They are not ashamed because their agenda is to destroy the America of our forefathers and turn it into a place only Neville Chamberlain could love.

The shame is they gave no consideration for their actions at how they may harm or hurt real people…even though many untruths were at the base of their motivation

“It’s obvious that the New York Times has an agenda of undermining the missions of our troops in the War on Terror, so much so that they are willing to resort to demonstrably false statistics to support their anti-troop bias,” said Melanie Morgan, Chairman of Move America Forward.

“The slander of our troops and veterans by the New York Times is unfortunately all too familiar. We heard this kind of nonsense about our returning veterans from Vietnam. It’s the same insult, different war.

“Perhaps the shameful staff of The New York Times has run out of war-time secrets to publish for America’s enemies to read, because now they’ve resorted to an all-out smear campaign of America’s finest men and women, who have served this country bravely and with distinction,” Morgan said.

In place of hard data to support their premise, The New York Times was instead forced to devote almost the entire portion of 6,321 word hit-piece to anecdotes of wrongdoing by individual veterans.

The New York Times even went so far as to trace back the phenomenon of murderous veterans to Greek mythology to back up their assertions of their report.

“The real mythology is the reporting by The New York Times,” Move America Forward’s Melanie Morgan concluded.

Entire Press Release From Move America Forward - http://www.moveamericaforward.org/index.php/MAF/MAFNews

http://www.gunowners.org/a010808.htm
http://www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/FindYourReps.html
http://www.outsourcecongress.org/outsource/congress/schstaffers.html

The actions of the NY Times continue to be a travesty and also appears to be part of Congress’s shameful action of passing HR 2640 by unanimous consent on December 19th, 2007 - after most Congressmen were returning home and party leadership had said that all the major votes were over for the year. Thanks to our Congressional leadership, if the President signs this bill it will disenfranchise up to 140,000 of our military veterans of their 2nd Amendment rights in spite of the fact that veterans are actually at least 5 times less likely than the public at large to commit murder.

HR 2640 accomplishes this through section 101 (c) (1) (C) which makes a veteran diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder a “prohibited person” (i.e. unable to lawfully own a gun) based solely on a medical finding by a psychiatrist or psychologist, provided that they
1) had “an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority”; and
2) that thay had notice that they would be made a “prohibited person” as a result of the agency action.

Presumably, the “lawful authority” could be the psychiatrist himself, and the hearing apparently doesn’t have to occur. The “lawful authority” doesn’t need to be unbiased. The veteran is also not necessarily entitled to legal representation during this process. What HR 2640 does is to statutorily lock in huge numbers of law-abiding Americans who will now be denied the right to legally defend themselves, then, under Section 105 of the bill, “graciously” allows these disarmed Americans to spend thousands of dollars for a effectively false chance to regain their gun rights.

Section 105 provides a process for some Americans diagnosed with so-called mental disabilities to get their rights restored in the state where they live. But then, in subsection (a)(2), the bill stipulates that such relief may occur only if “the person will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that the GRANTING OF THE RELIEF WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.” We all know what this means - most states will not make any effort to restore the rights of these veterans once they have ever been identified as a danger to society, claiming that granting relief would be “contrary to the public interest” since that is certainly the easiest route, effectively leaving no recourse to almost all of those affected by this bill.

We should not put our brave veterans in a no-win situation - having to choose between the right to needed VA disability benefits or losing their 2nd Amendment rights and their ability to lawfully defend themselves and others.

Feel free to use my text.