U.S. military continues to discharge gay Arab

Discussion in 'Multinational HQ' started by Random_Task, May 23, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. U.S. military continues to discharge gay Arab linguists, and Congress members seek hearing
  2. We can't afford to lose them. Besides, he more or less WAS keeping it to himself.
  3. All together now:

    "Sit on my face and tell me that you love me...."
  4. Apparently we can afford to lose them C_J. The law is a fairly easy one for all to comprehend. Don't get caught in the act and/or don't go around letting your CoC know that you like to smoke pole.

    Personally I couldn't care less about anyone's sexual orientation. But, until the law changes (and it will in time), then old boy is out on his ear.

    Nuff said.
  5. So the US military believes it can find some heterosexual Arabs? Not in this life time- especially on Man-Love Thursday.
  6. How about, just for a change, the US forces follow the British Forces. We allow gay (and transexual) service personnel to serve without hinderance. It works. There have been very few cases where it has caused problems.
  7. His wearing of the bright Pink bhurka was the give away!

    Nice to know that the US allows the persecution of shirt lifters, we Brits have been robbed of one of our national sports!
  8. Well mission accomplished in that the hunt for gays in the US forces if only Osma was 'Gay' im sure that he would be bang to rights by now.

    crazy waste of much needed assets!
  9. look on the bright side, he could always move to UK where he could be employed teaching 4 year olds about the benefits of "Man love".
  10. Seriously, doesn't Uncle Sam know about these people's proclivities?
  11. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    I thought the yanks had a don't ask don't tell policy - whats changed?
  12. He was using DOD networks to explore his... passion. His supervisor caught wind of it, and it was obvious enough that he didn't have to ask.

    However, I personally don't think he violated the policy as I interpret it. So long as he wasn't advertising, and was being more or less discreet, he should have been fine. In fairness though, using the DOD networks in that way would probably be a problem for straight people as well.
  13. Surely the best way to establish if this guy was causing an issue to his unit and colleagues as a whole... is to ask them?

    If they say, "oh yeah, we we're really freaked out by him..." then fair enough, BUT if they say, "What? No, why? He's gay, yeah, but who cares?" then where's the issue?

    Surely someone with his knowledge is essential to the US efforts at this point in time - the fact that he is gay shouldn't really matter.
  14. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    I'm with AH on this - was he really causing any problems by sending a fcuking message, secure system or not. Seems like a draconian over reaction to me.
  15. Oh, I'm all with you there. It is a text-book example of an overreaction. His colleagues seemed to have no problem with it, and I don't believe it should have been an issue.