Video: Don't tell Rachel not to ask -- she has important questions
**UPDATE: And now, the new rules: Pentagon Changes Rules for Discharging Gays [AP/NYT]
Class: can you say "51-days of HYPE now deflated like a cheap balloon"?
1. Third party outings are NOT now banned. Gates simply said that higher levels of officers would now consider such information and outers would need to testify under oath. Such information can STILL be used to discharge people. It's not any more "humane" if it's a one-star general kicking people to the curb.
The "grudge" outers are THE MOST LIKELY to be willing to do that. The people who outed both Victor Fehrebach and Margie Witt would no doubt have been willing to do that.
It was TRUE that he and Witt ARE gay and gays ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SERVE so they would STILL be discharged!!!!!!!!!!!!
2. "These changes are meant to provide a greater measure of common sense and common decency"??? TO DADT? That's like saying a wife beater will only continue to beat his wife using "common sense and common decency." A nonsensical and indecent policy can only be righted by eliminating it ENTIRELY and IMMEDIATELY.
3. And they want to spend MORE tax dollars for essentially a RETRIAL of the cases of anyone not yet fully discharged who choose to go through that ordeal????? Where's the "common sense" in that? And Margie Witt wouldn't benefit anyway as she's already been discharged.
Gates announced no "new policies' in relation to the 9th Circuit's ruling in Witt's case which he PROMISED the Senate would also be announced in 45 days [nearly A YEAR after they should have been].
4. The branches have 30 days to conform regulations BUT the "changes" will take effect immediately? THEN why is he opposed to stopping discharges immediately upon repeal and then changing the regs on paper?
5. Protection from information given to lawyers and security clearance investigators were ALREADY covered. He's padding.
6. Showing his true colors, Gates didn’t really raise the bar on discharges, but he’s raised the bar AGAIN on “permission” from hoi polloi to repeal. On Feb. 2nd, they suddenly claimed that, in addition to straight servicemembers, they had to consult their "families" about the alleged “impact” of repeal. NOW he's added "influencers," too. WHAT the hell does that mean? Who's next? Their high school football coach? Their Boy Scout leader? The girl they took to the prom?
Our latest phony Friend of the Gays ADM. Mullen said they must get "information from those it will affect most.” Attention, Sir! That would be GAY SERVICEMEMBERS!!!!!!!!!!
7. Once again, they warn of “difficult and complex issues” WITHOUT documenting what those are.
“Those who take the point of view that there must be a long period of transition are simply setting up a straw man to hide their real agenda, which is to maintain the current ban. Given these arguments, it is critical that the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell not be perceived as a complicated puzzle requiring complex solutions to minor problems. Substantial research finds that transitioning to an inclusive policy would be significantly less difficult than proponents of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell claim.” – The Center for American Progress.
This is nothing but a stunt to further narcotize people into believing they actually want repeal to happen when all they REALLY want is to run out the clock until the chance for repeal is dead!
Posted by: Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com | Mar 25, 2010 12:48:26 PMcomments powered by Disqus