« Giraldi on Zuckerman | Main | "They Don't Mind and We Don't Matter" - Anonymous 11b »

28 May 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

J

LeaNder,

Hetrosexual 'singles' are allowed in their off time to do the bar scene if they so choose. Will the Homosexuals be allowed the same? From what I have ascertained, the 'gay bar'scene is just a 'little bit' 'different' from the 'straight' world. Look at the following

to understand my 'concerns' regarding the clearances factor. Such will need to be addressed by Command.

Patrick Lang

Anon

Who do you think looks like Hope? pl

LeaNder

J, the homosexual bar scene is pretty complex. I am not a big bar customer, but there is a mixed bar around the corner that was run by two gay friends for many years. I can tell you, you would have had troubles to tell who is straight and who gay. ...

I avoid a larger more literary excursus, about male friendship over the ages and/or legal aspects. When was the paragraph abolished that punished homosexuality with dead in England, in the big 18th century reform? Were there equivalent laws in the States?

So, OK. Security risks. An artist friend who stood over here in Germany told me he had a minor clearance, which seems to occasionally come with camera training. I am assuming you wouldn't consider this guy's knowledge risky? Would you?

These two might be more suspect?: including 2 USNA grads

I can understand your irritation about the more flamboyant parts of gay society, although much of it to me feels like role playing to me - I am with optimax on the issue. But strictly again, I could imagine a heterosexual soldier in a brothel somewhere outside the states as pretty much the same security risk as the most brothel like gay bar or sauna. Can't you?

Something else comes to mind from the political German context. When the Green Party became part of our legislative bodies there was a huge discussion if one could really share state secrets with these guys. They have been in quite a few legislations since and obviously know more than they were supposed to know, but as far as I can tell there was no treason case. Quite the opposite they seem to be quite as corruptible as the rest given a chance. (irony alert)

To return to possible secret carriers above, the grads, that may have had a higher security clearance. Shouldn't their much longer training not only guarantee a higher responsibility and if not that than at least an awareness of the duties that accompany clearance more precisely legal aspects?

So what concrete evidence, apart from irritation by some flamboyant aspects of the gay pride world, do you have that a gay is untrustworthy?

rjj

Anon, what is an emo? will not google certain topics.

It was good of you to put Optimax in his muumuu substitutes on that list.

Are women allowed to wear makeup in uniform? Are there regulations governing mascara, lipstick shades, false eyelashes and that sort of thing?

Patrick Lang

Apropos of nothing, we had a gay bar here in Alexandria a few years back. it was a local sensation for a while, then it went broke. Now, I can't remember what it was called. I went in for a drink once to see the picture hanging over the bar. Another, even stranger old retired Army colonel had been very outspoken in his outrage over this place. In retaliation the owners had a picture painted that depicted him as a reclining nude looking back over his shoulder at the crowd across the bar. I wonder what happened to the painting... pl

rjj

is there a standard military issue bra?

J

LeaNder,

I have no 'irritation' with their world, as I have my hands full with my world as it is. What I have 'irritation' with is possible 'exploration' by Hostile Intelligence wonks (i.e. Mossad honey-traps, Russian honey-traps, etc.) that are all too frequently used in the world of espionage to ferret out secrets. The U.K./D.C. politicians and their homosexual individuals who have/are frequently successfully targeted by hostile-to-the-U.K./U.S. espionage honey-traps, are a prime example. Heterosexual individuals in the military world whether married or single, there are established guidelines in the security clearance arena. Since DADT, DOD has had the 'luxury' of being able to in most aspects turn a blind-eye to certain aspects of the homosexual/lesbian world, that it will now have to address if homosexuals/lesbians are 'formally accepted' into the military ranks. DOD will have to establish 'off limits' boundaries for all (Heterosexuals, Homosexuals) with no favoritism.

The days of Command 'luxury' in the clearances world is coming to a close. Hostile Intelligences never sleep, and continually seek to successfully exploit wherever and whenever they can. That's the real-world.

J

Colonel,

There are those who contend that the hidden agenda behind the drive to allow gays to openly serve is to undermine the Armed Services. There are those who contend that straight personnel do not wish to face an external enemy while at the same time fending off sexual overtures from the rear. Some see Homosexuals gaining rank and using it to extort sexual favors. There are concerns that discipline and morale will decline. There are those who see Heterosexuality is about love, marriage and procreation, whereas contend that Homosexuality is largely about sex for its own sake to compensate for developmental disorder. There are those who take issue with the way Homosexuality is being foisted upon military Heterosexuals.

See Gen. John J. "Jack" Sheehan (Retd. USMC) address his concerns to the Congress this past March:

.
He told a Senate Sub Committee that gays serving openly have a debilitating effect. (See YouTube above) He said the Commander of the Dutch Army blamed open gays for the failure of the Dutch to prevent the 1995 massacre in Srebrenica of 8,000 unarmed Bosnian men and boys by Serbian militia. It was the largest mass murder in Europe since World War II.
Sen. Levin then appeared upset at what Gen. Sheehan said. And the Dutch government responded with their shorts in a knot at what Gen. Sheehan had to say.

J

Colonel,

The military medical field will need to address battlefield wounded, blood transfusions. Will DOD then have to every six months do a blood test with Homosexuals to see if the have contracted AIDS? There are ramifications (i.e. medical, etc.) that extend far beyond the clearances factor that I broached above. How will these issues be addressed by DOD? DOD will no longer have the luxury of acting like a Ostrich with its head buried in the sand.


J

Colonel,

There are those who say that the 1993 Clinton mandated legislation didn't pop out of thin air. that it was put in place as a decoy from the real US Code Title 10, Subtitle G, Section 654

US Code Title 10, Subtitle G, Section 654:

Policy Concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces

-CITE-

10 USC Sec. 654 01/24/94

-EXPCITE-

TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES


Subtitle A - General Military Law


PART II - PERSONNEL


CHAPTER 37 - GENERAL SERVICE REQUIREMENTS

-HEAD-

Sec. 654. Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces

-STATUTE-

(a) Findings. -