The Pentagon continues the discrimination and where's Obama?

[Apollo]

Perhaps you should show the world that gays can serve their nation's army. Why don't you join the IDF?

Well I am not jewish, nor am I a Israeli citizen. Dont the IDF allow gays into their military? I think they do.

And I won't join my own countries army, why would I join theirs?

Why don't you go join up with Hamas? They are always looking for willing and able fighters ready to kill the crazy jews, sorry Zionist, at a moments notice.

 

[Apollo]

I am actually very pro-american. I will defend most of what this country does to anyone, and I believe in our constitution and the governmental process.

I am not racist, I like all people. One of my goals in life is to learn farsi, just for the hell of it. While Turkey isnt actually in the middle east, it has always been a dream of mine to visit.

If you notice, I said Hamas (the terrorist organization) and not Palestine. Cause Hamas is a terrorist organization with members (very few these days) who want to destroy the state of Israel and wipe them off the map.

And I don't consider you a jew hater, but your use of the word zionist sounds like nothing more than crazy jew. Maybe I should just say crazy patriot instead?

I don't want us to spill any american blood. I would rather we not be in Iraq or Afghanistan. I have never once supported either wars, nor did I ever EVER like Bush. Correction, I supported Afghanistan cause it was a good move. Iraq wasn't.

I never called you any names, don't start on me. I do play the game.

 

[Apollo]

^ Yes, you play the game: poorly.

really? i believe it is i who got you all angry, calling me a racist and anti-american. liking me to republicans of all people. none of which i am

sure your not playing the game poorly?

 

[PabloZed]

This policy should be near the bottom of the President's to-do list and I think it makes gays like Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddow look bad to push their personal agenda on tv. If anything, I would not be surprised if by them making the issue so visible that Axelrod sees it as an opportunity to show that the President is not driven by constituency groups. The public is not going to be upset with the President because he doesn't reverse the policy when gays say so.

Apropos of nothing, I like jewish guys too but I think we give Israel too much money and they are abusing the Palestinians.

 

[Apollo]

^ Oh yes, you ARE fair and balanced. Your blog, isn't it called "I Love Jewish Guys?" And that's public domain, it's on your profile.

Funny, you don't have a blog called "I love Arab Guys?"

So. Shall We Play A Game? Trust me, trust me, trust me: were we to, it would be game, set, match.

Fortunately for you, and in the words of Dorothy Parker, I adhere to her maxim:

"Malice is much like a game of tennis -- I never play it with someone manifestly inferior."​

No offense, just saying, that's all.

That blog is older than when I had an opinion on Israel and their place in the world.

Also, if you would be so kind as to look through the blog, you see only two posts on jewish men. From there I go all through the continents, never made it to africa sadly.

enjoy my post on some hot navy men http://ilovejewishguys.blogspot.com/2007/08/more-of-those-hot-marines-and-navy-men.html

had this huge thing for filipino men (pinoy) http://ilovejewishguys.blogspot.com/2007/05/hot-pinoy-men.html

damn that blog brings back memories. now where in that blog, or any other place do I bash or show my contempt for arab people? if you want to dig more into my internet past, i would look back through my records where i defend islam. i am not sure if i mentioned on this site how i considered converting to islam at one point in my life, but if i did, it is there somewhere.

you know, i found this wonderful arab porn blog back in the day. it got destroyed by google, but i prob still have one of the videos. good stuff. I think they were lebanese. meh

 

[syntax]

Sites, links, proof to back up this statement?

centexfarmer this is a question that should be appended to many recent posts and threads in CE&P.

 

[Apollo]

Really? Your last post on "I Love Jewish Guys" was 07 August 2007 -- less than two years ago. I take it you only very, very, VERY recently discovered your deep, unyielding, resolute support of Zionism...

But you need not make excuses to me -- I think I get the picture: I'm a crazy Jew Hater but you're an impartial political observer with no prejudices. Hell, you even watched at some distant point way in the past Arabs having sex -- Chirst, Allah Be, one can't get more pro-Arab than that!

Got It.

As the saying goes, "A liar should have a good memory."

Oh yeah, I remember that day. I remembered I had a blog and decided to try and revitalized the blog, then gave up after one try. Oh, you got the name of the blog wrong. The URL is I love Jewish Guys, the blog is "Masculine Beauty". Once called "Men From Around the World". When I realized how hard it is to keep with a theme like that, I changed the name. I guess if you actually looked at the blog you would know that.

I never once said I supported zionism. I do support Israel though, and their right to be where they are. But beyond that, I just don't like people who spread false propaganda about something. I will always debate and inform if I can for the people someone is trying to get down.

While this is the wrong thread, I came in here to defend Obama agaisnt the speed junkies who seem to want change now and not over time, which is what it takes.

I never said you were a jew hater. I don't think you are one either, never did. The way you used the word Zion though makes you sound like one, I really don't have to point it out to people.

I am not impartial, I am a democrat. Although, I will admit, I do listen to an issue before picking a side, although most times out of not, I go the democratic side. I will admit though, the republicans do get some issues (very little) right.

 

[NickCole]

I have predicted the ban on gays serving openly in the military will stand, in one way or another, for at least another 50 years. For the same basic reasons: they don't wants us, they don't need us, and they won't have us.

Exactly.

If they need us, whomever is President will see that the ban is dropped.

But Obama's promise to repeal it as a stand on equal rights will be another broken promise.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

centexfarmer this is a question that should be appended to many recent posts and threads in CE&P.

Nope, it should only be asked of the logically sound statements.

Oddly enough I don't feel compelled to find proof that some gays are politically inactive. Every group in this country has couch-warmers and I insist anyone asking for proof that the same can be said of gays is either bored or being disingenuous.

 

[BabiGayPimp]

I don't think anyone of consequence is willing to change something that is running smoothly. The mechanism for kicking gays out of the military is a smooth running machine, in part because the gays who remain keep the peace. They don't protest or raise hell. They don't create any discomfort or unease. And they can't. They are hogtied; can't even speak for themselves, much less others. I'v always believe that to fix something, sometimes you have to break it; make it fail. Until that happens, nothing changes. That's why I say young gays should look to some other career than military service.

 

[Kulindahr]

I have predicted the ban on gays serving openly in the military will stand, in one way or another, for at least another 50 years. For the same basic reasons: they don't wants us, they don't need us, and they won't have us.

Obama will not risk his credibilty as a war leader by challenging longstanding military traditions.

Those gays who continue to serve in the closet are admirable for their patriotism, but may be inadvertently helping to preserve the status quo.

The guys who serve at the moment are helping change the status quo: their comrades know quite frequently, and their presence demonstrates that gays have the courage of their convictions, and the courage to put their lives on the line for their country, and can be counted on as comrades like anyone else.

 

[Kulindahr]

Oh yeah, I remember that day. I remembered I had a blog and decided to try and revitalized the blog, then gave up after one try. Oh, you got the name of the blog wrong. The URL is I love Jewish Guys, the blog is "Masculine Beauty". Once called "Men From Around the World". When I realized how hard it is to keep with a theme like that, I changed the name. I guess if you actually looked at the blog you would know that.

I went through the whole blog, when I saw Alfie's accusation -- from experience, I was guessing he was using shallow stuff to back up an opportunity to violate the forum rules by making a personal attack.

Since that proved to be the case, I didn't respond to his post -- or the later ones.

Your pics of Navy types made me wonder, though, about something related to this thread: do you think any gays join the military just to be close to such hot bodies?

 

[Apollo]

I went through the whole blog, when I saw Alfie's accusation -- from experience, I was guessing he was using shallow stuff to back up an opportunity to violate the forum rules by making a personal attack.

Since that proved to be the case, I didn't respond to his post -- or the later ones.

Your pics of Navy types made me wonder, though, about something related to this thread: do you think any gays join the military just to be close to such hot bodies?

I think a few definitely join just to be around hot bodies, and possibly even for the sex that "doesnt" happen between the guys.

 

[Apollo]

Wonders when was the last time you needed to be an expert on anything to have an opinion? Especially in CE&P?

 

[NickCole]

I don't think anyone of consequence is willing to change something that is running smoothly. The mechanism for kicking gays out of the military is a smooth running machine, in part because the gays who remain keep the peace. They don't protest or raise hell. They don't create any discomfort or unease. And they can't. They are hogtied; can't even speak for themselves, much less others. I'v always believe that to fix something, sometimes you have to break it; make it fail. Until that happens, nothing changes. That's why I say young gays should look to some other career than military service.

You've got that backwards.

It takes someone of consequence to change something that's wrong and running smoothly.

Find a history book and look up civil rights.

Or, specific to the military, look up Harry Truman.

 

[BabiGayPimp]

The guys who serve at the moment are helping change the status quo: their comrades know quite frequently, and their presence demonstrates that gays have the courage of their convictions, and the courage to put their lives on the line for their country, and can be counted on as comrades like anyone else.

They think their comrades are learning something by their quiet example. Yet, whenever there is an opportunity to choose a different path, their comrades will always follow tradition and concur: Homosexuality (in word or deed) is not compatible with military service...

What might spur change is if the U.S.miliary suffered some spectactular setback, or suddenly became hugely unpopular, which is not like to happen in our lifetimes.

 

[BabiGayPimp]

You've got that backwards.

It takes someone of consequence to change something that's wrong and running smoothly.

Find a history book and look up civil rights.

Or, specific to the military, look up Harry Truman.

That's what I mean: someone of consequence (Commander in Chief or top brass). Harry Truman was a man of consequence. When it comes to changing military policy you need leaders on your side. Unless there is a mass rebellion in the ranks, which isn't happening.

 

[Glafna]

Ain't sure how effective it would be, but a protest that came to mind is for several thousand gay men/women to dress as soldiers, and march in formation to the white house, or wherever the goal is, stay at ease for however long, and then as a whole, announce something like "We are capable, we are willing, and most importantly, we can shoot straight".

Babi, I slightly agree with you, but the problem is that if they do come forward, unless there is immense pressure from a large portion of the armed forces, chances are they would be discharged just the same. Funny thing is, there are probably some who would have their unit, other units, and superior officers protesting loudly, but they just won't take the chance.

 

[NickCole]

That's what I mean: someone of consequence (Commander in Chief or top brass). Harry Truman was a man of consequence. When it comes to changing military policy you need leaders on your side. Unless there is a mass rebellion in the ranks, which isn't happening.

And gays don't have one in Obama.

Okay, I misunderstood. We agree.

 

[Kulindahr]

You've got that backwards.

It takes someone of consequence to change something that's wrong and running smoothly.

Find a history book and look up civil rights.

Or, specific to the military, look up Harry Truman.

He had it just fine. His point was that none of those people of consequence seem willing to do anything. That would suggest we're kinda stalled.