In view of that record, any one of which would be a disqualifier to me, how could ANYONE see Faisal Gill as one to make our government strong, efficient and trustworthy? Charles, are you there?

We know that Faisil Gill is a Reserve Judge Advocate Group Officer (JAG-OFF), in the United States Navy.

We know that during his service, he has let himself go, exceeding clear height and weight Standards.

We know that after his active service, but during his reserve component service, he received compensation from the AMC for what can best be described as being their spokesman.

We know that the head of the AMC was convicted of aiding terrorists.

We know that his current law partner has made public statements in support of terrorist organizations.

We know that after 9/11, Gill’s law-firm encouraged people to obstruct justice by refusing to co-operate with FBI investigations.

We know he got suspendend and eventually resigned from his position in the DHS, for not being completely honest regarding his associations with questionable individuals, catching the notice of Michelle Malkin.

We know that during his time serving in various capacities in PWC politics, Gill was at best a marginal performer, who lacked total attention to detail, so much so that attendees to a picnic almost went hungry, and the candidate who’s campaign he managed missed his filing deadline, and ended up looking like a horse’s ass, and blamed on the precursor to this blog.

We know that he has hired an attorney to represent the afore mentioned horse’s ass in a lawsuit, most is most likely doing this pro-bono, who can’t spell, and for which Gill had to face bar association ethics charges.

We know that his campaign to-date, has been a comedy of errors.

So, let’s sum it up:

Faisil Gill is a fat JAG-OFF, who lacks judgment, situational awareness, attention to detail, associates with people who range from criminals to imbeciles, who has been labled as a dangerous man by Michelle Malkin, and has zero management skills.

So why should we care what his positions on taxes and transportation are?

You tell me to “stick to the facts rather than personalities.” If you read my posts on this, and other pages, you will see that i consistently “stick to the facts.” While I may be colorful in my verbage (gleaned from military experience), I in no way attack without having my facts straight.

You notice that I sign using my full name, unlike some (is AW Cheney your name or nom de plume?), because I have nothing to hide. You bring up Jim Young’s name and to his credit, he does not hide behind anonymity, and for that, I have respect.

So again, please refrain from accusing me of attacking someone or doing something that all on these blogs do on occasion, if only to invite humorus banter back and forth.

I am still waiting on a reply from Charles? Maybe I got the answer to my challenge via AW defending his (read, “Charles’”) honor .

Won’t this distract Charles from his quest to cast the Ring of Power into the fires of Mordor, and defeat the evil Saron?

This is why I say this. EVERYONE is entitled to an opinion. We each, in our own way, believe that our opinion is right. However, if someone proves us wrong, we should thank that person for enlightening us and apologize for the error we have made. Charles, that is called MANNERS, something you Liberals no nothing about but like religion, it is NEVER too late to learn.

So, are you going to “be a man” and accept my challenge? If this is too much for you, then, I will make one more request that even a Dem. such as yourself MIGHT be able to do.

WHEN I prove you wrong, Charles, you are to post AN APOLOGY to Ms. Lucas, admit the error of your ways as far as questioning her honor, and send a copy of that letter either to the Potomac News or go to the next PWC GOP meeting and request to speak for 5 minutes and publicly apologize to Ms. Lucas and her supporters.

The ball is now in your court, Charles. It’s time to grow up, be a man, and do the right thing. Take my challenge. Call my bluff, if you will.

Post on THIS site, at THIS location a comment ONLY to me which reads, “John Light, I accept your challenge.”

Thank you.

Chalrles, If it was against the law to eat donuts, then Faisil would be in BIG trouble! Evidence suggests he like the Jelly, and the Honey Dipped a little too much.

But to your point(s), politics is about perception. It doesn’t matter what is in the candidate’s heart. It matters how the voter’s perceive the candidate’s intentions and character. Faisil Gill may have been completely clueless as to what his former employers were doing, and he may be 100% opposed to radical Islam. However, since he has never publically denounced radical Islam, and since he has chosen to accept money from an organization started by a man, later convicted of aiding terrorist organizations, and chose as his law partner a man who has publically said some very radical things, I perceive Gill to be sympathetic to terrorists.

Also, Faisil Gill may be a proud, professional Reserve Naval Officer. However, since he has failed to maintain proper weight and physical fitness standards, and has chosen to plaster his campaign literature with his overweight body wearing a Naval uniform, I perceive him to be unprofessional. Also, based on what I read in the DoD regulations, I also believe that he is in violation of them, when using posed shots on his campaign literature. At very least, the perception that he has is there, and that is realy all that matters.

Now let’s take you, Charles. You may very well be a fair-minded loyal Republican, who cares about getting the best candidates elected to office. You may understand that the Republican agenda cannot be moved forward, if Republican candidates don’t get elected. However, your constant defense & support of sub-par candidates such as the self-serving Steve Chapman, and the oportunistic Gill, neither of which you can vote for, gives me the perception that you are just plain ignorant of the way things work in politics. In other words, my perception of you is that you are an idiot.

So perhaps I’m as dumb as a rock and just am not getting it, but I still haven’t seen anything that indicates he is currently serving as an officer in the active or reserve component of the Army. His press releases say “former captain”, and that clearly tells me he no longer holds a commission. Having served in the reserve component for twelve years myself I’m at a loss to understand what I can possibly be missing here.

I also failed to find anything but memorabilia photos on his website, and there’s nothing on it that looks like it came from a photo shoot for a campaign. Every photo looks like it was taken while he was performing his official duties, which is permitted, and if after he has left the service he uses them as part of his biographical information there’s nothing to indicate that’s a violation. If he was putting his uniform on in order to do a photo shoot for his campaign, as Faisal Gill has done, there’d be a problem.

So help me out here. What am I missing?

And by the way, I am not saying, nor have I ever said that Faisal Gill is a terrorist. That is a lie.

Greg AND John — your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired in this case, maybe your hatred clouds your judgment.

He is a former Army officer, because he is now in the RESERVES. I gave you the link to the official congressional website that lists him as being in the reserves. I said he was in the reserves.

It’s pretty bad when I give you the link AND the information, and you ignore it and then claim I said something else I didn’t say and that I’m wrong about what I didn’t say.

BTB: At least you understood my post. You note that we have read the UCMJ, but you admit that we aren’t sure what it means. JM had posted that he had NEVER seen a case where a reservist had put a picture of themselves in uniform into their campaign literature. So I posted a link to a reservist who did exactly that.

I can’t prove a negative. I can’t find the section of the code which DOESN’T prohibit a candidate using pictures of themselves.

Can you point me to where in the law it says you can eat a donut? I can post a lot of laws which suggest there are things you can’t eat, and I could suggest that those laws really meant to apply to donuts. And you’d be hard-pressed to “prove” I was wrong, because you would not find a law that said “but notwithstanding any other law, it’s OK to eat donuts”.

So you might post pictures of police eating donuts — and I could say that just because police break the law doesn’t mean it isn’t against the law.

See the problem? I have provided the case of a person who is an active, not retired, reservist who used pictures of himself in uniform in his campaign. The specific picture I linked to was a picture that was this candidate in Iraq, with his campaign logo overlaying the picture.

Yes, this does NOT prove that this candidate didn’t break the law. Which is why I suggested that those who think he did should file charges against him — I don’t think it’s a good thing for republicans to attack people who have served our country honorably, but if you are going to do it I’d prefer you make fools of yourselves attacking democrats.

Summary: pretending to be clueless doesn’t put the ball back in my court. Show me a press release from an active reservist who says he didn’t use pictures because it was a violation of the law. Show me a letter from a JAG saying it violates the law. Show me a candidate being brought up for pictures.

Then we can talk some more. I COULD be wrong — but at the moment, there is no evidence to support that hypothesis, much less to support the unqualified claim by Greg that Faisal broke the regulation (or that he doesn’t meet the height/weight requirements).

Of course, those baseless charges pale next to the blatant charge that Faisal is a terrorist, a charge that has no evidence and that is surely actionable.

On another page you talk about Ms. Lucas not having served her country honorably. Well, if you would get out of your parent’s basement and actually pay attention, you would know that she HAS served her country honorably - she is an elected official. She is an United States Air Force Brat and a former United States Marine Corps wife.

Charles, my recommendation to you is this: Time, and time again, you shoot off your mouth PRIOR to getting your facts straight. Time and time again, readers of this Blog have to take time out of our day to correct you so that those who do not have the time to do research because they, unlike you, hold jobs for a living, may be incorrectly swayed to your ignorant beliefs. Please don’t post until you have ALL your facts straight. Don’t make accusations, then do a Google search and praying to St. Dukakis that you find something, THINK you do, and then post it, thus taking up space on this Blog as well as showing your ignorance to the entire world.

Don’t you just HATE IT when facts get in the way of an argument???

He’s got no choice but to do the rah-rah thing for all republican candidates, regardless of how he feels. There’s no choice here.

Get your head out of your fourth point of contact. If you think this really is a non-issue, find me a currently serving officer in the armed forces who is running for office and posing for campaign photos while wearing their uniform. I don’t think you can do it.

I am sending you a seeze and delist letter from Bill and Ballinger so check your email. I don’t care that you have put the Naby regs up and it appears that Faisli is violation of the USMCJMZB. I am a lawyer. I graduated and everything and have letterhead to prtove it. So stop! You have also called Fasyl fat. You should know this to be false. He isn’t fat. He is big-boned.

Charles, you insipid ommpah-loompah, don’t you know you can never justify someone’s bad behavior, by pointing the the bad behavior of others? How does one persons’ violation of military policies defend another’s? Greg has cited the DoD regs, and asked the question of whether this rises to the level of a violation. Condidering that Greg served, and the closest you came to serving is playing with your GI Joe Action Figure (with kung-fu grip), I would tend to think he has you outgunned in this discussion.