Sunday, May 30, 2010

Wisconsin Army Veteran Allowed to Keep Flag on Display after all

The sunlight of publicity works its usual magic
"A Wisconsin Army veteran -- who faced eviction this week for flying the American flag -- will now be allowed to keep the flag up for as long as he wants.

Under mounting nationwide protest, Charlie Price, 28, of Oshkosh, Wis., and officials at Midwest Realty Management struck a "mutual agreement" that allows the veteran to continue displaying the patriotic symbol, according to a statement posted on the company's website on Thursday.

Price and his wife, Dawn, 27, were previously told they had to remove the flag -- which hangs in a window inside the couple's apartment -- by Saturday or face eviction due to a company policy that bans the display of flags, banners and political or religious materials.

"It means the world to me," Price told "The way it happened wasn't the right way because the staff members were getting threatened and we didn't want any violence out of this, but I'm glad we did come to a compromise."

Randy Rich, the apartment complex's property manager, told that Midwest Realty Management received nearly 4,000 e-mails and thousands of phone calls in connection to the controversy.

In a statement posted on its website on Thursday, Midwest Realty Management apologized to Price and all U.S. veterans. "It was never our intention to hurt the Prices or disrespect what Mr. Price and all veterans have sacrificed for each and every one of us," the statement reads.



Anonymous said...

The company would be wise to evict the communist (probably a jew) who made the complaint instead of insulting the country, the flag, and the veteran.

Anonymous said...

(probably a jew)

The country would be wise to deport you to someplace with similar ignorance.

Anonymous said...

Anon 4:23, please reconsider your statement. While I absolutely agree with the motives of the veteran, I consequently have to support the RIGHT of the person who made the complaint to complain. Freedom of speech goes both ways. While I may not agree with his complaint, he has the right to do so. Of course, the court of public opinion has provided a sufficient answer to his complaint.