Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Marie

“Covering up was irritating a lot of them and not because it’s sexist. It inhibits movement and is unsafe.”

It was for travel in vehicles, and it was meant to protect them from being beaten. The military accepts a LOT of things we don’t like in order to not offend the host nation, and to protect our folks there.

McSally got to leave the base BECAUSE she was a she. Most men, including myself, went to PSAB many times and NEVER got to go off post. Ever. Tent City was 1/4 mile to a side of tents, and we lived there full time.

She also bypassed the chain of command so she could appeal to the SecDef. That normally gets a guy in heap big trouble, but McSally was protected by the females in Congress - not a very nice group of creatures to have as friends, if you are a conservative.

She later went to “the Legislative Fellowship program, during which time she lived in Washington, D.C. and advised John Kyl on defense and foreign affairs policy”...and I don’t know of any military officer who respects someone who did that. It marked you forever as a politician, not a fighter.

From Wiki:

“McSally’s suit alleged that “the regulations required her to send the message that she believes women are subservient to men.”[9] In addition to the issue of religious garb, McSally noted that policies also included other requirements:

In a “60 Minutes” interview broadcast on CBS on Jan. 20, she described the discrimination she experienced under the policy: “I have to sit in the back and at all times I must be escorted by a male . . . [who], when questioned, is supposed to claim me as his wife,” she said. “I can fly a single-seat aircraft in enemy territory, but [in Saudi Arabia] I can’t drive a vehicle.”[9]

During this process, she was granted audience with several high level officials, including two Secretaries of Defense, William Cohen and Donald Rumsfeld, which was atypical of a service member of her comparatively junior rank and position, especially in light of her public protest.”

She was ALL ABOUT HERSELF. No one thought she was endorsing the Saudi policies, nor did anyone expect her to...but we complied because it provided the best protection for our people. All of them, not just McSally.


25 posted on 11/05/2014 4:55:24 PM PST by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers
Here's another take on it:

"Then she lays out her arguments to them: The State Department does not require its female employees to wear the abaya. Nor does the Saudi government insist, at least not formally. Wives of military personnel stationed there do not have to wear the garment. Nor was there an abaya rule for our military women when the Iraqis invaded neighboring Kuwait and U.S. troops drove them out. Furthermore, the policy specifically forbids male military personnel from wearing traditional Saudi garb."

"After seven years of buttonholing brass on the Saudi policy, she gave up working within the system and filed the lawsuit."

Now, how to you feel about the soldiers who recently fought the Army's new regulations in the court of public opinion? (They also won and now ALL tattooed soldiers are grandfathered in, for all purposes.)

26 posted on 11/05/2014 5:24:47 PM PST by Marie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1298&dat=20011208&id=yC0zAAAAIBAJ&sjid=RAgGAAAAIBAJ&pg=6947,2253330

“She began with complaints up the chain of command during the Clinton administration...”

“...to force servicewomen, but not servicemen, to adopt Islamic dress and adhere to Islamic customs...”

That is what happened.


27 posted on 11/05/2014 5:29:37 PM PST by Marie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson