The Majority of Military Sexual Assault Victims Are Men. ( How could Danno have been so right?)

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Then such uncivility deserves the kind of moderator action people are complaining about.

However divisive the topic of discussion, the way people should discuss it need never be other than civil. Degenerating to insults and the like should have place in the exchNge of views.

You're acting like this whole thing is serious debate and not a bunch of tabloid rubbish. Most of the topics are posted to bait other members and all of it is irredeemably partisan.

You can't expect respectful dialogue when the entire platform is the complete opposite of that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think what is becoming more and more clear is that you DON"T want the discussion to take place, so you instead run interference.

Everyone has heard your opinion.... over and over again.

Everyone has seen you misrepresent my opening post.

Everyone has heard the moderator try to guide the discussion back on topic and AWAY from personality clashes, yet you insist...... IT:S YOUR WAY OR WE DON"T MOVE FORWARD.

Bro you just can't handle the facts as we know them.... and that is, there is a lot of homosexual sexual assaults taking place.

How many are by homosexuals, we don't know, and trust me...... no one wants to find out. (Up there)

Try for just five minutes to take your personality out of the subject line.

And for G_d sakes quit repeating yourself.

Your contention is that there is an increase in sexual assaults in the military and your conclusion for why this is is 'social engineering' and the Democrats for allowing openly gay people into the military.

You have offered zero proof to back this up, because it can't be proven and your idea of proof is no more than innuendo.

I would think that a lot of people here are of the view that there is nothing about being gay that somehow encourages sexual assaults and that perhaps the reasons for the assaults has to do with a bit more than simply "they allowed the gays in and look at what's happened. Danno was right".

Utter #######.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Papa Lazarou

[Danno 1,228]

Your contention is that there is an increase in sexual assaults in the military and your conclusion for why this is is 'social engineering' and the Democrats for allowing openly gay people into the military.

You have offered zero proof to back this up, because it can't be proven and your idea of proof is no more than innuendo.

I would think that a lot of people here are of the view that there is nothing about being gay that somehow encourages sexual assaults and that perhaps the reasons for the assaults has to do with a bit more than simply "they allowed the gays in and look at what's happened. Danno was right".

Utter #######.

To start with, what would add more weight to your POV is if you actually quote "What I wrote" not some interpretation ... dressed up like a quote.

You are going from wrong to dishonest.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Danno, that is essentially your premise for posting this thread, it's in the title (anyone who knows your views on the subject will know exactly why you said 'I was right') and it's throughout the thread. You start with a false premise, one you personally want to believe, and then you've used innuendo to fill in the blanks.

The idea that this is somehow 'debate' is frankly hilarious.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I don't know which is worse, the thought police on the left, or the bigots that seem to congregate on the right

[Danno 1,228]

I don't know which is worse, the thought police on the left, or the bigots that seem to congregate on the right

Don't play in the middle of the road Bro...... ats where you get run over.

[Pooky 3,784]

You're acting like this whole thing is serious debate and not a bunch of tabloid rubbish. Most of the topics are posted to bait other members and all of it is irredeemably partisan.

You can't expect respectful dialogue when the entire platform is the complete opposite of that.

I don't really care where the source material in the OP comes from, or how daft it might be. I'd just like to see people here keep a rein on the personal baiting and insults and argue the subject matter, rather than the poster or the source of their material. It's really not that hard.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Okay, let's play this straight then shall we?(No pun intended)

found the most liberal version of this story so you won't think WND is making it up.Try your best to bear the liberal clap-trap and take note of the facts. Remember Libs "F" things up, then the next wave is ready to charge in with more solutions to fix the problem they created.

Q: Why does the Left make such colossal mistakes with their grand social plans?

A: They don't understand human nature.

Consequently lives are destroyed and untold amounts of money is wasted.

Please explain what you mean by this? What does sexual assault in the military have to do with the Left?

Also, why would you post a picture of two men kissing? They're not assaulting each other, so what does that have to do with the article?

[Danno 1,228]

Okay, let's play this straight then shall we?(No pun intended)

found the most liberal version of this story so you won't think WND is making it up.Try your best to bear the liberal clap-trap and take note of the facts. Remember Libs "F" things up, then the next wave is ready to charge in with more solutions to fix the problem they created.

Q: Why does the Left make such colossal mistakes with their grand social plans?

A: They don't understand human nature.

Consequently lives are destroyed and untold amounts of money is wasted.

Please explain what you mean by this? What does sexual assault in the military have to do with the Left?

Also, why would you post a picture of two men kissing? They're not assaulting each other, so what does that have to do with the article?

I gotta hand it to you Marv, you (alone) asked for clarification rather than "fill in the blanks."

I really wasn't referring to DADT, holy smokes It is not even fully put in place yet, the results of that are 5 years down the road...

but not to worry, it "WILL BE A SUCCESS" (at least for public consumption)

I was loosely referring to the breaking down of social order across the board, civilian life and now that they are dictating military policy it is everywhere there too.

The numbers of attacks are so high, growing so fast.... you must willfully choose to ignore it.

The natural response of young men is to fight, and chase sex.

Thats a powerful force to try to harness.... to keep penned up, and we have taken all the fences down and put signs up.

Now there is no doubt in my mind, most of this sexual assault, is Homosexual in nature. (Though not always by homosexuals)

Haven't we been told over and over, they are already serving... just not openly?

What we don't know (and I don't know) is- What the percentage is?

In your mind The average Gay man is no more likely to act different than a straight recruit. Yet that is nothing but assumption born of your desire...... for it to be true.

I on the other hand am more openminded.

We know that Gays have much higher incidents in many areas of life so why assume anything?

It could be, they are LESS LIKELY to sexual assault others, maybe on average they are more sensitive to the topic?

You don't know and I don't know.

What we do know is that Before DADT is even running we have a huge existing problem of sexual relations between male service members.

If that don't not peak your interest, nothing will.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I gotta hand it to you Marv, you (alone) asked for clarification rather than "fill in the blanks."

I really wasn't referring to DADT, holy smokes It is not even fully put in place yet, the results of that are 5 years down the road...

but not to worry, it "WILL BE A SUCCESS" (at least for public consumption)

I was loosely referring to the breaking down of social order across the board, civilian life and now that they are dictating military policy it is everywhere there too.

The numbers of attacks are so high, growing so fast.... you must willfully choose to ignore it.

The natural response of young men is to fight, and chase sex.

Thats a powerful force to try to harness.... to keep penned up, and we have taken all the fences down and put signs up.

Now there is no doubt in my mind, most of this sexual assault, is Homosexual in nature. (Though not always by homosexuals)

Haven't we been told over and over, they are already serving... just not openly?

What we don't know (and I don't know) is- What the percentage is?

In your mind The average Gay man is no more likely to act different than a straight recruit. Yet that is nothing but assumption born of your desire...... for it to be true.

I on the other hand am more openminded.

We know that Gays have much higher incidents in many areas of life so why assume anything?

It could be, they are LESS LIKELY to sexual assault others, maybe on average they are more sensitive to the topic?

You don't know and I don't know.

What we do know is that Before DADT is even running we have a huge existing problem of sexual relations between male service members.

If that don't not peak your interest, nothing will.

Actually, it's been in affect since around New Year's 2010. We saw a rush of people coming out and admitting they were gay. Nothing was affected by it, on my ship.

One of my friends in High school was gay, I've served with gay men and women for 20 years next March, my younger cousin is gay. I've never felt uncomfortable around them at all, never got hit on, or felt uneasy.

A rapist is a rapist, it doesn't matter what sexual orientation you are.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

DADT was the policy of the past. That your own grasp on this simple fact is that you don't even know that (shocking, not) speaks volumes in regards to the entire subject at which you would have us believe that you are somehow knowledgeable. You aren't Danno.

DADT was policy from 1993 until 2010. Fact.

Obama didn't 'let gays into the military' per your statement. Gays have served in the military since the war of Independence. Fact.

Edited January 4, 2014 by ready4ONE

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

DADT was the policy of the past. That your own grasp on this simple fact is that you don't even know that (shocking, not) speaks volumes in regards to the entire subject at which you would have us believe that you are somehow knowledgeable. You aren't Danno.

DADT was policy from 1993 until 2010. Fact.

Obama didn't 'let gays into the military' per your statement. Gays have served in the military since the war of Independence. Fact.

Truth. Gays have ALWAYS served. They just couldn't do it openly. I believe Clinton started DADT around 1993, and it ended around December 2010. There were always men and women you knew were gay in the military.

[Operator 1,927]

I really wasn't referring to DADT, holy smokes It is not even fully put in place yet, the results of that are 5 years down the road...

but not to worry, it "WILL BE A SUCCESS" (at least for public consumption)

What we do know is that Before DADT is even running we have a huge existing problem of sexual relations between male service members.

If that don't not peak your interest, nothing will.

You might want to look into this a little bit more.

DADT ended on September 20, 2011.

Actually, openly gay men were allowed to serve in both WWII and Vietnam due to personnel shortages.

"Its a fact in the library of Congress, read more about it at your local library" I used to love those stupid AFN commercials.

[Danno 1,228]

Truth. Gays have ALWAYS served. They just couldn't do it openly. I believe Clinton started DADT around 1993, and it ended around December 2010. There were always men and women you knew were gay in the military.

Sure the military is like society full of all kinds of people, good bad straight gay, honest dishonest, wife beaters, child rapers you name it, even Kennedy was Killed by a Former Marine.

Oddly enough some of those who were great soldiers were also the very people who are the subject of this report.

Since the past was harkened on.... care to share what the policy was was from the beginning and forward then.... and how that might have effected ones behavior while he served undetected?

Whoops there I go again, putting things in context.

[Danno 1,228]

You might want to look into this a little bit more.

DADT ended on September 20, 2011.

Actually, openly gay men were allowed to serve in both WWII and Vietnam due to personnel shortages.

"Its a fact in the library of Congress, read more about it at your local library" I used to love those stupid AFN commercials.

It's a big internet out there bro, if you have knowledge of such a big policy change you should provide some proof, not just a map to the library.