Two leading critics of the F-35 fighter jets tried to lay blame for the noisy aircraft’s imminent arrival at the feet of Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Monday by staging a sit-in at the senator’s Burlington office.
Rosanne Greco and Roger Bourassa, both retired military officers, were eventually cited for trespass — but only after Burlington police deputy chief Jon Murad tried for 30 minutes to persuade them to leave voluntarily by citing political theorists.
Trailed by a gaggle of reporters, the pair arrived at Courthouse Plaza an hour before the close of business and vowed to remain inside Leahy’s office lobby until the senator agreed to a written demand that he direct the U.S. Air Force to delay its plan to base F-35s at the Burlington International Airport.
The jets are expected to arrive this month.
All three members of Vermont’s congressional delegation support the F-35s, but Leahy lobbied aggressively for Burlington to be chosen as a base, leading an unnamed whistleblower to tell the Boston Globe in 2013 that the site-selection process was “fudged.”
As a result of the basing decision, around 2,600 homes near the airport will be subjected to high-decibel noise levels as the jets take off and land — triple as many as were affected by the F-16 jets.
Without Leahy’s “direct interference and manipulation and pressure,” the Air Force would not have stationed the F-35s in Vermont, Greco said Monday.
She demanded that the senator agree to an investigation of improprieties involved in the site-selection process.
The senator was in Washington, D.C., on Monday. He has denied acting inappropriately to influence the basing decision.
In a statement, Leahy’s state director, John Tracy, described the Air Force’s study as “comprehensive” and rebutted suspicions that the jets may be used to carry nuclear weapons.
Greco and Bourassa chatted with reporters until Burlington police arrived about 40 minutes after the office was scheduled to close. Murad sought to convince the military vets to leave on their own, without police intervention. First, he noted, it “was not exactly fair” to arrive late in the afternoon with a list of demands and expect the senator to sign off.
“We think it’s reasonable,” Greco replied.
Murad changed tack, suggesting instead that the success of their stunt didn’t require an arrest to be successful.
Greco countered that their arrest for civil disobedience would “elevate the conversation” by showing that some Vermonters care enough about the issue to be willing to go to prison.
So Murad, a Harvard University graduate, invoked the late American political philosopher John Rawls to make his case.
“Yeah, but John Rawls will tell us that civil disobedience is really only possible in a near-just state, and it has to be done in a place where there is actually enough justice to have a situation that can be corrected by that act of civil disobedience,” Murad said. “Do you believe that this situation is going to be corrected by this act of disobedience? Because I don’t.”
At one point, the deputy chief turned to news reporters huddled around the philosophical discussion and asked if their coverage plans hinged upon the activists’ arrest.
As his persuasion techniques proved unsuccessful, Murad and other Burlington officers escorted Greco and Bourassa down the elevator and outside, where they wrote up trespass citations.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Reason many willing to be arrested, Mr Murad.
USAF Administrative Record
AR#53433, in which an Air Force official comments that the VTANG saying they will never use after burners does not reflect reality
AR#56874 Caputo 1/10/13 Harris wants data for developing noise contours-delay the data for developing noise contours to Harris as it will only add confusion of ignorant SOB’s fighting the bed down.Finnegan agrees delay sharing data until after bed down ROD (oh- So thats why noise maps delayed for SO long)
AR# 56567 noise Encroachment Mgr- Lynn Engleman to Germanos 12/14/12 3:03 Pm
Air guard reporting in news F35 does not use afterburner to take off EIS does not really state how many various take offs…. questions being asked– “it would be really bad if they can’t operate that way
AR #56076, in which an Air Force official sees problem with guard going on air.. creating expectations (regarding noise). she says who knows what will do to noisecould make worse somewhere else. and
#AR 56127 11/19-20/2012 VTANG-Finnegan Bush, Noise Encroachment Mgr Lynn Engleman says Finnegan assumptions making power/climb fuel changes for F16 will be same for F35 “Of course they didn’t bother to see where the noise did increase”. Says FIRST time Burlington SAW noise contour maps for F16 is when the baseline came out in F35 EIS Burlington alternative. Then adds… “Go home and drink heavily”
Penland copied on Lynns email responds “not to mention we were told they tried to do some of this stuff in simulator and it didnt work.
AR #56570 Noise Encroachment Mgr Engleman to Penland 12/14/14 12:23 PM
Subject: RE: confusion on Burlington Before Karnes (which shouldn’t have change % of departure on afterburner) But if it changed it’s because VTANG wanted it changed.
And many many more…..,
Ros and Rog! Not sure which one is the second banana, but they are a great act! ! And just when we thought vaudeville was dead!
Arrested or cited?
Thank you Rosanne & Roger for continuing to stand up to the F-35 basing.
Just turn out the lights at the end of the day and leave them in the dark. Isn’t that where they are anyways!
Shame on Rosane Greco for wearing the USAF uniform to a polotical rally. That is chicanery. For those that dont know, wearing a uniform to a political event is in clear viloation of Air Force regulation AFI 36-2903. By doing so she is representing the USAF in a grossly inappropriate manner. The armed forces must remain politically natural wearing of the uniform in such a manner muddies the water. If you read this Greco I ask you to think about your service, your fellow service memebers and what that uniform means to so many. If you want to protest fine but do so in a manner benefiting a former Colonel not a petulant child.
Political activity in uniform is illegal for active duty and Guard members of the military; is it legal for retired / former military?
Additionally Greco take your damned cover off inside, a Col should not have to be told that.
@Nate no regulations clearly state the uniform should not be worn in connection with political interests.
The reason regulations prohibit wear of the uniform at political rallies, speeches, etc. is to prevent individuals from implying a wider body of support for their position from others who happen to wear the same uniform, to avoid the impression of any sort of endorsement by the department, the service, other service members, or other retirees, and to silently imply some sort of expertise in the matter under discussion.
Ms. Greco wears her uniform to imply a wider body of support for her opinions from others who wear the same uniform, create the impression of some endorsement by other service members and retirees that doesn’t exist, and to imply greater expertise in the topic than she possesses.
Her prior false statements, dramatic demagoguery, and overall unfamiliarity with the truth demonstrate she is working a con game and is not worthy of the uniform she so presumptuously wore to her little tantrum.
Real civil disobedience get fully arrested…..also what did they accomplished? It looks very desperate. Oh you’re not getting your way? Guess I’ll pull a stunt and sit in a closed Senators office and pout while the press covers me! Ya! I’m sticking it to the military that is paying for my colonel retirement plus VA benefits. If you’re really concerned about the military budget maybe look at how much of the budget is going into your own pocket Greco………….
thank you rosanne and roger for standing up to stop the continued destruction of this planet by the military/industrial complex – the u.s. military in the twenty first century is not part of the solution – the u.s. military is part of the problem – true world peace will begin when men and women across the globe refuse to take part in military conscription and recruitment
Yes Justahuman you’re right its very disrespectful that Rosie Greco showed up in uniform. As a Colonel she knows the standers and disregarded them just like she says the Air Force is with the basing of the F-35. What are the consequence since she is retire? Rosieyou are slandering the uniform you wear and do not represent the men and women that wear the uniform (maybe her intention). If she did she have an ounce of respect for the uniform she wouldn’t be using fear tactics (In the 100 pages of the NPR the F-35 is mentions 7 times and in a NATO strengthening capacity) or acting like shes the expert on all things nuclear capable. If Ms. Rosie did what she said she did in her military career she should have a better understanding of how force structure works and how the National Guard Beau plays into everything the only NG base with a nuclear mission is Missouri and that because Whitman.
Im all for the 1A, but this is just silly she has run out of options so she dressed up to play Ron Kovic/John Kerry for a midnight whiny session? Also shame on Seven Days the headline says they were arrested but they just got cited. there is a deference and this headline hurts your journalistic integrity. Vermont is too great for click bate like that.
Maybe she’s upset because she couldn’t get a cool gov. contractor job after she retired and this is her way of “showing them what happens when you mess with her”…… @ ManInATinHatInTheWoods Ms. Rosie… nice
Given the facts about the F-35…it’s record of exploding, the noise, the possibility of carrying nukes (and exploding!) it’s insane price tag, the fact that…well, basically, it’s a hugely expensive dud…given all of that, I have been wracking my brain to try to understand why three otherwise intelligent and generally civic minded people, Leahy, Sanders and Welch, support it. All I can come up with is either they have all been bribed or they have been blackmailed…one way or another. I cannot imagine any other reason. Anyone have a clue as to why these guys support this boondoggle which is an affront to the local community as well as to the country?
The Democrats will continue to lose to both good people like GOP Governor Phil Scott and yes, to the likes of Donald Trump, so long as they continue to refuse to offer any credible alternative. At least the GOP is honest and make no bones about their priorities – the military-industrial complex and cutting taxes. The Democrats talk the talk about “democracy,” “science,” “diversity,” “community,” “public health,” etc. all while ignoring same with actions on the F-35. Ignore the environmental impact statement; ignore the science; ignore public health; etc.
As to democracy, all 3 communities facing declines in property values (and thus declining property tax revenue) because of the extreme noise from the F-35s voted against it. Winooski; South Burlington; and Burlington. . . The inner core of Chittenden County and a large source of votes that Democrats typically rely on in statewide gubernatorial elections. That is direct democracy in action.
Democrats like Leahy, Shumlin, and even Miro Weinberger (ignoring the majority votes of his own constituents), shamefully capitulate regardless. And then scream bloody murder about Trump somehow perverting democracy. . . and demand a popular vote instead of the electoral college.
Maybe next time the Democrats want to win back the governor’s office, or the presidency, they should align their actual actions with all their big talk.
DOWN WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND ALL PARTY POLITICS!!!!!!
To all those who are objecting to a retired officer wearing her uniform for a political event: I wonder what your thoughts were when active duty Guard members attended political meetings in uniform over the last seven years? Such as when Adj. Gen. Steven Cray, Col Joel Clark and other top Guard officials wore their full uniforms to City Council meetings and brought dozens of on-duty troops to line the council chamber walls at full attention for the length of a 4 hour meeting about the F35 basing? Nothing inappropriate there, right? Or when top Guard officials live-streamed meetings from the base to decry the Burlington ballot vote that asked residents whether or not they supported the F35 basing? Is blatant interference by the local military in a legal and democratic vote something you might also object to? JW.
To all those who are objecting to a retired officer wearing her uniform for a political event: I wonder what your thoughts were when active duty Guard members regularly attended political meetings in uniform over the last seven years? Such as when Adj. Gen. Steven Cray, Col Joel Clark and other top Guard officials wore their full uniforms to City Council meetings and brought dozens of on-duty troops to line the council chamber walls at full attention for the length of a 4 hour meeting about the F35 basing? Nothing inappropriate there, right? Or when top Guard officials live-streamed meetings from the base to decry the Burlington ballot vote that asked residents whether or not they supported the F35 basing? Is blatant interference by the local military in a legal and democratic vote something you might also object to? JW.
Eileen,
Were they on the clock while testifying about Guard policy, aims, and mission? Or on their own time and using the uniform to advance their own personal, whack-a-doo theories?
Patrick Cashman: Interesting question from someone who supposedly believes that “open, equitable, and accountable government comes before most anything else”.
Ummm….Eileen andreoli….. I was at those meeting they they where not at attention please dont be so dramatic. Also from my understanding if a member is on duty they have to wear there uniform. Col. Cray WAS representing VTANG and the Air Force therefore authorized to wear the uniform. The same thing happens when generals testify to Congress or on official business. Cray was testifying on behalf of the guard and doing so in a professional matter. Same with the press conference they are representatives of the guard. Greco on the other hand was not a acting as a representative but using here uniform in a political matter. Could she have worn regular clothes? Yes. But did she? No. Why? Because she knew people would take her photo and see shes in uniform and assume she was representing the military. Therefore she was using it in a political matter not in a personal matter. Im not surprised she did this shes been using her military career to justify her anti-F-35 rhetoric.
Eileen,
How so? Representatives of a branch of the Federal government (the Guard Bureau has a dual role) publicly testified to municipal government in a public forum. Sounds pretty open to me. A federal government entity made a decision it was obligated to make in accordance with USC Title X (DoD) and Title 32 (Guard) of US Code. So not only open and equitable, but also accountable by law. You didn’t get what you want. It doesn’t by default mean a conspiracy is afoot
The Air Force and Guard are doing their jobs they are obligated to do by the laws we commonly agreed upon. Roseanne is running a con to advance her personal theories. Ethically, she is running a definitive last place.
Spare me the dismissive language. Were you at the October 28, 2013 Burlington City Council meeting? If not, then you are ignorant of the event and can’t speak to the behavior of the Guard at that meeting. You have no idea what happened and your knee jerk defense nonetheless says a lot about you. The fact that you ignore the interference of the military in a democratically held vote is also very telling.
I was at the meeting yes there were members in uniform but also a lot of members not in uniform. Because they were representing themselves and their personal views. All I encountered were respectful. were there members line up against the wall? yes but there were also a lot of people in the room (full house!) If you felt threaten well no one can make you feel inferior without your consent- Eleanor Roosevelt
Um, Eileen? I’ve been in meetings so I think I get the gist. Though if you believe they violated any regulation or law I would eagerly encourage you to contact professionals such as the IG who actually know what they are talking about. But if experience is your standard for who gets to have an opinion on a matter… ever been in the military? Ever participated in force structure conferences? Ever wrote a JCIDS requirements document? If not, aren’t you disqualified from having an opinion due to ignorance?
I apologize for any dismissive language. My only excuse is that is was objectively and empirically the only correct response to your vacuous arguments.
Ex-military aren’t supposed to wear uniforms:
* To any meeting or demonstration that is anti-government in nature.
* During political activities, private-employment or commercial interests, when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity could be drawn.
* When appearing in civil or criminal court.
thebalancecareers.com/military-uniforms-by…
Greco is proving herself to be a disgrace to the military. She needs to be investigated and what ever action taken under UCMJ for improper use of the military uniform. There are military regulations in regards to the wear of the military uniform and being an officer and one who wants to be adjutant general she should know better. She needs to keep her personal agenda personal and stop telling lies for her own gain and she needs to stop wearing the uniform in an improper manner as though she is representing the military when she is indeed NOT representation of the military.
The one thing people are forgetting, the military doesn’t need your permission to base their equipment, of any kind.
@ Eileen, it is obvious you never served in the military so you don’t understand the difference when the military uniform was worn and for what reasons. The ones who were there at the city council meetings were INVITED to speak and answer questions. The others in uniform were there for the same reason, not political grand standing. Each branch of service has specific regulations and to the proper wear of the uniform and personal political statements and grand standing for personal reasons is not one of them.
To all the trolls who are belaboring the issue of the uniform, you are obviously trying to deflect and obfuscate the reason for this civil disobedience: the inappropriate, unnecessary, corrupted and environmentally harmful decision to base the immature, dysfunctional, engine-fire-prone F35s in Vermonts most densely populated residential neighborhoods.
If you want to discuss disgraceful actions and disrespect to the uniform, perhaps we can talk about the in-depth investigation last year that uncovered horrible abuses of power and misuse of federal funds by the Vermont National Guard? These allegations include sexual assault, sexual discrimination, sexual harassment, problems with alcohol, treatment of civilians, and misuse of government property and taxpayer dollars.
Along with these documented allegations are the facts that the Guard is guilty of withholding information about the F16 noise impact on residential neighborhoods from the FAA, PFOA contamination of South Burlington groundwater, and providing false/manipulated/distorted information to the USAF in order to secure a corrupted F35 basing decision.
All these allegations and charges qualify as ACTUAL, serious disrespect and dishonor to the uniform and the office! There is frankly no honor whatsoever to be found in this dangerous F35 basing decision that will harm over 6,500 Vermonters, impact children’s cognitive learning abilities, harm senior’s cardiovascular health, bomb property values, and risk the safety of people in the flightpath. Shameful!
Eileen, No, let’s stay on topic instead.
Also, based on your prior comments this all seems to be coming from an extreme anti-military ideology, so why presume to use the language of the military (honor, respect, duty) when you hold them in contempt for being “those in the business of war”?
From your previous comments:
“Wait, Scott thinks it’s okay to tax our social security benefits, but not military pensions? Why? And what about offering free college tuition to everyone, not just the military? What is the underlying reason for these proposals that are targeted to one specific group — those in the business of war?”
Nice try, Patrick but again you are seeking to kill the messenger and avoiding the message – the inappropriate F35 basing in our residential neighborhoods.
You are using that old saying incorrectly Eileen. You don’t “kill” the messenger because he is merely a conduit through which information passes, while having no control over that information. You are expressing your own opinions and theories, and are therefore the “sender”, not the “messanger”.
Unless you are, of course, simply repeating what you are told to say by others. I’m totally able to believe that might be the case. In such a case, since their claims are both outlandish and based wholly on the public’s willful gullibility in regards to military matters, you still wouldn’t be a “messenger”, but “mouthpiece” or “patsy” would work.
Don’t kill the patsy…Doesn’t have the same zing though. We’ll have to work on that.
Here is a thought: blame the people who built residential houses near the airport, not the airport. The airport was there first.
Like the ones who buy a house next to a working farm then complain about the noise and farm odors.