jrhooo

An "agent" in the FBI, DEA sense is a representative who acts on behalf of and wields the authority of the agency they represent.

When FBI Agent Smith asks you to do something, its as good as the FBI officially telling you to do it.

A CIA officer on the other hand, is completing tasks in the service of the CIA, but they are not wielding authority derived from the CIA.

Not trying to thread jack, just super interesting talk and feel like adding in if that's cool.

From the Marine perspective (Former 8th&I guy) it wasn't quite as difficult to maintain bearing in the marching platoons, because you were a bit disconnected. You were at the chapel and the grave site, but you were far enough away that you couldn't really say make out the families faces clearly. There was a bit of a disconnect. It wasn't totally "real" to you.

Now, our body bearers (pall bearers) they are right up there, but their discipline is next level, even compared to ours. In initial training they were brutal with us about maintaining bearing (I was later a CDS instructor so I've been on both sides of the line. and yeah you never show emotion, BUT the body bearers, to give an example, they were so strict that the entire time their guys were in trainee status they were not allowed to speak to anyone outside their unit. just absolute unflinching control.)

All that said, on the "not so real, insulated" aspect, there was ONE funeral that got to me. Didn't lose bearing at the site, just really bummed me out for the rest of the day.

There was a Warrant Officer who'd passed. Not even combat related, car accident, just freak awful luck.

Well, there we are outside the chapel, and the family goes in for the service, and there is this young boy, gotta be 10 years old. He's wearing a youth mock up of a Marine officer's uniform, complete with medals and rank and all.

After the family goes in, the boy comes out a few times for breaks, and a woman his mom I guess comes with him. The boys upset, we realize its the deceased's son. The last time the kid comes out, he leans over and throws up outside, because he's been in their sobbing so hard.

That shit was fuckin heart breaking.

Can vouch. Sort of. Was at 8th&I (The USMC counterpart to the Old Guard) and at the end of boot camp (or beginning of SOI if they still need numbers) they basically call a formation for everyone with an "03" (infantry) MOS allocation. They got us in a room. They said "ok, if you are shorter than 5'10", or you wear glasses that can't be corrected to contact lenses, you may leave the room.

Everyone that was left, they showed us some "oooh ahh cool guy" videos about the Barracks, gave a little speech about it being a big deal, and then said ok, if you want to do that, get in line and one of their scouting crew Marines will do your five minute interview.

Several weeks later when everyone was getting their duty station assignment out of SOI, if you found out "PFC JRHOO... You're going to DC."

My personal take, the use of the word "right" is overdone a lot right now. People are blurring the line between "rights" and "services".

Primary examples, education and healthcare. Yes, everyone should have access to education and to healthcare, but they still aren't exactly "rights". Why? because someone has to provide them, and no one has a right to anything that must be provided by someone else.

I say "must be provided" in the sense that someone has to pay for those school buildings, hospitals, teachers, etc. The $$$ has to come from somewhere.

BUT

Everyone should still have them right? Yes. The issue isn't "rights". It's public services and governmental responsibility.

We the people elect the government to do certain things necessary for society. Providing for some level of healthcare and education is a responsibility of a functional government. As we the people grant the government the general authority to manage public services and collect taxes to cover those services, THAT is the legal/ethical justification for education, healthcare, public safety or whatever else.

So why does the distinction matter? Because its about emotionally charged rhetoric.

The Left and the Right agree that some level of healthcare and education must be provided, BUT they argue about how much. Neither side wants to try and make their argument with plain facts and logic. That's too hard, not as effective and the voters don't have the patience for it anyways. Much easier to just stir up emotion and shout things.

Talking about things as "rights" allows one side to take the faux moral high ground and label the other guys as "the bad guys".

If the Right doesn't want to pass comprehensive education funding that ensures every person goes to college for free, the Left accuses them of "denying people their fundamental human right" to an education.

If the Left wants to raise taxes to pay for making college more accessible, the Right accuses the Left of "depriving people of their fundamental right to life, liberty and property".

Are you the guys at Bolling? If so, I gotta give you some kudos. Your firing party detail is crisp as hell.