tuscl

HERE WE GO AGAIN! Pentagon orders soldier fired for challenging prez

Thursday, July 16, 2009 5:22 PM
The Department of Defense has compelled a private employer to fire a U.S. Army Reserve major from his civilian job after he had his military deployment orders revoked for arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office. According to the CEO of Simtech Inc., a private company contracted by the Defense Security Services, an agency of the Department of Defense, the federal government has compelled the termination of Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook. Cook's attorney, Orly Taitz, wrote in her blog that Simtech CEO Larry Grice said he would try to find another position within the company for Cook, but nothing is currently available. The Department of Defense does contracting in the general field of information technology/systems integration, at which Cook, a senior systems engineer and architect, was employed until taking a military leave of absence on July 10 in preparation for his deployment to Afghanistan. "Grice told plaintiff, in essence, that the situation had become 'nutty and crazy,' and that plaintiff would no longer be able to work at his old position," Taitz wrote. Grice made clear that it was Defense Security Services that had compelled Simtech to fire Cook, Taitz wrote. According to the report, Grice told Cook "there was some gossip that 'people were disappointed in' the plaintiff because they thought he was manipulating his deployment orders to create a platform for political purposes." The Simtech CEO then discussed Cook's expectation of final paychecks, without any severance pay, and wished the soldier well.

11 comments

  • hogsun
    •
    15 years ago
    You don't like my input, put me on ignore!
  • hogsun
    •
    15 years ago
    I'm putting you on ignore!
  • DoctorDarby
    •
    15 years ago
    With a million forums on the net devoted to political, economic, social, and military topics, why in the world would you put such an off-topic post here and expect it to be well-received? It has nothing to do with "ignoring" your rant or not, it is a matter of universal web courtesy to not clog boards with completely off-topic drivel. Jeez. Do you go to strip clubs and talk politics with the dancers? OMG . . . You do . .. don't you!!!!!
  • MisterGuy
    •
    15 years ago
    "The Department of Defense has compelled a private employer to fire a U.S. Army Reserve major from his civilian job after he had his military deployment orders revoked for arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office." Again, let's just ASSUME that he had his orders revoked for the wing-nut batty assertion that Obama wasn't born in the USA, which he obviously was. "'Grice told plaintiff, in essence, that the situation had become 'nutty and crazy,' and that plaintiff would no longer be able to work at his old position,' Taitz wrote." I don't blame them for firing this guy...he's obviously off of his rocker, and it isn't appropriate to employ someone like that in a sensitive, military-related position. "According to the report, Grice told Cook 'there was some gossip that 'people were disappointed in' the plaintiff because they thought he was manipulating his deployment orders to create a platform for political purposes.'" Gee I wonder why this was happening?? Ugh...what a total waste of space. There are good men DYING in Afghanistan fighting the very people that attacked us on 9/11, and this guy plays bullshit games to avoid serving his contract with the military.
  • txtittyfan
    •
    15 years ago
    This is an unmoderated board. For those that do not like the context/posts, there is no need to read or respond to them. IMO, people should post whatever they want for discussion. That's all it is, the opportunity to discuss what you choose to discuss.
  • Slothrop
    •
    15 years ago
    Right wing nutcase posting totally irrelevant to the board.
  • chandler
    •
    15 years ago
    Tittyfan, you seem to have a misconception of what it means for this to be an unmoderated board. It simply means that there isn't a moderator enforcing rules. Nothing more. It doesn't mean that posting off-topic junk is any less obnoxious nor that there is anything wrong with ridiculing or objecting to it. On the contrary, it's on a moderated board that such responses are often discouraged or forbidden for encroaching on the mod's authority.
  • Dougster
    •
    15 years ago
    Come on now, chandler. We see people post off topicthreads here all the time. Economics, and politics are most popular but sometimes you see discussions about computers, motorcycles, whatever. I agree with tittyfan on this one. If you don't like threads like this just ignore them. That said, I think hogsun is a naive idiot who will believe anything the extreme right wing propaganda machine tells him to. Nevertheless, I don't have a problem with him starting threads to discuss politics. How can everyone else be allowed to and not be hypocritical when they don't like the existence of this because they disagree with the ideas expressed?
  • Clubber
    •
    15 years ago
    This may be the only place some get ANY political information.
  • CarolinaWanderer
    •
    15 years ago
    This actually is in violation of the boards terms of service. Terms of Service by founder May 7, 2007 By using [view link] you agree to our terms of service which are simple. You may use [view link] for your own personal use to help you find strip clubs and for your own research of strip clubs. If this dickhead does this again, we should all request he be removed from the board.
  • chandler
    •
    15 years ago
    Wanderer, the terms of service aren't applicable to this case. They refer to personal use as opposed to using the contents of TUSCL to start another website or publish a book for profit, stuff like that. Sure, it appears to say that non-strip club use of the site is forbidden, but I think either that's unintentional or Founder has left himself an out to deal with any unforeseen situation. When people have complained about junk like this in the past, Founder has made it clear many times that he's not in the business of policing off-topic or objectionable Discussion Board posts, no matter how loony. He screens club reviews for quality control, because they are the bread and butter of the site that draws ad traffic and subscriptions. He views this board as a minor added feature, not warranting a lot of babysitting. The best way to deal with junk is probably to ignore it. Acting too outraged would probably just encourage more of the same.
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion