DADT hypocrisy

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by DC_DEEP, Jun 9, 2007.

  1. DC_DEEP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    9,029
    Likes Received:
    12
    Well, well, I figured it would come to this at some point.

    I can't imagine the kind of stress this guy has gone through in this process. Here's the story, copied from 365Gay.com....

    Gay Sailor Fired Under DADT, Called Back Up, Fired Again, Could Be Called Up Again
    by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff


    Posted: June 7, 2007 - 11:00 am ET
    (Washington) An openly gay sailor, discharged in 2005 under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", then called up again last year and again dismissed under DADT this year could be called up again according to a report.

    Stars and Stripes, the military newspaper reports that Petty Officer 2nd Class Jason Knight's second round of discharge papers do not mention that he was fired for being gay - the same omission that led to his being recalled last year.

    Instead, the discharge papers say "completion of required active service." His recall code is noted as RE-1, with a reserve obligation ending in April 2009.

    That means that Knight is being placed in the reserves and could be recalled at any time.

    “I can’t do anything but laugh,” Knight told Stars and Stripes in a telephone interview. “It’s getting to the point of being ridiculous,” he said.
    Knight was first discharged in 2005 after coming out publicly. The military recalled him earlier this year. But following a story in May in Stars and Stripes the Navy notified Knight he was being dropped because of DADT which bars gays from serving openly.

    He was sent packing just weeks before he was to complete his one-year commitment with the Navy.

    Knight tells the military paper that he was called to the Judge Advocate General’s office at a Navy base in San Diego and went through the paperwork with a military lawyer, signing forms that indicated he was to be discharged for "homosexual conduct."

    But he said that when he got his official DD-214 separation forms in the mail, they mentioned nothing of the sort. Instead, Knight was again transferred to the Naval Reserve and "subject to active duty recall/annual screening."

    Questioned about the discrepancy by Stars and Stripes the Navy would say only that it would look into the situation.

    In the original Stars and Stripes article on Knight, a trained Hebrew linguist, he said that, having ‘come out’ to his command during his previous enlistment, he saw no reason to hide his sexual orientation on his second tour of duty.

    The publication also interviewed a number of Knight’s colleagues who spoke out in support of him.

    "He’s better than the average sailor at his job," Bill Driver, the leading petty officer of Knight’s 15-person customs crew in Kuwait, told the paper.

    "It’s not at all a strange situation. As open as he is now, it was under wraps for quite a while. It wasn’t an issue at work."

    Two lawsuits challenging DADT are underway. One, by the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network is underway in federal court in Boston and a second, by Log Cabin Republicans, is before a federal court in California.

    In February, Congressman Marty Meehan (D-MA), chair of the House Armed Services Sub-Committee on Oversight and Investigations, reintroduced legislation to repeal the law.

    The Democratic contenders for the presidency all oppose Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The Republican candidates favor keeping it.
    ©365Gay.com 2007

    If you would like to see the story on their website (several links to related articles and cited material) here's the link:

    Sailor story
     
  2. SteveHd

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,849
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Daytona
    I have a low opinion of 365gay.com. If that can be sourced to the m/s/m, then I'll read it.
     
  3. DC_DEEP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    9,029
    Likes Received:
    12
    I'm not sure what you mean by m/s/m.

    Would you trust (or have a higher opinion) of The Stars and Stripes, which was referenced, or the Servicemembers' Legal Defense Network?

    I'm not sure what you are disputing - you won't read the article because you don't like 365gay.com, or you think it's inaccurate because it was reported on 365gay.com?
     
  4. SteveHd

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,849
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Daytona
    DC_DEEP, I meant the so-called main stream media. I regard 365gay "news" as borderline tabloid. The two links you mentioned are excellent for a military story. I have to be honest and say I only briefly looked at the 365gay piece.
     
  5. B_NineInchCock_160IQ

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,378
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    where the sun never sets
    This sounds like more a case of stupidity than hypocrisy.
     
  6. DC_DEEP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    9,029
    Likes Received:
    12
    Not really, NIC. There are several references to "the narrative reason" for his discharge, in his discharge papers. The characterization of a servicemember's discharge (honorable, other than honorable, dishonorable, medical, whatever) before completion of contract is pretty much up to his OIC or whatever supervisor has to sign the papers. Most who are discharged under DADT are dishonorably discharged. As most of the articles about him have mentioned, some servicemembers in critical specialties have been discharged in such a way that, if the Pentagon gets really desperate, they can recall even those members whom they have branded as "unsuitable for service".

    For them to say homosexuals are "unfit for service (unless we really decide we need them)" is so incredibly insulting.

    One of the duties I had to do while in the USMC was paperwork. Lots and lots of paperwork. My "additional billet" within my unit was admin clerk. Morning reports, quarterly reports, annual reports, inprocessing Marines, outprocessing marines, processing leave requests, receiving and routing all incoming and outgoing official correspondence.

    If a mistake was made on this sailor's first discharge, I would raise an eyebrow, but say "mistakes do occasionally happen." For the exact same mistake to happen twice to the same sailor, I claim "bullshit - no mistake!" without hesitation or reservation. If a Marine had processed in at my unit, and had something like that previously in his SRB, it would have been severely scrutinized before he got processed out again. Actually, if it had come across my desk when he was recalled after his first DADT discharge, I would have rejected his recall orders and requested clarification from the Secretary of the Navy.

    No, I don't think it was a mistake. Not the first time, and certainly not the second time. The US Military just wants to be able to discriminate against homosexuals - but only when it's convenient. If it is to their advantage to ignore their own policy, that is exactly what will happen.
     
  7. Lex

    Lex
    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    9,536
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
    Agreed. I think every person who is willing and able should be allowed to serve if they meet the requirements. Being gay has nothing to do with "fitness to serve." I know a LOT of retired and active gay servicemen. We would not have at least a third of the forces we have now if they expelled all the gay men and women that are there.

    As a gov't function, this does not surprise me. They do what they want when it serves the purpose at the given time.

    So, instead of educating its membership so that they can train, work and fight alongside ANY fellow American, they would rather have the gay men and women run around and hide or not serve at all.

    It's all rather sad.
     
  8. SpeedoGuy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    4,229
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    That's what always galls me about bureacracies: Selective interpretation and enforcement of policy.

    It makes one wonder if rentention and recruitment problems will ever become so big that enforcement of DADT won't be so vigorously applied.
     
  9. DC_DEEP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    9,029
    Likes Received:
    12
    Well, that's part of the point of my posts and the articles. Recruitment and retention are falling below levels necessary to keep King George in his imperial quests. Linguists, especially those who specialize in middle eastern languages, are in demand.

    So, now, I guess it's "average queers are unfit for duty. Queers with skills we especially need are welcome."
     
Draft saved Draft deleted