First Marine injured in Iraq comes out!

Sgt. Eric Alva, the first Marine injured in Iraq is stepping forward to oppose Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

In the Washington Post, Alva, who lost his right leg to a landmine, speaks out.

More after the break...

This is a very high-profile coming out story.

Once a Marine, always a Marine. That pretty much sums up the life of retired Sgt. Eric Alva, who was sworn into the Marine Corps at 19, stationed in Somalia and Japan and lost his right leg when he stepped on a land mine on March 21, 2003, the first day of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

As the war's first injured soldier, Alva was an instant celebrity. He was on "Oprah." President Bush awarded him the Purple Heart. Donald Rumsfeld visited. And strangers in Alva's native San Antonio still insist on paying for his dinner at Chili's. Last fall Alva, 36, contacted the Human Rights Campaign, the gay rights group, and asked to be involved in its lobbying effort. Today he'll stand alongside Rep. Martin Meehan (D-Mass.) when he introduces a bill to repeal the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy on gay, lesbian and bisexual military personnel.

I think Alva's story will resonate:

"The truth is, something's wrong with this ban. I have to say something. I mean, you're asking men and women to lie about their orientation, to keep their personal lives private, so they can defend the rights and freedoms of others in this country...."

Given that a majority of Americans now supports ending DADT and the success of all our major allies in integrating their own military forces, it will be interesting to see how effective republicans will be in defending the ban.

Update:

Thanks to tvb for the link: Eric Alva wrote an article today over at Huffington Post.

•  Tip Jar.

  I think this guy is terrific!

  by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:15:24 AM PDT

  •  Agreed. I'm just sorry he had to lose his leg

    in order to get focus on the ridiculousness of DADT policies.

    Thanks for the diary, homogenius. And triple kudos and hugs to Sgt. Alva for bringing the issue to the forefront.

    by bleeding heart on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 12:00:48 PM PDT

    •  I'm sorry he had to lose a leg for this fiasco.

      Have a nice day, George W. (NOT)

      by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 12:07:05 PM PDT

      •  And I thought he was coming home

        when I read the title.

        Now he can fight for freedom one more time... A true hero.

        by FishOutofWater on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:32:10 PM PDT

        •  pic

          
          

          by sgary on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 02:51:41 PM PDT

  •  Well...

    there go his benefits...

    by kmiddle on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 12:54:37 PM PDT

    •  No shit.

      They've done that before. Hell, they even went after an upper echelon officer for testifying against DADT--his son was discharged for being gay.

      One non-gay military women was threatened with losing her children if she didn't cooperate with a witch hunt for lesbians on one base.

      They've tried to take away retirements, health benefits, you name it. They are vicious, heartless bastards.

      by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:01:26 PM PDT

    •  His benefits are intact.

      He was retired honorably. I doubt he is going to confess to (or be prosecuted for) anything he did on active duty.  Maybe he abstained while on active duty...which is all that's required.

      (Ok, that is a long shot)

      But since nothing apparently happened on active duty, his benefits are not going to be changed.

      Best regards,

      by USAFguy on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:06:08 PM PDT

      •  They've done it before.

        Specifically, they have tried to deny retirement benes to honorably discharged personnel who spoke out.

        by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:28:36 PM PDT

        •  He did admit

          to lying on his (pre-DADT) application which specifically asked if he was gay.

          by ebohlman on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 02:28:16 PM PDT

          •  However

            I have a feeling that if the Army or the Department of Veterans' Affairs goes after him, there will be a backlash against this move, and it will be more likely that DADTDP will be overturned.

            by Crisis Corps Volunteer on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 05:02:38 PM PDT

            •  Also

              when he first applied to the Marines, he might have honestly thought, at the time, that he wasn't gay, or, that even if he had erotic feelings towards men, that it was a temporary phase he would get through.

              by Crisis Corps Volunteer on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 05:05:01 PM PDT

              •  He's admitted lying on the application

                So when you were applying to be a Marine in 1990, before "Don’t ask, don’t tell" was implemented, the application asked for your sexual orientation?

                It did.

                What did you put down?

                I lied, I lied. The lying is what I hated most — why I had to do it, why I had to keep on doing it, the toll it took on me.

                From Defending his country, but not its don't ask, don't tell policy.

                by treetop57 on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 05:49:25 PM PDT

            •  I know a passel of ACLU-type lawyers

              just waiting for this chance challenge. Gay people have exponentially greater disposable income with some very high profile BILLIONAIREs. DOD will be mincemeat in discovery.  

              by llbear on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 06:34:17 PM PDT

              •  Exponentially? Whoa there...

                This is a widely held myth. It was started in the early '90s by some gay marketing people touting the value of marketing to gay communities. It has been perpetuated by the gay-bashing right-wing talibangelicals as a reason why we don't need civil rights protections (i.e., we're all rich).

                The only published research data show that gay men lag slightly behind their hetero counterparts and lesbians are even further behind (given the double whammy--being gay AND female).  Gay families endure the added burden of no spouse or dependent health benefits, greater tax burden, and legal fees associated with trying to secure the protections granted to hetero families.

                Yes, there are some high-profile wealthy individuals in our communities. But most emphatically do NOT have 'exponentially greater disposable income'.

                by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 06:48:01 PM PDT

                •  thank you homogenius

                  read more on actual lgbt income patterns...

                  by decafdyke on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 07:47:54 PM PDT

                •  I read to learn

                  And am glad to get my head turned in the right direction. Thanks for the yank.

                  by llbear on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 07:58:00 PM PDT

                •  The reason gay men appear to have higher incomes

                  is that gay men on average are better educated than average straight men. Gay men on average have more and higher degrees than straight guys. Yet, gay men do not make as much as comparably educated straight guys on average. But they make more than the average, just not what their educational level says they should make. I have known many gay guys with masters and doctoral degrees who never could get better than high level clerical/ administrative positions.

                  There appear to be many gay men with impressive academic degrees; there appear to be very few openly gay academics with prestigious positions. Even in fields where gay men predominate, like classical studies, most of the stars of the field are straight. My impression has always been that the further down the academic totem pole one goes, the more openly gay men there are. Junior colleges are filled with gay teachers; Ivy League schools are not.

                  by DaleA on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 08:20:49 PM PDT

                  •  And they dress better!

                    I kid because I love!

                    -5.88, -6.82

                    by Debby on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 10:49:49 PM PDT

                    •  Debby - I'm sorry

                      but I'm Oscar to the world's Felix

                      I'm a pi-ty-ful to behold, but I make everyone else look so good.

                      by llbear on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:43:47 PM PDT

                      •  You & I would sooooo get along !

                        I'm sitting here in my lovely Black Watch tartan bathrobe that has a huge bleached-out spot due to a laundry accident. Will I give it up ? Oh hell no, it's just now well broke in !

                        Ratty t-shirts ? Motor oil stained blue jeans ? Oh yeah, that's my kinda fashion !

                        Notice : You've just been Wolf-Flirted ®^TM

                        <Canine-Toothy Grin>

                        by The Werewolf Prophet on Thu Mar 01, 2007 at 05:50:46 AM PDT

                        •  OMG

                                                               
                          well, you know what they say about me - old and bold and a sight to behold

                          by llbear on Thu Mar 01, 2007 at 06:41:31 AM PDT

                  •  I can name exceptions for you, though, at least

                    in my field, at at least two Ivy League institutions.  I think it depends on the field.

                    by concernedamerican on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:36:53 PM PDT

              •  I recommended you because I agree we've

                needed someone with military "hero" creds to challenge DADT.  BUT I want to point out that you are wrong about the "exponentially greater disposable income" thing.  It is a gross generalization that is not based in facts.  It reminds me, uncomfortably, of how in Nazi Germany the standard wisdom about Jews was that they had so much more money than everyone else.  And you know what they did to the Jews in Nazi Germany....

                by concernedamerican on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:35:40 PM PDT

      •  Did he actually retire?

        He joined less than 20 years ago. I know most of the articles says he's retired, but newspaper articles say that all the time about people who separate before they can retire. But the fact that a) they almost all say that and b) I know little about what can happen to someone who is injured (are there early retirement possibilities?) means that it quite possibly could be true.

        by guppymoo on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 07:18:03 PM PDT

        •  Medically Retired

          The military can basically force you or most of the time asks you if you would like to retire due to medical conditions.  If they feel that you aren't a good asset anymore due to medical conditions you can retire at any point in your career, with full retirement benefits.

          by Daimeon on Thu Mar 01, 2007 at 07:45:49 AM PDT

  •  thank you homogenius...

    for this story. I too am an ex-marine, serving from" '74 to '79, and I too am gay. I also served proudly while living a lie, although I never saw war.

    This DADT policy must go! It is absurd to ask gay Americans to lie about who they are while asking them to fight and die  in order to bring "freedom" to Iraq.

    I offer my heartfelt gratitude to Sgt. Alva for standing up for truth. Sir, you are a hero, in more ways than one, and I thank you.

    by Rumarhazzit on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 02:00:06 PM PDT

    •  Thank you, man.

      We need to really support our service personnel. That's how I was raised. Where are the patriotic Americans? Where is the V-F-fucking-W?

      Sgt. Alva rocks.

      And there are no ex-marines. I'm just sayin'.

      by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 02:08:25 PM PDT

      •  There are no ex-marines.....

        Excellent, homogenious. And true.

        As for DADT, remember the translator scandals, where Arabic translators were being discharged, even as a critical shortage of their skills was probably costing American lives. DADT and wingnut republicans makes me want to vomit, and that's putting it mildly!!

        by Rumarhazzit on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:13:24 PM PDT

    •  We're everywhere

      I served in 82-86. Fortunately never saw combat, but came very close at one time. I came out six months before being honorably discharged.

      A good way for DADT to be repealed once and for all is for all GLB Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines to come out en-masse. When the military sees how many they will have to process out, they'll back down.

      by Cali Techie on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 04:15:14 PM PDT

      •  Awesome Cali Techie..

        I started coming out to most of my good friends about 6 months before I was discharged. This was in the late 70's, and even back then they were all very receptive and cool with it. As a matter of fact, by coming out as I did, I found out that one of my best buddies was also gay - still haven't figured out how we never ran into each other after hours at one of the bathhouses out in town. This whole DADT thing is totally political. The guys and girls in the military, for the most part, are cool with gays serving openly.

        by Rumarhazzit on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 04:42:08 PM PDT

        •  I could tell you stories

          All in all everyone was cool with it. Top basically told everyone they'd better be or else. I have a feeling he was a member of the family too. I was basically told not to make a big deal out of it or let it affect my work and it would be cool.

          Funny things started happening after I came out. Not only did other gays in my unit start coming out to me (and it was a substantial number, more than 10 percent), but I used to get propositioned by some of the "straight" guys in my unit as well. I think the only ones who had any problems with it were the folks back in Washington.

          Back then my advice to other gays was "keep your head down and get out at the end of your contract." Now that I have the benefit of more life experiences and I'm a bit less intimidated by authority, I would advise everyone to come out but do it all at the same time so they would see just how many of us are in there and the important roles we fill. The military has already been shamed by discharging Arabic Linguists because they happened to be gay. It would be even worse for them if they had to discharge THOUSANDS of gays and lesbians at once and nearly impossible for them to do and keep a ready fighting force.

          by Cali Techie on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 06:11:32 PM PDT

          •  When I think about the linguists,

            I want to bang my head on the desk. It's a stupid policy anyway, but that is really an example of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

            -5.88, -6.82

            by Debby on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 10:52:49 PM PDT

  •  Alva also questions the war...

    from a grunt's perspective. From the Kansas City Star:

    "If you ask how the war changed me, I'd say it's that I am now so against the war," Alva said. "I was a Marine for 12 years and I still feel all Americans have a duty to defend the nation. I went to Iraq because I believed that's what we were doing. That turned out not to be the case."

    Alva said he became disillusioned with the shifting reasons given for fighting in Iraq and the lack of any clear-cut end goals. He does not, however, believe in the peace movement's goals of bringing every troop home immediately.

    "I support the troops; I don't support the cause," he said. "I'd pick up a rifle and go back if I could, but I know from conversations with friends still in the Marines that they've grown disillusioned, too. They'll do the mission given them but they also see that nothing has changed in Iraq. They feel like it's Groundhog Day. Every day is the same, over and over again."

    What a solid, decent sounding guy.

    by janinsanfran on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 04:17:38 PM PDT

  •  SLDN's Lobby Day

    Thanks for this story, homogenius. It is far past time this ridiculous policy was overturned. The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network is having a Lobby Day March 26, 2007. If you want to help, follow the link and sign up!

    by akasha on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 05:03:33 PM PDT

    •  No, Thank YOU.

      (And sorry I fluffed SLDN--where the hell did I come up with SLDF?)

      This is great. I hope people will support SLDN--this is the time to act and get involved. The tide is turning and we need to do everything we can. We still have a lot of work to do.

      by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 08:45:56 PM PDT

•  couldn't ask for a better story

  to go with this effort.

  by duha on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:16:59 AM PDT

  •  The guy is a Marine's Marine.

    Third generation military, middle name is Fidelis (after his father and grandfather).

    by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:19:02 AM PDT

    •  Fidelis

      Now THAT should make for some good press.  As a "poster child" could this man be any more perfect?  

      by lgmcp on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:32:44 AM PDT

      •  The prosthetic adds a nice touch.

        (Speaking as a leg amputee).

        Or to quote Doonesbury, "Not everyone has a fashionable amputee in the family."

        by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:41:31 AM PDT

        •  The smile adds a nice touch, too.

          The guy's pretty cute.

          by Bearpaw on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:44:40 AM PDT

          •  Big time. But married (dammit)!

            Why are all the cute ones taken. But good for him. I am so stoked about this. He's really high-profile and seems up to the challenge.

            by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:46:05 AM PDT

            •  As I pointed out below ...

              ... married doesn't necessarily mean monogamy.  (Though obviously it usually does.)

              Besides, I'm just lookin'.

              by Bearpaw on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:54:37 AM PDT

        •  you guys ! ! !

          nobody undertands - or appreciates - how self-deprecating you can be.

          I can comfortably say "you guys".  I got out of the wheelchair in 1990.  Now walking on my own with a big old plastic pin holding an ankle together.  I'm still gay, though. [you know there is some stuff they can't fix]

          I never thought I would live long enough for a story like this to NOT make screaming headlines with pictures defaming Alva as the symbol of Satan's dominion . . . . oh, wait.  I haven't checked Fox News.

          by llbear on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:51:05 AM PDT

          •  Better a pin in your ankle

            then a hard heart that judges others.

            Walk proud.

            by zic on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:53:57 AM PDT

            •  When I think of you guys I do.

              YK2 - gonna be a zoo!

              by llbear on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 11:55:26 AM PDT

            •  zic -- wow. thank you for your comment.n/t

              _________________________________

              "Coimhéad fearg fhear na foighde."

              -9.75 (economic), -7.18 (social)

              by dadanation on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 05:12:18 PM PDT

          •  I did the 'chair thing for 9 months.

            And that was before they chopped the leg. It was a real learning experience. OTOH, it DOES put you at eye level with the eye candy, if you know what I mean.

            by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:14:36 PM PDT

            •  Trash

              You are coming to YK2, right?

              by llbear on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:09:45 PM PDT

              •  Dunno.

                I'm just doing contract work right now. No bucks, no Buck Rogers. Same reason I missed last year. We'll see.

                by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:11:58 PM PDT

          •  I had to check Fox News after reading that

            And I can't find a single mention of this story.  If it's there, tell me, but I can't find it.

            I suppose stony silence is an improvement over Satan's Dominion stories...

            by sarac on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 02:45:13 PM PDT

            •  Don't know how big it will be today.

              As I understand it, Rep. Meehan was introducing the repeal of DADT. I think it will get more coverage when hearings begin. I don't know if they were taking Sgt. Alva around to Member's offices or what. This should be the biggest attention to DADT since 1993.

              by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:04:03 PM PDT

            •  Fox won't cover it, they won't know

              what to make of it. Cognative dissonance gives them the willies.

              Kind of how they stopped talking so much about Pat Tillman after we heard from his brother that Pat was an athiest and was going to meet with Noam Chomsky after he got back from Afghanistan.

              by thepdxbikerboy on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:18:08 PM PDT

              •  You're exactly right.

                Besides, this story would open the minds of a few of their less cretinous viewers—and they can't afford to lose any more.

                by perro amarillo on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:30:01 PM PDT

                •  Right it would conflict with the "gays on parade"

                  footage that they always roll out when gay issues come up.

                  Gotta always show the leather chaps ya know.

                  (not that there's anything wrong with that ;-)

                  by thepdxbikerboy on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:43:40 PM PDT

                •  Would LOVE to see Hannity & Colmes

                  ...touch that story.  Preferably when Ann Coulter's around.  Coulter and InSanity were flabbergasted to find that Pat Tillman was a liberal who opposed the Iraq war.  When they learn about this, Colmes will be scraping their brain tissue off the ceiling after a massive explosion.

                  by The Truffle on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 04:08:33 PM PDT

            •  Just wait

              They're probably digging all kinds of dirt on him right now.  Hell, they're actually just kicking around fucking lies to spread about him.

              by fabooj on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:36:56 PM PDT

              •  Let's see, how could they swiftboat him? n/t

                by thepdxbikerboy on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:41:37 PM PDT

                •  Pretty much the same as they did Kerry,

                  another decorated veteran of great integrity -- by saying he's forfeited his veterans status by "betraying" his brothers in arms.  It was horseshit then and it'll be horseshit now.

                  by lgmcp on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 04:59:09 PM PDT

    •  Careful with that

      For years Hollywood got a chuckle out of saying Rock Hudson was a man's man. The rest of the world didn't realize it was a double entendre.
      By calling him a Marine's Marine you may mean it in a genuine manner but piss-off some homophobic ass.

      by TexDem on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:27:20 PM PDT

      •  What's wrong with pissing off homophobes?

        by Quanta on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:36:50 PM PDT

        •  I consider it an artform! n/t

          by john07801 on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:43:27 PM PDT

          •  And a service to humanity.

            Then, of course, there's that whole gratification thing. Ahhh, guilty pleasures. Oh wait--I don't feel guilty. Whatever.

            by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 01:51:45 PM PDT

            •  Then there's that genrtic imprint

              we were born to snark!

              But let me show you a Marine.   His last year of active duty was 1943.  He is 83 years old. If called tomorrow, he would serve.
              

                                     That's My Dad.

              He is as proud of me as he was of my younger brother who was also gay.  In a small town like Dixon, IL, that saying a mouth full.

              By the way, my younger brother, does this say gay or what?
              

              Talk with anyone over 70 in the town and ask them about my mother and father.  

              Best
              Parents
              in the
              World.

              In our case nurture had nothing to do with sexual orientation.  

              by llbear on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:30:53 PM PDT

              •  part one and two

                Part 1 - Your dad - Awesome!

                Part 2 - Your bro - Faaabulous!

                by thepdxbikerboy on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:58:20 PM PDT

                •  You want fabulous:

                  Fred was fabulous.  As an actor he appeared in lots and lots of movies - as an Under 5 Actor.

                  He played himself in "Star 80".  Yep, Hefner's head butler for 10 years.  He made a ton of commercials, too.  But, no one played the fool better than Fred at Mardi Gras.  Check this out:

                  

                  Yes, boy and girls, men and women, good people of DKos, relatively speaking, I'm the staid brother.

                  by llbear on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 06:12:57 PM PDT

        •  It depends on where you are.

          In the world often they travel in packs.
          On dkos they will be pummeled with reason and debate and they'll go running whimpering away.
          Nothing wrong with pissin' off homophobes. I'm straight and I do it often. I just try to be aware of my surroundings.

          What pisses me off about Hollywood and their attempts at hiding the sexual orientation of some of their biggest stars is that it retarded the debate. Think of where we would be today if we had started this debate in the 60s or better yet the 50s. It very well could have dovetailed with the civil rights movement. Gays and Americans of African/slave descent marching side by side requesting equal protection under the law and equal recognition of their humanity.

          DADT would have ended in the 80s. Wouldn't you agree?

          by TexDem on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 02:01:26 PM PDT

          •  DADT couldn't have ended in the 80s

            It didn't start til the 90s.

            by thepdxbikerboy on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:20:00 PM PDT

            •  That's the point of saying

              the debate was retarded. If the debate had started earlier with comprarable events and timelines we would have been past DADT by now.

              by TexDem on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:26:15 PM PDT

              •  gotcha. n/t

                by thepdxbikerboy on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:36:46 PM PDT

      •  Reminds me of the old joke

        Q: What's the difference between a Marine and a gay man?

        A: A six pack.

        Sounds like we may have here a solution to the stop-loss dilemma.  Anyone involuntarily called back to military service can just come out.  Wonder how far they'd press the point then?

        by Dallasdoc on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 02:35:37 PM PDT

        •  For Real.

          I think that standard would just disappear. Or the military would be put in the position of proving the declarent was not gay. That could prove interesting. Then they would have to charge them with, lying?
          Seems like it would create a Catch-22 for the military.

          by TexDem on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:01:55 PM PDT

          •  No, it's written the other way 'round.

            (The constitution notwithstanding). If a person says he or she is gay, it creates a refutable premise that he or she is sexually active. In practice, however, the standard for refuting it is impossibly high.

            by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:06:18 PM PDT

            •  But the question remains how do they refute it

              Testimony? Video evidence?
              Dallasdoc's suggestion of if numerous stop loss call-ups start "coming out", it puts the military in a bind. Do they ship them out before they settle the issue or do they delay deployment?

              by TexDem on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:18:46 PM PDT

              •  I was of the impression that stop loss....

                meant just that. Even the gays are put on hold. I'm pretty sure I read that. Will have to research that further.

                by Rumarhazzit on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:35:53 PM PDT

                •  It has meant that in the past.

                  But the DoD claims that even before Iraq II there were service members claiming to be gay to get out of their enlistment. Don't know if I believe them, but there it is.

                  In the past gays were put on hold then discharged as soon as fighting was over. Check Servicemember's Legal Defense Fund (SLDN)--they're the main resource.

                  by homogenius on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 03:46:17 PM PDT

                  •  So they really don't care if you're gay.

                    It's all PR.
                    If they're shipping them out to go fight, they're de facto refuting the claim that it disrupt unit cohesion and fighting efficiency or if they believe their claims then they are intentionally putting other soldiers at risk for expediency. Are they not? Which is it?

                    by TexDem on Wed Feb 28, 2007 at 05:06:54 PM PDT