This came to me in an email, like the author or not a point is made: BRADLEY MANNING: POSTER BOY FOR 'DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL' December 1, 2010 The two biggest stories this week are WikiLeaks' continued publication of classified government documents, which did untold damage to America's national security interests, and the Democrats' fanatical determination to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" and allow gays to serve openly in the military. The mole who allegedly gave WikiLeaks the mountains of secret documents is Pfc. Bradley Manning, Army intelligence analyst and angry gay. We've heard 1 billion times about the Army translator who just wanted to serve his country, but was cashiered because of whom he loved. I'll see your Army translator and raise you one Bradley Manning. According to Bradley's online chats, he was in "an awkward place" both "emotionally and psychologically." So in a snit, he betrayed his country by orchestrating the greatest leak of classified intelligence in U.S. history. Isn't that in the Army Code of Conduct? You must follow orders at all times. Exceptions will be made for servicemen in an awkward place. Now, who wants a hug? Waitress! Three more apple-tinis!" According to The New York Times, Bradley sought "moral support" from his "self-described drag queen" boyfriend. Alas, he still felt out of sorts. So why not sell out his country? In an online chat with a computer hacker, Bradley said he lifted the hundreds of thousands of classified documents by pretending to be listening to a CD labeled "Lady Gaga." Then he acted as if he were singing along with her hit song "Telephone" while frantically downloading classified documents. I'm not a military man, but I think singing along to Lady Gaga would constitute "telling" under "don't ask, don't tell." Do you have to actually wear a dress to be captured by the Army's "don't ask, don't tell" dragnet? What constitutes being "openly" gay now? Bringing a spice rack to basic training? Attending morning drills decked out as a Cher impersonator? Following Anderson Cooper on Twitter? Also, U.S. military, have you seen a picture of Bradley Manning? The photo I've seen is only from the waist up, but you get the feeling that he's wearing butt-less chaps underneath. He looks like a guy in a soldier costume at the Greenwich Village Halloween parade. With any luck, Bradley's court-martial will be gayer than a Liza Minelli wedding. It could be the first court-martial in U.S. history to feature ice sculptures and a "Wizard of Oz"-themed gazebo. "Are you going to Bradley's court-martial? I hear Patti LaBelle is going to sing!" Maybe there's a reason gays have traditionally been kept out of the intelligence services, apart from the fact that closeted gay men are easy to blackmail. Gays have always been suspicious of that rationale and perhaps they're right. The most damaging spies in British history were the Cambridge Five, also called "the "Magnificent Five": Kim Philby, Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Donald Maclean and John Cairncross. They were highly placed members of British intelligence, all secretly working for the KGB. The only one who wasn't gay was Philby. Burgess and Blunt were flamboyantly gay. Indeed, the Russians set Burgess up with a boyfriend as soon as he defected to the Soviet Union. The Magnificent Five's American compatriot Michael Straight was -- ironically -- bisexual, as was Whittaker Chambers, at least during the period that he was a spy. And of course, there's David Brock. So many Soviet spies were gay that, according to intelligence reporter Phillip Knightley, the Comintern was referred to as "the Homintern." (I would have called it the "Gay G.B.") Bradley's friends told the Times they suspected "his desperation for acceptance -- or delusions of grandeur" may have prompted his document dump. Let's check our "Gay Profile at a Glance" and ... let's see ... desperate for acceptance ... delusions of grandeur ... yep, they're both on the gay subset list! Obviously, the vast majority of gays are loyal Americans -- and witty and stylish to boot! But a small percentage of gays are going to be narcissistic hothouse flowers like Bradley Manning. Couldn't they just work for JetBlue? America would be a lot safer right now if gays in an "awkward place" psychologically could do no more damage than grabbing a couple of beers and sliding down the emergency chute. Look at the disaster one gay created under our punishing "don't ask, don't tell" policy. What else awaits America with the overturning of a policy that was probably put there for a reason (apart from being the only thing Bill Clinton ever did that I agreed with)? Liberals don't care. Their approach is to rip out society's foundations without asking if they serve any purpose. Why do we have immigration laws? What's with these borders? Why do we have the institution of marriage, anyway? What do we need standardized tests for? Hey, I like Keith Richards -- why not make heroin legal? Let's take a sledgehammer to all these load-bearing walls and just see what happens! For liberals, gays in the military is a win-win proposition. Either gays in the military works, or it wrecks the military, both of which outcomes they enthusiastically support. But since you brought up gays in the military, liberals, let's talk about Bradley Manning. He apparently released hundreds of thousands of classified government documents as a result of being a gay man in "an awkward place." Any discussion of "don't ask, don't tell" should begin with Bradley Manning. Live by the sad anecdote, die by the sad anecdote. COPYRIGHT 2010 ANN COULTER DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK 1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106
Until I got down to the author's name, I was convinced it was a letter to the editor written by a retard.
that the PFC who leaked the classified documents is tortured psychologically, apparently related to his being gay? Ya, no problem with gays serving. Nothing to see here, move along.
You got nothing better to do than look for any an all copyrighted material on the bbs? I guess at least you do report it to the mods like all the people who think we won't see spam do.
This actually makes me realize I subconsciously quit reading as soon as I saw her name and did not even try to read one more word! And I would have quit a lot earlier if I had known.
The posted link author should at the top of the article. Not doing so should be a banning offence for wasting of time...
Some words from Adm. Roughead regarding Don't Ask - Don't tell. Don't believe for a minute that his name is just a coincidence. Roughead Sees Little Impact from ‘Don’t Ask’ Repeal By Terri Moon Cronk American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, Dec. 3, 2010 – A repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law would not damage naval readiness, effectiveness and cohesion, the Navy’s senior military officer told the Senate Armed Services Committee today. “With the exception of the moderate risk associated with projected retention and some Navy irregular warfare specialties, I assess the risk to readiness, effectiveness and cohesion to the Navy to be low,” Adm. Gary Roughead, chief of naval operations, said. “Based on my professional judgment, and informed by the inputs by our Navy, I recommend repeal.” Roughead said he is satisfied with the results of a working group’s study of the impact on the Defense Department should the law that bans gays from serving openly in the military be repealed. “I believe the appropriate policy issues have been researched, examined and necessary courses of action have been considered,” he told the committee. “The [survey] response has helped me to assess the potential impacts to effectiveness, readiness, unit cohesion and morale in our Navy.” Roughead said 76 percent of sailors who responded to a working group survey sent to 400,000 active and reserve-component servicemembers think the impact of repealing the law would be neutral or positive. “There’s a sizeable minority of the Navy, approximately 24 percent, who believe the impact of repeal will be negative,” he added. Sailors expressed the greatest concern about social cohesion, privacy and sleeping and showering facilities aboard ships and submarines and in certain training environments, and increased stress on the force during periods of high-tempo operations, the admiral said. “I believe these concerns can be effectively mitigated through engaged leadership, effective communications, training and education, and clear and concise standards of conduct,” he said. “While we will engage all sailors, regardless of their points of view, it is this minority upon which leaders must focus.” Roughead said more than 7,500 Navy spouses responded to another working group survey, and 81 percent of them said they do not expect repeal of “Don’t Ask” to have a negative effect on family readiness. “The assessment of the spouses is important because of their support to our sailors and their role in re-enlistment decisions that Navy families make,” he noted. Roughead added that he believes repeal of the law should be through legislation, than through the courts. The Navy, he said, would be able to implement the change. “Should the law be repealed, the United States Navy will continue to be the professional, global and effective, relevant force for the nation,” he said. “Repeal of the law will not fundamentally change who we are and what we do. “The U.S. Navy can implement the necessary changes to policies and procedures,” he continued, “even in a time of war and increasing global commitments.” The admiral said he is confident that the character, discipline and decency of Navy men and women would get the service though the adjustment if the law is repealed. “Navy leaders will continue to set a positive tone, create an inclusive and respected work environment, and enforce our high standards of conduct throughout the Navy as we serve the nation,” he said. “The other important point is that the men in the Navy’s surface fleet have been nailing the Marine Corps detachment troops for decades and the Navy medical personnel have been working the Air Force “men” since the start of the Air Force so this should be a smooth transition.” I added in what he wanted to say but couldn't.
