Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  does not compute

SHOCK: U.S. Military Swiftly Kicks Out Gays. White Supremacists? Not So Much

fogartynazitats

Riddle us this: The U.S. military continues to kick out gay servicemembers on the grounds that they make the military less stable, ready, and effective. So far, more than 250 of ‘em have been discharged since Barack Obama took the nation’s highest office. But ya know who the U.S. military doesn’t kick out? White supremacists. These guys, apparently, are great for our nation’s security. Just a sample:

Army regulations prohibit soldiers from participating in racist groups, and recruiters are instructed to keep an eye out for suspicious tattoos. Before signing on the dotted line, enlistees are required to explain any tattoos. At a Tampa recruitment office, though, [Forrest] Fogarty sailed right through the signup process. “They just told me to write an explanation of each tattoo, and I made up some stuff, and that was that,” he says. Soon he was posted to Fort Stewart in Georgia, where he became part of the 3rd Infantry Division.

Fogarty’s ex-girlfriend, intent on destroying his new military career, sent a dossier of photographs to Fort Stewart. The photos showed Fogarty attending white supremacist rallies and performing with his band, Attack. “They hauled me before some sort of committee and showed me the pictures,” Fogarty says. “I just denied them and said my girlfriend was a spiteful bitch.” He adds: “They knew what I was about. But they let it go because I’m a great soldier.”

In 2003, Fogarty was sent to Iraq. For two years he served in the military police, escorting officers, including generals, around the hostile country. He says he was granted top-secret clearance and access to battle plans. Fogarty speaks with regret that he “never had any kill counts.” But he says his time in Iraq increased his racist resolve.

“I hate Arabs more than anybody, for the simple fact I’ve served over there and seen how they live,” he tells me. “They’re just a backward people. Them and the Jews are just disgusting people as far as I’m concerned. Their customs, everything to do with the Middle East, is just repugnant to me.”

Because of his tattoos and his racist comments, most of his buddies and his commanding officers were aware of his Nazism. “They all knew in my unit,” he says. “They would always kid around and say, ‘Hey, you’re that skinhead!’” But no one sounded an alarm to higher-ups. “I would volunteer for all the hardest missions, and they were like, ‘Let Fogarty go.’ They didn’t want to get rid of me.”

Fogarty left the Army in 2005 with an honorable discharge. He says he was asked to reenlist. He declined. He was sick of the system.

Off to kill some Arabs Stateside, we presume.

By:           editor editor
On:           Jun 19, 2009
Tagged: , , , ,

  • 139 Comments
    • Bitch, please!
      Bitch, please!

      Why are we “ACTING” so surprised? Isn’t it the same kind of people who sent the country to this war? Didn’t we get proof from multiple security sources, nationally and internationally, that the whole premise for this war was based on lies over lies? Didn’t we elect the same people for two terms so they could continue to kill and torture? Why are we suppressing torture pictures from the war prisons, which in itself goes against the Geneva pact? Who are these enlisted soldiers that are doing these kinds of torture with “smiles on their faces”? Why are we still enlisting, now that we know the truth? We should really quit “ACTING” surprised when we all know who are responsible–we all are! We all are these “skinheads” in some form or other!

      Jun 19, 2009 at 10:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bri
      Bri

      I just got mail yesterday from the military trying to recruit me. I’m sending it back with the “remove me from your mailing list” box checked and a note saying that I will not consider joining until DADT is repealed. If anyone gets that stuff I recommend you do the same.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 10:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      We need to make it loud and clear that we will not tolerate this disgraceful state of affairs which exists in the military. The military top brass need to get their act together and stop dismissing good gay personnel.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 10:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com

      IN MEMORIAM

      [img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3098/2798217554_fd311099e3.jpg?v=0[/img]

      Jun 19, 2009 at 10:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      Um, so lets get this straight here….the military kicks out gays because they are bad for unit moral and cohesion, and yet the Military, which has HUGE numbers of minorities in it….thinks that having White Supremicists ISN’T a threat to those very same things.

      So appaerntly Neil Patrick Harris and Ellen are more of an ideological threat to our military and nation than the Klan?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 11:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Cam: Pretty much. You have to look at who the Christian majority is willing to back. The Christian majority (even the minority churches in it) would back a white supremacist before it would back a gay any day. Hell, the KKK gave full support, endorsement, and money to Barac Obama in the primary to defeat Clinton though.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 11:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      ——————————
      Islamophobia is the newest form of racism and a weapon in the oil war. The US military recruits and accepts these scum knowing full well that they’ll go out of their way, and even enjoy, killing muslims. Since terrorizing the population is their prime objective the military overlooks torture, homophobia, raping civilians and female soldiers as ‘collateral’ damage.

      The sad fact is that most of these sucm will be coming home, and not just to kill muslims. In addition to being racists and misogynists these skinhead islamophobes hate GLBT folks.

      The US armed forces, under the direction of self serving hustlers like Bush and Obama, are fighting and dying for Haliburton, BP-Conoco, Shell, Chevron-Texaco and the rest.

      The solution is to immediately end the war, make both islamophobia and homobigotry a crime and bring all the troops home immediately and permanently. We should do everything we can to actively discourage GLBT folks from enlisting. Promoting the military adventures of the Administration by advocating enlistment is a betrayal of both the GLBT equality and antiwar movements.
      [img]http://static.flickr.com/4/5123220_6306f66b81.jpg[/img]

      Jun 19, 2009 at 12:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dlpca
      dlpca

      Why would anyone want to serve in a military that is so conflicted, contrary and blatantly bigoted against alternative sexual orientation? Furthermore, why defend a country that condones, promotes and supports said military? For all the Gays who joined the military, knowing well that DADT is policy I wonder what the motivation and thinking could have been to justify such action.

      Common sense tells me that if you are aware the building is on fire, and that fire burns (even kills) then don’t go into the building. OK, say you are a firefighter, trained to deal with buildings on fire. But the department only gives protection to those they decide deserving or worthy, and it is well known policy? Would you join this fire department or if already in, stay?

      There are other choices besides the military. The first one is not to enlist. I tell you, common sense is really not that common after all.

      I say there should be a true Gay Agenda, a solidarity of consciousness against discrimination of Gays in all areas of industry. A passive but aggressive movement to change, reform and repair the hate and separatist thinking. But first we need to come together. Not until then will we become a force to be reckoned with, respected and valued for our contribution to the country.

      Gays who educate are sabotaged, forced out of their positions. Gays in the military are kicked out. Gays who work in politics are scandalized. Gays who work in religion are manipulated and disgraced. Gays of accomplishment or celebrity are targeted, exploited and embarrassed.

      When will enough be enough! How much more of this are we expected to take?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 12:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geoff M
      Geoff M

      It’s just a feeling….but as we continue to add or be drawn into new wars/conflicts….I think they’re going to take any and everybody whether they’re gay, white supremecists or flat footed. The draft is on it’s way.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 1:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steven
      Steven

      Check this out: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488 It’s called “Jesus Killed Mohammed: The Crusade for a Christian military” from Harper’s Magazine. It’s a rather frightening look into the means and methods by which fundamentalists are purposefully taking over sections of our active army on the ground and how leadership is looking the other way because, once again, they make good soldiers.

      Fanatics are dangerous, regardless of which side you’re on.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 1:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dlpca
      dlpca

      By the way, if you haven’t already seen this article it is interesting reading; found at:

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-mutchnick/where-is-my-martin-luther_b_217426.html

      Jun 19, 2009 at 2:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      Here is a tip…Until the United States gets rid of DADT…STOP SIGNING UP FOR THE MILITARY and make the military suffer the loss so they learn.

      If you are in the Military, DON’T TELL until we can work through Clinton’s fiasco. Dan Choi knew the consequences of going on national television and saying he was gay…it was his CHOICE. He could have kept it to himself. He wanted to be the poster boy for this issue.

      Considering we are fighting wars in 2 VERY HOMOPHOBIC COUNTRIES where they will kill you, I don’t think I would tell even if it was an option and I was gay.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 2:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      These are the american values that politicians like barack obama celebrate.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @SM:

      Go fuck yourself, you antigay blood belching cunt. Some people give a fuck about this country. NOt you. Get the fuck lost.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com

      @SM:

      ‘Dan Choi knew the consequences of going on national television and saying he was gay…it was his CHOICE. He could have kept it to himself. He wanted to be the poster boy for this issue.”

      Thank St. Judy the discussion isn’t about black civil rights or SM would be screeching,

      “Martin Luther King knew the consequences of going on national televison, going to Montgomery and Selma and Memphis and stirring things up….it was his CHOICE. He wanted to be the poster boy for this issue. It’s his fault he got shot! JFK-Dallas-same thing. RFK running for Prez, condemning the war-same thing. Blacks lynched? It was their choice to live ’round there.”

      You really are a pathetic excuse for a human being aren’t you? One hopes you’re at least getting paid for defending Lord Obama at all costs to rationality and decency.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      YOU GO FUCK YOURSELF.

      This is not the only place on the internert.

      Why do you take your GODDAMN LOSER SELF TO THE PLACE WHERE PEOPLE ARE DISCUSSING HEALTHCARE REFORM going on and working on it so people do not DIE.

      GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!!!!!!

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com

      [img]http://nonviolentmigration.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/lorrainemotel.jpg[/img]

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com

      [img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3099/3209068159_f4bbb496f0_o.jpg[/img]

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @SM:

      No, cunt, GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU ANTIGAY BIGOTED PIECE OF SHIT! WHO FUCKING DARE YOU TELL LESBIAN AND GAY PATRIOTS NOT TO SERVE! FUCK YOU, ASSHOLE!

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com:

      Martin Luther King Jr. would think Queerty and the poster “Tank” were a SAD JOKE.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com

      [img]http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0309/images/life/lynching.jpg[/img]

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @SM:

      You’re a retard as well as an antigay bigot, too. DIE OF CANCER.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      If you want to make a point and make the military suffer..DO NOT SIGN UP UNTIL WE FIX IT.

      It’s no different than a FUCKING BOYCOTT YOU PSYCHO PIECE OF SHIT! You all BOYCOTT CRAP ALL THE TIME WITH YOUR TEMPER TANTRUMS.

      GO FUCK YOURSELF.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      You’re too stupid to talk to. You need to be talked at. THAT VALIDATES INSTITUTIONAL BIGOTRY. YOU ARE A PRIMITIVE HOMOPHOBIC BIGOT. GO AWAY.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      And further, SM you homophobic bigot, it goes beyond don’t ask don’t tell. You are so unforgivably stupid and bigoted. DIE OF CANCER

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      No you are fucking stupid and don’t see it. If you gay people who want FULL EQUALITY SO BAD HAD BALLS THEY WOULD HAVE IT.

      People have DIED and FOUGHT WARS for their EQUALITY.

      I GUARANTEE if all the gay people serving in the armed forces SPOKE OUT AT ONCE, America would wake the hell up.

      I GUARANTEE if the MILLIONS of gay people in the United States who want FULL EQUALITY and thier supporters started showing up in Washington DC and writing letters, Obama would think it was a pressing matter and Americans would wake the hell up.

      You don’t have full equality because your community does not CARE!

      People DIED for their EQUALITY…Gay people can’t even make a rally in DC.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Gay people have fought and died for your equality, you dumb cunt. Go away now.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      GO FUCK YOURSELF.

      Fighting for Equaltiy is not sending money to the HRC and having them send a pretty boy to the White House to meet with Obama for a picture.

      There is not full equality for gays in the United States of America because the millions of gay people here have NO BALLS and cannot MAKE A TRIP TO WASHINGTON DC and START SPEAKING OUT.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      You don’t know anything about fighting for equality. You’re an atigay bigot who believes in an outright ban on gay servicemembers–further than DADT.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ousslander
      Ousslander

      Yes bill service members arenothing but evil hench raping n pillaging their way across the middle east. Racist bastard americans assaulting the peaceful freedom loving muslims.

      There were plenty of his types serving with me along with assorted hard core bloods n crips

      Jun 19, 2009 at 3:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brooke
      Brooke

      @ SM and TANK
      Stop! You are both ridiculous! No one will ever be able to hear both of your valid points until the AWFUL name calling ends. You are obviously both on this site because you CARE about these issues! Please act like adults and carry on a civil argument. You are on the same side! If you can’t co-exist and work with other people who have the same civil and social desires as you, how can we possibly hope to work with people who really are against LGBT civil rights! Unbelievable.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Geoff M: The current situation in Iraq will NEVER lead to a draft. The war is not that popular and if you want to see this country truly go ape shit and take to the streets then institute a draft. The reason they ended Vietnam without really accomplishing anything is the horde of protesters that got involved and the only reason they protested was because of the draft. Its much harder to protest an all volunteer military.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Brooke:

      LOL!

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Absurd.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @SM: Stay out of things that don’t deserve you. Go look at your husband (if anyone was stupid enough to marry you) and ask yourself what the fuck would happen if someone came in your house and said the next time you fuck your husband you are going to jail. While your husband would celebrate and go fuck his mistress, I’m sure you would take a stand on the matter. Then again with as sexually repressed as you are, you might just like the concept. If that is the case then imagine that the next time you didn’t fuck your husband when he wanted it you were going to jail. Removing a persons freedoms simply because they desire to act out sexually goes against everything this country has ever stood for. On top of that, being gay is not just about having sex, so its more like removing someones identity. The founding fathers thought everyone was equal and had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brooke
      Brooke [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @ TANK
      I am proud to stand up against HATE of any kind. Your words are hateful, pure and simple. If you truly think that’s absurd, I honestly feel even more vindicated in my statement.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @TANK: Tank dear, no one really wants to fuck that dried up piece of ugliness. If they did, she wouldn’t be slamming the gays 24/7.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Brooke:

      You aren’t a sentient being. You have no principle or backbone or strategy or purpose… It’s all about style not substance with people like you. It’s absurd.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RainaWeather
      RainaWeather

      Not surprising that an asshole excels in a place that breeds, attracts, and turns normal people into assholes.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      “can’t we all just get along” doesn’t work most of the time. IT may sound good to people if your ilk, but it’s not what moves the pawns forward.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @TANK:

      When you call an antigay bigot’s opinion valid ,brooke, you lose credibility moreso than the person who decried and berated that bigot for its bigotry. A lot more so…because it’s either stupid or it’s evil; either way, you don’t look good.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      How would you know if it works or not. Have you ever tried it?

      Anyway, just popped in to ask you kids to keep it down. We’re trying to get some work done next door.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @strumpetwindsock:

      Have I Ever tried to reason with a vehement vocal bigot before? Have I ever encountered a hate filled funamentalist christian before and attempted to reason with it? Of course. You have not. You don’t know the nature of hate.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Brooke: If you truly were proud to stand up against hate of any kind you would be backing Tank in his argument against hetero hate mongering bitch SM. You make me laugh. You are self-apologetic. When that gay basher bashes you do you apologize to them too?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brooke
      Brooke [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @ Tank
      The theme of my statement was not “Can’t we all just get along” but “Co-exist”. There is a difference. SM’s language was far more offensive than yours, but the ANGER in both of your comments is raging off the page. This person is irrelevant in the grand scheme, but you are obviously personally offended and it changes YOUR behavior. I think your statements to her were offensive and hateful as well. And I think ALL of it is counter-productive.
      As for your statement accusing me of being “all style and no substance”, well, I haven’t made any comment about any substantive issue because I was so blown away by the hatefulness of the exchange on this page.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @TANK: I’ve been trying to reason with my dad for the last 12 years as he gives my brother literature from Focus on the Family about how, among other things, that gay people will never be able to breed more gay people and that is a blessing. My brother throws the shit away and goes off on my dad about his religious bigotry. When I first came out my brother was not on my side, but after living around him for as long as I have and showing him that not all gay guys are the way he thinks they were, he has come to my side 100%.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      In fact, strumpet, I’d go further to suggest that in all of your 50 years on this planet, you still don’t understand human nature, and are operating under a failed model of it. It has no connection with research nor experience.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @galefan2004:

      Yeah, but it’s not reasoning which compels to stop hating. It’s not something you learn like a fact. IF it were like that, then what is that fact so that we can teach it like we do geography?

      It is, rather, something totally different than “rationality” and “reason” which gets people to stop hating. For, as we can see, we can repeat the same arguments with the same facts to people over and over again…and it doesn’t matter…but to others, it does…becuase something is operative. But you don’t “reason” with hate.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brooke
      Brooke [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @GALEFAN2004
      I honestly do not believe SM is wrong. It seems her original point was boycott the Army if you’re gay. This seems to have worked MANY times throughout the movement (boycotting organizations, products, etc. that were homophobic.) If all gay people quit/didn’t join the Armed Forces, it’s hard to deny that that impact would be huge.
      I also think that TANK has an extremely valid point in saying that it is necessary to work within the system, that gay people have every right to proudly fight for their country, and that serving in the military is one way of fighting for equality as a gay person.
      However, all these VALID points have been lost in hateful, emotional, and childish name calling.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      Well, just reading this thread it sure looks like you guys are making fine progress. Do you think you might get to square one before it’s quitting time?

      And Tank, as for what I know about hate or anything else you only know what I have told you. You are simply making assumptions.

      I have had to deal with one or two homphobes, sometimes in situations where I didn’t have the luxury of just swearing at them and hoping they would to away.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      I honestly do not believe SM is wrong.

      As I said, you are either stupid or evil…

      Being neutral here is a position, and an ethical one with consequences. Those consequences are doing precisely what the religious right would prefer sans POLICY (getting gays out of the armed services). So which is it?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @strumpetwindsock:

      LOL! These aren’t assumptions. These are born out in your opinions on several different topics which suggest that you don’t get religious fundamentalism and bigotry. You don’t understand what dogma is.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Brooke: What drives someone to fight and die for their country has NOTHING to do with them being gay and lesbian. We aren’t talking about buying a prada handbag or something lame assed like that. We are talking about having the desire to fight and die for your country. Asking someone to give that up in protest of stupidity is lame. The only reason SM even mentioned this concept is she would like nothing more than to see every gay and lesbian military person leave the military or stay on the side lines of the military. It has nothing to do with her wanting us to have our rights. She is just some old hag that thinks because she marched for Prop 8 that she has a right to comment on gay issues. I campaigned for my candidate in 2006 and 2008 and he won both times and my biggest issue was with government reform not gay rights. I don’t throw that up every chance I get.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brooke
      Brooke [Different person #1 using similar name]

      And if you think I have not made myself clear, I reproach ALL of the terrible, personal comments that have been made by everyone. And trading homophobic for sexist comments is beyond stupid, it’s damaging. TO BOTH PARTIES. I bet SM is not homophobic (otherwise why would she be reading/commenting on Queerity!!!) and I bet TANK is not sexist.
      Yet they both came off as so. I am not taking sides here. Both originally made valid point, both became personally offended, both took that offense and reacted to it with personal, hateful comments. All of that is again, unproductive, hateful, and ridiculous.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Yeah, there aren’t any homophobes on queerty! LMAO!

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Brooke: How old are you and how long have you been on the internet? Seriously! I’ve been on the internet for the last 12 years. In that time I have been in fights with homophobes on every blog and in every chat room. Homophobes love to come to gay fights just to try to piss on and piss off the gays. Its like a form of internet crack to them. They get off on it. SM is no different. How innocent you must be to think that the only reason people come to a site like QT that offers very little in the way of moderation and allows people to write openly isn’t going to attract people that hate gays.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      No TANK, it’s just that I don’t agree with you on some of these issues, and for some reason you don’t have a very high tolerance for anyone with opinions different than yours.

      But as for things I have dealt with and situations I have been in, you are quite wrong. You are basing it all on my opinions.

      I do disagree with SM’s boycott proposal. But I do think she made it in good faith. I think the language used against her (and hers in return) is needless and shameful.

      Basically you are not accomplishing a damn thing. Obama is still out there kicking dogs and drinking baby’s blood and you’re wasting your time.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 4:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brooke
      Brooke [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Well, everyone here is certainly all pissed off, haha. If SM is actually a homophobe, you should all be embarrassed to have played into her hands. My original point was that the personal, hateful attacks GOING BOTH WAYS were unproductive, distracting, over-reactionary, emotional, hateful and hurtful.
      And if, as I said before, you read her original statements, you can see she is offering genuine suggestions for how to IMPROVE LGBT standing with the military. That does not sound like someone who is an enemy to the gay movement. (Although her statements later were CLEARLY inappropriate and hateful).
      And BTW – I am not neutral on this subject. I have just not given my opinion because it’s hardly like anyone here could actually hear it, or care, to be frank.
      I read the comments to get a sense of where people stand on controversial subjects like this. And I was BLOWN AWAY by the disgusting comments going all way. MY ONLY POINT thus far is that this kind of rhetoric on all sides will only turn people away.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brooke
      Brooke [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Thanks for your rationality Strumpetwindsock! It’s good to know someone out there is capable of open-minded, careful deliberation and reasoning, haha!

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @strumpetwindsock:

      You agree with the boycott policy. You’re a canadian. You don’t understand the united states, DADT, or homophobia in this country. You think it should be further than DADT, apparently, and play into the hands of what those who implemented dadt would prefer…I think you’re shameful and attitudes like yours are a stumbling block to equality.

      Good faith? So her telling gay people that they don’t care and it’s all their fault that they’re second class citizens and that they should boycott the armed services so that they can stop harming it…was in good faith? You’re scum.

      Further, you’re just plain wrong on facts most of the time.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Brooke:

      Fred Phelps offers genuine suggestions too. Perhaps you consider those valid. I think your attempt at being even handed and open minded here has rendered you absurd…and vapid.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @TANK:

      Insofar as your posts here defending SM’s position are concerned, you are neutral…and that is something that should be condemned.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brooke
      Brooke [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @ TANK
      Haha, you think this is what I said??? Unbelievable!
      “Good faith? So her telling gay people that they don’t care and it’s all their fault that they’re second class citizens and that they should boycott the armed services so that they can stop harming it…was in good faith? You’re scum.”
      Wow. Try reading. words. one. at. a. time.
      And I’m out because this is definitely stupid now.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Brooke:

      Are you a turnip? I was responding to strumpet with that. And yes, that first part wasn’t necessary, but i have zero patience for people who are clearly not “getting it”.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Brooke: The hateful attacks made by me were fun. I didn’t play into anyone’s hands. I simply expressed my contempt for a homophobic bitch. Oh, btw, those words you hate so much were put into the English language because at some point someone somewhere thought that it was a great way to express his/her views. I was an English major for most of my college career and had a professor who had taught longer than I was alive who did his doctoral dissertation on the legitimate use of the word fuck in the English language.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      I think brooke was referring to the word “cunt” used pejoratively. Dirty talk! IT’s so misogynistic…ha ha ha…whatever it is, it’s a great word that fully captures one’s disgust.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RainaWeather
      RainaWeather

      I agree with SM that gays should boycott the military if they don’t like the way they/we are treated. This is one of the many reasons I would never join the military.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @TANK: Dude you forgot the part where she says in COUNTLESS posts and threads that we are all sick lazy disgusting people that don’t deserve to be equal. Apparently, Brooke has missed all those other posts, or she wouldn’t try to defend this piece of crap old hag.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Many gay people agree with rightwing republicans who don’t want gays in the military and are glad for dadt (because boycotting the military would make dadt repeal an even remoter possibility–gays aren’t serving so it’s not a problem that needs to be addressed) and would be happy with a gay ban. These people are their own enemies and need to be kept as far away from decision making power as possible.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      ‘scuse me?

      I just said I disagreed with her boycott proposal. How do you figure that I actually support it?

      (and you and I have had boycott discussions before, so you should know better)

      More importantly, to immediately respond to her with this:
      http://www.queerty.com/shock-us-military-swiftly-kicks-out-gays-white-supremacists-not-so-much-20090619/#comment-182955

      is not very productive, not does it have a strong foundation on those philosophical ideals you talk so much about.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @galefan2004:

      ALso where she justifies a gay boycott of the military based on it harming the military…not harming gay people. LOL! It has nothing to do with DADT reform at all. But there is a very very sick group of lgbt americans that agree more with the religious right wing than they do with lgbt equality…unfortunately, they’ve got very big mouths and have bullied their way into key positions. They are a cancer just waiting to be excised.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @strumpetwindsock:

      Where did I Get that you agree with it?

      I do disagree with SM’s boycott proposal

      LOL!

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @TANK:
      Nevermind.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RainaWeather
      RainaWeather

      Well, Tank, since it’s okay to use “cunt” all you want can I satrt calling people “fags”? What makes your sexist ass any better than a homophobe?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @strumpetwindsock:

      Riiight, I should have known better when she said this in the same post.

      If you are in the Military, DON’T TELL until we can work through Clinton’s fiasco. Dan Choi knew the consequences of going on national television and saying he was gay…it was his CHOICE. He could have kept it to himself. He wanted to be the poster boy for this issue.

      She deserved what I said. SHe is a cunt.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RainaWeather
      RainaWeather

      @TANK: I’m glad you realize you’re an ass

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @RainaWeather:

      Because cunt is automatically sexist, huh? You’re a literalist blockhead. BUt go ahead, use the word ‘fag’, cunt.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @RainaWeather: I respect your right to call anyone acting like a fag a fag. I respect Tank’s right to call anyone acting like a cunt a cunt as well. Now, if he called someone that wasn’t acting like a cunt a cunt I would not respect that right.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RainaWeather
      RainaWeather

      @galefan2004: “Acting like a fag?” And you claim to be for gay rights. SMH

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      This person raina has no legitimacy. IT’s for a boycott of the military because of DADT. Mind numbing stupidity…do they even think? IT’s like FAS babies bumping into things.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geoff M
      Geoff M

      @galefan2004: It isn’t the popularity of a war that leads to a draft…it’s the necessity to fight the war that leads to it. You’re right that obviously we currently have an all volunteer military and that can’t last with Pakistan being added to the mix and the increasing probablity we’ll be drawn into another North Korean fiasco. And if or when that happens, they absolutely will institute a draft and I think that’s when they’ll stop caring about gays in the military. Supply and demand. I hope it doesn’t happen, but I have a feeling it’s going to…scary times.

      What’s w/all the name calling? Queerty can’t you moderate some of this bullsh@#$ as it goes against those sweet comment rules you posted several months ago?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kid A
      Kid A

      *grabs another handful of popcorn*

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @RainaWeather: Just like black people can realize that some people simply don’t represent them. I realize that some gay people simply don’t represent me as well. I’m personally not represented by whiny little bitches that think their shit matters just because they are hot and not because they have a brain. I call those people how I see them. Sorry if that offends you.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      I agree, some people are “fags”. But if a straight person ever called a fag a fag….I’d cut ‘em….well, probably not.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 5:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Geoff M: The war in Iraq is not necessary. There is absolutely no reason to get involved in Pakistan. There is no reason to get involved in North Korea either. Countries that want to get nuclear weapons will get them. We can’t stop that. However, just like Russia didn’t use them in the cold war, those other countries wont use them either because they realize that the result of attacking the US with nuclear weapons would be complete and utter destruction for their country. Also, if the Iraqi people and the rest of the terrorists were able to “fight us over here” they wouldn’t have needed to steal our own planes to even attempt a maneuver.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Boosh
      Boosh

      Has Queerty ever considered employing a moderator?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Boosh: It would honestly destroy this site if it had a moderator. The internet is about free speech. Free speech is messy. You can’t just take away part of the speech because you don’t like it. Sites that have moderators normally hurt for feedback.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Yeah, if this site had a moderator, I’d be totally banned for life, yo. ANd that would suck for everybody…but especially for me, because that’s why I come here.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @galefan2004:

      Not true.

      On sites where there is an active moderator people just manage to discuss the issues without resorting to personal attack.

      Actually this site stands alone among most of those I am familiar with for all the irresponsible bullshit they allow to go on.

      Free speech? Perhaps in the same way as being in the middle of a riot or living in downtown Mogadishu is freedom.

      But don’t try typing the name J A P H Y G R A N T without altering it or you’ll get censored right away.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      One.

      The war began based on lies by Bill Clinton’s administration about WMD’s but it’s all about oil, and nothing else.

      Republican Senator CHARLES HAGEL: “People say we’re not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America’s national interest. What the hell do you think they’re talking about? We’re not there for figs.” (Speaking at Catholic University, Sept. 24, 2007)

      Former Federal Reserve Chairman ALAN GREENSPAN, in his book The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World: “I’m saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: The Iraq war is largely about oil.”

      Democratic Senator JOHN TESTER: “We’re still fighting a war in Iraq and people who are honest about it will admit we’re there over oil.” (Associated Press, Sept. 24, 2007)

      General JOHN ABIZAID: retired commander of CENTCOM: “Of course it’s about oil, we can’t really deny that.” (Speaking at Stanford University, Oct. 13, 2007)

      The United States has no legitimate interests in the region. We should join the antiwar movement in demanding the total, permanent and immediate withdrawal of all US troops, spy, murder and torture agencies and mercenary forces from South Asia, the Mediterranean, the Indian Ocean and Africa. For starters.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      Two: paytriotism, flag waving and claims that the US has some legitimate role in South Asia from Palestine to Pakistan are reactionary. Those who support the war and enlistment during the war support the mass murder of Iraqis and the sacrifice of thousands of GIs to profit oil companies. Those are the murderous politics of Clinton, Bush and Obama. Their supporters are despicable and they betray both the GLBT and antiwar struggles.

      “Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all others because you were born in it.” George Bernard Shaw

      Patriotism … is a superstition artificially created and maintained through a network of lies and falsehoods; a superstition that robs man of his self-respect and dignity, and increases his arrogance and conceit. Emma Goldman

      Here are the real patriots. [img]http://www.williambowles.info/gispecial/2006/0306/270306/image001.jpg[/img]

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      Three: The US should do as Desmond Tutu suggests and cut the purse strings that pay for the apartheid and ethnic cleansing used by zionists against Palestinians.

      Tutu won an award for his unstinting support for LGBT rights around the world and is quoted in The Guardian as having “

      accused Israel of practising apartheid in its policies towards the Palestinians.

      The Nobel peace laureate said he was “very deeply distressed” by a visit to the Holy Land, adding that “it reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South Africa”. Tutu said he saw “the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about”.

      The archbishop, who was a leading opponent of apartheid in South Africa, said Israel would “never get true security and safety through oppressing another people”.

      Archbishop Tutu said his criticism of the Israeli Government did not mean he was anti-Semitic.”

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      I disagree. I think sites that actively censor their commenters have stifled dialogues, and it encourages groupthink which ultimately makes the comments boring. There are exceptions to that go beyond the pale and should be censored, but nothing that amounts to “Irresponsible bullshit they allow to go on”. ANd I rarely if ever see you just discussing the issues without infusing them with your own opinions which are often false.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @TANK:

      E.g., that SM made a the boycott suggestion in “good faith,” after endlessly blaming gay people for their own oppression and attempting to quiet dissent about the DOJ DOMA brief by insanely threatening democratic support.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 6:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      Dude…grow up…Do you know where I hear people commenting on all gays quitting the military and not signing up until DADT is gone? FROM GAY PEOPLE.

      It was their idea!

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      Are you a professional victim or what?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @SM:

      I haven’t heard a single gay person suggest it. I think it’s a terrible idea regardless of who it originates with, and have provided several reasons why. There isn’t a single positive reason why it should be taken seriously. Even if it were to come to pass, it would satisfy the desires of top military brass responsible for DADT who, after a few cycles for replacements, would be grateful. The pentagon elite (mostly constituted of radical fundamentalist christians) don’t want gays and lesbians serving. There is no winning with that strategy, as it takes the most compelling issue for DADT’s repeal off the table with replacements (preparedness).

      I can’t believe I’m even discussing this nonsense with the likes of you…you’re crazy. THis has nothing to do with DADT or the humiliation and violation of equality and equal protection that it represents. THIs is about you defending the democratic party no matter what…even when it’s indefensible like prolonging and enforcing this unethical stain on america’s reputation.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Obama’s more than happy having ex cons, actual CONS and white supremacists serving openly in his army…but not gays. Those are his values, apparently.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      Keep your temper tantrums shorter..I’m not reading all that.

      I’ve posted links and plenty of tips and ideas to help all you pissed off people out including a link to contact the White House directly. If you, your family and your supporters don’t step up and start helping yourselves out..its your own fault.

      You are nothing more than some idiot who sits behind a computer and thinks he can stir the pot.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      I’ve posted links and plenty of tips and ideas to help all you pissed off people out including a link to contact the White House directly.

      If those tips are anything like your suggestion for getting DADT repealed, keep them to yourself. As it stands, we’d infinitely better off not taking your advice on anything.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      If you, your family and your supporters don’t step up and start helping yourselves out..its your own fault.

      But you’ll say that regardless, as family and supporters are stepping up and helping. This has nothing to do with accurate criticism of the lgbt community, and everything to do with defending bigoted obama policy.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      Once again…I’m not the only one saying the things you seem to despise me for. Many of your SUPPORTERS are saying it and the WAY YOU ACT IS SENDING PUBLIC OPINION IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.

      THE POLLS SHOW IT

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      Actually I value difference of opinion. I disagree with you on many issues, but have I ever told you you do not have the right to believe what you do? Have I ever questioned your right to post here?

      I’d like to hear how you think forbidding personal attack would “stifle dialogue and encourage groupthink”.

      If people cannot debate the issues without resorting to lies and calling each other names, then what is the point of talking at all?

      As an example, I’d like to know how you think your comment #14 added anything relevant or productive to this discussion.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Actually I value difference of opinion.

      For its own sake. You’re oppositional defiant disorder…ed.

      I disagree with you on many issues, but have I ever told you you do not have the right to believe what you do? Have I ever questioned your right to post here?

      Yes. IN fact, you’ve tried to have me removed. YOu’ve flagged comments and attempted to misconstrue what I’ve said so that they’re in violation of the comment policy.

      I’d like to hear how you think forbidding personal attack would “stifle dialogue and encourage groupthink”.

      Because personal attack is warranted on occasion. ALl attack is personal if you think about. There isn’t this amazing divide between your beliefs and you that your entire premise rests upon. Thus, it encourages groupthink because the moderator is editing out comments that don’t appeal to its sensibilities when those vary, and…since you value a difference of opinion, that’s a good thing to you.


      If people cannot debate the issues without resorting to lies and calling each other names, then what is the point of talking at all?

      Lies? Which lies? I think name calling in addition to substantive criticism is just fine. Ad hominem is invalid argument–that’s why I dislike it; not because people are getting called names… Calling people names (oft deserved ,actually) in addition to substantive criticism is just fine…not rule of informal logic is being broken. And many people need to have their feelings hurt. And this isn’t necessary, as you suggest, but the result of, say, people telling lies “respectfully” and being “bigots”. The point of talking? There isn’t much point aside from boredom talking to you…


      As an example, I’d like to know how you think your comment #14 added anything relevant or productive to this discussion.

      By expressing offense at bigotry.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 7:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geoff M
      Geoff M

      @galefan2004: No one here ever said it was a necessary war. Why are you so combative with everyone? Wait. Don’t answer. I don’t care.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      I have never tried to have you removed (I know better than to try, because the administrators here do fuck all anyway).

      I have reported comments of yours which I considered offensive (like calling people nelly, faggot, and other homophobic names) but we both know that nothing has ever come of that.

      Lies? I don’t want to get into a litany, but to use an immediate example your comment that SM cares nothing about your country is completely unsubstantiated.

      And there is never any excuse for personal attack, especially not of this sort:
      http://www.queerty.com/dykes-on-bikes-tarzana-trannies-should-no-longer-be-representing-the-pride-20090619/#comment-183195

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      How was Gramps being so bigoted that he warranted that kind of response?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Lies? I don’t want to get into a litany, but to use an immediate example your comment that SM cares nothing about your country is completely unsubstantiated.

      Well that’s not a lie. If this person thinks that we are
      entirely responsible for our own oppression in the u.s., then that should be extended to every other oppressed group…that is inconsistent with caring about this country (the people in it; and not just some of them, but all of them).

      And yes you have tried to have me removed zealously. You can’t stand the fact that I refute your ravings.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @strumpetwindsock:

      Did you just call him gramps? That’s FUCKING AWFUL! I never called him gramps…that’s just…I mean you’re like seventy, right? OR in your sixties, yeah? Old is old; doesn’t matter. But gramps? That’s just hateful.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      Don’t play games. Gary used the term “Gramps” himself.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @strumpetwindsock:

      LOL! Oh, okay…I won’t “play games”. But it’s gary, not gramps… Does it make it okay if he used the term? No…so stop being so vile with your hate speech and lederhosen. Look, I don’t know where all this hatred for your fellow olds is coming from, but it’s disturbing.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      @TANK:

      My suggestion was EXACTLY the stand Lt. Dan Choi had the guts to do.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @SM:

      Delusional. No, Dan Choi is not calling on lesbian and gay servicemembers to boycott the military.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      TANK, I’ll let everyone else reading this figure it out for themselves.

      …and no, I didn’t honestly expect you to quit the slurs and games.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 8:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @strumpetwindsock:

      Gary, I’d like to apologize for strumpet’s venomous vindictive hatred of you and of his own kind (cranky olds). I don’t know what you did or said to him, but he’s got a real hard on for you, and I don’t think that’s right…the necessity of viagra in defiance of god aside. It’s uwarranted and malicious of him to call you “Gramps” and “methuselah” and “pile of old used up dirty laundry”. So on his behalf from me, I apologize….okay…I know you’re probably not wearing reading glasses right now….I APOLOGIZE, GARY Much better.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 9:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      Just out of curiosity how come you all don’t get MAD at the HRC because they cannot spend all the money they have to put huge billboards in Washington DC and other cities. Billboards with a counter and faces of The Members of the United States Military that are victims of DADT?

      Jun 19, 2009 at 10:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tyler Frost
      Tyler Frost

      Obviously a psychotic, muscle bound skinhead would make a much better warrior then so me fruity little twink.

      Jun 19, 2009 at 11:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Otto_Erotica
      Otto_Erotica

      That skinhead racist is hot. Any chance he did some Dirk Yates j/o porn? [img]http://theater.aebn.net/dispatcher/movieDetail?movieId=114604&theaterId=56286[/img]

      Yeah, other than that, fuck the military. it’s like whining that you got a shitty meal at Arby’s. Duh- racism, inhumanity and the inequitable abuse of power are the only mandates of a military regime.

      So…like, you were expecting Club Med with guns? If so, move to Dubai!

      Jun 20, 2009 at 3:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bitch, please!
      Bitch, please!

      @OTTO_EROTICA: Oh sweetheart, I sure would want you to find out for yourself about the “hot skinhead”. Look at it this way, either you will get lucky and you will fulfill your cocksucking fantasy, or you will get bashed in the face with the butt of the gun and/or bullets fired with the nozzle inside your ass. How wonderful would that be for you? I am thinking “fireworks”!

      Jun 20, 2009 at 4:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • epluribusunumjk
      epluribusunumjk

      The comments on this site are starting to sound like some weird-ass Jerry Springer show.

      What up on all the use of “fuck,” “cunt,” etc? Come on guys – I have nothing against profanity, but still…we sound like children.

      Jun 20, 2009 at 7:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • number2
      number2

      The military always has been a group of white supremacists… this is news?

      Jun 20, 2009 at 8:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Condoleezma "White As"  Rice
      Condoleezma "White As" Rice

      “I would volunteer for all the hardest missions, and they were like, ‘Let Fogarty go.’ They didn’t want to get rid of me.”

      You sure about that, Crackuh?

      Jun 20, 2009 at 10:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Distingué Traces
      Distingué Traces

      Yes, and convicted violent criminals are also getting in.

      At the same time the armed forces have been spending dollars and time on getting rid of distinguished gay servicewomen and men (twice as many lesbians as gay men have been discharged), they have been grossly, recklessly relaxing the standards for criminal history of new recruits.

      Winning global hearts and minds — with the criminal underclass as our representatives!

      Jun 21, 2009 at 12:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tony
      Tony

      So baby jesus obama hussein osama protects the racists more than the gays.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 2:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jack
      Jack

      Tank is dumb.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 6:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:
      lederhosen???

      Jun 21, 2009 at 6:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @strumpetwindsock:

      Very hot with Jack Boots! ;P

      Jun 21, 2009 at 10:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @schlukitz:

      LOL

      Yeah, except I like my leather black and shiny, not suede. That Bavarian fetish gear just makes me cringe.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 11:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      And thanks for sharing, I’m sure…and jack boots, hmmmm, I haven’t tried that before.

      I thought you got turned on by the tim hortons uniform, strumpet.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 11:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      Had to look it up to find one:
      http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/PXKcTe-1DzmN52ElwKBfYA

      Didn’t quite recognize it ’cause usually they have aprons on.
      Doesn’t do it for me, actually.

      But lederhosen? It might just be the cultural association, but ugh… don’t like’em.

      Jun 22, 2009 at 12:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Lederhosen sexy to me? I never said that. Jason Voorhees sexy? Oh yeah. Now that’s a [made up] man!

      Jun 22, 2009 at 1:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      no no no…
      schlukitz said it.

      You said something that made no sense about “hate speech and lederhosen” and that’s what I was referring to.

      But never mind, this has dragged on far enough as it is.

      Lederhosen just reminds me of Bayern, not one of my favourite places. No offense to anyone from there, but my experience of the place was right-wing, reactionary and religious.

      Give me Hamburg or Berlin any day.

      Jun 22, 2009 at 1:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @strumpetwindsock:

      I’m with you. guys. I like my leather black and shiny as well. ;)

      Leder is the German word for leather and of course, hosen is the German word for pants, so it would encompass motorcycle-style leathers as well as the famliar Bavarian suede shorts that have come to be known as lederhosen.

      Actually, the correct name for them is Plattlerhosen, so named for the ages old dance performed by men and boys in Bavaria called the Schuhplattle. More can be learned on the topic at the following link.

      http://www.bavgirl.com/2008/02/a_bavarian_tradition_lederhose.html

      Jun 22, 2009 at 3:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @strumpetwindsock:

      I too find Hamburg an interesting Port City. A much more diverse mix of people and attitudes. My father lived there for a number of years before he passed on.

      Hamburg is home to the leather community and a host of leather bars. I doubt you’d find anything like the Reeperbahn in Bayern. LOL

      Jun 22, 2009 at 4:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @schlukitz:

      Dat stimmt

      Or Schmidt’s Tivoli

      And speaking of Schmidt, I don’t think there are too many other places where the head of the local football club is openly gay.

      Jun 22, 2009 at 12:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @strumpetwindsock:

      And “Moin Moin” sounds so much better than “Gruess Gott”.

      I could never bring myself to actually say that.

      Jun 22, 2009 at 12:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Eh, I prefer munich to hamburg. It is true that the bavarian layman is…very simple and extremely religious (roman catholic)conservative. But, they know their place and purpose and seem content in knowing their function as Heidegger might chime in. Plus, bavaria contains some beautiful scenery and architecture.

      Jun 22, 2009 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Julian Edward Domain
      Julian Edward Domain

      @SM: Speaking for all gender variant individuals, if bdsm doesn’t quit using testicles as a qualifier to indicate active participation in society, I too will engage in the effort to point out your factual errors and questionally based opines.

      Aug 1, 2009 at 12:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sky Captain
      Sky Captain

      @TANK: How do you know that Obama is anti-gay? Stop talking bullshit.

      Aug 31, 2010 at 7:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.