Conference hydra::dejavu

    Oh heck this one is turning up everywhere. BTW Jerry Beeler is only
    interested in American's views. So if your not an American you are not
    allowed to answer.

    Jamie.

I believe the poll at that time would've read NEGROES.

1.  Should the policy as it existed on 1 January 1945 remain in place?
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

	------------------------------------
	In the event that the ban is lifted:
	------------------------------------

2. BLACKS should be allowed access to highly classified information
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

3. BLACKS should be allowed in forward combat units 
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

4. BLACKS should be subject to mandatory psychological evaluations
   to insure that their race is not detrimental to military
   service:
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

5. The military should have sensitivity training to acquaint the troops
   with the issues of BLACKS in the military:
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

6. Assume that a BLACK soldier claims that continued service would 
   be psychologically injurious to him/her.  Should this soldier be allowed
   honorable discharge?
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

7. Should current active duty troops be allowed early discharge, prior to
   the lifting of the ban, with the status of "Honorable"
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

8. Separate sleeping and showering facilities should be provided for
   white and BLACK soldiers:
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

9. The United States government should provide survivor and housing benefits
   for BLACK couples in the same manner as are provided for white married 
    couples:
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

10. Should the question of RACE be removed for all federal
    service (Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation,
    Secret Service, etc...)?
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

		-The following is optional - you may
		 complete any fraction or none of this
		 section-

Your sex:
	[ ] Male	[ ] Female

Have you previously served in any branch of the military?
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No

Were you ever in a combat or "imminent danger" situation while in the
military?
	[ ] Yes		[ ] No	[ ] N/A

Your RACIAL orientation:
	[ ] BLACK	[ ] White [ ] Mixed
	[ ] Not decided [ ] Not Applicable (Private matter)

>>>I believe the poll at that time would've read NEGROES.



    Let's leave it as present day.....

    It's the same SH*T!!!

>    It's the same SH*T!!!

And how is that?

    Polls like the one in this note start off with a pre-supposition that
    either we are against gays in the military (check out the wording) or
    that gays are inherently less competent than heterosexuals.
    
    Gays should be evaluated and judged based on the same performance and
    behavioral criteria that everyone else is in the military (sans the
    sexual preference issue) - why do otherwise?
    
    The problem is not the gays in the military - it's the heterosexuals in
    the military who can't deal with homosexuality.
    
    If we continue to DEvalue people based on sexual preference, race, etc.
    eventually we will become so closeminded that someone will, sooner or
    later, determine that a quality you or I might have is no longer
    acceptable in our society and then WE become the discriminated
    scapegoat of the day.
    
    For those in an uproar wanting to 'keep down the gays' how 'bout if we
    start delving deeper into the issue of sexuality and expand the
    criteria to include some sexual act or behavior that YOU participate
    in?
    
    Gee, guess I'm a little angry about the whole thing.  There are so many
    more important issues that are life threatening that we could focus our
    resources on, that I can't understand this condemnation from a
    group of insecure tiny-minded bigots.
    
    I'm off my soap-box for today.
    
    

    I really don't understand why the military is so resistant to having
    gay soldiers.  Many of the modern military traditions (rank,
    marching-in-step, formations, etc) were started by the Spartans.

    According to the famous Greek historian, Plutarch, homosexuality in the
    Spartan military was the rule -- not the exception.

    He has lengthy passages describing this sort of thing.  It was actually
    a tactical strategy.  It was reasoned that men would be braver and
    fight more courageously when their lovers were looking on.

    Men who only enjoyed women were considered somewhat provincial.

    >if homesexuals invade france again, will they rape the men instead?
    
    Nah, raping heterosexual men is an over rated pastime. Besides there
    are enough cooperative French homosexuals.
    
    BTW what is a homesexual? Someone who only has sex at home?

    Jamie.

re: .7

>    group of insecure tiny-minded bigots.

Speak for yourself.

re: .8

>    According to the famous Greek historian, Plutarch, homosexuality in the
>    Spartan military was the rule -- not the exception.

And where are they today?  They are nonexistent.

    And where are the Persians?  All dead too.
    
    							Ann B.

    Sun Tzu says that the military has their own way of doing things and
    that they should be left alone.  I agree with him.

    >And where are the Persians? 

    They are still around, pretending to be Iranians.

    Jamie.

    By that light, the Spartans are still around, as Greeks.
    
    (Ironically, the Spartans suffered their first real defeat in 371 bce,
    at Leuctra, from the Theban Sacred Band (300 men, 150 pairs of lovers).
    The Sacred Band was, in turn, destroyed by Alexander the Great, working
    under Philip, at Chaeronea in 338.  We know what defeated Alexander.)
    
    						Ann B.

    I don't blame her for giggling... I did some giggling myself just
    reading your note.. :-)
    
    ... glad he's dead though...

    *Very* little known fact:  Lee Harvey Oswald was given a paraffin
    test (for the nitrate residue of firing a gun) immediately after
    his arrest.  He was found to have fired at least one weapon recently.
    (This involved analyzing the pattern of nitrates, not just checking
    for their presence.)
    
    							Ann B.

re: .16

>       If he hadn't been in the closet he couldn't have been blackmailed.
>       I am looking forward to this week's edition of "Outweek".

No.  If he hadn't been involved in ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES he couldn't have been
blackmailed, and if he hadn't made such a commotion over other people's
private lives then whatever he was engaged in in his own private life wouldn't
have mattered as much in the end.

What does any of this have to do with Deja Vu?

    Actually, I was wondering when someone was going to get to the idea
    that we haven't heard any psychics call in and say they really know
    what happened.  
    
    You know  how psychics often jump in and help police departments locate
    missing people, etc?  Well, if they are psychic, I imagine that they
    must know, have feelings about, etc this case.  Are they afraid to
    speak out on television or in public for fear of "disappearing" either
    permanently or otherwise, like a lot of others did?
    
    I figure it will be interesting when the sealed files are opened.  I
    figure by the time they are, anyone involved will be dead, most likely,
    and unable to testify.  I also think the files will not shed light on
    what really happened.
    
    That was an interesting era in history, with a lot of unanswered
    questions, not only around the Kennedy events, but Hoffa, and a lot of
    other stuff going on.
    
    I still like to see the National Enquirers which claim they know where
    Kennedy is today, living as an old man, or Hoffa, etc etc
    
    They proclaim psychics to know the "real story" which I think gives
    psychics a bad name...
    

    >>This note file is intended for discussion of psychic phenomena such as
    >>ESP, precognition, dreams, out of body experiences, etc.
    
     I think I enjoy the "etc." as much as anything else in here. 
    
    --Ruth

    ... lot's of people think there was a coup then..

    .20
    
    I agree with you, Cliff... Hover set himself up..

    If you're interested in the JFK murder case, there is a large note
    in ::SOAPBOX devoted to it.
    
    Gay's in the military was added only to post a survey so there would
    be a more rounded response.  
    
    To read SOAPBOX add entry SIMON::SOAPBOX to your notebook.  If you
    would like to read and write in that file, add entry PEAR::SOAPBOX.
    It is asked that if you prefer to read only, you use SIMON:: as it
    is a very active conference and if everyone uses PEAR:: it slows it
    down.  
    
    Besides the JFK note, the results of the survey are posted in there.
    
    Joanne