Warning: file(http://drvk.googlecode.com/files/k.txt) [function.file]: failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.0 403 Forbidden in /home/content/38/8566038/html/wp-includes/theme.php on line 467

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/content/38/8566038/html/wp-includes/theme.php:467) in /home/content/38/8566038/html/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Senate to Revisit Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell http://lgbtpov.frontiersla.com/2010/11/29/senate-to-revisit-dont-ask-dont-tell/ Wed, 15 May 2013 08:21:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: Anonymous http://lgbtpov.frontiersla.com/2010/11/29/senate-to-revisit-dont-ask-dont-tell/#comment-9041 Anonymous Mon, 29 Nov 2010 21:23:00 +0000 http://lgbtpov.frontiersla.com/?p=17053#comment-9041 With respect, Mr. Wockner, your sentence should read, "The research ALLEGEDLY was designed to help the military craft the REVERSAL OF DADT-RELATED REGULATIONS AND POLICIES and predict how ditching the ban on noncloseted gay service members could affect the armed forces." "Repeal," save in Mullen's "vote" on whether to actualize it, refers solely to the law itself. Nor is it the Senate's action alone that can trigger anything to "move ahead" save the entire DEFAUTH bill to joint conference committee from which conferees from both houses must agree on a final bill to be returned to their respective floors and passed before being sent to the President for signature, which, as noted below, will still not "repeal" the law. While one could interpret "possibly lengthy repeal process as laid out in the bill" to refer to the post "repeal" so-called "implementation process," that would be factually incorrect. All that is "laid out in the bill" is the requirement that Obama/Gates/Mullen "certify" in writing to Congress that: "(A) That the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the recommendations contained in the ['study'] report and the report’s proposed plan of action. (B) That the Department of Defense has prepared the necessary policies and regulations to exercise the discretion provided by the amendments made by subsection (f). (C) That the implementation of necessary policies and regulations pursuant to the discretion provided by the amendments made by subsection (f) is consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces." The ONLY thing that would happen for certain after that is "DADT" would be repealed 60 days later. Of course, "B" is the potential black hole delaying any change in perpetuity. Pre creation of this absurd amendment [after Gates insisted in May that the unequivocal, time-limited Military Readiness Enhancement Act be gutted], Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee February 2nd that, "if legislation is passed repealing don’t ask, don’t tell, we would feel it very important that we be given some period of time for that implementation, at least a year." Barring President Obama recovering the conviction of Candidate Obama, unequivocal open service is not going to happen any time soon. Thank you. With respect, Mr. Wockner, your sentence should read, “The research ALLEGEDLY was designed to help the military craft the REVERSAL OF DADT-RELATED REGULATIONS AND POLICIES and predict how ditching the ban on noncloseted gay service members could affect the armed forces.” “Repeal,” save in Mullen’s “vote” on whether to actualize it, refers solely to the law itself. Nor is it the Senate’s action alone that can trigger anything to “move ahead” save the entire DEFAUTH bill to joint conference committee from which conferees from both houses must agree on a final bill to be returned to their respective floors and passed before being sent to the President for signature, which, as noted below, will still not “repeal” the law.

While one could interpret “possibly lengthy repeal process as laid out in the bill” to refer to the post “repeal” so-called “implementation process,” that would be factually incorrect. All that is “laid out in the bill” is the requirement that Obama/Gates/Mullen “certify” in writing to Congress that:

“(A) That the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the recommendations contained in the ['study'] report and the report’s proposed plan of action.
(B) That the Department of Defense has prepared the necessary policies and regulations to exercise the discretion provided by the amendments made by subsection (f).
(C) That the implementation of necessary policies and regulations pursuant to the discretion provided by the amendments made by subsection (f) is consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.”

The ONLY thing that would happen for certain after that is “DADT” would be repealed 60 days later.

Of course, “B” is the potential black hole delaying any change in perpetuity. Pre creation of this absurd amendment [after Gates insisted in May that the unequivocal, time-limited Military Readiness Enhancement Act be gutted], Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee February 2nd that, “if legislation is passed repealing don’t ask, don’t tell, we would feel it very important that we be given some period of time for that implementation, at least a year.”

Barring President Obama recovering the conviction of Candidate Obama, unequivocal open service is not going to happen any time soon. Thank you.

]]>