BS: Don't ask don't tell

Subject: BS: Don't Ask Don't Tell
From: John P
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 10:09 AM

I'm glad a federal judge struck down the idiotic Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. I hope it withstands the appeals.

What about the military wanting a year to study the issue? Are they really so imcompetent that they haven't already studied it? This issue has been on the table for twenty or thirty years -- and they haven't studied it?? And they can't just use and of the information from every civilised country in the world who don't seem to be having any problems with homosexuals in the military?

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 10:21 AM

Scene: a battlefield, at night. Shells are dropping by the dozens and bullets going past sound like mosquitoes on a summer night in Minnesota. Two guys are in a foxhole, trying to prevent their position from being overrun.

Frank: Pat, have I ever told you you have lovely eyes, and I really dig that little chuckle of yours?
--------------

Seems a bit unlikely, no?

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Jeri
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 10:36 AM

Don't ask, don't tell was Clinton's thing. I thought it was a chickenshit way to NOT handle the issue then, and that opinion never changed. I think he did it because of military leaders bitching, but they bitched when the services were integrated racially and when women won a larger role. Most of the time, in the military, you can bitch, but you'd better do the job.

The military does not make laws, and aren't the sole developers of policy. When I was in the Air Force, I used to wonder why women weren't allowed to do certain things, and the answer was ALWAYS, "The American public would not stand for it."

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: John P
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 10:43 AM

Jeri, I agree about Clinton. What a double tongue he had! Unfortuneately, sodomy is written into the law. It will take an act of congress or a Supreme Court ruling to make it legal to be a gay soldier. The president could, however, order the military to NOT waste time on study and to get 100% behind changing the law.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 10:45 AM

"I hope it withstands the appeals."

The feds presented NO witnesses and NO defense....they just gave a brief history of why the policy was begun. There is speculation that they may NOT appeal, and allow the policy to just wither away under the judge's ruling.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 12:56 PM

From the military folks I've talked to about this, there is a feeling that the chain of command cannot handle the bullies in the line... and that the overt christianization of the body military makes such bullying necessary. Sigh. How about, behave or be courtmartialed?

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 01:35 PM

Seems to me that the British Navy had similar issues going back in the days of the wooden ships...

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 01:47 PM

ah, yes, on the water, very free...

..and easy...

he he he

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: romanyman
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 02:27 PM

swigging in the riggin oh such jolly days hhhmmmmm

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 02:29 PM

". How about, behave or be courtmartialed?"

That was essentially what Truman said when he ordered integration of the military.
There was to be a meeting to 'discuss' the issue, and the various military brass had prepared their objections....and Harry just walked into the room, announced that 'henceforth, there will be no segregation in the armed forces', and walked out, leaving all the generals with dropped jaws....

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 02:41 PM

Hmmm...the magic of Google:
Here is the exact process Truman went thru..., with a crucial item being:

"January 12, 1949: The Fahy Committee holds its first meeting with President Truman and the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Defense. "I want the job done," the President said, "and I want it done in a way so that everyone will be happy to cooperate to get it done."

Tha may be the meeting I read about.

Many have asked why this would not work fof DADT.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 02:55 PM

I had a battery clerk in Vietnam who was, if not actually "openly" gay, at least well known to be. He was a crappy clerk, but that had nothing at all to do with his sexual orientation. Officially ending "don't ask, don't tell" will enable those who are mistreated by their peers and superiors because of what is "unofficially" known to begin making official complaints and to have the boom lowered on the perps just as it is in any other case of sexual harassment.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 02:57 PM

Yes, or to put it another way: the truth will set you free.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Jeri
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 03:03 PM

"Many have asked why this would not work fof DADT."
Because they still get kicked out if they ARE asked or DID tell. It's not illegal to ask or tell. I got enough harassment because people believed I was lesbian. If it wasn't against any policy to be truthful about one's sexual orientation, perhaps there wouldn't be those 'passing' to escape the bullies or people's suspicion.

People shouldn't be forced to 'tell', but they also shouldn't be forced to be secretive. Harassment of people who choose to be honest should be against policy, and punished accordingly.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Jeri
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 03:05 PM

...and while I was typing, artbrooks said it better and more concisely.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,999
Date: 11 Sep 10 - 06:18 PM

If someone is willing to put his or her life on the line on my behalf, the least I can do is say thank you. I cpuld give a rat`s ass as to people`s sexual orientations. DADT is--as was noted above by Jeri--a poor way NOT to handle the situation. Art`s comment is really incisive. Not much else to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Penny S.
Date: 12 Sep 10 - 04:40 PM

I don't entirely understand Mrrzy's comment. That with the military being more aligned with christians, bullying of homosexuals or people believed to be homosexual becomes mandatory?

I stick with the lower case, because following JC doesn't seem to be being implied, and motes and planks are coming to mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: gnu
Date: 12 Sep 10 - 05:03 PM

Art... indeed. About time.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Charmion
Date: 13 Sep 10 - 02:01 PM

In Canada, while our neighbours to the south were chickening out on this issue, a Human Rights Tribunal decision compelled the nation's employers, including the Canadian Forces, to become blind to sexuality -- in effect, not "Don't ask, don't tell," but "Who cares?"

The result has been a major change in military culture that hardly anybody bothers to talk about.

We still have plenty of knuckle-draggers with unpleasant opinions about "faggots", but they keep their mouths shut at work or face disciplinary proceedings under a fairly draconian harassment policy.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 Sep 10 - 02:12 PM

yes, christianity as professed in such circumstances tends to be extremely homophobic. You can't just let it slide and remain a good christian of that ilk, you *have* to try to Save them, or destroy them in the effort.

I like the idea of Obama walking in, saying that Henceforth sexual orientation is a non-issue in the military, and walking out again, without discussion. ***BE*** the commander-in-chief!

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 13 Sep 10 - 02:48 PM

Interestingly, all the adminitration has to do to end this dumb policy is...nothing. If they don't appeal the decision, it stands.
BTW, in re historical parallels:

SAMBO'S RIGHT TO BE KILT
("Private" Miles O'Reilly and S. Lover)

Some tell me 'tis a burnin' shame
To make the naygers fight;
And that the trade of bein' kilt
Belongs but to the white,
But as for me, upon my soul!
So lib'ral are we here
I'll let Sambo be shot instead of myself
On ev'ry day in the year.
On ev'ry day of the year, boys,
And in ev'ry hour in the day;
The right to be kilt I'll divide wid him
And divil a word I'll say.

In battles wild commotion,
I shouldn't at all object,
If Sambo's body should stop a ball
That's comin' for me direct;
And the prod of a Southern bagnet*
So ginerous are we here,
I'll resign and let Sambo take it
On every day in the year.
On ev'ry day in the year, boys,
And wid none 'iv your nasty pride,
All my rights in a Southern bagnet prod,
Wid Sambo I'll divide.

* bayonet

The men who object to Sambo
Should take his place and fight;
And it's better to have a nayger's hue
Than a liver that's wake and white.
Though Sambo's black as the ace of spades,
His fingers a trigger can pull,
And his eye runs straight on the barrel sight,
From under the thatch of wool.
On ev'ry day in the year, boys,
Don't think that I'm tippin' you chaff,
The right to be kilt we'll divide with him, boys
And give him the largest half.

@American @Civil @war @equality @Army
filename[ SAMBOKLT
TUNE FILE: SAMBOKLT
CLICK TO PLAY
RG

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,Charmion's brother Andrew
Date: 16 Sep 10 - 11:50 AM

Charmion: "they keep their mouths shut at work or face disciplinary proceedings under a fairly draconian harassment policy."

It's hardly a draconian policy if it can be justified in a free and democratic society, which it has. It is enforced fairly stringently, though--I speak as one who had to investigate harrassment allegations. :(

For most people serving, the attitude to the change in policy concerning sexual orientation was best typified by the petty officer whom reporters buttonholed on his way out of the Halifax dockyard seeking reaction to the statement that homosexuality was now permitted in the Forces: "I don't care as long as they don't make it mandatory."

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,Charmion's brother Andrew
Date: 16 Sep 10 - 11:54 AM

Bill D "Harry just walked into the room, announced that 'henceforth, there will be no segregation in the armed forces', and walked out, leaving all the generals with dropped jaws...."

As a student of history, I am still wild about Harry. The U.S. lucked out when they got him as a successor to FDR.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: katlaughing
Date: 16 Sep 10 - 12:38 PM

"I don't care as long as they don't make it mandatory."

LOL! I wish that was the attitude here in the US!

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 16 Sep 10 - 02:59 PM

Zero tolerance of ANY bullying should be the order of the day IMHO. Whatever the basis of it happening, there can never be an excuse for it. I know it goes on in the military as I had personal experience of it when I was in. I can tell you it makes your life hell and affects your job due to worry and lack of sleep at times. Being scared each day is not a great way to live a career. At that time a great deal of my bullying happened because I was getting confirmed at church and the flight would have to get up one Sunday to attend. That's how it started. Others were bullied for other reasons. I do not recall any homophobic bullying in the RAF on my camp though.

In the military there is much talk about honour. What honour takes place to bully someone who is weaker than the others? I would have thought honour would lead to a helping hand, not a boot in the back.

Throughout history gay men have laid down and died for their countries. In these more enlightened times, one would hope, sexuality should not be an issue at all but many go out of their way to make it so. It's just another excuse to bully.

The whole idea that gay men or women fancy EVERYONE of their own gender is a fantasy that goes off in the minds of those who fear homosexuality. Of course they don't. No more than hetrosexuals fancy every siingle person of the opposite sex. And, just like most hetrosexuals, gay folks also have controls built in. Being in a foxhole with someone who is gay should bother no-one. Why should there be such upset?

Live and let live because these gay people in the forces are willing to die for what they are doing and believe... but not at the hands of their own comrades

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: mauvepink
Date: 16 Sep 10 - 03:10 PM

Forgive me. Having just read through my post again it seems I may be suggesting that gay personnel are in some way weak. Often it is quite the opposite. That aside, I was talking about honour in helping others and did not mean to imply that, when it comes to being gay, there is an inherent weakness. Far from it in fact.

In short, what honour can there be in bullying anyone?

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Sep 10 - 01:32 AM

Why does anyone HAVE to ask or tell. In the military does it HAVE to matter?? This whole thing is STUPID!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Sep 10 - 07:32 PM

Why should anyone give a bugger anyway?

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 Sep 10 - 12:56 AM

mp, well said.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 10:59 AM

Senators block vote on repeal

:-(

So let me get this right. Free speech allows that a man can burn Korans openly in public, with he potential that many more innocent people get killed, but it does not allow for something to be debated that would give freedom to many of those who are willing to lay down their lives for their country?

Good enough to die for ideals but not good enough to be given freedom from persecution becaus of their sexuality?

Another sad day in the fight for true freedom

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 01:27 PM

mauvepink, the 'don't ask...' measure was attached to military spending bill, to which the Democratic leader attached an unrelated immigration measure. In other words, the Democratic leadership guaranteed the failure of the repeal vote.
Some senators who were in favor of repeal voted no, so the Democrats only had 56 of the 60 votes they needed to prevent the blockage.
NY Times, Sept. 22, 2010.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 01:58 PM

Thanks 'Q'. I knew someone would explain it who understood the system better. It's a great shame in all meanings of the word. Thanks for replying :-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 02:02 PM

Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, who I had come to think of as one of the best new voices in ages voted against allowins the bill to proceed.

Part of his statement is as follows:

"...I continue to believe that the survey of the members of our military, mandated by the Department of Defense in February, should be completed and assessed before the Congress moves forward on any legislative changes to the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. I remain concerned that many members of the military would view as disrespectful a move to pre-empt the process. Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen have both stated that military men and women in all services and at all levels should be engaged in this process. The Obama Administration agreed with the importance of this process in its May 24 letter, stating that 'ideally the Department of Defense Comprehensive Review… would be completed before the Congress takes any legislative action.'"


I view this as a weasling cop-out. It suggests that ending this policy hinges on some sort of 'consensus' among members of the military....that is, if a whole bunch of homophobes shout loud enough, we have to 'wait' another decade or two for decency to prevail.

I shall send my opinion to Senator Webb.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 02:14 PM

But don't ask why unrelated measures were attached. Some things are beyond understanding.

Added was an act to repeal a ban on abortions at military hospitals overseas, and a proposal to give young illegals who join the military or attend college a path to citizenship.

(For many years, immigrants who joined and served complete terms in the military were given the opportunity to gain citizenship. I guess this door has been closed or was closed some time ago. I remember it from years ago.)

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 02:24 PM

Adding unrelated measures to bills are standard practice... the Republicans use the tactic far more than the Democrats. It is how 'pork barrel' funds are distributed. This was a test to see how far the Repubs would go to stop DADT.

I'd LOVE to see the entire practice stopped, but it would be harder to mess with than gun control.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,Songbob
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 02:38 PM

"Adding unrelated measures to bills are standard practice... I'd LOVE to see the entire practice stopped, but it would be harder to mess with than gun control."

No, it's easy -- just attach it as a provision in an unrelated bill.

Bob

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 02:52 PM

LOL...hey...why didn't I think of that?

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 05:01 PM

@Q: immigrants and others in the US legally who serve in the US military are still granted citizenship on an expedited basis. What this bill would have done is to grant the same to those who have no legal status.

IMHO, the best avenue for this issue is through the courts, since this would clearly establish that nondiscrimination based upon sexual orientation is a basic right, not something granted through legislative action.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 05:39 PM

Pamphlet on "Naturalization Certificates" for soldiers being discharged following WW1.

"Soldiers who are aliens may be naturalized before being discharged from the army. If they desire to do so, they should notify the U. S. Army Naturalization Officer immediately upon their arrival in Camp."
From- "For Discharged Soldiers of the United States Army WW1" compiled under the direction of Major General W. A. Holbrook U. S. Army, commanding Camp Grant, Illinois." April 25, 1919.
Further details in General Orders No. 146.

The above from http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com

Army recruiters at the time of WW1 would accept aliens who wished to serve and were physically able to do so. How they entered the country was not asked.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 05:46 PM

As a point of fact, passing the bill would not have ended DADT--it made it contingent on favorable findings from the Department of Defense Comprehensive Review. And, the US military has been consistently ignoring the DA part---they've been preemptively outing gays.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 05:53 PM

"...they've been preemptively outing gays."

And John MCCain is lying thru his teeth about what is happening....he won't even allow a reporter to finish asking a question about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 06:50 PM

Like it or not (and I don't), gays and lesbians are still legally prohibited from service in the US military. If soldier A outs soldier B, and soldier B admits homosexual behavior, than she/he is out of the service. On the other hand, if he/she denies that behavior, and there is no proof, there are no grounds for separation.   There is no prohibition of military service by a celibate homosexual. See this, and scroll down to section 654(b).

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: gnu
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 07:39 PM

Queer stuff indeed.

Such a bunch of idiots. In this day and age, it's bothersome to put up with these uneducated, ignorant twits.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: John P
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 07:42 PM

Why isn't the military brass ashamed to admit they haven't studied it yet? Are they idiots? This question has been on the table for 30 years. What HAVE they been doing? Playing ostrich?

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 10:21 PM

No-one should have to deny their sexuality. To be allowed to die for freedom and be given no freedom in return seems hypocritical in the least and entirely bigoted at best

Sad sad state of affairs :-(

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 10:50 PM

So just saying you're homosexual is enough to get you booted from the armed services, huh? Well, it sure as hell wasn't enough to keep 'em from drafting your ass into the armed services forty years ago. The question "Are you a homosexual?" may have been on the induction questionnaire, but if you answered "Yes" they wouldn't believe you unless you were also wearing one of Liza Minelli's dresses.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: frogprince
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 10:57 PM

If you read all of the regulations in artbrooks link, there are at least two or three points that I would consider absurd.
1. Supposedly it could be found that a soldier has engaged in a homosexual act, but he might not be discharged if it is determined that he has no propensity to engage in homosexual acts.

2. He might admit that he is a homosexual, but that is acceptable so long as he has no propensity to engage in homosexual acts.

3. There is no justification for discharging him if he has engaged in homosexual acts, but it is determined that he did so because he wanted to get out of the service.

Give me a break.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 11:34 PM

1. If, for example, a male soldier kisses another male soldier passionately while dead drunk, and therefore theoretically not responsible for his actions, he'd probably get off.

2. As I think I noted before, a celibate homosexual is not subject to discharge. It is the act that triggers removal.

3. This one is, I think, obvious.

Please note that these aren't 'regulations', but rather the text of the law itself - in other words, politician-speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Sep 10 - 11:55 PM

Bastards. BillD, excellent points.

There's a good series of stories by gays who are in or have been in the military and DADT HERE.

I've been looking for what the cost loss is for a total of over 14,000 members of the military who have been fired since 1994 because of this ludicrous "law."

I am proud to say Colorado's Senator Udall is not done fighting for this repeal...had a great email from him after it fell through this time.

Wonder what Harry Truman would have said to them about the long-drawn out "study." Naw, I don't really have to wonder.

Subject: RE: BS: Don't ask don't tell
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 01 Dec 10 - 05:00 PM

For those wanting to get at the data from the DADT report, it's downloadable from the Defense Dept. here.

I sent an e-mail to my senator (McCain) yesterday urging him to reconsider his position, but I don't have any great hopes that he will, at least in the near future.

Faux News used the A.P. story, but stuck its own spin on the headlines:

"Pentagon plays down resistance to gays among some"

and

"U.S. Combat Troops Resist 'Don't Ask' Repeal"

Aargh.

I find this an interesting subset of the story: Chaplains v. Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

In the end, change will come, whether by congressional or judicial mandate. I agree with Secretary Gates that it's probably better if they can do it with some planning and preparation, rather than over night.

~ Becky in Long Beach
(registered voter in Arizona)