Ping, but with reservations. I'd like to see some back-up on what the story actually SAYS before I start to run in circles and scream and shout.
I have heard two versions of the blurb now. One said "accused pedophiles" so we're in the "guilty in the press before innocent under the law" mode again. The other was the original from this morning, which definately indicated that the military was doing this due to a desperate shortage of people. That offends me far more than anything else; the guy(s) can be guilty as sin and I'm still going to be angry over the press using it to claim the military is desperate for soldiers.
I pulled up the film clip on their website, which turned out to be the same as I heard over the radio. Here are the exact words:
(Announcer): "Just how bad does the United States Military need soldiers? Bad enough to keep pedophiles in uniform."
(Woman's voice): "When somebody told me that he had re-enlisted, I hit the roof."
(Announcer): "A stunning discovery, tonight, on 11News at 10."
The most likely reasons for anyone to still be in uniform are:
1. The process to discharge them hasn't been completed.
2. They are only accused, not yet tried.
3. Bureaucratic foul-up.
The implication -- hell it's not an implication, they're outright SAYING that the military would deliberately choose to keep pedophiles in uniform due to shortage of soldiers, and I find that outrageous.
Don't forget jumping up and down. :)
When in danger or in doubt...