0
skyrider

BRADLEY MANNING: POSTER BOY FOR 'DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL'

Recommended Posts

December 1, 2010





The two biggest stories this week are WikiLeaks' continued publication of classified government documents, which did untold damage to America's national security interests, and the Democrats' fanatical determination to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" and allow gays to serve openly in the military.



The mole who allegedly gave WikiLeaks the mountains of secret documents is Pfc. Bradley Manning, Army intelligence analyst and angry gay.



We've heard 1 billion times about the Army translator who just wanted to serve his country, but was cashiered because of whom he loved.



I'll see your Army translator and raise you one Bradley Manning.



According to Bradley's online chats, he was in "an awkward place" both "emotionally and psychologically." So in a snit, he betrayed his country by orchestrating the greatest leak of classified intelligence in U.S. history.



Isn't that in the Army Code of Conduct? You must follow orders at all times. Exceptions will be made for servicemen in an awkward place. Now, who wants a hug? Waitress! Three more apple-tinis!"



According to The New York Times, Bradley sought "moral support" from his "self-described drag queen" boyfriend. Alas, he still felt out of sorts. So why not sell out his country?



In an online chat with a computer hacker, Bradley said he lifted the hundreds of thousands of classified documents by pretending to be listening to a CD labeled "Lady Gaga." Then he acted as if he were singing along with her hit song "Telephone" while frantically downloading classified documents.



I'm not a military man, but I think singing along to Lady Gaga would constitute "telling" under "don't ask, don't tell."



Do you have to actually wear a dress to be captured by the Army's "don't ask, don't tell" dragnet?



What constitutes being "openly" gay now? Bringing a spice rack to basic training? Attending morning drills decked out as a Cher impersonator? Following Anderson Cooper on Twitter?



Also, U.S. military, have you seen a picture of Bradley Manning? The photo I've seen is only from the waist up, but you get the feeling that he's wearing butt-less chaps underneath. He looks like a guy in a soldier costume at the Greenwich Village Halloween parade.



With any luck, Bradley's court-martial will be gayer than a Liza Minelli wedding. It could be the first court-martial in U.S. history to feature ice sculptures and a "Wizard of Oz"-themed gazebo. "Are you going to Bradley's court-martial? I hear Patti LaBelle is going to sing!"



Maybe there's a reason gays have traditionally been kept out of the intelligence services, apart from the fact that closeted gay men are easy to blackmail. Gays have always been suspicious of that rationale and perhaps they're right.



The most damaging spies in British history were the Cambridge Five, also called "the "Magnificent Five": Kim Philby, Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Donald Maclean and John Cairncross. They were highly placed members of British intelligence, all secretly working for the KGB.



The only one who wasn't gay was Philby. Burgess and Blunt were flamboyantly gay. Indeed, the Russians set Burgess up with a boyfriend as soon as he defected to the Soviet Union.



The Magnificent Five's American compatriot Michael Straight was -- ironically -- bisexual, as was Whittaker Chambers, at least during the period that he was a spy. And of course, there's David Brock.



So many Soviet spies were gay that, according to intelligence reporter Phillip Knightley, the Comintern was referred to as "the Homintern." (I would have called it the "Gay G.B.")



Bradley's friends told the Times they suspected "his desperation for acceptance -- or delusions of grandeur" may have prompted his document dump.



Let's check our "Gay Profile at a Glance" and ... let's see ... desperate for acceptance ... delusions of grandeur ... yep, they're both on the gay subset list!



Obviously, the vast majority of gays are loyal Americans -- and witty and stylish to boot! But a small percentage of gays are going to be narcissistic hothouse flowers like Bradley Manning.



Couldn't they just work for JetBlue? America would be a lot safer right now if gays in an "awkward place" psychologically could do no more damage than grabbing a couple of beers and sliding down the emergency chute.



Look at the disaster one gay created under our punishing "don't ask, don't tell" policy. What else awaits America with the overturning of a policy that was probably put there for a reason (apart from being the only thing Bill Clinton ever did that I agreed with)?



Liberals don't care. Their approach is to rip out society's foundations without asking if they serve any purpose.



Why do we have immigration laws? What's with these borders? Why do we have the institution of marriage, anyway? What do we need standardized tests for? Hey, I like Keith Richards -- why not make heroin legal? Let's take a sledgehammer to all these load-bearing walls and just see what happens!



For liberals, gays in the military is a win-win proposition. Either gays in the military works, or it wrecks the military, both of which outcomes they enthusiastically support.



But since you brought up gays in the military, liberals, let's talk about Bradley Manning. He apparently released hundreds of thousands of classified government documents as a result of being a gay man in "an awkward place."



Any discussion of "don't ask, don't tell" should begin with Bradley Manning. Live by the sad anecdote, die by the sad anecdote.



http://www.anncoulter.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We really need to find you a black Muslim liberal gay man on unemployment comp, who literally steps on copies of the Constitution (and uses a hand-cam!), to rage against. Then you could consolidate all your threads into one! :)
Oh, P.S. - Ann Coulter is Satan's spewie, so consider the source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Look at the disaster one gay created under our punishing
>"don't ask, don't tell" policy.

Agreed. Do we really want this to happen more often?

>Maybe there's a reason gays have traditionally been kept out of
>the intelligence services, apart from the fact that closeted gay men are
>easy to blackmail.

He's hit the nail on the head there. Let them come out of the closet, and we will stop enabling blackmailers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

apart from the fact that closeted gay men are easy to blackmail.



That is EXACTLY why DADT should be revoked. Take away the option of blackmail.



That's so racist. Whites have mail, too.



*groan*
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Liberals don't care. Their approach is to rip out society's foundations without asking if they serve any purpose.



She kinda got a point there: rampant bigotry has long been a foundation of most societies.

Quote

Any discussion of "don't ask, don't tell" should begin with Bradley Manning.



Yes. Because, as sensible person knows, all gay men are untrustworthy traitors with delusions of grandeur.

I've got to hand it to you Skyrider, every time I think you've found the most insane tract of mentally deficient bullshit imaginable, a few weeks later you always find a way to prove me wrong.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>>Liberals don't care. Their approach is to rip out society's foundations
>>without asking if they serve any purpose.


>She kinda got a point there: rampant bigotry has long been a foundation
>of most societies.

Well, forget bigotry. Liberals ripped out the foundation of agricultural labor in the US without a single thought for the plantation owners. And women voting? Did any liberal ever ask themselves, just once, if that guy with the uppity, know-it-all wife was OK with her voting? I doubt it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[Reply]Maybe there's a reason gays have traditionally been kept out of the intelligence services, apart from the fact that closeted gay men are easy to blackmail.



That, to me, is the top reason to cease the ban on homosexuals. From an operational security standpoint, the banning of gays puts sexual orientation as a basis for blackmail. If we allow gays to serve, the opportunity to blackmail a homosexual servicemember disappears.

That this is not recognized by those who prefer the anti-homosexual policies is shocking.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

We really need to find you a black Muslim liberal gay man on unemployment comp, who literally steps on copies of the Constitution (and uses a hand-cam!), to rage against. Then you could consolidate all your threads into one! :)
Oh, P.S. - Ann Coulter is Satan's spewie, so consider the source.



COOOL less people under the bed to watch for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, I'm confused.

Are you saying we should stop treating people different than us like subhumans so that they won't take advantage of any opportunity to get back at us?

Or are you saying that the people we treat like shit should never be given any chances at any responsibility because they will take advantage of those opportunities to have their revenge?
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Ok, I'm confused.

Are you saying...



He's not saying anything, he's just 'putting it out there for discussion'.

That way he gets to judge the responses before he lets us know if he ever actually agreed with it or not:S
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with Ann Coulter is that I can not get past her screaming in print to find out whether I agree with her or not. Same thing with Amazon.

The idea that homosexuals are unfit for combat would have kept Alexander the Great at home, had he subscribed to it. The same goes for some of the most brilliant military men (and perhaps women, witness the Amazons...) throughout history.

Some of the problems we have had with security breaches originating with gays have more to do with our society in general than with the military per se. Though an outsider to the "gay world," I have lived in areas with very large gay populations, and have been exposed to some of the realities of their lifestyle.

One guy, who was very gay (he died of cancer), was asked by my brother why he had a wife. He responded that he married to be "normal," since "nobody wants to be a pariah." He later accepted the fact that he was gay, and his wife had already figured it out and was at peace with it.

As a matter of survival, many gays have lived a lie for the bulk of their lives. Since admission to their sexual persuasion could result in expressions of disapproval ranging from shunning to unemployment to severe beatings to imprisonment to death, many gays are understandably leery about letting on their sexual persuasion.

The EPQ (embarrassing personal question) disqualifier for employment with the NSA is "have you had an adult homosexual experience?" Homosexuality is up there with kleptomania and drug use, in that the willingness to engage in proscribed activity is enough to remove one from consideration.

It is, of course ironic, that Alan Turing was one of the most gifted cryptanalysts that ever lived, and he was destroyed for his homosexuality.

Would I share a foxhole with a homosexual? If they could shoot straight and stay awake on watch, you had better believe it. When you're up to your ass in gomers and things are going bang around you, the last thing I am worried about is who someone does or does not sleep with.

Similarly, my only objection to women in combat is if they are not strong enough to carry me back to safety should I be wounded. If you have a woman who can saddle up a 65 pound rucksack plus a machine gun and hump it 14 miles before nightfall, I want her on my fire team.

As James Webb noted, if you train by touch-football rules it does not help you much when you go up against the Green Bay Packers. When going into combat, it is best to count on facing the Varsity.

In any event, from the standpoint of reliability in combat, the idea that sexual orientation is a factor is absurd. There have always been stellar combat leaders whose homosexuality was accepted, if not openly acknowledged. I have been honored to know a number of them.

From the standpoint of security, however, the track record of gays in the U.S. intelligence services has been less than stellar. Perhaps allowing them to let on that they are gay, while still holding them to "conduct unbecoming" standards (spare me the details, dude, that's too much information...) would change this. If everything one does is a Felony, the whole right/wrong thing is seen from a rather skewed perspective.

Had the person who leaked all these documents openly aligned himself with the Baha'i faith, one could expect rather a groundswell of opinion against the dastardly Baha'i. Unfortunately for the gay community, he is a cranky homosexual.

When voting for a bill, the options are pretty much "aye" or "nay;" there is no box for "it is not that simple."

While I am in favor of universal conscription, and for service as a prerequisite for citizenship a la "Starship Troopers," I think that a form of DADT that protects gays from malicious outing is the best we can do for the moment.

In any event, given all the things I need to worry about, I am glad this is not one of them.


BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one that just cain't hep hissef:ph34r::ph34r::ph34r:

Just keep it up shurly... cause I am that woman that can pick up your scrawny ass while carryin that pack and all the other stuff.:ph34r::ph34r::ph34r:

I have seen plenty of guys that can't hack that standard you set.



Personally I think EVERY job should be open to ANYONE who wishes to volunteer for it. If you have the apptitude for it.. and you can hack the same standard, you get the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Another one that just cain't hep hissef:ph34r::ph34r::ph34r:



Evidently you missed the part where he said he had no problems serving with gay people.

Reading really *is* fundamental.

Quote

Just keep it up shurly... cause I am that woman that can pick up your scrawny ass while carryin that pack and all the other stuff.:ph34r::ph34r::ph34r:

I have seen plenty of guys that can't hack that standard you set.



Then they shouldn't have the job.

Quote

Personally I think EVERY job should be open to ANYONE who wishes to volunteer for it. If you have the apptitude for it.. and you can hack the same standard, you get the job.



Then the three of us agree on the subject.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Another one that just cain't hep hissef:ph34r::ph34r::ph34r:

Just keep it up shurly... cause I am that woman that can pick up your scrawny ass while carryin that pack and all the other stuff.:ph34r::ph34r::ph34r:

Quote



If my weight is reduced by traumatic amputation and I need a little help getting to a medevac, I will most assuredly appreciate your demonstration of said ability.




I have seen plenty of guys that can't hack that standard you set.
Quote



Me too. The washout rate from my class in Jump School, of those who qualified to get in in the first place, was 70%.




Personally I think EVERY job should be open to ANYONE who wishes to volunteer for it. If you have the apptitude for it.. and you can hack the same standard, you get the job.


Roger that. I do not give a rat's ass WHAT kind of special privilege someone claims - whether they are from a favored ethnic group or their daddy was a Senator - if they can not deliver. If, however, someone is from a favored ethnic group or their daddy was a Senator and they do a brilliant job, all I care about is the fact that they are committed to doing a brilliant job and deliver.

Screw it - as Joe Namath said, "If you've got it, flaunt it!"


BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Another one that just cain't hep hissef:ph34r::ph34r::ph34r:



Evidently you missed the part where he said he had no problems serving with gay people.

Reading really *is* fundamental.

Quote

Just keep it up shurly... cause I am that woman that can pick up your scrawny ass while carryin that pack and all the other stuff.:ph34r::ph34r::ph34r:

I have seen plenty of guys that can't hack that standard you set.



Then they shouldn't have the job.

Quote

Personally I think EVERY job should be open to ANYONE who wishes to volunteer for it. If you have the apptitude for it.. and you can hack the same standard, you get the job.



Then the three of us agree on the subject.




Quote

The problem with Ann Coulter is that I can not get past her screaming in print to find out whether I agree with her or not. Same thing with Amazon.



What are those rules again MIKEEE, but I do so love the attention and being the part of any generic slam that anyone wishes to make????


Quote

Reading really *is* fundamental.




Yes.... yes it *is*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What are those rules again MIKEEE, but I do so love the attention and being the part of any generic slam that anyone wishes to make????



What rules would those be - that you get a free pass on slamming people?

Given that you make more insulting / inflammatory posts than any three other people in this sub-forum, the 'innocent victim' act is a bit...threadbare.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

What are those rules again MIKEEE, but I do so love the attention and being the part of any generic slam that anyone wishes to make????



What rules would those be - that you get a free pass on slamming people?

Given that you make more insulting / inflammatory posts than any three other people in this sub-forum, the 'innocent victim' act is a bit...threadbare.


Gee no comment on the rest huh.... go figger

Sorry but if I would get a banning or a warning for something similar pardon me if I point out a similar post... now untwist those little girl panties and suck it up cupiedoll.:ph34r::ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

What are those rules again MIKEEE, but I do so love the attention and being the part of any generic slam that anyone wishes to make????



What rules would those be - that you get a free pass on slamming people?

Given that you make more insulting / inflammatory posts than any three other people in this sub-forum, the 'innocent victim' act is a bit...threadbare.


Gee no comment on the rest huh.... go figger

Sorry but if I would get a banning or a warning for something similar pardon me if I point out a similar post... now untwist those little girl panties and suck it up cupiedoll.:ph34r::ph34r:


Thanks for (yet again) proving my point - and his.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

That is EXACTLY why DADT should be revoked. Take away the option of blackmail.



Mike, I served as a lesbian in the somewhat darker years before DADT and I was fully prepared to go to the brig, because that was a not entirely uncommon parking place for gays awaiting dishonorable discharge, before I would allow anyone to blackmail me.

It was, for me and many of my gay and lesbian friends, a topic of discussion. We wanted to serve for many reasons, and as odd as it might sound we were willing to betray an oath in so far as we had to swear we were not gay to enlist, but we would not betray that oath to serve our country otherwise, even if it meant imprisonment and shame.

As far as this jackoff Manning goes, he's just a twit. His sexuality has nothing to do with it.
Owned by Remi #?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Mike, I served as a lesbian in the somewhat darker years before DADT and I was fully prepared to go to the brig, because that was a not entirely uncommon parking place for gays awaiting dishonorable discharge, before I would allow anyone to blackmail me.

It was, for me and many of my gay and lesbian friends, a topic of discussion. We wanted to serve for many reasons, and as odd as it might sound we were willing to betray an oath in so far as we had to swear we were not gay to enlist, but we would not betray that oath to serve our country otherwise, even if it meant imprisonment and shame.



Thank you for your service, and for that of your friends.

Quote

As far as this jackoff Manning goes, he's just a twit. His sexuality has nothing to do with it.



Agreed.

From Admiral Mullen:
Quote

Mullen told a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing that the military is based on meritocracy, "what you do, not who you are." He said if Congress changes the don't ask, don't tell policy then the U.S. military will comply.

And if some people have a problem with that, they may not want to join the service.

"Should repeal occur, some soldiers and Marines may want separate shower facilities. Some may ask for different berthing. Some may even quit the service," Mullen said. "We'll deal with that."

Mullen added that "there is no gray area" in the debate when it comes to standards of conduct in the military.

"We treat each other with respect or we find another place to work. Period," he said.


Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

As far as this jackoff Manning goes, he's just a twit. His sexuality has nothing to do with it.



Exactly. Leave it to Coulter and her followers to turn this into an issue about sexuality. Robert Hannsen and Aldrich Ames are two individuals who caused far more damage than Manning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to bother to grace that post with a serious response, but

Quote


I'm not a military man, but I think singing along to Lady Gaga would constitute "telling" under "don't ask, don't tell."



That was pretty damn funny:D
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0