WELCOME...

Thank you for checking out my blog. To submit comments, click on "COMMENTS" at the end of each post. To email a post to a friend, click the white envelope also at the end of each post. Contact Me

TO ADD YOUR BLOG HERE - Click the "Follow This Blog" on the right.

TO SUBSCRIBE - Click a subscription option on the right.

TO READ PAST POSTINGS - Scroll down to my "Blog Archives" on the right or enter a search word or phrase in the search box above.


Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Lt Dan Choi. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Lt Dan Choi. Sort by date Show all posts

May 15, 2009

JON STEWART RAILS AGAINST FIRING OF ARMY LINGUIST EXPERT LT. DAN CHOI

In my March 23rd posting, I did a story (with video) on the very public coming out of Lt. Dan Choi on the Rachel Maddow Show.

Lt. Choi is a graduate of West Point, a NY National Guard platoon leader, an Iraq war veteran and an Arabic linguist expert. He and 38 other West Point graduates risked their careers by coming out publicly and forming an organization called Knights Out, which they intended to be a support group that would offer help to their alma mater in educating future Army leaders on the need to accept and honor the sacrifices of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender troops.

At the time of his Maddow interview, Lt. Choi was still an active duty officer in good standing. Unfortunately, even after very personal, heartfelt and reasoned pleas from Choi not to be discharged under DADT, the Army went ahead and fired him anyway. Totally disregarding, as they had 53 times before, the inestimable value an Arabic linguist has to the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Below is a video segment of The Daily Show's Jon Stewart skewering Barack Obama and the military for the insane firing of Lt. Choi and others in the middle of two wars in two Arabic/Muslim countries.

According to LezGetReal.com, as a lead-in to the video segment with John Oliver, Stewart cautioned us to always check the fine print as the camera focused in on an Obama banner that was altered to read below the “Yes We Can” slogan the words “But That Doesn’t Necessarily Mean We Are Going To.”

Here's that video:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c
Dan Choi Is Gay
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Economic CrisisPolitical Humor


To date, the United States Military has fired over 12,000 service men and women for no other reason than the fact that they are gay. Many of the them were highly decorated war veterans.

If you would like to express your concerns directly to President Obama, you can send an email using the contact form at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

March 23, 2009

TWO VIDEOS OF NOTE...

Lt. Dan Choi is an active duty member of the United States Army, a graduate of West Point, a NY National Guard platoon leader, an Iraq veteran, and an Arab linguist. He and 38 other West Point graduates risked their careers by coming out publicly and forming an organization they call Knights Out.

According to The Advocate, Knights Out is intended to be a support group offering help to their alma mater to educate future Army leaders on the need to accept and honor the sacrifices of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender troops. Their goal is to form a connection between gay troops and Army administrators to provide an “open forum” for communication between gay West Point graduates and their fellow alumni. They would also like to serve in an advisory role to West Point leaders when the disastrous "don't ask, don't tell" policy is repealed.

Knights Out joins two other similar groups formed by graduates of the U.S. Naval and Air Force academies - the U.S. Naval Academy’s USNA Out and the U.S. Air Force Academy’s Blue Alliance.

Below is an interview Lt. Choi gave to Dr. Rachel Maddow on MSNBC last week.


It will be interesting to see whether or not the military pursues discharges for these courageous service men. Considering how badly the more than 12,500 discharges under DADT have already hurt the military's readiness and the fact that President Obama is actively working with the pentagon to end DADT, I would hope that NO ONE ELSE will be added to that discharge list.

Thanks also to Lez Get Real for their article and the video.


Portia De Rossi Apologizes For Marrying Ellen DeGeneres...
The following video is currently running on YouTube and has cumulatively received more than 50,000 hits so far. It's hilarious! Thanks Portia. Enjoy...

July 13, 2009

IS "DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL" MAKING FOOLS OF THE U.S. MILITARY?

In an excellent article published yesterday in Monterey County's (CA) The Herald, a powerful contrast was drawn between the countries that have allowed gay service members to serve openly for years and the United State's persistent and harmful Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) policy.

Since 1994, the most recent accounts have stated that more than 13,500 US service men and women have been discharged just for being gay. That includes dozens of Arabic linguist who were critical to the success of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and who the military admits were vital because of the difficulties of finding qualified replacements.

Contrast that to England where gay and lesbian service members proudly marched in uniform in the annual London Pride Parade this July 4th. Or to Australia where soldiers and sailors had their own float in Sydney's Gay Mardi Gras parade. Or to Israel, which is acknowledged to have one of the fiercest and best trained militaries in the world, where the army's own magazine earlier this year featured two male soldiers on the cover, hugging one another.

One of the arguments for keeping DADT in place has always been that allowing gays to serve openly would severally harm unit morale and cohesion. Another, more recent argument is that it would hurt recruitment efforts and drive scores of active duty personnel out of the military completely. But others see it differently...

U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy, the first Iraq war veteran elected to Congress, has just launched a campaign for a bill to repeal "don't ask, don't tell." He observed British troops in Iraq operating smoothly with a serve-openly policy and bristles at the contention that America's armed forces would suffer morale and recruiting problems if they followed suit.

"I take it as a personal affront to our warriors," said the Pennsylvania Democrat. "To say that other countries' soldiers are professional enough to handle this and American soldiers aren't is really a slap in the face."

In Israel where gays and lesbians have been proudly serving since 1993 (the same year DADT was approved), the open policy is now considered "thoroughly uncontroversial." In fact, their army recognizes the partners of gay officers as their bereaved next-of-kin after their deaths, eligible for the same benefits straight officer's next-of-kin receive. At promotions and other ceremonies, gay officers often have their partners by their sides.

I do understand that in this country, where homosexuality is still a hot button issue primarily because of the intrusive and manipulative tactics of some of the more fanatical religions, transition to an open military would be a little more problematic. BUT, it would be no more difficult than the readjustment the military had to go through when blacks were allowed to serve as integral parts within all units of the military.

It would be now, as it was then, up to the generals, commanders and sergeants to make sure that the transition is handled professionally. I agree with Representative Murphy, to think that this country's service men and women are incapable of doing what many of our allies have already done is a very big slap in the face to them.

It's long past time to get over this and move on.

UPDATE...
According to a list compiled by the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, the following countries allow gays to serve openly in their militaries:

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Britain, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Uruguay.

Also today, Jason Bellini reported in the Daily Beast that New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand intends to introduce an amendment that would put an 18-month moratorium on the discharge of gays serving in the military.

This would give congress time to work out the details of repealing DADT without harming the reputations of any more patriotic gay American soldiers. It would also be the first time since 1993 that senators will be forced to declare their position on the gay ban.

BTW - the latest discharges under DADT are West Point graduate and Iraq war veteran, Army National Guard Lt. Dan Choi, and a veteran of combat missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, Air Force Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach.

June 6, 2009

AFTER ACCUSATIONS OF BACKROOM DEALS HRC FINALLY JOINS ACTIVISTS AGAINST DADT

On May 10th I posted a blog article chastising President Obama for not taking any visible action to end the DADT policy despite overwhelming public support to repeal it and his numerous and clearly stated intentions to do just that when he was elected.

Two days later, on May 12th, I posted another story about the new study published by the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, that said the President does, indeed, have the authority to end DADT on his own authority.

The study said that the Commander-In-Chief already has the statutory authority to halt military separations under 10 U.S.C. § 12305, a law which Congress titled, “Authority of President to suspend certain laws relating to promotion, retirement, and separation.”

More importantly, the study also said that the provisions of the "stop-loss" law, which are granted by Congress, give the President authority to "suspend laws relating to separation when a national emergency has strained personnel requirements.” This is something that can be done immediately by the President alone.

So, given the fact that it has been almost a full month since this new information was made public, why hasn't Obama issued that order?

Well, according to a video piece (see below) posted at The Daily Beast by award winning gay journalist Jason Bellini, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and other "mainstream" gay rights organizations had reached an agreement with the White House to support delaying action on the DADT repeal until some of the other pressing GLBT rights legislation has been passed. To lend credence to this has been the HRC's somewhat milquetoast efforts to hold the administration's feet to the fire to get this repeal accomplished as promised.

Of course HRC immediately issued a statement denying that any deal was made. But despite that denial, many people in the gay community, especially the newest and youngest activists and activist organizations felt that there might be some truth to the accusation because blogs and websites burned up the internet with condemnations and accusations against HRC for not truly representing the goals of the now more fervent, in-the-street, activist movement.

In response to this growing maelstrom, HRC President Joe Solmonese finally came out and publicly called on President Obama to at least suspend DADT to stop the unwarranted and unwise discharges of sorely needed military personnel.

Gay News Net reported yesterday that when Chris Matthews on MSNBC's Hardball last night asked Solmonese whether he believes Obama has the authority to sign such an order and whether he should do so, Solmonese said, "Yes he can and yes I do." Matthews repeated the question, asking "Do you think he should?" Salmonese confirmed, "Yes I do."

Solmonese also said that Obama should sign the executive order immediately to halt further firings like that of Lt. Dan Choi, a West Point graduate who speaks Arabic. "The president has the opportunity to stop that from happening," Solmonese said. "We've asked him to do that and pressed him to do that and hope that he will."

If, in fact, the HRC did reach some kind of agreement to delay an all-out push for the repeal of DADT, I'm absolutely positive that there were no sinister, underlying motivations. I'm sure that they thought that strategy would be the most effective in securing all of the rights we're seeking. It's possible that they didn't even know about the recently revealed Presidential powers that Obama has to effect this change completely on his own authority.

Whatever reasons were behind HRC's past inaction, I'm glad to see them now using their substantial political capital to pressure Obama to suspend the firings. They're a good organization that has done a whole lot in advancing our causes in towns, cities, states and municipalities throughout the country. So let's not, as the saying goes, "throw the baby out with the bath water."

One thing for sure at this point - it is now almost impossible for the President and his administration to ignore the importance of immediate action on DADT. We're all watching Mr. President.

Below is Jason Bellini's video piece referred to above: