{"id":110484,"date":"2017-12-02T10:20:00","date_gmt":"2017-12-02T10:20:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2023-01-08T11:01:16","modified_gmt":"2023-01-08T11:01:16","slug":"more-thoughts-from-speech-police-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/2017\/12\/02\/more-thoughts-from-speech-police-2\/","title":{"rendered":"More Thoughts From the Speech Police"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;\" class=\"sharethis-inline-share-buttons\" ><\/div><h3 class=\"post-title entry-title\" itemprop=\"name\"><\/h3>\n<div class=\"post-header\"> <\/div>\n<p>Air Force Colonel Who Banned Anti-Obama Comments Clarifies Position, But Subordinates Remain Confused<\/p>\n<p>by Nate Hale<\/p>\n<p>The  Air Force Commander who banned negative comments about President  Obama&#8211;and raised concerns about restrictions on free speech&#8211;has issued  a new e-mail, clarifying his policy.  But members of his unit remain  confused about the ban and the motivations behind it. <\/p>\n<p>Colonel  Jack Franz, Commander of the 677th Aeronautical Systems Group (AESG) at  Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, recently sent a second e-mail to members of  his unit.  The message, dated 9 February, was aimed at &#8220;clarifying&#8221; his  initial directive, which was issued shortly after last year&#8217;s  presidential election.  Franz also said he hoped that the e-mail would  provide a &#8220;bit of context&#8221; to help explain the situation. <\/p>\n<p>In his  original e-mail, Colonel Franz expressed &#8220;concern&#8221; about &#8220;several  political comments in the local media, and I&#8217;m sure around  Wright-Patterson AFB.&#8221; <\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Our local news radio station (WHIO) is  playing up Rush Limbaugh&#8217;s comments about our new president and his  cabinet,&#8221; Franz wrote, a reference to the conservative host&#8217;s remark  that he &#8220;didn&#8217;t want Obama to succeed.&#8221;  In subsequent interviews, Mr.  Limbaugh made it clear that his opposition was based on Obama&#8217;s  policies, not personal reasons.<\/p>\n<p>But Franz described the host&#8217;s  comments as &#8220;inappropriate and un-American,&#8221; and emphasized the similar  criticism would not be tolerated in his unit. <\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We need to be  very clear,&#8221; the Colonel stated in his e-mail. Our mission is to support  and defend the constitution of the United States. That means supporting  our elected officials, as well as the officers appointed over us, and  ensuring they succeed.&#8221; <\/p>\n<p>Franz also warned that similar remarks  in the 677th AESG or at &#8220;official functions&#8221; would be grounds for  removal.  The commander said the edict applied to all members of the  group, including military personnel, civilian employees, contractors and  even visitors. <\/p>\n<p>The Colonel&#8217;s policy touched off a minor firestorm after the e-mail was reprinted by <a href=\"http:\/\/formerspook.blogspot.com\/2009\/01\/return-of-speech-police.html\"><em>In From the Cold<\/em><\/a> and other outlets.  Franz was widely criticized for extending his  policy to non-military personnel.  While all of the armed forces limit  political speech for military members, those prohibitions do not extend  to Defense Department civilians, contractors and civilians.  <\/p>\n<p>Others  were puzzled by his reference to Rush Limbaugh, wondering why he used  the host&#8217;s comments as a foundation for his policy.  Mr. Limbaugh has  never served in the military and has no formal ties to the armed  services.  Critics of Franz noted that the talk show king was simply  exercising his First Amendment rights in criticizing Obama&#8211;rights  outlined in the same Constitution that the Colonel has vowed to defend. <\/p>\n<p>In  his latest message, Franz writes that &#8220;some of you raised legitimate  questions about my e-mail regarding political activities and discussions  in the workplace.&#8221; <\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We at Wright-Patterson are committed to  safeguarding the rights of all our employees (both military and  civilian) to free expression, while at the same time maintaining good  order and discipline within our units,&#8221; he continued. <\/p>\n<p>But  Colonel Franz also urged his personnel to be &#8220;vigilant&#8221; in focusing on  mission accomplishment and unit cohesion, claiming that  &#8220;politically-related comments have been made that were [at best]  potentially destructive to good order and discipline, and at worst  reflected discriminatory undertones among some of our personnel.&#8221; <\/p>\n<p>The  commander said these remarks &#8220;only serve to divide and distract us&#8221;  from our common mission under the Constitution.  However, Franz did not  say how many comments were overheard, or what made them so  objectionable. <\/p>\n<p>Franz&#8217;s latest e-mail has created confusion among  some personnel.  One member of the 677th, speaking on the condition of  anonymity, said he was not aware of &#8220;any&#8221; derogatory remarks about  President Obama by unit personnel.  &#8220;I don&#8217;t know what to think,&#8221; he  said. <\/p>\n<p>Other individuals assigned to the group described Colonel Franz as a &#8220;good guy,&#8221; but expressed shock about the original note. <\/p>\n<p>A  retired Chief Master Sergeant, with years of experience as a First  Sergeant and Senior Enlisted Adviser, suggested that Franz&#8217;s concerns  might be misplaced.  If the problem genuinely exists, the chief  suggested, the group may have discrimination and racial problems that  require more action than an e-mail.  <\/p>\n<p>In his clarification  message, Colonel Franz said his purpose was to &#8220;make clear our shared  obligation to respect and honor the authority of our duly-appointed  leadership,&#8221; and &#8220;to maintain our historical posture as a  politically-disinterested military under civilian control.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>The  commander also expressed hope that situations involving potential  discrimination can be &#8220;resolved amicably,&#8221; while cautioning that  &#8220;continued violations of good order and discipline may bring more  serious repercussions as necessary and appropriate.&#8221; <\/p>\n<p>The full  text of Franz&#8217;s latest e-mail is provided below.  Neither the Colonel  nor Air Force public affairs officers at Wright-Patterson have responded  to requests for comment. <\/p>\n<p>***<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">From: Franz, John H Col USAF AFMC 677 AESG\/CC<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 6:02 PM<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">To: 677 AESG All Personnel<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Subject: Clarification <\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Team,<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Some  of you raised legitimate questions about my email regarding political  activities and discussions in the workplace.  I want to clarify my  intentions for you, and also provide a bit of context that I think helps  explain the situation.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Let  me start by reiterating what I hope most of you know &#8211; that we at  Wright-Patterson AFB are committed to safeguarding the rights of all our  employees (both military and civilian) to free expression, while at the  same time maintaining good order and discipline within our units.  Over  the past several months, many of us have enjoyed the right to engage in  various aspects of the political process, both formally and informally.   While we certainly do celebrate these freedoms, we in the 677th AESG  must also be vigilant to maintain our focus on mission accomplishment  and unit cohesiveness.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">In  the weeks following the 2008 election, some politically-related  comments have been made that at best were potentially destructive to  good order and discipline, and at worst reflected discriminatory  undertones among some of our personnel.  These kinds of comments only  serve to divide and distract us from our common mission under the  Constitution.  The purpose of my email was to make clear our shared  obligation to respect and honor the authority of our duly-appointed  leadership, and to maintain our historical posture as a  politically-disinterested military under civilian control.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">We  will always address situations involving potential discrimination on an  individual basis, often in an informal manner and certainly with regard  to the rights of our personnel.  These situations can often be resolved  amicably, but it is possible that continued violations of good order  and discipline may bring more serious repercussions as necessary and  appropriate.  It is my hope that such actions will not be necessary.<\/p>\n<p>I  understand that some of you read my earlier email as attempting to  unduly interfere with your freedom of expression, while at the same time  making a political statement of my own.  I sincerely apologize for  causing any confusion, and I hope this email clarifies both my personal  intent and our unit&#8217;s policy.  <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Thank  you for what each of you are contributing to our work, and to the  defense of our nation.  If you have further questions or concerns about  this, please let me know or use our anonymous feedback link.   Below are  links to additional information helpful in understanding our rights and  responsibilities as Air Force members.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">For information on political activities by members of the U.S. Air Force, see <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/www.e-publishing.af.mil\/shared\/media\/epubs\/AFI51-902.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">http:\/\/www.e-publishing.af.mil\/shared\/media\/epubs\/AFI51-902.pdf<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"> <\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">For information on dissident and protest activities by members of the U.S. Air Force, see <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/www.e-publishing.af.mil\/shared\/media\/epubs\/AFI51-903.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">http:\/\/www.e-publishing.af.mil\/shared\/media\/epubs\/AFI51-903.pdf<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><br \/><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">For information on Civilian Employees&#8217; Participation in Political Activities, see <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/dodgc\/defense_ethics\/dod_oge\/DepSecDef_Memo_14_Nov_07\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/dodgc\/defense_ethics\/dod_oge\/DepSecDef_Memo_14_Nov_07<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">For information on the Hatch Act, see <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/www.osc.gov\/ha_fed.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">http:\/\/www.osc.gov\/ha_fed.htm<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><br \/><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Thanks,<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Jack <\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\"><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">JACK FRANZ, COL., USAF<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">677th AESG, Commander (AFMC)<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: 85%;\">Training System Product Group<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Air Force Colonel Who Banned Anti-Obama Comments Clarifies Position, But Subordinates Remain Confused by Nate Hale The Air Force Commander who banned negative comments about President Obama&#8211;and raised concerns about restrictions on free speech&#8211;has issued a new e-mail, clarifying his policy. But members of his unit remain confused about the ban and the motivations behind [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110484"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=110484"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110484\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110484"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110484"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110484"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}