Skip to comments.
LtCol in the AF stands up for her rights
Posted on 09/18/2002 6:36:50 AM PDT by flyer182
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
1
posted on
09/18/2002 6:36:51 AM PDT
by
flyer182
To: flyer182
Perhaps it's time to stop bending backward for 'pc' in Saudi Arabia -- They can either be "with us, or against us".
2
posted on
09/18/2002 6:45:08 AM PDT
by
Crowcreek
To: flyer182
Since I have a real problem with putting women in fighter aircraft anyway, I'll pass on this one.
Our local p.c. problem needs to be addressed before we start worrying about being p.c. in other countries.
3
posted on
09/18/2002 6:53:20 AM PDT
by
Illbay
To: flyer182
If they do not accept our brave men and women as they are, it is time for Saudia Arabia to take care of all its defense needs by itself with their pilots not ours. This PC crap has got to go.
4
posted on
09/18/2002 6:54:51 AM PDT
by
cpdiii
To: Illbay
Well said.
5
posted on
09/18/2002 7:04:07 AM PDT
by
Northpaw
To: flyer182
I agree with McSally. However, she will have brought harm to her career by taking her stand against the "brass." The Air Force doesn't like trouble makers, however right they may be in the long run. They will take action against her in subtle ways. At her pay grade, a bad fitness report isn't necessary to finish her. A phone call by her commander will do.
Take it from someone who's been there.
To: flyer182
To: Illbay; Crowcreek
I think each of you make a good point.
This is not a fight over "rights". It is a disagreement over policy. No military has a "right" to dress in a certain way in a foreign land. The superiors have set a policy on this issue, and it is this Air Force officer's duty to folow that policy. Despite this news "reporter's" obvious preferences, the stated policy violates no "right" based on Womanhood.
Anyone can have an opinion about whether the policy is necessary or wise, but to make this some kind of civil rights issue is absurd.
To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
Who's the dude?
9
posted on
09/18/2002 7:29:37 AM PDT
by
dakine
To: flyer182
I would "strongly encourage" all women who leave the base in SA be accompanied by men. Preferably at least a squad of heavily armed men who will make sure that the women will not be victims to a gang of terrorists acting under the cover of religion. Since this gang of terrorists includes most of the Saudi government and royal family they should be treated accordingly.
10
posted on
09/18/2002 7:34:38 AM PDT
by
FreePaul
To: San Jacinto
"The superiors have set a policy on this issue, and it is this Air Force officer's duty to folow that policy"An American officer ought to be able to dress herself appropriately when out of uniform in a foreign country, and should be allowed to do so using her own judgement, not that of some REMF policymaker.
To: flyer182
I firmly believe McSally should be given a court martial for the BS she has caused.
1) You sign away a lot of your "constitutional" rights when you join the military.
2) The only reason there is a military presence in Saudi Arabia is because they have given us permission to be there. And, when in Rome, you do as the Romans do.
3) I am quite frankly sick and tired of this attitude, "I can do anything I want because I am an American." No, you can't. When you go into a foreign land, even as part of the US military, you are subject to that nation's laws and penalties. If you do not like that, you don't go to that country. Period.
12
posted on
09/18/2002 8:19:05 AM PDT
by
Houmatt
To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
I wondered if she didn't look more like a man than a woman. She could have dressed like a man and the MP's would never have known, let alone the Saudi's.
To: WellsFargo94
OMG! I have taken home some ugly women in my youth... but they never had more testosterone than me.
14
posted on
09/18/2002 8:27:09 AM PDT
by
johnny7
To: WellsFargo94
I wondered if she didn't look more like a man than a woman. She could have dressed like a man and the MP's would never have known, let alone the Saudi's Why don't you send the Lt. Col. your address, then she can pay you a visit...in her A-10 Warthog.
15
posted on
09/18/2002 8:37:26 AM PDT
by
El Gato
To: FreePaul
Preferably at least a squad of heavily armed men who will make sure that the women will not be victims to a gang of terrorists acting under the cover of religion Just let the women check out an M-16 and a bandoleer of ammo, along with a sidearm, preferably a 1911A1 but the Berretta if that's all they've got. The whip wielders are a bunch of cowards anyway. The same sort that shot Afghan women in the back of the head with and AK-47 for not properly wearing their version of the Muslim gunnysack.
16
posted on
09/18/2002 8:42:19 AM PDT
by
El Gato
To: San Jacinto
stated policy violates no "right" based on Womanhood. And nobody claims it does. However it does violate serval clauses of the Constitution, and thus consitutes and illegal order. The wearing of the "bag" is an inherently religious act, insisted upon by the religious "police". Therefore to order someone to wear it, especially when it's not required by Saudi law, or of non-military American women in Saudi, is to compel the wearer to practice a religion not their own. It is the same as requiring Jewish officers to wear a crucifix while off duty in Italy, Germany or France.
17
posted on
09/18/2002 8:47:14 AM PDT
by
El Gato
To: Houmatt
When you go into a foreign land, even as part of the US military, you are subject to that nation's laws and penalties The only thing is that Saudi law does not require non-muslim women to dress that way. It's just that not doing so offends the whip wielders, the religious "police". As the story states, non military American women, be they military dependents, oil industry workers or dependents, or civilisan US government employees or dependents, are not required, by Saudi law or US policy to wear the bag, nor to sit in the back of the vehicle. The policy was probably put in place by some well meaning staff puke, and should never have been upheld by the local command structure in the first place.
18
posted on
09/18/2002 8:53:51 AM PDT
by
El Gato
To: Houmatt
Apparently you did not read the article completely. There is NO requirement or even a suggestion from the host country for American females to wear these religious garments. Our military instigated this situation and it runs contrary to her beliefs and in her shoes I would do the same thing. As far as giving up your "constitutional" rights, that only goes so far. If your commander tells you to fire upon civillians for no particular reason, you are required to tell them, No! In America, we do not rquire foreigners to attend any particlar church, wear any particular garments, not even to speak our language. How is America being unreasonable to want the same courtesies anywhere else? Again, there was no law requiring her to wear anything you just didn't read the article before you spotted off.
To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
where is the female officer?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson