The folks at the Men of War Motorcycle Club, veterans all, wanted me to let you know about them. They sent this video;
And they sent this picture of some of the good works they do;
That was the saluting Marine at Thunder Run this year getting aid and comfort from his brother veterans from that motorcycle club. If you’re interested, you can find out more about them at this link.
Everyone here’s doubtless heard about the “Got Your Six” campaign out of Hollywood. NBC – yeah, that NBC, the same one that brings us MSNBC – is a sponsor.
NBC also now is part owner of the Weather Channel. I didn’t know that, but it’s also not surprising. Media companies get bought and sold by other media companies all the time, and NBC is one of the “big dogs” in the industry.
Well, it looks like NBC might have been caught being just a tad hypocritical. (What a surprise.) Seems that a former Weather Channel host, Nicole Mitchell, has brought a lawsuit against NBC her former emloyers. She’s an officer in the USAF Reserve and a member of the USAFR’s “Hurricane Hunters”. And she alleges that NBC fired her as a Weather Channel host because of her military status.
Mitchell’s allegations on the surface appear fairly damning, assuming they’re accurate. There appears to be an escalating pattern of discriminatory behavior, starting after NBC acquired ownership interest in the Weather Channel, culminating in a firing. And all of it clearly seems to be be based largely if not entirely on Mitchell’s military reserve status.
But at this point, they’re just allegations. They aren’t yet proven.
The Weather Channel, predictably, has declined to comment on the pending lawsuit other than to say that they don’t discriminate, they follow the law, and that Mitchell’s allegations are “inaccurate” – without providing any specifics, of course. Figures. But unlike our “Best Friend” Timmy Poe, at least they seem to know when to keep their mouths shut to avoid eating more foot.
NBC and the Weather Channel probably should hope Mitchell can’t prove her allegations. There’s this little thing called the Uniformed Services Employment/Reemployment Rights Act on the books. Has been since 1994.
It’s a Federal law. And it says, very clearly, “You can’t do that. ”
“Got your six”, eh? Yeah, NBC – looks like you “got her six”, alright. But I don’t think what you seem to have done here is exactly what the term means.
If Mitchell prevails in court, well, here’s hoping she returns the favor and “gets NBC’s seven”. As in seven figures or more.
Under the wide and starry sky
Dig the grave and let me lie:
Glad did I live, and gladly die,
And I lay me down with a will.
Could he answer, I rather doubt that that Pfc John A. Donovan, USMC, of Plymouth, MI, would agree that he “glady” died. Young men just don’t think like that. They have too much life left to live.
Nevertheless, on a stormy April night Donovan died. He was 20.
Donovan was lost, along with the rest of his crewmates, on a training mission in what is today the nation of Vanatu Vanuatu. During World War II. On the night of 23 April 1944.
The precise circumstances of loss were not known at the time. And for a long, long time the wide and starry sky above Donovon and his crewmates was indeed their only grave. But it wasn’t their wide and starry sky. It was the southern sky above the island called Espritu Espiritu Santo.
For decades, they lay under that foreign sky. It might have been pretty, but it wasn’t the sky of home.
Fifty years later, a private search firm looking for another aircraft crash site located theirs. That information was relayed to the Department of Defense.
It took many years and substantial effort, but eventually sufficient remains were located to allow the crew’s positive identification – and in Donovan’s case, to allow for a proper burial.
At home.
Donovan’s remains were returned to the United States on 6 June 2012. He was to be buried today. He’ll be buried besides his brothers in Ann Arbor, MI – with his sole surviving sibling, his sister Josephine Demianenko, in attendance.
This be the verse you ‘grave for me:
Here he lies where he long’d to be;
Home is the sailor, home from the sea,
And the hunter home from the hill.
Welcome home, Marine We’re sorry it took so long to return you to your own wide and starry sky. But you’re now home.
Now, rest in peace. You’ve more than earned that.
Alabama Governor has signed a laws that will restrict protests of funerals considering the past actions of Westbro group. The House Bill 238 will put a 1000 foot boundary that will protect those against those who wish to cause them emotional anguish.
Governor Bentley today held a ceremonial signing of House Bill 238, sponsored by Rep. DuWayne Bridges (R-Valley), which sets a perimeter of 1000 feet, or two blocks, for any disruption of a funeral in Alabama. The bill passed by unanimous votes in both the House and Senate during the recently completed legislative session.
I found the full bill online for review to see all the fine details. Here are the meat and potatoes of the bill.
A person commits the crime of disrupting a funeral or memorial service if, during the 60 minutes immediately preceding a funeral or memorial service that has a scheduled starting time, during the funeral or memorial service, or immediately following the funeral or memorial service, the person does any of the following with the intention of disrupting the funeral or memorial service:
Engages in a protest, including, but not 25 limited to, protest with or without using an electric sound amplification device, that involves singing, chanting, whistling, yelling, or honking a motor vehicle horn within 500-1,000 feet of the entrance to a facility being used for a 4 funeral or memorial service.
Blocks access to a facility being used for the service.
Impedes vehicles that he or she knows are part of the procession.
For purposes of this section, the term “facility” includes a funeral home, church, or cemetery in
which the funeral or memorial service takes place.A violation of subsection is a Class A 13 misdemeanor for the first conviction and a Class C felony for
14 each subsequent conviction.”
It may not stop them completely but another law like this passing is always a good thing.
Today was the 68th Anniversary of D-Day. While that’s not a “magic number” anniversary – like 2009 was (the 65th) or 2019 will be (the 75th), it’s still a day worth remembering.
By most, anyway. But not by all.
Some people forget, I guess. They get caught up in life, and are too busy to take time to remember those who fought 68 years ago today to ensure that America remained free.
Some whose family fought in World War II are even too busy to remember. Even when those family members were someone close – like a grandfather, or a grand-uncle. Oh well, such is modern life.
But you’d think the POTUS would remember D-Day.
For the third consecutive year, the POTUS has done nothing to commemorate publicly the anniversary of D-Day. His schedule today just doesn’t seem to have allowed it. The last time he did anything to recognize D-Day publicly was in 2009 – the 65th anniversary.
And it looks like the POTUS was also too busy to post a D-Day statement on the White House Website or to make a Presidential proclamation observing today’s D-Day anniversary.
But I’ll give the POTUS credit; he was able to find the time to issue a public statement noting yesterday’s passing of noted author Ray Bradbury. That was important enough to merit some of his time.
I know the POTUS is a very busy man. But it seems he could find maybe a 1/2 hour to do something – somewhere – on the 6th of June to pay his respects to those Americans who fought in Normandy on that date in 1944. You’d think he’d do at least that much, since his maternal grandfather supported the D-Day landings and one of his great-uncles went ashore at Omaha Easy Red on D+4. And another of his great-uncles participated in the liberation of the Nazi forced labor camp at Ohrdruf.
I guess the POTUS had his reasons for not publicly commemorating D-Day today. Maybe he was simply too busy. Or maybe he just plain forgot. But I still just don’t understand why he couldn’t find the time to remember and recognize those who, 68 years ago today, fought to ensure his freedom – even though he wasn’t yet born.
After all: he seemed to have plenty of spare time 9 days ago to visit Arlington National Cemetery and the Vietnam War Memorial.
Lobster68w sends us a link from the Minnesota Star Tribune which reports that Peter Taunton, the founder and president of the Snap Fitness franchise, wrote a $7000 check to replace more than 200 bronze star markers which have been stolen from veterans cemeteries over the last few months.
“It drives me crazy when people exercise unbelievably poor judgment and insensitivity,” he said Monday. “Those are people’s moms, dads and kids. For someone to come along and be so disrespectful. … That bronze star is our country’s token of appreciation for their effort in serving our country.”
Stealing from any gravesite is wrong, Taunton said.
“But the fact that these people were military vets, it’s wrong on so many other levels,” he said.
“I came up from a very modest background,” Taunton said. “I’ve experienced more good fortune than anyone deserves … so I always feel when you’ve been blessed with such good fortune it’s important to pay it forward and give back.”
And, that’s called being an American.
Daniel sends us this link to the Boston Herald‘s article about a veteran of Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan who was discriminated against by a landlady who is a peace-activist based on his military service;
Sgt. Joel Morgan, 29, said the two-bedroom $1,220-a-month Savin Hill apartment that property owner Janice Roberts, 63, showed him in April was perfect. But he claims Roberts told him in an April 9 voicemail that renting to him would be a conflict, saying, “We are very adamant about our beliefs.”
“It just is not going to be comfortable for us without a doubt. It probably would be better for you to look for a place that is a little bit less politically active and controversial,” Roberts told Morgan, according to his complaint.
Well, I’m sure SGT Morgan wouldn’t be comfortable living next to Roberts, but that’s not the point is it? Roberts is a member of some idiot organization called “Garden of Enlightenment”, I can’t find it on the internet so I can’t comment on it’s goals, not knowing anything about it. But, suppose, just suppose that SGT Morgan was a member of some racial minority group and Ms. Roberts was a member of some racist group and made a relatively similar remark, but in regards to her beliefs and SGT Morgan’s particular racial group. The feds would be all over Roberts for discrimination. So what’s the difference here?
Morgan is taking her to court, but I don’t think that will solve the problem – Ms. Roberts bias which she probably wouldn’t tolerate in another instance, but applies to her own business – and she has no problem putting it into words with the intended victim of her bias.
Of course, being a conservative, I think Roberts has the right to rent to whomever she wants and to deny her apartment to whomever she wants, but the hypocrisy, in this case, is just too blatant to ignore.