Comments on: Choi trial halted after challenge to judge’s ruling

By: laurelboy2

laurelboy2 — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 02:49:19 +0000

Pathetic, jealous troll? Why would I be jealous over someone acting like an enraged media whore?

By: Scott Burkey

Scott Burkey — Sun, 04 Sep 2011 12:47:33 +0000

Frankly Syd, you and laurelboy2 should both be ashamed of yourselves. Your snide remarks and non-too-veiled insinuations are petty and pathetic, typical of a Web site troll. Dan Choi’s battle with PTSD is the same as that of thousands of other veterans, and your pathetic smears insult all of them. Of the 9 men in my family, over the past three generations, who served in the U.S. military, four came home with PTSD. One took many years to recover from it and to restore the man we knew before the military. Another still suffers, 8 years later. Of the other two, one became an alcoholic and drank himself to death – the other committed suicide. I thank the Gods that Lt. Choi had the opportunity to seek the help he needed, and that the V.A. had the services available – and damn you both for being such pathetic, jealous trolls.

By: Syd Diamond

Syd Diamond — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 01:49:37 +0000

Dan Choi has a history of depression and mental illness. Anyone who supports him with this court case is enabling his delusions of grandeur. It is clear from his testimony that Dan Choi is Charles Guiteau crazy.

By: Syd Diamond

Syd Diamond — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 01:43:58 +0000

I have to agree with laurelboy2 this time. If you ever been to the White House you will notice several peaceful protests happening. You have that right to make a sign and protest in any public space you want. That is our right as Americans. Choi does not have a right to handcuff himself to a security fence.

If anyone thinks Dan Choi was instrumental in overturning DADT then you need to read the facts.

By: Syd Diamond

Syd Diamond — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 01:32:46 +0000

I think you missed the fact the purpose of handcuffing themselves to the White House fence was to get arrested. Getting arrested is a form of protest. It gets you in the news. Actress Daryl Hannah was arrested the other day.

By: laurelboy2

laurelboy2 — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 18:41:35 +0000

He does have a right, but in accordance with law, rules, and regulations. It doens’t matter what he was protesting about – if he did so in a manner contrary to governing statutes, he’s guilty.

By: laurelboy2

laurelboy2 — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 18:40:08 +0000

Protest in accordance with governing law, rules and regulations. Just because it’s about DADT doesn’t give anyone license to act contrary to law. If it did, we’d have anarchy.

By: Joel

Joel — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 18:24:59 +0000

He’s not a media whore. As for the others settling their cases, I wonder about their reasons for doing that. On the one hand, they feel like standing up for a principle–that DADT was unconstitutional. Yet, when slapped with fines or potential jail sentences for protesting (also something we have the right to do), they cave in.

DADT is as much unconstitutional as a police officer telling someone they don’t have the right to protest on government, tax-payer owned property. I’m frankly getting sick and tired of seeing protestors ARRESTED! It’s becoming all too frequent for the police to respond to protestors by arresting them despite the fact we have the right to publicly air our grievances.

By: laurelboy2

laurelboy2 — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 17:40:42 +0000

and all the other folks who were arrested with him settled their cases out of court. –CENSORED–, or is Choi just trying to get more attention for himself, which is why (and because of his showmanship at the Netroots conference even Queerty had an article titled “Bad Behavior. Dan Choi at Netroots Nation Commits Conduct Unbecomming an Officer” June 17, 2011) –CENSORED–

By: Joel

Joel — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 14:02:56 +0000

If Westboro Baptist has the right to protest military funerals with signs that say “Thank God for dead soldiers,” Dan Choi has a right to protest these laws that treat us unfairly. AND, this RIGHT is enshrined in the First Amendment! My God, do these conservatives read the Constitution?