• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

2 women share 1st kiss at US Navy ship's return

There has been HUGE damage to the military and national security due to the repeal of DADT. Testimony in the article 32 hearing last week of PFC Bradley Manning, the Wikileaks source, revealed that his homosexuality was widely known and he had sent his commanding officer a photo of himself dressed as a woman and referred to himself as "Brianna". He stated that he had a gender identity problem. He was so unstable that the bolt had been removed from his weapon and despite all of this his access to classified info was never restricted. His immediate supervisor refused to testify at the hearing. Does anyone really think that if Obama hadn't let it be known that he wanted DADT repealed that Manning's behavior would have been tolerated?
 
There has been HUGE damage to the military and national security due to the repeal of DADT. Testimony in the article 32 hearing last week of PFC Bradley Manning, the Wikileaks source, revealed that his homosexuality was widely known and he had sent his commanding officer a photo of himself dressed as a woman and referred to himself as "Brianna". He stated that he had a gender identity problem. He was so unstable that the bolt had been removed from his weapon and despite all of this his access to classified info was never restricted. His immediate supervisor refused to testify at the hearing. Does anyone really think that if Obama hadn't let it be known that he wanted DADT repealed that Manning's behavior would have been tolerated?

:lamo :lamo
 
There has been HUGE damage to the military and national security due to the repeal of DADT. Testimony in the article 32 hearing last week of PFC Bradley Manning, the Wikileaks source, revealed that his homosexuality was widely known and he had sent his commanding officer a photo of himself dressed as a woman and referred to himself as "Brianna". He stated that he had a gender identity problem. He was so unstable that the bolt had been removed from his weapon and despite all of this his access to classified info was never restricted. His immediate supervisor refused to testify at the hearing. Does anyone really think that if Obama hadn't let it be known that he wanted DADT repealed that Manning's behavior would have been tolerated?

most transvestites are not homosexuals and most gay men don't dress up in skirts hose etc
 
There has been HUGE damage to the military and national security due to the repeal of DADT. Testimony in the article 32 hearing last week of PFC Bradley Manning, the Wikileaks source, revealed that his homosexuality was widely known and he had sent his commanding officer a photo of himself dressed as a woman and referred to himself as "Brianna". He stated that he had a gender identity problem. He was so unstable that the bolt had been removed from his weapon and despite all of this his access to classified info was never restricted. His immediate supervisor refused to testify at the hearing. Does anyone really think that if Obama hadn't let it be known that he wanted DADT repealed that Manning's behavior would have been tolerated?

Being that was your first post...wow. Not that I am old hat, but wow.
 
I guess those that attacked my opinion didn't bother following the article 32 hearings. No doubt most of the left leaning media completely ignored the story. However I've included a link to a Politico report of day 1 of the hearings.

A struggle with emotional problems and even his gender may affect the culpability of an Army private accused of leaking thousands of classified military reports and diplomatic cables to Wikileaks, the defense argued at a preliminary hearing here Saturday.

As a clearer view of the defense’s strategy in the high-profile criminal investigation emerged, a lawyer for Pfc. Bradley Manning pressed a government investigator about whether she found articles he’d printed out about “gender identity disorder” and “gender reassignment,” including one about transsexuals in the military engaging in “flight into hyper masculinity.”
Graham told Maj. Matthew Kemkes the information found in Manning’s quarters at a forward operating base in Iraq last year wasn’t a surprise to her. “We already knew before arriving … that PFC Manning was homosexual and — I don’t know the proper term — transvestite, or was interested in those topics,” she said.

Another defense lawyer, Capt. Paul Bouchard, said twice later in the hearing that Manning had created “an alter-ego” under the name “Breanna Manning.”

Another investigator who testified Saturday, former Army special agent Troy Bettencourt, said Manning had “at least one” email address as well as a Facebook profile of himself as “Breanna.”

Witnesses also said that Manning, an intelligence analyst, sent an e-mail to his immediate supervisor in which Manning included a photo of himself dressed as a woman and said he’d concluded he was suffering from gender identity disorder.


Read more: Defense cites Bradley Manning
 
^^^^ That has nothing to do with allowing LGBT people to serve openly.
 
I guess those that attacked my opinion didn't bother following the article 32 hearings. No doubt most of the left leaning media completely ignored the story. However I've included a link to a Politico report of day 1 of the hearings.

A struggle with emotional problems and even his gender may affect the culpability of an Army private accused of leaking thousands of classified military reports and diplomatic cables to Wikileaks, the defense argued at a preliminary hearing here Saturday.

As a clearer view of the defense’s strategy in the high-profile criminal investigation emerged, a lawyer for Pfc. Bradley Manning pressed a government investigator about whether she found articles he’d printed out about “gender identity disorder” and “gender reassignment,” including one about transsexuals in the military engaging in “flight into hyper masculinity.”
Graham told Maj. Matthew Kemkes the information found in Manning’s quarters at a forward operating base in Iraq last year wasn’t a surprise to her. “We already knew before arriving … that PFC Manning was homosexual and — I don’t know the proper term — transvestite, or was interested in those topics,” she said.

Another defense lawyer, Capt. Paul Bouchard, said twice later in the hearing that Manning had created “an alter-ego” under the name “Breanna Manning.”

Another investigator who testified Saturday, former Army special agent Troy Bettencourt, said Manning had “at least one” email address as well as a Facebook profile of himself as “Breanna.”

Witnesses also said that Manning, an intelligence analyst, sent an e-mail to his immediate supervisor in which Manning included a photo of himself dressed as a woman and said he’d concluded he was suffering from gender identity disorder.


Read more: Defense cites Bradley Manning

This has nothing to do with Don't ask, Don't Tell and the ability of homosexuals to serve openly in the military.
 
^^^^ That has nothing to do with allowing LGBT people to serve openly.

It has plenty to do with it. Several posters have written that the repeal of DADT has not harmed the military. This case appears to shows that it has. Shortly after Obama promised in his 2010 State of the Union address to repeal DADT, Secretary Gates issued directives making it much harder to discharge anyone under the policy. In effect the writing was on the wall and most career military know better than to buck the system. This "hands off" approach contributed to Manning keeping his job and security clearance. What else could have persuaded his chain of command to do so? He would often curl into a ball on the floor while at work and refuse to interact with his coworkers. He physically struck a female soldier he worked with and threw numerous temper tantrums. His unit was so spooked by his behavior that they removed the bolt from his weapon. But still he was allowed unsupervised access to classified material everyday.
His defense is that he was so far gone that the fault for his actions lie with his chain of command. He is using his homosexuality as his ticket to freedom. At least that's what some of his fellow gay soldiers think:

If he’s guilty, Manning not only violated security protocol and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, he violated the trust of his colleagues, the Army and his countrymen. Now that he prepares to stand trial, he has shown himself to be willing to sacrifice honorable gay and lesbian servicemembers to avoid responsibility. Lawyers for Manning are claiming that his struggle with his sexual orientation contributed to emotional problems that should have precluded him from working in a classified environment. This shameful defense is an offense to the tens of thousands of gay servicemembers who served honorably under “don’t ask, don’t tell.” We all served under the same law, with the same challenges and struggles. We did not commit treason because of it.
Manning
 
I see. So you're complaining because it DOESN'T bother you? :roll:

No, that is your misconstruing of my position. Don't blame me for your shortcomings in understanding.

The owner of the newspaper thought so.

The paper's owner thought it to be on par with the famous kiss of the sailor in WWII kissing the woman in the street in NY too....I find that agenda type of thought to be what is killing the news paper business....Not totally, but aiding at the least.

Are you suggesting that someone should have the power to censor the news?

You don't think that papers "censor" what they print on a daily basis? Let me know when you decide to be truthful.

Then just bury your face in the comics section

Don't have time for them. I have a job.

Jesus had two daddies

What would you know of Jesus?

I see hypocrisy

Why? Is there a mirror in front of you?


j-mac
 
You kidding, a win for America? I can think of a lot more important things that could be wins for America. Your standards are lower than an earthworm's navel.

of course its a win for america, its an example of how we progress and freedom grows and its a stepping stone in the slow removal of bigotry, discrimination and inequality.

Thats what america is, its about freedom and equality and righting its wrongs if you cant see that i seriously wonder how you view america.
Are there other things we need? OF COURSE but its always a WIN for our great country when discrimination, inequality and bigotry LOSE:mrgreen:
 
of course its a win for america, its an example of how we progress and freedom grows and its a stepping stone in the slow removal of bigotry, discrimination and inequality.

Thats what america is, its about freedom and equality and righting its wrongs if you cant see that i seriously wonder how you view america.
Are there other things we need? OF COURSE but its always a WIN for our great country when discrimination, inequality and bigotry LOSE:mrgreen:


You think a picture in a biased news paper removes the bigotry that exists?


j-mac
 
You think a picture in a biased news paper removes the bigotry that exists?


j-mac


wow you have a VERY big imagination? How did you have come to that conclusion that conclusion based on what I said? LMAO Theres nothing I said that even hints of anything close to that ball park.
 
wow you have a VERY big imagination? How did you have come to that conclusion that conclusion based on what I said? LMAO Theres nothing I said that even hints of anything close to that ball park.


So you didn't type "...the slow removal of bigotry".... Now I guess this is the part where you say things then come back and say that you didn't actually say them...Tell ya what, I don't have the patience for that crap today, so why don't you try, and I do mean truly try and type something intelligent, then we can have a conversation. See that is how adults do it....k?

j-mac
 
So you didn't type "...the slow removal of bigotry".... Now I guess this is the part where you say things then come back and say that you didn't actually say them...Tell ya what, I don't have the patience for that crap today, so why don't you try, and I do mean truly try and type something intelligent, then we can have a conversation. See that is how adults do it....k?

j-mac
]

LMAO oh the irony, did you just say intelligent?

so in what english class does it say that "the slow removal of bigotry" = the existence of bigotry has completely ended. LMAO

sorry, you are reaching and failing and now trying to save face, no where in my post did I suggest that bigotry would no longer exist, nice try

now YOU come back when YOU are ready to have a HONEST conversation like adults do LMAO
 
]

LMAO oh the irony, did you just say intelligent?

so in what english class does it say that "the slow removal of bigotry" = the existence of bigotry has completely ended. LMAO

sorry, you are reaching and failing and now trying to save face, no where in my post did I suggest that bigotry would no longer exist, nice try

now YOU come back when YOU are ready to have a HONEST conversation like adults do LMAO


Run along boy, you bother me.


j-mac
 
No, that is your misconstruing of my position. Don't blame me for your shortcomings in understanding.

Uh-huh :roll:



The paper's owner thought it to be on par with the famous kiss of the sailor in WWII kissing the woman in the street in NY too....I find that agenda type of thought to be what is killing the news paper business....Not totally, but aiding at the least.

Yes, the internet has nothing to do with it. It's this picture that's killing newspapers :roll:


You don't think that papers "censor" what they print on a daily basis? Let me know when you decide to be truthful.

You have to put words in my mouth to make an argument? Let me know when you want to make an truthful argument

Then you can address the point I actually made (do you want someone to have the power to censor the newspaper?), instead of the one you wished I made


Don't have time for them. I have a job.

But you have time for this thread?


What would you know of Jesus?

I know he had two fathers

Why? Is there a mirror in front of you?

That was childish. Next time, I suggest you use the "I'm rubber, you're glue" rhyme
 
Last edited:
Run along boy, you bother me.


j-mac

translation: you cant man up like an adult and admit you were wrong, had a knee-jerk reaction and misspoke, its ok I already knew that LOL
 
I see I'm not the only one that j-mac is trying to misrepresent

seems he makes up his own meanings to what he reads, then he argues against things no one said :shrug: pretty funny
 
translation: you cant man up like an adult and admit you were wrong, had a knee-jerk reaction and misspoke, its ok I already knew that LOL


Good Grief....You and Sangha or what ever are two real peas in a pod. I am tired of wasting my time with punks...Grow up.


j-mac
 
Good Grief....You and Sangha or what ever are two real peas in a pod. I am tired of wasting my time with punks...Grow up.


j-mac

you are right its "us" that have the problem even though YOU make stuff up and cant back up YOUR false claims:laughat:

just man up and admit you were wrong and knee-jerk, its no big deal, otherwise you are the only one that needs to grow up and you failing attempts at insults shows that :shrug:
 
Don't ask me why, but I just knew that the first openly gay kiss would come from the Navy. I heard too many Navy jokes. :mrgreen:

Article is here.

For most people its a little tittalating to see 2 women swapping spit....When 2 guys do it you might see a whole different reaction........
 
Tell me exactly how you explain to 3 girls, ages 9, 9 and 7 (yes, twins) why two women are kissing and why it is on the front page of the paper.

The answer has already been provided on this thread, but I'll just add this - there's must scarier **** on the front page of the paper every day. If you don't want to explain it to your kids, don't let them see it.
 
Back
Top Bottom