60 Minutes

[Retired Fly Boy]

60 Minutes (CBS TV) did a story about a Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Air Force. He picked up a 19 year old airman on base and took him home. The two had sex with the consent of the younger man. Then the colonel asked the airman if he could video tape them having sex together and again the young man said yes. Two days later, the colonel got a phone call, his home was on fire. When he got there it was a total loss. The firemen said it was a case of arson and called police. The colonel told police who he thought might have done it. The young airman told police he did it because the colonel would not give him the tape. He got five years in prison. The colonel was given a dishonorable discharge from the Air Force and his pension was taken away. All of this, two days before he was to retire from the military. Did the colonel get a raw deal, or is he the all time fool? His case is now in the courts. The Air Force said, he is lucky he did not get a court martial and sent to prison. He used his rank and ifluence on a young enlisted man. Any of you former military men ever have sex with a buddy in the service and was sorry later? Or did you enjoy every minute of it?

[+ Hoover42]

I think the colonel was a fool for having sex with an enlisted man; he would have been much safer with another officer. However, he certainly didn't deserve to have his house burned down and his retirement lost because of that one mistake.

[+ deej]

They were both fools.

 

The airman deserves full punishment for arson, and when that's done he's facing UCMJ charges for homosexual conduct and consorting with an officer.

 

The officer, on the other hand, was a plain flat idiot and deserves to lose his pension. When you're days away from retirement, KEEP IT IN YOUR PANTS. Being close to retirement doesn't relax the rules any.

 

They knew the rules. The airman signed the enlistment contract and was fully trained on appropriate and inappropriate behavior against which he would be judged. The officer was under different contract, but no less beholden to the UCMJ and no less aware.

 

Any soft-sell aside, there are rules they agreed to live by and they got caught breaking them.

 

And, yes, I had sex in the USMC. There's nothing so fun as a Marine fresh out of bootcamp, all pumped up, full of testosterone, with his legs over your shoulders. I just didn't get caught. }(

[HooBoy]

Maybe the enlisted man was a fan of Lisa Lopes of the singing group TLC. She burned down her hubby's house, football star Andre Rison in a fit of rage.

 

I know of an escort who threatened to burn down a client's home in California if the escort couldn't get his Ecstasy. This was years ago and he probably would not have burned the house. But that was what ended the "HooBoy Seal Of Approval".

 

I don't think he escorts anymore. I heard he joined the army and had altercation with his commanding officer.

 

Could it be.....nah!!!

[skins1]

when did the show air? will it be on again?

[woodlawn]

This story was reported in The New York Times last year. It has been mentioned on this site before as a response to those who say there is no reason to think that allowing gays to serve in the military will cause any problems because gay men are capable of exercising "self restraint."

 

Those who said that ending racial segregation in the military would cause problems were right. There were many racial incidents in the military as a result. Those who said that allowing women to serve would cause problems were right; the sexual assault scandal at the Air Force Academy is only the most recent example of many such problems. And those who say that allowing gay men to serve will cause problems are also right. The question is, is there something to be achieved by allowing gay men to serve that makes it worthwhile to deal with the problems that will result?

[+ deej]

The whole argument of "allowing" gay men to serve is facetious. As this case proves, we're already "in" and always have been. I'm sure this isn't the first time a soldier slept with an officer, with a promotion dangling on a stick. (So to speak.)

 

Sleeping around to further your career isn't a symptom of gays in the military. (Or in The Show Business or in corporate America.)

 

Burning down a house to destroy evidence is a symptom of white trash, not gays, in the military. :9

[Guest msclonly]

This case has little to do with sex and more to do with Videoing a young guy, who couldn't get the tape. Just what did the Officier want it for. The tape is why he got burned and could have been prevented, if he gave up the video instead of his house!

 

}(

 

The kid didn't think a video being shown around like a trophy by the officier was such a good idea for his reputation. The kid should have gotten a light sentence and the officier showing poor and bad judgement should have gotten the book thrown at him!

 

 

:7

[Guest YFSC]

>when did the show air?

 

I believe it was last year (TV year, 02-03 season). Maybe even the year before.

 

>will it be on again?

 

Ask CBS.

[Doug69]

>The question is, is there something to be achieved by

>allowing gay men to serve that makes it worthwhile to deal

>with the problems that will result?

 

What an interesting way to formulate the question. With regard to ending racial segregation of the armed forces, was the relevant question: "Is there something to be achieved by allowing blacks to serve with whites"? Was that the relevant question?

 

And if racial intergration of the armed forces had caused more problems than it did, would you have been oppposed to it?

 

In general, treating American citizens equally and giving them equal opportunity doesn't depend upon how many "problems" doing so will create or whether it's worth it from a cost-benefit analysis. Treating citizens equally is an end in itself which shouldn't depend upon that sort of test.

[Guest YFSC]

>This case has little to do with sex and more to do with

>Videoing a young guy, who couldn't get the tape. Just what

>did the Officier want it for. The tape is why he got burned

>and could have been prevented, if he gave up the video instead

>of his house!

 

True. It could just as well have been a straight encounter and it could just as well have involved a civilian or been entirely between civilians.

 

>The kid didn't think a video being shown around like a trophy

>by the officier was such a good idea for his reputation.

 

Yeah, but why didn't he think of that *before* saying yes to videotaping? And in any case, burning down a house is not the way to deal with the situation.

 

>The kid should have gotten a light sentence

 

For arson??? And causing property damage probably in 6 figures??

Maybe just a slap on the wrist? or on the butt? }(

 

>and the officier

>showing poor and bad judgement should have gotten the book

>thrown at him!

 

Effectively he did, with a dishonorable discharge and losing his retirement, on top of his house and possessions. We don't put people in jail just for 'bad judgement.'

[Guest Cumbee]

Boy, this is a tough one! I guess I do fall down on the side of individual responsibility here after some thought about it.

 

The young guy clearly exceeded anything justifiable in committing arson. Gay stigma or not, he can't be given a pass on such a serious error of judgement.

 

The officer knew the rules, AND THE PENALTIES, for his behavior. Fraternization (sp?) between officers and enlisted personnel, even without sex, is a violation of the UCMJ. Even a straight encounter may have produced similar, dire results for him. To ascert that the severe penality he received was based solely upon the gay nature of his relationship with the young man may well be unfair. And the accusation that this was a form of sexual harassment by a superior upon an inferior ranking person DEFINITELY has merit, in my judgement. A twenty year officer should know better than that!

 

If you choose to stick your hand into the fire, you shouldn't be surprised that your hand gets burned! I do not believe the descrimination against gays in our military is necessary or justified. But I don't necessarily see this case as a confirmed example of that discrimination either!

[Luv2play]

I think the officer showed an incredible lack of judgment and the enlisted man a wanton disregard for life and property (how did he know that someone wasn't sleeping in the house). Five years for arson? yes, I have no problem with that. The officer being stripped of his job? again, no problem here.

 

What I have a problem with is the Air Force being able to strip someone of their pension. This is a draconian measure and one I would argue as unconstitutional, as cruel and unusual punishment. In what other sphere of society is an organization permitted to levy a fine which is really incalculable? The worth of that pension is not ascertainable in the specific case but if the pensioner were to live another 40 years (not unheard of for a military pension) it could be worth over a million dollars. Is that a fair punishment? Not in my book.x(

[dick_nyc]

Two things come to mind in this thread.

 

One is the Tailhook Scandal where the officers lost their jobs and their pensions.

 

The other is the woman Air Force pilot who had an affair with a sergeant and she also lost her job - don't remember if she lost her pension or not. She was suing about it but I don't think she won.

 

I agree with the general consensus of the panel that both came off as assholes in this case. When I was a little younger - rather, a lot younger - and just out of the service I sorta specialized in servicemen for about 3 years in DC. I had been a sergeant and worked at the Pentagon as a civilian. I was lucky that the servicemen I hooked up with realized that we both had a lot to lose if we messed up. We both knew the score and what we could and could not do and we both abided by what protected ourselves. I even managed to go with a guard from the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier for over a year and had no problems. These guys just decided that they did not have to play by the rules and as a result they both lost big time.

 

Moral of the story is think!!

[Rick Munroe]

>Treating citizens equally is an end in

>itself which shouldn't depend upon that sort of test.

 

Hear, hear. Or is it "Here, here"? I agree either way.

[phage]

>What I have a problem with is the Air Force being able to

>strip someone of their pension. This is a draconian measure

>and one I would argue as unconstitutional, as cruel and

>In what other sphere of society is an

>organization permitted to levy a fine which is really

>incalculable?

 

In every sphere that I am aware of, if you are terminated before you vest in the pension plan, you don’t get it. He wasn’t “stripped” of anything because he hadn’t earned it yet. He was just nearing retirement. In the private sector that happens to good people who have done nothing wrong except be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

I think he got just what he deserved for violating his obligation to not abuse the tremendous authority that officers are given over enlisted people.

[Guest fukamarine]

>>What I have a problem with is the Air Force being able to

>>strip someone of their pension. This is a draconian measure

>>and one I would argue as unconstitutional, as cruel and

>>In what other sphere of society is an

>>organization permitted to levy a fine which is really

>>incalculable?

>

>In every sphere that I am aware of, if you are terminated

>before you vest in the pension plan, you don’t get it

 

Phage - I have to disagree with you here. I know it is the custom to strip military personnel of their pensions if they are fired, same happens to policemen and I presume many other government employees.

 

But in the private sector, one's pension is contributed to by the employer as a specified benefit when you are hired - becomes part of your compensation and can't be arbitrarily taken from you, regardless of when or why you leave the company.

 

I have always thought it was very unfair and frankly should be illegal for any government employer to have the right to refuse you what is rightfully yours. I would fight it in court!

 

fukamarine

[Guest msclonly]

Does anyone here know WHAT the Officier many have said or commanded and in what tone to the poor kid?

He could have been completely at the mercy of the officier's command and very vulnerable at the moment with ahard cock running him.

I understand some the guys out of Boot camp are so vulnerable, that they were EASY prey just walking down the street in town.

 

:7

[phage]

>can't be arbitrarily

>taken from you, regardless of when or why you leave the

>company.

 

I guess that depends on what you mean by “taken from you.” The private sector plans that I’m familiar with allow for vesting after some period of time. My personal plan was five years. If I am terminated for any reason, they keep the money and I get some (small) kind of payment when I reach a specific age.

 

The next milestone in the plan is 20 years of service. If I’m separated for any reason prior to that milestone, even by one day, I am not eligible for full retirement benefits. They will have taken away my ability to get full retirement, but they won’t be “stripping” me of anything that I already have.

 

>I have always thought it was very unfair and frankly should be

>illegal for any government employer to have the right to

>refuse you what is rightfully yours. I would fight it in

>court!

 

I’ve been out of the military for 20 years, so it’s a bit hazy, but I don’t believe there is any provision for vesting. You are only eligible for a pension if you complete 20 years of active duty. If I remember this story correctly, the Colonel was approaching retirement, but had not completed the 20 years.

 

The dishonorable discharged may have stripped him of the ability to complete his 20 years, but it didn’t strip him of a pension because he hadn't earned one yet. If I’m wrong, and he was still in the service after 20 years, maybe he would have a case.

[OneFinger]

<...Any of you former military men ever have sex with a buddy in the service and was sorry later? Or did you enjoy every minute of it?

 

I had sex several times with other sailors assigned to my submarine. I think we all really enjoyed these experiences and were lucky enough not to get "caught" or suffer negative consequences.

 

BTW, we didn't have sex aboard the boat while underway. We always hooked up awhile in port or on leave. There's just no privacy on a submarine and we did try to be somewhat discrete. ;-)

 

But, sex between officers and enlisted (gay or hetero) adds another complexity and a whole new set of rules. I'm glad I never crossed that line.

[Luv2play]

Here in Canada, a pension vests after you have contributed to it for at least 10 years and you are 45 years of age. At that point, if you are terminated (for any reason), the employer must return your pension contributions together with his AND INTEREST so that you can invest it in another pension vehicle. It is the law. We don't like to see old people living on the streets. That is just the kind of society we are, COMPASSIONATE, something certain US politicians (on the religious right, who profess to follow Jesus Christ's ways) talk about but seem to do little about. When this officer was 2 days away from retirement and to say he hadn't earned his pension yet, well what does his 20 years of service count for, NIL? Comeon, get a heart!x(

[Doug69]

>Here in Canada, a pension vests after you have contributed to

>it for at least 10 years and you are 45 years of age.

 

So what happens in your super-compassionate, oh-so-great country if a worker is fired after 9 years and 11 months? Presumably, based on what you said - and to use your words - "well what does his 10 years of service count for, NIL? Comeon, get a heart!"

 

>It is the law. We don't like to see old people living on the

>streets.

 

I was in Toronto about 3 months ago and I saw enormous numbers of homeless people everywhere - more so per block than I see, say, on the streets of New York.

 

And in the U.S., we have this thing called Social Security that typically prevents old people from becoming homeless. Have you been to the U.S. before you wrote your lecture on how compassionate your great country is and how mean and awful ours is? How many senior citizens did you see living on the street?

 

That is just the kind of society we are,

>COMPASSIONATE, something certain US politicians (on the

>religious right, who profess to follow Jesus Christ's ways)

>talk about but seem to do little about.

 

I love all these people who greatly benefit from and hungrily use all of the inventions and products which are the by-product of the work of U.S. corporations (who created the computer you are using? its software? the brower which you use to read this? whose pharmaceutical products do you use when you are sick? who built the airplanes you fly on?), and whose countries produce every little for the world, who then come here and lecture us on how mean and evil and bad our country is and how nice and compassionate theirs is.

 

When this officer was

>2 days away from retirement and to say he hadn't earned his

>pension yet, well what does his 20 years of service count for,

>NIL? Comeon, get a heart!

 

Making excuses for people when they break rules of which they are well aware and trying to give them things to which they aren't entitled isn't "compassionate"; it's foolish. Societies that operate on this type of perspective are generally quiet little irrelevant places which inexorably suffocate the souls of its citizens through a relentless buzz of boredom, stagnation, and mediocrity. Did I mention that I was in Toronto a few months ago?

[phage]

>Comeon, get a heart!x(

 

I don’t want to make this a United States versus Canada thing. He was not in the Canadian military. He was familiar with the policies and should have controlled himself.

 

Were you ever in the military? Do you appreciate the tremendous disparity in power that exists between a senior officer and a junior enlisted person? There is no equivalent in the civilian world and there is simply no way that it can ever be an even playing field. Officers are given great authority based solely on their rank, and with that authority comes great responsibility. Others have been dismissing this as “bad judgment” but it was much, much more than that.

 

In this case, I don’t even think it has that much to do with the fact that it was homo sex. It certainly made it worse, but the results probably would have been the same if he had taped a female. Fraternization is very serious and it is almost always the officer who is punished.

 

While I was in the service, I knew of two cases of fraternization that were pursued. One was a very young and junior officer (female) and they let her stay in and the male enlisted member got out. (It probably still killed her career.) The other was a senior male officer and a junior enlisted female. She stayed in with no retribution and he completely disappeared. I don’t know the terms of his discharge, but in both cases, the situation was not tolerated.

[Luv2play]

What happens if he is fired after 9 years? He gets his own contributions back, but not the employers.

 

I've lived in the US for 5 years and know how the poor are treated. In Miami last year a woman with a need for a liver transplant couldn't afford one and was told to basically go home and die. Even the Miami Herald was appalled! Wouldn't happen in Canada. Nobody is turned away from medically required procedures because of lack of means. So yes, we do have a heart, as does the rest of the Western world where access to medical care is guaranteed for EVERYONE. You have 43 million without medical insurance, a total scandal for a rich country like yours.

 

And yes, there are homeless people in Toronto and other major cities in Canada. If you look into it, most of these people have rejected state-offered accomodation and prefer to live in the streets because of mental or pyscological problems including various types of addictions.

 

And for your ignorant attitude about how the US invented everything, try reading a little bit about history. While many great inventions came from the US some pretty impressive ones came from Europe and Asia(and even Canada). We did invent the telephone , after all (Alexander Graham Bell in Brantford, Ont.)

[Guest msclonly]

Heath Care in the US helps people in Canada

 

Wow! The distortion of facts about medical treatment above must be replied to!

 

MANY MANY people come to the US for treatment, because they are WAY DOWN the WAIT list in Canada. TRUE no one said, they can't have treatment, but the list is SO long for specialized treatment, that they rather pay out of their own pocket for US care!

 

It ain't what it is cracked up to be in Canadian medicine!