Doesn't The "Stolen Valor" Ruling Bother Anyone?

[SlowwHand]

I don't know what process you're referring to. If there are ramifications, I don't realize them.

#42. Two before your post. If you're a veteran, I would think you'd have at least some knowledge of how slowly things happen already.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Pretty sure the law considers it fraud for non-doctors to provide medical advice, non-lawyers to provide legal advice, etc. Licensing agencies take that very seriously. Then you have con artists who actually work as a teacher, drive buses, wear a collar, fake a badge.
Even if there is no economic motive, it's still fraud.

Nope not fraud, in the first examples, the offense against the state would be called something like "Unlicensed practice of ...", if they took money or value from the client, that would be fraud, sans the value, it would be malpractice (and if the fake doctor touches the person during an 'exam' it would be battery). As for the ones working a job unlicensed, again their is the jb, the economic value, but even then, it would likely be prosecuted as something other than fraud,

[giblets]

Given the thread title mocked americans for their education, the irony is delicious. Apparently, ignorance of evolution doesn't end at the American border.

MikeH wasn't even the one who wrote the thread title.

[Ben Kenobi]

Nope not fraud, in the first examples, the offense against the state would be called something like "Unlicensed practice of ...", if they took money or value from the client, that would be fraud, sans the value, it would be malpractice (and if the fake doctor touches the person during an 'exam' it would be battery). As for the ones working a job unlicensed, again their is the jb, the economic value, but even then, it would likely be prosecuted as something other than fraud,

So if the MOH recipients received a stipend and someone falsified documents to receive the stipend that would be charged as fraud?

Interesting, I didn't know that there had to be some economic benefit associated with it in order to be considered fraud. Misrepresentation alone wasn't all it entailed. Thank you Lefty.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So... you wrote something false as gribbler stated? And as I pointed out?

[MrFun]

I haven't seen mention of it. According to the Supreme Court, it's OK to claim to be a Medal Of Honor recipient. Lying is now protected under free speech.
Does no one finding this disgusting? The ultimate lying on your resume, and it's OK?

Dude, we allow KKK rallies under free speech protection for fvck's sake.

[Al B. Sure!]

Apparently people did get the memo. Yesterday downtown, I saw a guy wearing a Navy short-sleeved service uniform without a belt. I only saw him from behind so I couldn't see anything else but no belt, though? Where they do that at? Faker.

[Al B. Sure!]

Stuff like this is a problem. Faker was in Iraq Veterans Against the War and talks about atrocities, executions of women and children, etc.

"When we were doing the night raids in the houses, we would pull people out and have them all on their knees and zip-tied. We would ask the man of the house questions. If he didn't answer the way we liked, we would shoot his youngest kid in the head. We would keep going, this was our interrogation. He could be innocent. He could be just an average Joe trying to support his family. If he didn't give us a satisfactory answer, we'd start killing off his family until he told us something. If he didn't know anything, I guess he was SOL."

His uniform is out of regulations but people still ate up his claims.

[kentonio]

Stuff like this is a problem. Faker was in Iraq Veterans Against the War and talks about atrocities, executions of women and children, etc.

His uniform is out of regulations but people still ate up his claims.

You might want to ask yourself why people were so ready to believe claims like this. I think that might point to a slightly bigger problem than fake soldiers.

[Al B. Sure!]

You might want to ask yourself why people were so ready to believe claims like this. I think that might point to a slightly bigger problem than fake soldiers.

Yeah. Ready to believe claims like this because they're stupid and watched too much Platoon.

Or maybe the fact that they need to go to fakes to find these stories...

[kentonio]

Yeah. Ready to believe claims like this because they're stupid and watched too much Platoon.

I was thinking more of Haditha, Abu Ghraib etc.

[Al B. Sure!]

I was thinking more of Haditha, Abu Ghraib etc.

And **** completely hits the fan when stuff like that happens. They need fakes to act like stuff is happening all the time in secret.


Here's a forum where people post fakes. It happens so much:

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=117

[kentonio]

And **** completely hits the fan when stuff like that happens.

You mean **** completely hits the fan when whistleblowers reveal what happened, usually much later, after the inevitable series of military coverups fail to conceal the truth?

[Al B. Sure!]

Another video on this:

[Lefty Scaevola]

New bill filed, cautious limited to false claims to get some things of significant value.

“The bill would cover issues ranging from lying to receive veterans and health-care benefits or obtaining a government contract, to getting a job reserved for a veteran,” he said.

“Additionally, the bill contains a de minimis clause that states these penalties would not apply to someone who, for example, received an item of nominal value -- like a drink at a bar -- for telling an embellished war tale,” Heck added