Fwd: CITIZEN Offending with Truth JOURNALIST

-----Original Message-----
From: b <rrdd3939@aol.com>
To: rrdd3939 <rrdd3939@aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Oct 8, 2012 8:43 pm
Subject: Fwd: CITIZEN Offending with Truth JOURNALIST

     ARES PRESENTS a DISPLEASED ATHENA (New Version) 

    As Sgt. Friday used to say: "Just the facts, ma'am."

 Our Motto: "We Report/You Decide." As Yogi Berra used to

say: "It's deja vu' all over again  (Do we have enough sub-titles?

Or, put another way, Is our sub-title long enough?)

             by Richard DePersio with Citizen Journalist

(The following demonstrates the Citizen Journalist style

quite well: while others are employing just the one argument:

 the natural inclination to protect; CJ will present numerous:

 some original, thereby, giving his moderate and conservative

 readers ample ammunition. As always, feel free to email this

and other posts, we only ask that we are credited. Please tell

 friends that they can connect to CJCS Comsats (web sites)

via Facebook - Second American Revolution. Thank You)
HEADLINE: Shocking - Former Navy Secretary Lehman on

Readiness of Our Fight Pilots on Aircraft Carriers...

Women in uniform are hot!...The TRUTH ABOUT WOMEN IN UNIFORM...

LIBERAL SOCIAL EXPERIMENTATION VS. NATIONAL DEFENSE...

Our military is planning to allow women to serve near the front line in

war-time. Is this in the best interest of our security or is this the

consequence of liberal political pressure? What are the facts? In basic

 training (Army and Air Force) and in boot camp (Navy and Marines)

women don't train with, don't compete against and aren't graded against

men. Why separate and unequal? It is felt that the male recruit is

somewhat immature and might engage in verbal and/or physical

harassment of sexual, as well as, non-sexual nature if they were to

spend to much time in close quarters.. This constitutes an absurd mode

of thinking. It should logically follow that the male recruit is too immature

to wear a uniform. Further, aren't women capable of defending

 themselves!?! The other reason is unspoken...we shall speak it...

women wouldn't perform as well as men if their were to train and

compete together. Feminists would have a fit that women were being

humiliated. At the same time, feminists try to gloss over the difference

between the genders. Feminists chose to ignore the fact that women

have to reach lower standards - mental and physical - on tests in order to

pass basic and boot - and now they should be allowed near the front! You

could have an all-male army and succeed but not an all-female or all-homo.

What about morale? Last year, the military ended Don't Ask/ Don't Tell - in

 spite of the fact that over 60% of Infantrymen, Marines and Special Forces

didn't want to serve with homos. Parading their Perversion in Public...and

in barracks! MILITARY MORALE SHOULD TRUMP LIBERAL SOCIAL

EXPERIMENTATION!!! We assume that their opinions and objections will

 be ignored regarding opening up combat positions near the front to the

 female. A male soldier doesn't always secure the occupation that he

 requests. If he is assigned a combat position, he can't opt out. Under this

plan (which has nearly been adopted)women would be afforded

the option. Further, they will be afforded the opportunity to opt out of a

dangerous assignment meaning that a unit might have to perform a task

 with fewer individuals than are deemed necessary.

Presently, women serve in support roles. In Iraq, that did walk the streets

 (as street walkers, we josh) a long with males when all the fighting in that

 town (a type of front) was over - all the fighting having been done by

 males. It was dangerous for their were snipers. A role that women,

heretofore, had not assumed but in Iraq assumed rarely. We bet that their

 were more female casualties than male. Of course, we will never know:

These statistics will never be revealed as the U.S. Military fears feminists

orgs like N.O.W. On the other hand, there might have been fewer female

 casualties, as of result of, male protection. (We confirmed most of the

 preceding with a former soldier who did two tours in Iraq; rest-various

sources). Last year, we saw a doc on basic training in which males and

females - separately, of course - had to crawl on their stomachs

 pretending that bullets were being fired above them. One soldier had the

additional task of pulling a heavy load. The male struggled but succeeded.

 The female couldn't; two other females had to drift back to assist her.

 The narrator (script must have been written by a lib) said that the

 important thing was that the job had been done and that women generally

 achieved goals via cooperation more often than men. Let's objectively

analyze the situation; three people doing the job of one is a positive?;

what if those two soldiers were needed for something else, they were no

 longer be available; three soldiers clustered together making for an easier

target is a positive!?! Who can forget America's heroin...pardon me, hero

Jessica Lynch, the first female soldier to be captured in Iraq. The liberal

 media, feminist groups and the new politically-correct military made her

into a hero. She was a support soldier who found herself in proximity to the

 enemy. Why? Should didn't know how to use a compass and read a map

 (How did she pass basic? - That's right, we know how; doesn't she remind

 you of that great female aviator Amilia Earhart.). Was she a hero for getting

lost? Was she a hero for attempting to avoid capture? No; she didn't do that.

Was she a hero for saving lives? No, again. After capture did she attempt to

escape - no, we were told that she was too wounded to do so (Is it possible

 that she was too terrified; we'll never know). They don't make heroes like

 they used to (forgive me for Offending with Truth and forgive me for ending

 a sentence with a proposition!!). LIBERAL SOCIAL EXPERIMENTATION.

America's

 joke: the new military. Be all that you can be in the sissy army. There was

 an expression used by real soldiers in WW1: "Praise the Lord and pass the

 ammunition." The modern version should be: Praise the Lord and pass the

 lipstick. HOLD IT! Lord? God is being removed from the military - a tradition

 dating back to our nation's founding due to new minority rule in the military

 (for more on this, as well as, women in uniform {learn about

 the  dirty little secret concerning women cops} visit

 www.pan-multiverse.blogspot.com - you can connect via Facebook: Second

 American Revolution). Do you have a strange feeling of having been there

before? Several years ago what is about to happen in Army had already

transpired - The case of the Navy and Marines: The Tail Hook Incident: Male

Marines sexually assaulted and harassed female officers. All cases were

 one-on-one; none of the women could successfully defend themselves -

what malfunctioned regarding the female fighting machines!?! Result:

 Billy-boy Clinton decided to punish all fighter jocks in Navy and Marines by

making them accept females in combat flying roles. No studies to determine

 if fems could handle it or what effect it would have on male aviators: their

 balls had to be shrunk! We now know the result of that LIBERAL SOCIAL

EXPERIMENTATION. According to former Navy Secretary John Lehman

and many others the warrior/fighter jock culture has been diluted. The old

swagger and confidence removed. Standards have been lowered for those

with vaginas so that they can pass - males are compelled to pass them. It is

 reasonable to assume that fem casualties are higher, on the other hand, it

could be male due to incompetent flying whores or due to males maneuvering

 to protect them, thereby, endangering themselves. Male nature: protect

women! Public will never be supplied with data because now the military is

afraid of BIG Bad N.O.W. (National Organization of Women). Before

all-volunteer military was established in '74, only nurses allowed near the

front, not at it, like corpsman and medics. Female support soldiers weren't

allowed to bring supplies to the front, as a result. temporarily be there - that

 too will change. Getting back  to the Navy and Marines, we'd like to

proposes to new mottos for them: Fly your Flag, Sail and Skirt High;

When Fighter Jock Fly, Shoot Them in the Fly. Will allowing gays to serve

openly or allowing women at the front or lowering standards for women to

pass or taking Christianity out of the military --- enhance military capability

 (rhetorical question). Military is special component of our nation and

shouldn't be a playground for libs and should be shielded from the

craziness of the rest of 'society.' GIRLS JUST GOT TO BE BOYS!!!

(Please read older posts: still relevant; not out-of-date; valuable info;

we worked hard on them).