Panetta: So far, DADT A "Non-Event"

[Formaldehyde]

In comparison to how many discharges total? How many of those discharges were voluntary? You do know that claiming to be homosexual in the service was a guranteed way to get out of an enlistment contract right? How many of those discharges had additional misconduct associated with them? Do you know?

Do you know instead of merely speculating?

And those are just the ones reported to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. I seriously doubt they were complaining they outed themselves. Do you have any actual proof there were other reasons?

I've been a military paralegal for over 25 years. I can safely say, without hesistation, that every, single discharge I worked that was solely for homosexuality, was because the person was requesting voluntarily to disclose that status in order to get out of the military. In every other instance where the discharge was not voluntary, there were additional acts of misconduct which had nothing to do with the sexuality, which would have still removed them from service.

There have been hundreds, if not thousands, of documented cases reported in the media which didn't fit either of those conditions. How about providing some actual data to support your allegations.

Fortunately, this form of harassment and discrimination is now prohibited by law despite numerous Republican congressmen and politicians even still trying to reimplement it. They obviously wouldn't feel they have to do so if those they were trying to persecute fit either of the categories you just mentioned. Ironically, it would be a "non-event" instead of blatant discrimination towards gays and even straight women who simply didn't want to have sex against their will.

 

[BasketCase]

And the crowd goes silent.

Ahem. You spoke way too soon there. Next time, let the thread keep going for more than four posts before you draw the above conclusion. Extra irony points here, because MobBoss spoke up right after you posted the above.

It's only been.....I don't remember how long, but only a few months or so since DADT was repealed. Nowhere near enough time to see what the fallout will be. I do know this, though: the repeal of DADT is creating terrorists. Yes, you heard that right. Repeal of DADT, creating terrorists. Devout Muslims such as the Taliban hate gays. In fact, they execute gays. The repeal of DADT is drawing more of them into the suicide-bomber ranks.

However, I have a feeling you and yours don't care, and that you consider the repeal of DADT the right thing to do even if more suicide bombers blow stuff up?

 

[MobBoss]

Do you know instead of merely speculating?

Since my entire career over 25 years specifically deals with it; I think I have a far more informed idea of it than you do. But to put it into a ball park figure, since the military recruits to a static number (the size of the military is a set number) and the goal of recruiting is to replace all of those leaving service each year, a good ballpark figure for those leaving service would be in the area of 160,000+ a year during the last 10 years or so. Thats the overall turnover rate. Average number discharged for homosexuality the last 10 years or so is about 600 per year. 600 divided by 160,000 is .3 percent.......

And those are just the ones reported to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. I seriously doubt they were complaining they outed themselves. Do you have any actual proof there were other reasons?

Aside from the fact that I personally work such cases on a weekly basis? It may come as a shock to you Form, but admin separations can be for multiple reasons, and often are. You might want to scan the UCMJ for some examples.

There have been hundreds, if not thousands, of documented cases reported in the media which didn't fit either of those conditions. Instead of making an appeal to authority, which a paralegal hardly qualifies in the first place, how about providing some actual data to support your allegations.

This is my career...my profession for 25 years. Dont presume to lecture me on what I know for a fact. Again, all you know about it is what you can cut and paste from a wiki page. I have provided actual data. Dont like it? Oh well.

Fortunately, this form of harassment and discrimination is now prohibited by law despite numerous Republican congressmen and politicians even still trying to reimplement it.

A lot of what your links allege was also prohibited by DADT as well, and yet it didnt stop such things from being alledged.

My experience has been there has been a lot less persecution than has been found to be factual. Does it occur? Sure. But its pretty darn rare to find legitimate cases of it ongoing. Army Command Policy (AR 600-20) was very clear about the legal limits of DADT, and in my experience, in the vast majority of cases, commanders were advised of those restrictions and they were adhered to.

They obviously wouldn't feel they have to do so if those they were trying to persecute fit either of the categories you just mentioned. Ironically, it would be a "non-event" instead of blatant discrimination towards gays and even straight women who simply didn't want to have sex against their will.

It may come as a shock to you as well that not every case of discrimination or harassment is legitimate either. Proper investigation is required to determine whether a complaint is legitimate or not. The military has reams of regulation in place to cover this stuff because it can be a morale killer in units. Each complaint should be taken seriously, and investigated to the fullest extent possible to determine the facts. Not every allegation bears fruit, and in some cases, the one making the allegation ends up being discharged for making false statements against other soldiers.

 

[Formaldehyde]

So you really have no actual data to corroborate your own personal opinions, which are contradicted by numerous reports in the media that claim quite differently?

Once again, the figures I provided earlier are not the entire number of DADT cases. They are merely the ones reported to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. But it doesn't matter what percentage it actually is because DADT ruined the lives of thousands of brave soldiers who did nothing wrong other than being outed by homophobes or those who had personal axes to grind.

Fortunately, nobody in the military can persecute gays in this way anymore, much less heterosexual women. Baby steps.

 

[Dachs]

One particularly fierce military force in history was all dudes with boners for each others.

The Sacred Band of Thebes is not a very good model for the modern United States Army.

Also, it was "particularly fierce" (read: "particularly fierce" is not an accurate description of their relevance on the battlefield even in tactical terms) for like, three decades, if that.

And if you're thinking of the Spartans, you're wrong.

 

[MobBoss]

So you really have no actual data to corroborate your own personal opinions, which are contradicted by numerous reports in the media that claim quite differently?

I just gave you actual data. If you choose to ignore it, thats on you. The only thing you have provided is a largely ambiguous wiki link which fails to explain what I mentioned.

Once again, the figures I provided earlier are not the entire number of DADT cases. They are merely the ones reported to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

Which in turn got them from the Department of Defense. Perhaps you should read those links the wiki provided? The actual numbers separated should be easily gotten via a FOIA request. Its not like its a secret or anything, but simply a matter of record.

But it doesn't matter what percentage it actually is because DADT ruined the lives of thousands of brave soldiers who did nothing wrong other than being outed by homophobes or those who had personal axes to grind.

Oh please, cut it with the drama. As I said before, the actual majority of the cases I personally worked on were soldiers that claimed to be homosexual and were request separation based upon that sexual preference. It was a quick way to get out of an enlistment contract to be honest, and still resulted in an honorable discharge.

Fortunately, nobody in the military can persecute gays in this way anymore, much less heterosexual women. Baby steps.

Yeah, they passed a law and all persecution ended. Right.

I mean you seriously cant believe that, can you?

 

[Arakhor]

It's only been.....I don't remember how long, but only a few months or so since DADT was repealed. Nowhere near enough time to see what the fallout will be. I do know this, though: the repeal of DADT is creating terrorists. Yes, you heard that right. Repeal of DADT, creating terrorists. Devout Muslims such as the Taliban hate gays. In fact, they execute gays. The repeal of DADT is drawing more of them into the suicide-bomber ranks.

Do you have any evidence for that ludicrous assumption?

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

Ahem. You spoke way too soon there. Next time, let the thread keep going for more than four posts before you draw the above conclusion. Extra irony points here, because MobBoss spoke up right after you posted the above.

Yeah it was only a few hours of the thread being posted, no one came to the defense of the old policy. But you're right, it was post number 4, which demonstrates exactly what I was saying... no one was speaking up in defense of the policy, four hours into the thread being active.

MobBoss speaking up not particularly in defense of the policy, but arguing that it was too soon to tell. Which is tacit agreement that the policy changed, and nothing happened. Extra irony points, when coming from one of the most outspoken members in defense of the reasons behind having DADT.

It's only been.....I don't remember how long, but only a few months or so since DADT was repealed. Nowhere near enough time to see what the fallout will be. I do know this, though: the repeal of DADT is creating terrorists.

See, now this is not an example of irony. This would be satire, absurdism, Dadaism.

Yes, you heard that right.

Technically I saw it, without seeing it. I read someone's writing about it, and have not observed any facts supporting the ridiculous statement.

Repeal of DADT, creating terrorists. Devout Muslims such as the Taliban hate gays. In fact, they execute gays.

I didn't know that! Thank you for educating me.

Now that you've taught me about how gays are mistreated elsewhere, I suppose we should also mistreat gay people, to conform and display our moral cowardice. That makes total sense! Thanks again.

The repeal of DADT is drawing more of them into the suicide-bomber ranks.

I also hear that praying to God and waving the American flag draws some Muslim extremists into the ranks of suicide bombing. I also hear that paying your taxes, mowing your lawn, eating Rice Krispies, and enjoying freedom causes terrorists to hate us. You know where I hear that from? They're the silliest sort of people on the planet, and they make the silliest arguments, leading us into wars based on a fear of things that aren't happening or don't exist. Like Saddam's WMDs.

However, I have a feeling you and yours don't care, and that you consider the repeal of DADT the right thing to do even if more suicide bombers blow stuff up?

Kind sir, you've convinced me that the only logical course of action is to beg Allah for forgiveness, because my fear of dying in a terrorist attack, statistically much smaller than being hit by lightning, is stronger than my desire to live freely and fairly, and treat others the same way.


If we began executing gay people for being gay, would that appease the terrorists? No. And if we did, we'd be terrorists. You know, I'm not afraid of suicide bombers or the thick-headed, dark-ages values they cling to. They, like their ridiculous cult, are in the extreme minority, and their philosophy is much like their tactics of terrorizing innocent people and blowing themselves up: suicide. The only person who should be afraid of a terrorist is the guy strapping a bomb to his own chest, because his life is in the hands of a madman who hates living beings and wants them to die, and has nothing to live for but the broken promise of afterlife whores. The rest of us have lives worth living, which means we're too busy having fun to surrender to sandy suicidal idiots who are literally dying to get laid.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I just gave you actual data. If you choose to ignore it, thats on you. The only thing you have provided is a largely ambiguous wiki link which fails to explain what I mentioned.

No you didn't. You merely cited numbers without any reputable source which are directly contradicted by those I provided from a clearly reputable organization. The Wiki article makes it quite clear that those were not the entire number of victims by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh please, cut it with the drama. As I said before, the actual majority of the cases I personally worked on were soldiers that claimed to be homosexual and were request separation based upon that sexual preference. It was a quick way to get out of an enlistment contract to be honest, and still resulted in an honorable discharge.

It isn't "drama" at all to properly draw attention to how this absurd law has literally ruined the careers of thousands of brave and honorable soldiers.

And again, using your own personal experiences which are directly contradicted by numerous documented accounts and experts on this topic is hardly a refutation. It is just your personal opinion without any actual supporting sources. Look how many times that has already been shown to be wrong in numerous past threads on this particular topic. Nearly one year later, and the repeal of DADT is considered by the experts to be a "non-event" instead of one which has seriously jeopardized the effectiveness of our combat troops.

You make it sound like there was no witch hunt at all when the evidence clearly shows just the opposite. DADT was supposed to eliminate these absurd persecutions by making it illegal to even ask, instead of being an excuse to continue to persecute suspected gays while even being used to take advantage of heterosexual women.

Yeah, they passed a law and all persecution ended. Right.

I mean you seriously cant believe that, can you?

The legal persecution finally did. One can only hope those who were responsible will eventually be held accountable for their reprehensible acts.

No, there will likely always be homophobic bigots in the military who will use their authority to make the lives of suspected gays and heterosexual women who refuse to have sex as rough as they possibly can. And they will likely go unpunished in the vast majority of cases even when they do report these individuals to their superiors. What could I have possibly stated which made you jump to that completely absurd conclusion of my actual opinions?

 

[MobBoss]

No you didn't. You merely cited numbers without any reputable source which are directly contradicted by those I provided from a clearly reputable organization. The Wiki article makes it quite clear that those were not the entire number of victims by any stretch of the imagination.

You need a source? OK. Here is a link that confirms my point: http://dailyuw.com/news/2010/oct/19/dont-ask-dont-tell-by-the-numbers/

Without disputing the validity of that claim, however, we must consider the question of scale. Exactly how many soldiers have been dismissed from the U.S. military for being gay? A congressional report states that between 1994 (the first full year during which the policy was in operation) and 2008, 12,785 soldiers were kicked out of the military under DADT.

#During the same time, 90,302 were discharged for drug use, 55,790 for being overweight and 39,454 for being pregnant. Of total unplanned (non-retirement) discharges, homosexuality accounted for less than 1 percent. Regardless of the individual anecdotes, DADT is not bleeding the military dry

Like I said, other discharge reasons, like drug use vastly overshadow those separated under DADT.

Your link also says this, Form:

The number of discharges per fiscal year under DADT dropped sharply after the September 11 attacks and has remained comparatively low through to the repeal.

It isn't "drama" at all to properly draw attention to how this absurd law has literally ruined the careers of thousands of brave and honorable soldiers.

You want official? I'll give you a very official link reporting on this: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30113.pdf

Statistics from this link:

First, we found that the large majority of the discharges for homosexual conduct are based on the statements of service members who identify themselves as
homosexual, as opposed to cases involving homosexual acts. The services
believe that most of these statements — although not all of them — involve
service members who voluntarily elect to disclose their sexual orientation to their peers, supervisors or commanders. The increase in the number of discharges for homosexual conduct since 1994 is attributable to this increase in statement cases.
Discharges for homosexual acts and marriages has declined by 20% over the past
three years [1994-1997]. Second, most of those discharged under the policy are
junior personnel with very little time in the military, and most of the increase in
discharges for homosexual conduct has occurred in this sector. The number of
cases involving career service members is relatively small. Third, the great
majority of discharges for homosexual conduct are uncontested and are
processed administratively. Finally, more than 98% of all members discharged
in Fiscal Year 1997 under the policy received honorable discharges. (Separation
of enlisted members in their first 180 days of military service are generally
uncharacterized.) Discharges under other than honorable conditions or courtsmartial
for consensual homosexual conduct are infrequent and have invariably
involved aggravating circumstances or additional charges.22

Please note the highlighted parts which correspond with my points mentioned earlier in this thread.

Also:

23 For example, see Moskos, Charles, “The Law Works — And Here’s Why,” Army Times,October 27, 2003: 62. “Homosexual separations for whatever reason are one-tenth of 1%of military personnel. Of those discharges, more than 80% are the result of voluntary‘statements’ by service members. The number of discharges for homosexual ‘acts’ hasdeclined over the past decade. Gay-rights advocates argue that the growth in discharges forstatements is due largely to commanders improperly seeking out gays. Undoubtedly, that happens sometimes. Yet commanders also report being worried they might be accused of conducting ‘witch hunts,’ so they tend to process out an alleged homosexual only when a case of ‘telling’ is dumped in their laps. Let me offer another possible explanation. Whether you’re gay or not, saying you are is now the quickest way out of the military with an honorable discharge. And identifying oneself as gay carries less stigma in our society than it once did. Consider that whites are proportionately three times more likely than blacks to be discharged for homosexuality. Are commanders singling out whites and investigating their sexual orientation? Highly unlikely. The stigma against homosexuality is stronger among blacks than whites, and thus blacks are less willing to declare they are gay. Gay advocates are quick to draw an analogy between the exclusion of homosexuals and racial segregation in the military. Many black soldiers find that analogy offensive.” See
also: Christenson, Sig, “Recruits Deny Lackland Harassment,” San Antonio Express-News, February 7, 1999. These and other articles assert that claims of homosexuality can serve as a means of terminating a military obligation. “Mario isn’t in the Army now. In March he left Fort Bragg with an honorable discharge. Some may find Mario’s willingness to use his homosexuality as a means of shirking his commitment objectionable.” Lamme, Robert, “Dazed in the Military,” The Advocate, No. 673, January 24, 1995: 46.

Further, the numbers below confirm my earlier estimations:

During the period covered by these data, the average percentage discharged was
0.064%. For the period prior to the implementation of the new policy (and law), i.e.
FY1980 to FY1992, the average percentage discharged was 0.060%. For the period
FY1993 to FY2005, the average was 0.062%. The difference in the percentage
discharged before and following the implementation of the new policy was
statistically insignificant. Thus, although the data appear to move in differing
directions prior to and following the implementation of the new policy, statistical
analysis suggests that such changes may reflect random fluctuations in the data.

Table 1. Homosexual Conduct Administrative Separation Discharge Statistics
Fiscal Year /Total Number of Homosexual Discharges/Percentage of Total
Active Force
1980/ 1,754/ 0.086
1981 /1,817/ 0.088
1982 /1,998/ 0.095
1983 /1,815 /0.085
1984 /1,822 /0.085
1985 /1,660 /0.077
1986 /1,643/ 0.076
1987 /1,380 /0.063
1988 /1,101 /0.051
1989 /996 /0.047
1990 /941 /0.046
1991 /949 /0.048
1992 /730 /0.040
1993 /682/ 0.040
1994 /617 /0.038
1995 /757 /0.050
1996 /858 /0.058
1997 /997 /0.069
1998 /1,145/ 0.081
1999 /1,034 /0.075
2000 /1,212 /0.088
2001 /1,227 /0.089
2002 /885 /0.063
2003 /770 /0.054
2004 /653 /0.046
2005 /726 /0.052
2006 /612 /0.044

And again, using your own personal experiences which are directly contradicted by numerous documented accounts and experts on this topic is hardly a refutation.

See above.

It is just your personal opinion without any actual supporting sources. Look how many times that has already been shown to be wrong in numerous past threads on this particular topic. Nearly one year later, and the repeal of DADT is considered by the experts to be a "non-event" instead of one which has seriously jeopardized the effectiveness of our combat troops.

Again, ever hear of inertia?

You make it sound like there was no witch hunt at all when the evidence clearly shows just the opposite. DADT was supposed to eliminate these absurd persecutions by making it illegal to even ask, instead of being an excuse to continue to persecute suspected gays while even being used to take advantage of heterosexual women.

This official report would seem to largely disagree with your unsupported claims. I'm not saying 'witchhunts' didnt occur...they most assuredly did, but simply not to the ratio or extent as claimed.

The legal persecution finally did. One can only hope those who were responsible will eventually be held accountable for their reprehensible acts.

Since those acts were conducted largely from within the legal administrative process at the time....dont hold your breath.

Well, I think this discussion is over Form. I just knocked it out of the park.

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

Well, I think this discussion is over Form. I just knocked it out of the park.

Only if we're judging it on-par with the special olympics.

 

[MobBoss]

Only if we're judging it on-par with the special olympics.

Yeah, I can see where validation of my career experience in this would upset you. /Oh well.

Fwiw, i'd rather hit it out of the park in the special olympics, than strike out miserably. Ouch.

 

[Arakhor]

It's still a complete non-event so far.

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

Yeah, I can see where validation of my career experience in this would upset you. /Oh well.

Where on earth did that conclusion come from?

 

[MobBoss]

Where on earth did that conclusion come from?

From the thread. But if you dont have anything really meaningful to add aside from taking shots at me making my argument, maybe not. Your choice I guess.

 

[Flying Pig]

Yeah, they passed a law and all persecution ended. Right.

I mean you seriously cant believe that, can you?

Now their NCOs and Officers can address any persecution if and when it occours, rather than simply bundling their soldier out of the Army - and if they're not willing to do that, they're in the wrong trade.

 

[MobBoss]

Now their NCOs and Officers can address any persecution if and when it occours, rather than simply bundling their soldier out of the Army - and if they're not willing to do that, they're in the wrong trade.

FP, that was also the case under DADT. Part of the reason why that law was enacted was to also try and quell violence and investigations regardint the issue.

The point being, while Clintons policy is often referred to as 'Dont ask, Dont tell' there was also a third part to that: 'Dont pursue'. People tend to forget that.

 

[Disgustipated]

And the crowd goes silent.

That's what happens when you're so right that it actually shuts the other side down, as literally every single one of their talking points was proven absolutely wrong in the real world application of this policy. This is going to be what happens in states where gay people are allowed to get married. Nothing will happen except the wedding service industry will sell more gowns and tuxedos, and more honeymoon vacations will be booked. How wicked! And all those fears about the downfall of western society will no longer be able to be pinned on gay people, because they will be proven to be bigoted nonsense, wholly without merit, completely ungrounded in reality, as all superstitious supremacist nonsense always is.

Considering the Islamic terrorists want to destroy our nation because of it's lack of moral values and decadence, is this really a good ting? I think us adopting Islamic values and morals would prevent future terrorist attacks, and it's something we should consider.

 

[Disgustipated]

FP, that was also the case under DADT. Part of the reason why that law was enacted was to also try and quell violence and investigations regardint the issue.

The point being, while Clintons policy is often referred to as 'Dont ask, Dont tell' there was also a third part to that: 'Dont pursue'. People tend to forget that.

I knew one guy who got out of the navy by saying he was gay. Getting rid of DADT means it's a lot harder to get out of the military the easy way (without a dishonorable discharge on your record).

Although it turns out the guy was actually gay, he was just in the closet. He was actually our roommate for a while. Yes, I had a gay roommate. We never knew for sure he was gay until he got out of the navy, and he left a gay porn video in his room when he moved out. Although the fact he drove a purple car should have been a dead giveaway. He mainly wanted to get out because he couldn't handle it (the workload of the nuclear program that is), not because he was gay or was receiving any threats or whatnot.

 

[MobBoss]

Actually, DADT gave honorable discharges in the overwhelming majority of discharges for homosexuality.

But I agree with you, a lot of them did indeed come out voluntarily in order to exit the service under their own terms. People critical of DADT dont seem to get that that would occur in a large number of instances.