So — Muslims can serve in the Armed Forces but we're still purging homosexuals? How's that working out?

by CynthiaYockey on November 5, 2009

I weep for the wounded and dead at Fort Hood — except for the gunman, military psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan (update: he is alive).

But when Muslims are allowed to serve in our military, despite the fact that the Koran commands them to deceive and kill non-Muslims, yet lesbians and gays like Arabic-interpreter Lt. Dan Choi are barred from serving and witch-hunted out of the services, with Obama’s full support in practice despite his lip-service-only opposition to “don’t ask, don’t tell,” I have to remark on how insane it is to embrace your sworn enemy into your military and elevate him in the name of tolerance, while you stigmatize and cast out loyal and patriotic homosexuals who freely pledge to their country their last full measure of devotion.

Thanks to the commenters at Hot Air: The gunman’s photo is here, and his military record is at This Ain’t Hell — no religion is listed. The post at Hot Air linked above now also has video clips from Fox News, including an interview with Hasan’s cousin.

Update, 11/8/09: Welcome, Daily Pundit readers, and thank you, Daily Pundit for the link and most of all for the headline, “i think cynthia has a good point.”

Follow conservativelez on Twitter

Jonn Lilyea November 5, 2009 at 9:27 pm

Hi, it looks like Maj. Hasan is alive, so could you take down his SSN? I’m sure he’s not going to need it anymore, but it might save you some headaches.
.-= Jonn Lilyea´s last blog ..Dahr Jamail: Another Carrion Bird Swooping in for a feast =-.

Cynthia Yockey November 5, 2009 at 9:31 pm

John Lilyea,

Done. Thanks.


Attmay November 6, 2009 at 9:32 am

That is exactly what this gay Jew was thinking when I heard the news.

Cynthia Yockey November 6, 2009 at 12:09 pm


Thank you. The more we learn about Maj. Hasan, the more I ask, “Exactly WHAT do straight people have to do to get thrown out of the military?” Because clearly he was given an astonishing amount of latitude in the direction of mutiny and treachery. In contrast, all you need to do to get a homosexual tossed from the services is tattle, since there’s no apparent penalty for telling in “don’t ask don’t tell” and plenty of incentive for telling to get rid of a more competent gay or lesbian rival, or to exact revenge for a sexual rejection — far more women are thrown out for being lesbian than men are for being gay (and once you make an example of one uppity woman, you can threaten and bully more of the others, lesbian or straight, into agreeing to sex to save their careers).

Also, while the MSM and Islamic communities are playing the religious bigotry card to excuse Hasan’s killing rampage — “he said people harassed him because he was Muslim, boo-hoo” — I’m pretty sure that closer examination will reveal he was an obnoxious man who pretty much started all the trouble that came back to him AND that his fellow service members are more familiar with the commands of his religion to kill ALL unbelievers than most civilians are, so they would have plenty to say in reply to him, AND it is likely that Hasan’s real complaint is that he kept trying to convert the service members around him but the non-believers were bigots because they refused to convert and admit his superiority due solely to his Islamic identity.


Stinky November 6, 2009 at 2:48 pm

You are preaching to the choir!

I am often reminded of Hitler’s rise to power – he was supported by many Germans who happened to be gay. You know, the whole “hope and change” thing. And guess who were among the first to go under the bus on the Night of the Long Knives in 1934?

I echo your frequent call to the gay community to WAKE UP – look at what people say and do, and stop buying their lies. People say what they say, but they DO what they WANT to do. Follow the actions.

Ad rem November 6, 2009 at 3:30 pm

“Don’t ask don’t tell” is a total failure. Why should we want to keep these good people from serving? Perhaps if he had screamed “Allahu Akbar” while wearing a dress we’d have a whole new narrative?

Peter November 6, 2009 at 9:29 pm

Hasan was still in the Army precisely because of that great fear of being intolerant to favored minorities.

By the same token, though, there have been a lot of Muslims who did yeoman’s service to this nation. It ain’t like we’re really better off with no one who understands the language and culture in uniform. So, we need the loyal-to-the-USA Muslims, we don’t need the freelance Jihadists. How to tell the difference? Damned if I know, without the widespread use of truth serum. I do think an end to PC would go a long way.

I must say that when this Hasan clown wakes up I would love to be the one telling him he was stopped by four shots from the pistol of a brave woman police officer. I would begin every session with this bozo with Ha Ha! You were shot by a woman! Given what we already know about him this should be just about effective as waterboarding.

And judging from the pictures if I were single I’d be down there in Kileen with flowers, trying hard to convince her that an affair with an older man would be just what she needs for her social development. But I’m not single.

As to gays in the Services, I know that when I had those bad haircuts and funny clothes there were always a few guys who we all “knew” batted for the other team. Mostly we did not care, as long as he carried his own gear on the march and, when things got ugly, did his part. Problems were very rare. When there were problems, though, it was really serious.

My problem with thinking about how having open gays in the Services is that my experience was during Viet Nam. Society has changed since then. I do not know what the eightteen and nineteen year old potential recruits think, I barely remember how I thought back then.

What I wish we could do is say, loudly, “OKAY, THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL!!!” and then enlist a batch of openly gay and lesbian folks, and allow those serving under DADT to go into a specific division, along with a mix of the straight troops. Then if it works, great, add it to all the Services. If it doesn’t work, go back to DADT, allow the folks now serving under DADT to go back into whatever they were not telling and go on to the next problem. I, personally, would love for it to work.

While I totally get the desire of teh gheys , the Armed Services are not about rights. That’s a division of the Justice Department, I believe. The Armed Services are all about close teamwork to kill people and break their stuff until they beg us to stop. In between wars they are supposed to stand around looking so fierce and dangerous that other countries just kind of tiptoe around praying that they do not arouse our wrath.

Cynthia Yockey November 7, 2009 at 2:18 am


In the 1980’s, white straight women were almost universally infuriated the fact that not all single men were available to them because some of them — often the most attractive ones — were gay. These men didn’t have the option to be openly gay before then, so that’s when this first came up. But, by the 1990’s, white straight women had learned to accept that not all men are straight and that it behooves them to check before launching a campaign for a man’s affections.

Due to the nation-building/anti-gay bigotry spread in the black community by their churches and demagogues like Al Sharpton, this hasn’t happened in the black community yet and black gay men are still on the down low.

This applies to the military and the idea of unit cohesion because the truth is that people can learn to stop assuming everyone is straight and accept gays and lesbians and still identify with their unit — also, stigmatizing poor performance as gay is bad leadership and should stop.

Plus — service in the military is not about rights: it’s about equality. People who are not equal are not allowed to serve in the military — this simultaneously validates stigmatizing them AND provides proof positive of their second-class citizenship since they are not trusted to carry the burdens that first-class citizens do.


Attmay November 7, 2009 at 7:13 pm

I highly doubt Lt. Dan Choi would ever go on a killing spree like this.

Cynthia Yockey November 7, 2009 at 10:06 pm


Lt. Dan Choi is a West Point graduate who loves the United States and loves the Army. He would give his life for America and his fellow soldiers.

Lt. Choi served as an Arabic interpreter. How many people will die because he was tossed out for a being crime? Meanwhile, I’ve read news coverage saying that Maj. Hasan was making threatening and treasonous statements for years, but he’s straight so the Army kept him?


Peter November 8, 2009 at 8:58 pm

Cyn, damnit, the Armed Forces have noting to do with equality, either. If they did the Corps would have taken me back after 9/11. Alas, they did not think they needed any Corporals in their mid fifties., even Corporals with more fighting experience than any of those young whippersnappers of the time. Too, short? Can’t go in. Too tall, can’t go in. Too light? Too heavy? Too old, too young. These are all these infamous crimes of being you mention.

Again, I have no particular objections to allowing openly gay/lesbian membership in the Services. I just do not feel myself competent to make that decision. Nor should you.

I do not give a rat’s patootie how unfair it is to the couple-three percent of gay/lesbian Americans if they can’t enter the Services if if means it would keep a significant percentage of the 18-21 year old majority from enlisting.

You don’t know how the end of DADT would affect that, I don’t, neither do the Joint Chiefs. Whether or not it is fair is not at all materiel. We don’t have a draft, it’s all up to those kids. I have no idea how they think about it, neither does anyone else.

Now, suppose we decided to allow openly gay/lesbian enlistments and those straight kids don’t enlist? What then? Reinstitute the draft? Fat chance. Say, sorry, it didn’t work, all you gay/lesbian troops who have been serving honorably have to get your walking papers? Yeah, right. So, what to do? What, Cyn, if you’re wrong?
.-= Peter´s last blog ..Random Shots At Moving Targets =-.

Cynthia Yockey November 8, 2009 at 11:12 pm


Those arguments were used about blacks and women, too, as I recall.

With regard to homosexuals, these arguments are obsolete because they date from before 1969, the year of the Stonewall Riots, which mark the beginning of the movement for equality for homosexuals. In that era, almost no one was openly gay, so straight people could deceive themselves that we were very rare. Well, we’re not, and now enough of us have the courage to be openly homosexual that we are well past the critical mass of straight people who now realize there’s NO place you can go where there are no homosexuals.

Regarding the kids who are so deranged by their prejudice toward homosexuals that they wouldn’t enlist: first, good riddance, they probably have a lot of other screws loose; second, so many kids are able to come out and be openly gay in high school that most young people are acquainted with someone who is gay and the ones who are so hateful towards gays that joining an organization that treats gays as equals are very much in the minority — and that minority is getting smaller every day — unless, come to think of it, we start increasing our recruiting of Muslims, since plenty of them want to come to the U.S. and get citizenship and that’s the fast track to do so. Do you think the kids are going to be happy to enlist KNOWING they’ll be serving with Muslims — the current estimate, as I recall, is 10,000 to 15,000 currently serving — who are ALL commanded by the Koran to deceive and kill unbelievers and many of whom feel obligated to rape or kill women who are not “properly covered”?

Really, Peter, men and women who have such poor personal boundaries that their individual identity requires them to belong to a group exactly like them in every way are not mentally healthy. Frankly, Eric Hoffer describes them as the candidates for totalitarianisms in The True Believer. Aren’t those people more likely to be Lefties now, with no inclination at all for military service?

Plus, has anyone bothered to survey how many more lesbians and gays would enlist or take ROTC if they could serve openly?

Even Colin Powell supports the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” and permitting homosexuals to serve openly — which, by the way, means they have to observe the same rules everyone else does, they just don’t have to hide their choice of a same-sex partner.



I take it you didn’t notice that I linked you in my latest Project Valour IT post.

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: