you do make one point very clear you were never a Leader, and you have also obviously forgotten your oath, concerning protecting America from all Enemies both foreign and DONESTIC.

So please save your BS for those who may think you are important enough to listen too, because I am certainly not one of them. 

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1131/rights-of-military-personnel

Quote

Indicative of the military’s special status, the Uniform Code of Military Justice prohibits military personnel from using “contemptuous speech” against the President and other leaders, from engaging in “conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline in the Armed Forces,” and from “conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.” These regulations have been used to restrict political expression as well as other activities. Also under the code, military personnel can be severely punished—including dismissal, forfeiture of pay, and imprisonment—for participating in rallies that criticize war efforts, even if they are off duty and dressed as civilians

https://www.fedweek.com/armed-forces-news/retirees-remain-subject-to-court-martial/

Quote

Military retirees can be tried at court martial for crimes they commit — even though the alleged illegalities do not directly relate to their military service. The laws that subject retirees to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) remain intact.

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

5 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1131/rights-of-military-personnel

https://www.fedweek.com/armed-forces-news/retirees-remain-subject-to-court-martial/

 

Please list the exact article in the UCMJ where it says that retired military do not fall under civil jurisdiction, you magazine Fedweek.com is a worthless referance. The other regulations you listed only apply to Active Duty Military Personnel, so if you can't list the specific article outlined in the UCMJ, where it says that retired military personnel are not able to speak freely about a threat to the Nation, People and the Constitution don't bother to quote me again.

Because again I say your knowledge is very limited. 

[Grim Reaper 6]

33 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1131/rights-of-military-personnel

https://www.fedweek.com/armed-forces-news/retirees-remain-subject-to-court-martial/

 

Well I will help you out check out article 2 of the UCMJ, and there is nothing about speech. In fact only the Navy has ever brought a Military Retire back for prosecution and they were rapists or child molesters, dam that is some such chit, weren't you a Marine??