Slain soldier Alan Rogers' sexuality continues to stir scandal.

An unidentified internet troll inside the Pentagon reportedly deleted all gay details from Rogers' Wikipedia entry:

The user on Monday redacted details about Rogers that appeared on the online encyclopedia site. Information that was deleted included Rogers’ sexual orientation; the soldier’s participation in American Veterans for Equal Rights, a group that works to change military policy toward gays; and the fact that Rogers’ death helped bring the U.S. military’s casualty toll in Iraq to 4,000.
…
The IP address attached to the deletion of the details and the posted comments is 141.116.168.135. The address belongs to a computer from the office of the Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence (G-2) at the Pentagon. The office is headed by Lt. Gen. John Kimmons, who was present at Rogers’ funeral and presented the flag from Rogers’ coffin to his cousin, Cathy Long.

Those army girl are cold bitches.

CONTINUED »

Deborah Howell had her work cut out for her this Sunday. The Washington Post ombudsman had to explain why her paper did not mention fallen American soldier Major Alan Rogers' homosexuality.

Rogers died in Iraq early this year and, according to his friends, begrudgingly hid his homosexuality under the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. Those same friends say Rogers would have wanted his untimely death to highlight our army's unfair treatment of gays.

Howell explained yesterday, however, that the original story did include Rogers's homosexuality, but Executive Editor Len Downie made the call to excise that tidbit because "there was no proof that Rogers was gay and no clear indication that, if he was, he wanted the information made public."

Howell goes on to defend Downie's decision, which is in line with the Post's editorial standard on sexuality: it shouldn't be mentioned unless absolutely integral. Not all gay activists, the paper believes, are gay, which is definitely true.

Though she doesn't criticize Downie outrightly, Howell does some more digging into Rogers' life - including chatting with other activist friends - and concludes that the story would have been "richer" with more details on Rogers' private life.

The Post was right to be cautious, but there was enough evidence — particularly of Rogers's feelings about "don't ask, don't tell" — to warrant quoting his friends and adding that dimension to the story of his life. The story would have been richer for it.

Now that the story's out, perhaps Rogers' death can do some actual good…