| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Fredric L. Rice" |
| Date: |
13 Jan 2005 10:53:35 PM |
| Object: |
Hatred under fire |
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The number of Arabic linguists discharged from
the military for violating its "don't ask, don't tell" policy is
higher than previously reported, according to records obtained by a
research group.
The group contends the records show that the military - at a time when
it and U.S. intelligence agencies don't have enough Arabic speakers -
is putting its anti-gay stance ahead of national security.
Between 1998 and 2004, the military discharged 20 Arabic and six Farsi
speakers, according to Department of Defense data obtained by the
Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military under a
Freedom of Information Act request.
The military previously confirmed that seven translators who
specialized in Arabic had been discharged between 1998 and 2003
because they were gay. The military did not break down the discharges
by year, but said some, but not all, of the additional 13 discharges
of Arabic speakers occurred in 2004.
Aaron Belkin, the center's director, said he wants the public to see
the real costs of "don't ask, don't tell."
"We had a language problem after 9/11 and we still have a language
problem," Belkin said Wednesday.
The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy allows gays and lesbians
to serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual orientation
private and do not engage in homosexual acts.
"The military is placing homophobia well ahead of national security,"
said Steve Ralls, spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, a nonprofit group that advocates for the rights of gay
military members. "It's rather appalling that in the weeks
leading up to 9/11 messages were coming in, waiting to be translated
.... and at the same time they were firing people who could've done
that job."....."
.
|
|
| User: "Solomon \You Dirty Mother\ Kozanski" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 01:56:45 AM |
|
|
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE> wrote in message
news:41e7500c.2514936@news.linkline.com...
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The number of Arabic linguists discharged from
the military for violating its "don't ask, don't tell" policy is
higher than previously reported, according to records obtained by a
research group.
The group contends the records show that the military - at a time when
it and U.S. intelligence agencies don't have enough Arabic speakers -
is putting its anti-gay stance ahead of national security.
Between 1998 and 2004, the military discharged 20 Arabic and six Farsi
speakers, according to Department of Defense data obtained by the
Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military under a
Freedom of Information Act request.
The military previously confirmed that seven translators who
specialized in Arabic had been discharged between 1998 and 2003
because they were gay. The military did not break down the discharges
by year, but said some, but not all, of the additional 13 discharges
of Arabic speakers occurred in 2004.
Aaron Belkin, the center's director, said he wants the public to see
the real costs of "don't ask, don't tell."
"We had a language problem after 9/11 and we still have a language
problem," Belkin said Wednesday.
The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy allows gays and lesbians
to serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual orientation
private and do not engage in homosexual acts.
"The military is placing homophobia well ahead of national security,"
said Steve Ralls, spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, a nonprofit group that advocates for the rights of gay
military members. "It's rather appalling that in the weeks
leading up to 9/11 messages were coming in, waiting to be translated
... and at the same time they were firing people who could've done
that job."....."
one would think, given the military's fondness for long, hard, phallic
shaped objects that penetrate their targets and explode, naval enlistees'
uniforms, and their deep appreciation for masculinity, that they'd have no
problem with homosexuals.
--
Brought to you, courtesy of Kozanski's Morgue & Grill, LLC
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "sanguinevikings" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 09:55:39 AM |
|
|
Fredric L. Rice wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
I presume the same policy applies to cryptologists, so they'd have
sacked Alan Turing, and we'd have lost WWII.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Last Liberal / ShyDavid / Desertphile" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 12:23:45 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:55:39 +0000, sanguinevikings
<spam@spam.not> wrote:
Fredric L. Rice wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
I presume the same policy applies to cryptologists, so they'd have
sacked Alan Turing, and we'd have lost WWII.
Turing was tortured by the USA military and used as a guinea pig
for medical experimentation. The USA eventually killed him. This
is "gratituide," American Government style.
---
Sig Heil! A *FREE* random signature quote program by Desertphile RiceWare
http://holysmoke.org/sig/index.html
"We don't necessarily discriminate. We simply exclude certain types
of people." - Colonel Gerald Wellman, ROTC instructor
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 10:54:19 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:55:39 +0000, sanguinevikings <spam@spam.not>
wrote:
Fredric L. Rice wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS Associated Press Writer
I presume the same policy applies to cryptologists, so they'd have
sacked Alan Turing, and we'd have lost WWII.
And Danny Kaye would never have been allowed to
entertain American troops.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nivlem" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 10:59:50 PM |
|
|
sanguinevikings wrote:
Fredric L. Rice wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
I presume the same policy applies to cryptologists, so they'd have
sacked Alan Turing, and we'd have lost WWII.
IIRC, Turing had to keep himself pretty carefully closeted.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 12:51:41 AM |
|
|
In article <41e7500c.2514936@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The number of Arabic linguists discharged from
the military for violating its "don't ask, don't tell" policy is
higher than previously reported, according to records obtained by a
research group.
The group contends the records show that the military - at a time when
it and U.S. intelligence agencies don't have enough Arabic speakers -
is putting its anti-gay stance ahead of national security.
Between 1998 and 2004, the military discharged 20 Arabic and six Farsi
speakers, according to Department of Defense data obtained by the
Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military under a
Freedom of Information Act request.
The military previously confirmed that seven translators who
specialized in Arabic had been discharged between 1998 and 2003
because they were gay. The military did not break down the discharges
by year, but said some, but not all, of the additional 13 discharges
of Arabic speakers occurred in 2004.
Aaron Belkin, the center's director, said he wants the public to see
the real costs of "don't ask, don't tell."
"We had a language problem after 9/11 and we still have a language
problem," Belkin said Wednesday.
The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy allows gays and lesbians
to serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual orientation
private and do not engage in homosexual acts.
"The military is placing homophobia well ahead of national security,"
said Steve Ralls, spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, a nonprofit group that advocates for the rights of gay
military members. "It's rather appalling that in the weeks
leading up to 9/11 messages were coming in, waiting to be translated
... and at the same time they were firing people who could've done
that job."....."
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
Intelligent Design has as much to do with science as reality
television has to do with reality. - Barry Lynn on CNN 12/25/04
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 05:01:42 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> said in
alt.atheism:
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
The same thing that atheism has to do with citizenship.
--
"So much blood has been shed by the Church because of an omission from the Gospel: "Ye
shall be indifferent as to what your neighbor's religion is." Not merely tolerant of it,
but indifferent to it. Divinity is claimed for many religions; but no religion is great
enough or divine enough to add that new law to its code."
- Mark Twain, a Biography
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
15 Jan 2005 02:58:16 AM |
|
|
In article <vpjgu0dii0h7kt5lba9glrq5mha668emkr@4ax.com>,
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> said in
alt.atheism:
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
The same thing that atheism has to do with citizenship.
I guess that gays can't be good citizens or patriots either.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
Intelligent Design has as much to do with science as reality
television has to do with reality. - Barry Lynn on CNN 12/25/04
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
16 Jan 2005 05:21:55 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:58:16 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> said in
alt.atheism:
In article <vpjgu0dii0h7kt5lba9glrq5mha668emkr@4ax.com>,
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> said in
alt.atheism:
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
The same thing that atheism has to do with citizenship.
I guess that gays can't be good citizens or patriots either.
I guess I wouldn't want to be a citizen of a country that was run like
that.
--
"...I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand
why I dismiss yours."
- Stephen F. Roberts
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
16 Jan 2005 11:48:56 PM |
|
|
In article <ontlu0dql8e40onr66tnhdo4gd2laaa2uh@4ax.com>,
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:58:16 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> said in
alt.atheism:
In article <vpjgu0dii0h7kt5lba9glrq5mha668emkr@4ax.com>,
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> said in
alt.atheism:
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
The same thing that atheism has to do with citizenship.
I guess that gays can't be good citizens or patriots either.
I guess I wouldn't want to be a citizen of a country that was run like
that.
Sadly, that is how the trend seems to be going. "If you are not for us,
you are against us" is transforming into "If you are not just like us,
you are against us".
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
Intelligent Design has as much to do with science as reality
television has to do with reality. - Barry Lynn on CNN 12/25/04
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
17 Jan 2005 03:05:57 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:48:56 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> said in
alt.atheism:
Sadly, that is how the trend seems to be going. "If you are not for us,
you are against us" is transforming into "If you are not just like us,
you are against us".
Next it'll be "if you're not us, you're against us".
--
"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is
a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the
crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due
to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious
indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility
corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of
nature and of our own being."
- Albert Einstein to Guy H. Raner Jr., Sept. 28, 1949, from article by
Michael R. Gilmore in Skeptic magazine, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1997
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
19 Jan 2005 12:41:52 AM |
|
|
In article <05aou054fbq82a875a382t5laqr3eiq40l@4ax.com>,
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:48:56 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> said in
alt.atheism:
Sadly, that is how the trend seems to be going. "If you are not for us,
you are against us" is transforming into "If you are not just like us,
you are against us".
Next it'll be "if you're not us, you're against us".
Taking to it's logical conclusion, "If you're not me, you're against me"
Bang! Bang!
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
Intelligent Design has as much to do with science as reality
television has to do with reality. - Barry Lynn on CNN 12/25/04
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
17 Jan 2005 07:30:50 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e7500c.2514936@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The number of Arabic linguists discharged from
the military for violating its "don't ask, don't tell" policy is
higher than previously reported, according to records obtained by a
research group.
The group contends the records show that the military - at a time when
it and U.S. intelligence agencies don't have enough Arabic speakers -
is putting its anti-gay stance ahead of national security.
Between 1998 and 2004, the military discharged 20 Arabic and six Farsi
speakers, according to Department of Defense data obtained by the
Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military under a
Freedom of Information Act request.
The military previously confirmed that seven translators who
specialized in Arabic had been discharged between 1998 and 2003
because they were gay. The military did not break down the discharges
by year, but said some, but not all, of the additional 13 discharges
of Arabic speakers occurred in 2004.
Aaron Belkin, the center's director, said he wants the public to see
the real costs of "don't ask, don't tell."
"We had a language problem after 9/11 and we still have a language
problem," Belkin said Wednesday.
The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy allows gays and lesbians
to serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual orientation
private and do not engage in homosexual acts.
"The military is placing homophobia well ahead of national security,"
said Steve Ralls, spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, a nonprofit group that advocates for the rights of gay
military members. "It's rather appalling that in the weeks
leading up to 9/11 messages were coming in, waiting to be translated
... and at the same time they were firing people who could've done
that job."....."
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
Nothing. It's the usual Christian bigotry.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 10:48:50 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e7500c.2514936@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS Associated Press Writer
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
It's a throwback to previous decades where one's
homosexuality was considered a blackmailable handle
upon which a foreign national could compromise a
US government worker. In the past it worked -- a
foreign agent could acquire compromising photographs
and blackmail a US government employee with exposure
if he or she didn't do the agent's bidding.
In more enlightened times, one's homosexuality was
not a matter and it couldn't be used as blackmail.
With the growth of fascism in the United States and
the accompanying hatred and bigotry -- not to
mention growing violence -- against fags, it's now
becoming a blackmailable phenomena again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
15 Jan 2005 02:56:19 AM |
|
|
In article <41e89fdd.4150017@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e7500c.2514936@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS Associated Press Writer
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
It's a throwback to previous decades where one's
homosexuality was considered a blackmailable handle
upon which a foreign national could compromise a
US government worker. In the past it worked -- a
foreign agent could acquire compromising photographs
and blackmail a US government employee with exposure
if he or she didn't do the agent's bidding.
In more enlightened times, one's homosexuality was
not a matter and it couldn't be used as blackmail.
With the growth of fascism in the United States and
the accompanying hatred and bigotry -- not to
mention growing violence -- against fags, it's now
becoming a blackmailable phenomena again.
Yeah. I'm sure that it was also extremely blackmailable in Nazi Germany.
The trend continues.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
Intelligent Design has as much to do with science as reality
television has to do with reality. - Barry Lynn on CNN 12/25/04
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
15 Jan 2005 08:56:25 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:56:19 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e89fdd.4150017@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e7500c.2514936@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS Associated Press Writer
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
It's a throwback to previous decades where one's
homosexuality was considered a blackmailable handle
upon which a foreign national could compromise a
US government worker. In the past it worked -- a
foreign agent could acquire compromising photographs
and blackmail a US government employee with exposure
if he or she didn't do the agent's bidding.
In more enlightened times, one's homosexuality was
not a matter and it couldn't be used as blackmail.
With the growth of fascism in the United States and
the accompanying hatred and bigotry -- not to
mention growing violence -- against fags, it's now
becoming a blackmailable phenomena again.
Yeah. I'm sure that it was also extremely blackmailable in Nazi Germany.
The trend continues.
It was very odd. The reason blackmail was so effective was because of
the rules against homosexuality, and the rules against homosexuality
were justified because of the fact that homosexuals could be
blackmailed. No one seemed to notice how absurd it was.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
16 Jan 2005 01:54:46 AM |
|
|
In article <05aiu0t56kihshqdp0fe5g4643p2n067h8@4ax.com>,
thomas p <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:56:19 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e89fdd.4150017@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e7500c.2514936@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS Associated Press Writer
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
It's a throwback to previous decades where one's
homosexuality was considered a blackmailable handle
upon which a foreign national could compromise a
US government worker. In the past it worked -- a
foreign agent could acquire compromising photographs
and blackmail a US government employee with exposure
if he or she didn't do the agent's bidding.
In more enlightened times, one's homosexuality was
not a matter and it couldn't be used as blackmail.
With the growth of fascism in the United States and
the accompanying hatred and bigotry -- not to
mention growing violence -- against fags, it's now
becoming a blackmailable phenomena again.
Yeah. I'm sure that it was also extremely blackmailable in Nazi Germany.
The trend continues.
It was very odd. The reason blackmail was so effective was because of
the rules against homosexuality, and the rules against homosexuality
were justified because of the fact that homosexuals could be
blackmailed. No one seemed to notice how absurd it was.
Good example of circular reasoning. Unfortunately the powers that be
still don't get it. Times do change even if they don't. People are
becoming more tolerant today, even in spite of religious opposition, and
that's a trend that I do hope continues.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
Intelligent Design has as much to do with science as reality
television has to do with reality. - Barry Lynn on CNN 12/25/04
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
17 Jan 2005 07:32:23 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 15:56:25 +0100, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:56:19 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e89fdd.4150017@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:51:41 -0800, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <41e7500c.2514936@news.linkline.com>,
frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS Associated Press Writer
What the F--- does sexual orientation have to do with the ability to
translate one language into another anyway?
It's a throwback to previous decades where one's
homosexuality was considered a blackmailable handle
upon which a foreign national could compromise a
US government worker. In the past it worked -- a
foreign agent could acquire compromising photographs
and blackmail a US government employee with exposure
if he or she didn't do the agent's bidding.
In more enlightened times, one's homosexuality was
not a matter and it couldn't be used as blackmail.
With the growth of fascism in the United States and
the accompanying hatred and bigotry -- not to
mention growing violence -- against fags, it's now
becoming a blackmailable phenomena again.
Yeah. I'm sure that it was also extremely blackmailable in Nazi Germany.
The trend continues.
It was very odd. The reason blackmail was so effective was because of
the rules against homosexuality, and the rules against homosexuality
were justified because of the fact that homosexuals could be
blackmailed. No one seemed to notice how absurd it was.
That takes having some functioning neurons. Sadly, those are hard to
find in the US.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Victoria Hirt" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 06:29:32 AM |
|
|
What's your point? I think most of us know that if you break the
rules in the U.S. military you will be punished. The rule is "Don't
ask, don't tell." And if you break that rule, then you are out.
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 04:53:35 GMT, frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The number of Arabic linguists discharged from
the military for violating its "don't ask, don't tell" policy is
higher than previously reported, according to records obtained by a
research group.
The group contends the records show that the military - at a time when
it and U.S. intelligence agencies don't have enough Arabic speakers -
is putting its anti-gay stance ahead of national security.
Between 1998 and 2004, the military discharged 20 Arabic and six Farsi
speakers, according to Department of Defense data obtained by the
Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military under a
Freedom of Information Act request.
The military previously confirmed that seven translators who
specialized in Arabic had been discharged between 1998 and 2003
because they were gay. The military did not break down the discharges
by year, but said some, but not all, of the additional 13 discharges
of Arabic speakers occurred in 2004.
Aaron Belkin, the center's director, said he wants the public to see
the real costs of "don't ask, don't tell."
"We had a language problem after 9/11 and we still have a language
problem," Belkin said Wednesday.
The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy allows gays and lesbians
to serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual orientation
private and do not engage in homosexual acts.
"The military is placing homophobia well ahead of national security,"
said Steve Ralls, spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, a nonprofit group that advocates for the rights of gay
military members. "It's rather appalling that in the weeks
leading up to 9/11 messages were coming in, waiting to be translated
... and at the same time they were firing people who could've done
that job."....."
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
17 Jan 2005 07:34:07 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please>
wrote:
What's your point? I think most of us know that if you break the
rules in the U.S. military you will be punished. The rule is "Don't
ask, don't tell." And if you break that rule, then you are out.
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
Such as Christian bigotry. That's a good question.
[]
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 10:51:21 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please>
wrote:
What's your point? I think most of us know that if you break the
rules in the U.S. military you will be punished. The rule is "Don't
ask, don't tell." And if you break that rule, then you are out.
The point? The point is that we're surrounded by hate
mongers. The admonishment not to "engage in homosexual
acts" is the height of Christian hatred equal to the
demand that Negros not "engage in being black."
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
You're a hate mongering Christian, obviously, and no
amount of reason would make it through that hate block
you suffer from.
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 04:53:35 GMT, frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 05:02:40 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please> said
in alt.atheism:
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
How is being gay "put[ting] their own desires above national
security"?
--
"I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their
numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion,
only His nonexistence could excuse Him."
-A. Einstein (Letter to Edgar Meyer, Jan. 2, 1915)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nivlem" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 11:01:57 PM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please> said
in alt.atheism:
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
How is being gay "put[ting] their own desires above national
security"?
Actually, the present policy on gays probably compromises national
security. It automatically gives you a handle by which to blackmail gay
personnel.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
16 Jan 2005 05:26:29 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 21:01:57 -0800, Nivlem <mlml@svn.net> said in
alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please> said
in alt.atheism:
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
How is being gay "put[ting] their own desires above national
security"?
Actually, the present policy on gays probably compromises national
security. It automatically gives you a handle by which to blackmail gay
personnel.
Which is a very good reason to change that policy to "we don't care".
--
"Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom. Atheism is
human concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind
cannot begin to understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an
old religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and
never has been, a religion at all. The definition of Atheism is magnificent in
its simplicity: Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of
madness."
[Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields]
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
17 Jan 2005 07:38:23 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 21:01:57 -0800, Nivlem <mlml@svn.net> wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please> said
in alt.atheism:
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
How is being gay "put[ting] their own desires above national
security"?
Actually, the present policy on gays probably compromises national
security. It automatically gives you a handle by which to blackmail gay
personnel.
No probably about it. Damned Christian bigots putting their desires
above national security.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 10:53:03 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:02:40 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please> said
in alt.atheism:
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
How is being gay "put[ting] their own desires above national
security"?
I was going to ask but decided that the individual is so
awash with hatred and bigotry that no rational answer
would be forthcoming.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
16 Jan 2005 05:26:55 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 04:53:03 GMT, frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE (Fredric
L. Rice) said in alt.atheism:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:02:40 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please> said
in alt.atheism:
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
How is being gay "put[ting] their own desires above national
security"?
I was going to ask but decided that the individual is so
awash with hatred and bigotry that no rational answer
would be forthcoming.
I thought the question was pretty much rhetorical.
--
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but
not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."
-A. Einstein (1929 -- Einstein Archive 33-272)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Last Liberal / ShyDavid / Desertphile" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
14 Jan 2005 07:01:05 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:02:40 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please> said
in alt.atheism:
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
Romania's Ceausescu (a demon incarnate) believed the same thing.
http://www.ceausescu.org/ceausescu_texts/overplanned_parenthood.htm
How is being gay "put[ting] their own desires above national
security"?
Being homosexual is hardly what people "desire," and it certainly
is obvious to any sane human being that being homosexual has
nothing at all to do with "national security."
--
"I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their
numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion,
only His nonexistence could excuse Him."
-A. Einstein (Letter to Edgar Meyer, Jan. 2, 1915)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
---
Sig Heil! A *FREE* random signature quote program
http://holysmoke.org/sig/index.html
I'd rather have a free mind than be "saved." - Robert Jackson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
16 Jan 2005 05:25:47 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 01:01:05 GMT, (The Last
Liberal / ShyDavid / Desertphile) said in alt.atheism:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:02:40 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:32 GMT, Victoria Hirt <no@spam.please> said
in alt.atheism:
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires above
national security?
How is being gay "put[ting] their own desires above national
security"?
Being homosexual is hardly what people "desire," and it certainly
is obvious to any sane human being that being homosexual has
nothing at all to do with "national security."
Exactly. Except, possibly, for the opinion of certain posters who
shall remain unnamed, but whose initials are VH.
--
"Given that you exist and that you are aware of your situation and
surroundings, you will find yourself in a place which has conditions
exactly suitable to your being there. If the environment was
hostile or incompatible in some important way then you would not be
there in the first place. Therefore the suitability and seeming
perfection of your universe cannot be taken as evidence of anything
more than your existence in it."
- Edward Warren, "The naturalistic fallacy"
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Hatred under fire |
15 Jan 2005 09:11:44 AM |
|
|
Victoria Hirt wrote:
What's your point? I think most of us know that if you break the
rules in the U.S. military you will be punished. The rule is "Don't
ask, don't tell." And if you break that rule, then you are out.
In addition why would you trust people who put their own desires
above
national security?
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 04:53:35 GMT, frice@skeptictank.orgREMOVE
(Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Jan 13, 4:54 PM EST
Military Firing of Gay Linguists Blasted
By KIM CURTIS
Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The number of Arabic linguists discharged from
the military for violating its "don't ask, don't tell" policy is
higher than previously reported, according to records obtained by a
research group.
The group contends the records show that the military - at a time
when
it and U.S. intelligence agencies don't have enough Arabic speakers
-
is putting its anti-gay stance ahead of national security.
Between 1998 and 2004, the military discharged 20 Arabic and six
Farsi
speakers, according to Department of Defense data obtained by the
Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military under a
Freedom of Information Act request.
The military previously confirmed that seven translators who
specialized in Arabic had been discharged between 1998 and 2003
because they were gay. The military did not break down the
discharges
by year, but said some, but not all, of the additional 13 discharges
of Arabic speakers occurred in 2004.
Aaron Belkin, the center's director, said he wants the public to see
the real costs of "don't ask, don't tell."
"We had a language problem after 9/11 and we still have a language
problem," Belkin said Wednesday.
The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy allows gays and
lesbians
to serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual
orientation
private and do not engage in homosexual acts.
"The military is placing homophobia well ahead of national
security,"
said Steve Ralls, spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, a nonprofit group that advocates for the rights of gay
military members. "It's rather appalling that in the weeks
leading up to 9/11 messages were coming in, waiting to be translated
... and at the same time they were firing people who could've done
that job."....."
Did they break that rule?
The article quoted says nothing about it.
If so, do you have a cite?
I have never heard of a straight soldier being discharged or
reprimanded for having sex with a foreign hooker. How successful would
a rule be that forbids soldiers from having sex of any kind during
their service?
Kermit
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
