Congressman on Provost murder and DADT: the military 'doesn't want that discussion to take place'

Push this murder investigation as hard as they did TAILHOOK

let every G*D DAMN person of EVERY rank know their career is on the line, if ANY cover up occurs.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 13:14:43 PM CDT

I agree Petey

And I m thrilled that this Congressman has stood up and said something about it.  Far too often our elected officials stand back and do nothing.  It is refreshing to see this, and right after the Representative who has become the new face of repealing DADT on Rachel Maddow a few nights back.

Bob is a good rep, and you should click through to read his bio.  A former Freedom Rider from the 60's and a science and technology buff to boot.  It's nice to see a little sanity in Congress, we see so little of it.  

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 13:26:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I could almost believe in god

from such a vigorous response to this tragedy, from this Congressman and others.  The positive changes that have come about since the horror of Matthew Shepard's murder are about to be joined by the consequences of the fact that the gov't and the military are STUCK with the horror of this sailor's murder whether they want it or not, and this conversation will be had whether they want it or not.

---

by: Jake @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 13:34:36 PM CDT

I really don't get it?

Isn't the fact that this sailor was gay enough? That is the only reason the possibility exists under DADT that he would not have been able to report being harassed. What is the military going to say, because it isn't true in this case the questions should not be raised at all? Investigation or no investigation the cat is out of the bag. It is time for the military to speak up on how they are meeting the needs of gay and lesbian soldiers, sailors and marines. It's not as if we don't know already....  

Always thinking about it...

---

by: kudo451 @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 14:28:10 PM CDT

So sad

the levels of secrecy we force our courageous, gay soldiers in this country to partake in -- they can't even report harassment when threatened, for fear of being dishonorably discharged. Imagine that? The murderers are very likely to walk free, for we may never know who they were, but it was Provost who was at risk of being dishonorably discharged. There are some days I wonder why I fight so hard for this country to change, perhaps it is beyond all reasonable hope?

---

by: RyansTake @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 14:44:23 PM CDT

There is zero incentive for the Pentagon to admit this was a sexual orientation-related hate crime.

Actually I think "less than zero incentives" is a better way to put it.  Then you could talk about the cultural disincentives there are in the military for treating gay service members as anything other than Untermenschen.

---

by: oddjob @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 16:32:21 PM CDT

With respect, there's misconception about DADT

Reporting harassment based on homophobia neither means that one IS gay nor requires one to "tell" that he or she IS gay if they are.

Barry Winchell was killed for being PERCEIVED as gay because he was in a relationship with a transgender person. HE never considered himself gay.

We are not served by misstating that the policy is even more heinous than it already is.

Yes, some people fear that reporting harassment will, in violation of the policy,trigger an investigation but the complaint alone does NOT justify such action by his/her commanding officer. As long as DADTDPDH remains law, we must demand that it be enforced consistently which includes DON'T HARASS as well as the ban on a commander ASKing the person reporting the harassment whether or not he or she IS gay.

The bottomline remains the same, of course: "improper" investigations will only end when "proper" ones do....with the death of DADT...and, in the interim, Mr. Gay Friend in the White House FREEZING DISCHARGES!

---

by: Michael Bedwell @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 18:01:43 PM CDT

i think in practice

the system isn't so clean as you suggest based on the letter of the law.  it's no secret that military women reporting rape and sexual abuse only get abused more.  it's no secret that mentioning the "g" word is highly risky, and the result depends completely on the fair-mindedness of the soldier's superiors.  i've never heard of a non-fair-minded superior officer being reprimanded in a dadt-related case.  

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 19:40:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I never suggested it was "clean" at all

... nor did I suggest that the frequent abuse of the policies are appropriately punished, if punished at all.

---

by: Michael Bedwell @ Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 01:36:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Rape in the military is widespread.

that even the Pentagon has to take note. According to a March 2009 story by CBS

"The Pentagon released a disturbing report Tuesday on sexual abuse in the military, saying that more than 2,900 sexual assaults were reported last year, up nearly 9 percent from the year before. Nearly two-thirds of the cases involved rape or aggravated assault ."

You'll notice that the Pentagon doesn't include rape, murder and other crimes of violence against GLBT folks among their concerns. There is no mention that Clintons DADT caused the deaths of Barry Winchell and August Provost.

The bipartisan Congressional bigots who voted for DADT and the bigoted President, Clinton, who made it law with his signature made sure that information isn't available. DADT, as intended, forces people into the closet and, by law, makes them lie about their sexuality. The result is isolation from friends, lovers and allies and being set up for victimization ranging from loss of benefits to violence and murder.

The looter rich much prefer working with Democrats like Obama and the Clintons - they're greedier, they fool more people and they're able to get away with a lot more than Republicans.  

---

by: donal1944 @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 06:49:51 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

OT: Just got this GLAAD Twitter and it's ugly...

PLS report YouTube user http://tinyurl.com/kpasl9 & http://tinyurl.com/mmr7el for advocating killing gays http://www.youtube.com/safe...

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 19:55:29 PM CDT

Language: clue to Navy 's attitude toward teh gays

The language used by Navy PR dude Brian O'Rourke reveals his--and probably the Navy's--attitude toward LGBT civil rights organizations.

From the Navy Times:

"We're hearing from special interest groups that there were complaints, but according to the unit, there were no complaints," O'Rourke said.

Special interest groups?  Discounting the possibly unintended insult of labeling August Provost's family and friends a special interest group, just who would those groups be?

I haven't heard that nasty little epithet-masquerading-as-a-term-of-debate for a while, but whenever I did, the context and/or tone of voice fairly dripped with contempt for the "special interest groups" in question.

Americans still find it hard to understand that civil rights are in the nation's general interest.  And here, the Navy's representative, speaking to a national Navy publication, feels perfectly comfortable using creepy right-wing codewords to describe those whiny gays complaining about their "special rights" (to not be harassed and murdered?) again...

And maybe I'm just a whiny neurotic oversensitive gay who picked up Martin Luther King's Why We Can't Wait and fell for the idea.

---

by: williamsf @ Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 20:50:43 PM CDT

Special interest groups?

I predict the Brass will continue to dismiss the complaints that way until they realize they are pissing off significant members of Congress.  At that point, and only at that point, will they stop.

---

by: oddjob @ Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 02:30:27 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

From our point of view DADT is a crime and there is no defense for it.

The murders of August Provost and Barry Winchell are the direct result of DADT, a law written by Democratic bigots with the cheerful help of military bigots and Republican bigots. Obama and the Democrat leadership in Congress refuse to make a serious or principled effort to get it repealed.

It was signed into law by a bigot named Bill Clinton who could have vetoed it but instead chose to codify military bigotry. In signing DADT Clinton elevated old bigoted policies into law, sending a powerful signal that bigotry is not only OK, it's mandatory. Thugs both enlisted and officers got the message and these two murders are the direct result. DADT was so maliciously conceived that even those only perceived to be LGBT are targeted by the rampant military prejudice it sanctifies and encourages.  

DADT forces GLBT folks to lie, to get into the closet and to stay there. It isolates us from friends, lovers and allies and prevents us from seeking protection when threatened by thugs, setting us up for harassment, loss of benefits, illegal termination and occasional violence, including murder.

We ought to insist that it be repealed immediately even though, along with DOMA, it's part of Bill Clinton and the Democratic (sic) Party's legacy of bigotry. Obama made vague promises to repeal it but hasn't. And won't. He'll likely delay repeal until the next election cycle and then drop it.

At the same time we ought to be actively discouraging enlistment in the genocidal oil wars against Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan. The best way for the LGBT communities to support all US military personnel is to join with the antiwar movement in demanding an end the war and total, unilateral, immediate and permanent withdrawal of US forces to US home bases.  

The looter rich much prefer working with Democrats like Obama and the Clintons - they're greedier, they fool more people and they're able to get away with a lot more than Republicans.  

---

by: donal1944 @ Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 16:05:04 PM CDT

Still lying about history I see...

DADT was passed in both Houses by an VETO-PROOF majority. To claim that Clinton could have stopped it is typical of your "Rise Up & Throw Off Your Oppressors" stealth socialist propaganda.

Equally dishonest is to claim that homophobia and violence against gays in the military began with DADT.

Try telling that to sailor Allen Schindler's mother. His murder was in 1992...before Clinton even had the Democratic nomination....let alone before anyone had heard of DADT.

And how could Clinton be the bigot that Donal1944 aka Bill Perdue aka Rainbow RED claims when, in response to the Winchell murder, he issued an executive order adding a hate crimes sentence enhancement to the Uniform Code of Military Justice....in addition to his executive order banning gay discrimination in civilian federal employment?

---

by: Michael Bedwell @ Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 17:52:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Jeeze, Bedwell, follow the script.

I didn't claim Clinton could have overridden a veto. I said he was a bigot for signing it. DOMA confirms that. Prove I said otherwise. If you can. With a quote.  

I didn't say that military bigotry began with Clinton, just that he abetted it. Prove that I said what you claimed I did. Prove my dishonesty. If you can. With a quote.

I didn't blame Alan Schlinders murder on Clinton because his murder occurred before Clinton signed the bigoted act DADT. I did blame it on the prevalent homohating in the military, the kind that Bill Clinton approved of later when he signed DADT. But go ahead, prove otherwise. If you can.

Clinton's a bigot simply because he signed DADT and DOMA, boasted about signing DOMA to pander to religious bigots  and enforced the codified bigotry of both virulently bigoted laws. He's worse than Bush or Obama who also enforce them and support them because he signed them.  

Here's a news flash. I'm going to keep saying that because it's true. If you'd been around the Blend you'd know that my leftist views are not exactly stealthy.

You're going to lose this one Bedwell. Just like Hillary Clinton lost.

The looter rich much prefer working with Democrats like Obama and the Clintons - they're greedier, they fool more people and they're able to get away with a lot more than Republicans.  

---

by: donal1944 @ Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 20:24:20 PM CDT

Race, too.

My colleague Jeanne Scheper just posted an interesting note about this reflecting that race is tied up with sexual orientation here, adding another layer to the silences and lack of information.  She also notes, as the U.C. system faces serious budget cuts, that Provost had been attending school to become an engineer...

Indra Lusero
Palm Center, Assistant Director

---

by: Indra @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 17:58:44 PM CDT