Sailor speaks out

[Apollo]

god...i hate stupidity...i asked you do you know what a chain of command is because as an enlistee....technically your co is your first line of defense...but he is not your only boss......talking to you people is like like talking to a two year old.....there are so many paths he could of taken its ridiculous...but hence you would know this if you knew what a chain of command was....thanks for playing

Calm down hun. You just gotta accept people don't know what their talking about half the time.

Have fun with em instead.

 

[archive]

Calm down hun. You just gotta accept people don't know what their talking about half the time.

Have fun with em instead.

its kinda hard when you respond to their posts and they respond with one word answers...i never thought i could/would be fighting with fellow gays over dadt...im not saying DADT is awesome...but its also not some witch hunt that people make it out to be

 

[archive]

Touche. I feel the same way.

wow...great response

 

[Apollo]

Well, long posts with quotes and shit don't make sense to you...so maybe just a couple of words may make it easier to understand.

Witchunt. Yes, that's the word for what they do. lol

And resorting to childish attacks and calling people's views "stupidity" and calling people "loons" is just another way of attacking when you are just not winning.

But thanks for playing. lol

I think very few go on a witch hunt. At least the guys in charge. Especially as the war has progressed and they need the people.

But if someone mentions it to a CO or someone in charge, it must then be investigated. If the CO chooses to ignore the mention then more power to them, but to be honest, if they do investigate and discharge, they were only doing their job.

Not supporting the discharge of gays or anything, but yeah.

With Rocha, his CO didn't discharge him, because he had no real proof, and no one presented him with any. Rocha himself presented the evidence, and thus under the law, he was discharged.

 

[archive]

Well, long posts with quotes and shit don't make sense to you...so maybe just a couple of words may make it easier to understand.

Witchunt. Yes, that's the word for what they do. lol

And resorting to childish attacks and calling people's views "stupidity" and calling people "loons" is just another way of attacking when you are just not winning.

But thanks for playing. lol

youve quoted nothing of substance...sorry you really havent....i already knew the first thing you were going to use was a wikipedia article...wiki articles cant even be used as souces when writing HIGH SCHOOL papers....and you expect someone to use it as a relaible source...laughable...

second....i do apologize for the use of the word stupidity and loon...i should have used the word ignorance (and not as a derogatory term)...i was frustrated and it was uncalled for

third....the article is poorly written...as i assumed (which i usually do when i shouldnt) that most people could see that....sure his past tasking in the dog handling unit was a disgrace...but he moved on from that...as he was in officer school....which would be two totally different locales...and then he decided from past dealings and other circumstances that it would be best for him to resign....

im sorry if it appears im being a hothead....but dealing with dadt... and it makes me shake my head when alot of the times...people dont see the bigger bigger

 

[archive]

for you elvin....

http://www.law.georgetown.edu/solomon/background.html

 

[Apollo]

I agree.

But once it is mentioned or there is suspicion, it becomes a sort of witchhunt. How do you prove that you are straight? How do you make them believe that you are not gay or bisexual? You are fucked. And what's worse is that if someone came forward and mentioned it or reported it, you will always have more than one person out there that know your secret and have an agenda.

It truly depends on where your stationed and the level, or lack there of, of homophobia of your CO's.

If there is a suspicion someone is gay, it is not always a problem and, I believe but I can't say this on any firm ground, I think the majority of the time people dismiss it or simply don't care. Some even accept it and go from there.

But for that one crazy homophobic CO, they go on the witch hunt.

It's like that quote "One bad apple ruins the bunch" It's the one bad apple that shines a bad light on everyone else. Even though this policy has been pretty horrible regardless.

I remember listening to Dan Choi's talk on the Moth, and when he started being open about his sexuality, he was sent a letter saying they understand he is gay blah blah but they would like to offer him a honorable discharge or something similar. It might have been, they were going to ignore it if he denied the charges, but he wouldn't stay quiet, so they had to process him out, dishonorable discharge.

Somethimes a CO's hands are tied, but they will still give you a honorable discharge which won't completely ruin your life. I think under DADT, it is supposed to be a dishonorable discharge? but don't quote me on that.

 

[archive]

The fuck it isn't. The point of this whole thread is that it is important that the behavior nobody knows about is being brought to light. Yes it is one story, but how many others are being treated the same and we don't know about it. We live in a world of latent homophobia. Our own President Clinton put this madness in play. "You can go to war, serve our country, come home and suck dick, but just don't tell anyone about it." Homophobia at its best. It's OK to be gay, I just don't want to know about it. Is that really OK with you?

as i stated to elvin as i should to you also...im sorry for the "stupidity"bit i wrote out of frustration" but honestly...that is not how it works...it really doesnt

on the sidenote of you mentioning clinton...i think he gets the shortend of the stick at times....its quite ironic that the president that made it possible for gays to serve is chastised because his dream law was "reformed" by powerful opposition blocks

 

[archive]

Thanks for posting this link. I didn't have to go too far in there. Right in the first paragraph:


"Some Americans view the policy as a benign gentlemen’s agreement, with discretion providing the key to job security. But "discretion" is not a fail-safe mechanism. An honest statement by a servicemember of his or her sexual orientation to anyone, anywhere, anytime may lead to discharge from the armed services. Moreover, discretion in the form of mandated silence is itself a form of oppression and discrimination. "

i think you should read a little further...what most americans believes goes on in military life....is usually far off but anywho

as i was stating to you earlier

How the Policy "Works"

Assessing each of its component parts is a good way to understand "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell."

Don't Ask
Commanders or appointed inquiry officials shall not ask, and members shall not be required to reveal, their sexual orientation.

Don't Tell
A basis for discharge exists if . . . "the member has said that he or she is a homosexual or bisexual, or made some other statement that indicates a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts ..."

Don't Pursue
More than a dozen specific investigative limits as laid out in DoD instructions and directives comprise "Don't Pursue." It is the most complicated and least understood component of the policy. These investigative limits establish a minimum threshold to start an inquiry and restrict the scope of an inquiry even when one is properly initiated.

Only a service member's commanding officer may initiate an inquiry into homosexual conduct. In order to begin an inquiry, the commanding officer must receive credible information from a reliable source that a service member has violated the policy. Actions that are associational behavior, such as having gay friends, going to a gay bar, attending gay pride events, and reading gay magazines or books, are never to be considered credible. In addition, a service member's report to his/her command regarding harassment or assault based on perceived sexuality is never to be considered credible evidence.

this states exactly what i stated...i know what humans do and i know the law (well law in general) is not perfect...but this is how its applied

 

[Apollo]

We know what the law says, and what actually happens.

The problem now, is getting it fixed. Which I think we can all agree on.

All this debate on semantics is helping no one.

 

[archive]

elvin...for what you wrote..... take it in to account that it is outdated by almost 8 years

 

[archive]

We know what the law says, and what actually happens.

The problem now, is getting it fixed. Which I think we can all agree on.

All this debate on semantics is helping no one.

youre definitely right....

 

[archive]

ill just respectfully bow out...its been fun...

 

[Apollo]

I know. Why isn't Obama using stop-loss indefinitely until this is fixed? I don't get it.

Well there are theories up the ass as to why.

Mostly, and this is my opinion. He doesn't want to stop the momentum of getting DADT repealed and let this happen legally. Obama, to my knowledge, has yet to issue an EO or anything similar to limit any laws that he disagrees with. This is really par the course.

Stop loss would be nice, but i'd rather see his pen glide across the full repeal of DADT, and I feel a stop loss would slow that day happening.

 

[Apollo]

He actually does have people on it. The Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs on This Week With ole George months ago mentioned how Obama had they polling the generals and officers in charge on repealing the policy.

And this was mentioned again recently on getting the military services ready for the repeal.

For all intents and purposes, the military is ready. They are just waiting for Congress to repeal the bitch.

 

[Apollo]

Let's hope. I have faith in him. I just think that for the soldiers...the urgency of now is overwhelming. That includes those who have already been discharged. What happens to them?

idk to be honest. maybe in the new law, they could state that all those discharged under the law has an oppotunity to re-enlist?

Or a EO from Obama himself? Who knows.

That's a good question.

 

[Apollo]

Sorry I didn't reply to this. I just noticed it.



True. Not everyone in the military is homophobic. Alot are though. When some of these guys find out that the person sleeping and showering, etc...next to him is gay, chances are he's going to freak out and complain about him. A CO will follow the law regardless. Soldiers take orders and do what is required of them.



Dan Choi is another one of my heroes.
The issue here is that he was discriminated against/discharged no matter what. Once his sexuality was revealed, he had to go and it was the end of his miltary career. They could have called it whatever they wanted but it all came down to them getting rid of him and saying that there is no place there for him. As for them ignoring his sexuality, it really doesn't matter...they knew and I'm sure he would have been out eventually. I'm sure he knew that once he was out, he was out and that he could be fired at a whim. No matter if his CO was gay-friendly. A CO takes orders too and has to follow the law. His sexuality is something they could always hold over his head and anyone use to fuck with him wether they worked above him or under him. And so he probably thought "Stay here and deal and hope no one uses it against me or fight it because the law is wrong and I would rather live a dignified life?". He chose the latter.

He had to deny and lie in order to serve and die for his country and even then, they had something on him anyway.

Know what I mean?

True, he had to go. But they gave him the option to leave honorably. And really, that's how you want to go. If he weren't a national figure now, being dishonorably discharged could hurt his ability to get a job, and he would recieve no benefits from the military for serving.

From how he talked about it, and this is from him. They tried not to be malicious when processing him out. He kinda made it worse for himself, but that was his choice. And hey, he's on television in a good light, his future job prospects are good.




I am on such a Mad Men buzz right now.

 

[Apollo]

I see the differences on both. But the bigger issue is that you are not allowed to serve with us, in a unilt becuase you are gay. You need to go wether it's sweet or not, your career as you knew it and fought for is over.



They didn't have to be malicious. He was geting discharged. He's not welcomed because he's gay and probably happy to see him go. If he made it worse, it was because he was upset that after all his years and training, it all came down to one issue that affects no one.

Anyone in the military today knows that they can't be out and proud in the military. It isn't like DADT is some secret.

Except for a few good instances like Rocha, there is no honor is outing yourself to get out of the service. If you didn't want to be silent about being gay, then don't join them military right now. Plain and Simple.

Dan Choi just stopped lying. He was just open, and they tried to let him leave in a humane way. He wanted to go out with a bang and so he did. Not trying to attack the guy, but that's how it went down. And this is from his mouth, not some opinion piece.

They didn't have to be malicious. He was geting discharged. He's not welcomed because he's gay and probably happy to see him go. If he made it worse, it was because he was upset that after all his years and training, it all came down to one issue that affects no one.

They probably weren't happy to see him go as he was a West Point graduate and Arab linguist. But they have to do their jobs and they did it. It isn't the military's fault he was kicked out, it's Dan Choi's. He wanted to be out, so he came out, and he was rightly fired under current law. Simple.

He was well welcomed by his peers. The men who served under him loved him and respected him, and I imagine his bosses were happy with him too. I mean how many arab linguists they got hanging around? Not many.

Let's not act like they are all homophobic. They have a law, it must be followed.

 

[Apollo]

I kind of agree. Only problem is that alot of people joined the military before DADT. The law also states that they aren't supposed to "pursue" but they do anyway. Alot of people also aren't sure of their sexuality until they have an encounter. Just because some of us always knew doesn't mean that others do/did.



No need to. The law itself is homophobic enough.

And we're still waiting for Obama to do what he promised.

It doesn't matter. You join the military, straight, gay, not sure. You know the law. Of the entire UCMJ, pretty much everyone, not in the military, knows that law. So do your time, follow the law, and move on from the military.

Of course, when the law is repealed, then hey, no need to hide it anymore and have fun. But until then, don't use it as an excuse to get out because your too weak to do the work. For Rocha, it was different circumstances, and I am sure for a few others the same apply. What Rocha did was fine, that type of abuse is just intolerable, and he saw no other way. He went in knowing the law and accepting it, but fell into a shit storm.

 

[Apollo]

Hmmm, I see it much differently because the law states that the soldier's sexuality should not be "pursued". 13,000 people didn't all just decide to come out. I'm sure alot of them were outed. As been reported.

Maybe the title is too deceiving and they should change it to "No faggots allowed...and make sure that your closet is closed and sealed really tight or you could be invistigated and pursued...and those that were serving before DADT should just resign and move on."

I don't completely agree with you but I respect your opinion.

All I can do is roll my eyes to that whole post. I won't even get into it anymore. You seem to have made up your mind.

I don't know why I even wasted my time.