>> IN 1993 IT SEEMED TO BE
THE BEST POLICY FOR ALL
PARTIES INVOLVED.
WHEN IT CAME TO GAYS AND
LESBIANS IN THE MILITARY THE
CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
CONCEDED THAT A DON'T ASK
DON'T TELL POLICY WOULD WORK
BEST.
SO LONG AS THESE MEN AN
WOMEN KEPT THEIR SEXUAL
ORIENTATION A SECRET, THEY
COULD STAY IN.
NOW CONGRESS IS ON THE VERGE
OF VOTING TO REPEAL THE
PRACTICE.
HERE TO TALK MORE ABOUT THE
ISSUE ARE TRAVIS HENGEN WHO
SPENT NEARLY 12 YEARS IN THE
ARMY BEFORE BEING DISCHARGED
FOR COMING OUT.
RETIRED BRIGADIER-GENERAL
KEVIN RYAN NOW WITH
HARVARD'S KENNEDY COOL.
WELCOME TO BOTH YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I JUST WANT TO START AND
GET A SENSE OF YOUR OWN
PERSONAL HISTORY WITH THIS.
YOU WERE IN THE ARMY FOR 12,
ALMOST 12 YEARS.
WHEN YOU DECIDED TO COME OUT,
KNOWING WHAT THE POLICY WAS.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> WHY DID YOU FEEL TO COME
OUT TO YOUR SUPERIORS?
>> THERE WERE MANY REASONS.
PRIMARILY THE BIGGEST REASON
WAS, IT WAS A QUESTIONING OF
MY UNTEG RIT.
YOU KNOW, ANYBODY WHO SERVES
IN THE MILITARY KNOWS THAT
THERE ARE CERTAIN VALUES
THAT THEY MUST FOLLOW AND
INTEGRITY IS ONE OF THEM.
AND AFTER A WHILE I FELT
THAT THERE WAS THIS POLICY
LOOMING OVER MY HEAD THAT AT
ANY TIME SOMETHING COULD
HAPPEN.
IT WAS VERY DISTRACTING.
AND ALSO --
>> AND ANYTHING TOCO HAPPEN
MEANING --
>> THAT, A WITCH-HUNT,
SOMEBODY MAY QUESTION MY
SEXUALITY.
AND THEN THEY MAY START AN
INVESTIGATION SO THAT THAT
WAS VERY DISTRACTING.
AND ALSO, I FELT THAT I WAS
ALMOST BEING FORCED IT TO
LIE TO COVER THIS UP.
>> IT WASN'T ALMOST, YOU
WERE.
>> YES, WELL, EXACTLY.
BUT YOU KNOW, IT WASN'T SO
OVERTLY LYING.
I FELT THAT I HAD TO HAVE
THIS SECRET THAT WAS JUST,
YOU KNOW, THAT WAS JUST
REALLY TOUGH TO KEEP.
AND IT WAS VERY DISTRACTING.
I WAS DEPLOYED RIGHT AFTER
SEPTEMBER 11th.
I WAS IN KUWAIT SITTING ON
THE IRAQ BORDER FOR ABOUT
SIX MONTHS.
AND I SAW MYSELF BECOMING
MORE AND MORE DISTRACTED AND
I FELT THAT I REALLY OWED IT
TO MY SOLDIERS, HI EIGHT
PEOPLE THERE WHO WORKED FOR
ME, THAT I REALLY NEEDED TO
BE 100 PERCENT ON MY GAME.
AND I FELT THAT THAT WASN'T
HAPPENING BECAUSE I HAD THIS
DISTRACTION.
>> NOW KEVIN, THIS IS 12 12
YEARS AGO.
HAVE WE VOLUME OF THE, HAS
THE MILITARY EVOLVED IN THIS
LAST 12 QUERS TO BE ABLE TO
ACCEPT THIS?
BECAUSE WE ARE BEING TOLD AT
THIS POINT THAT THE VOTES
ARE THERE IN CONGRESS TO GET
THIS DON'T ASK DON'T TELL
POLICY REPEALED.
DO YOU THINK IT'S THE RIGHT
TIME?
>> YEAH, I DO THINK IT'S THE
RIGHT TIME.
AND I THINK THAT BOTH FROM
THE PERSPECTIVE OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT AND ALSO
POLITICALLY, YOU KNOW, THE
POLITICAL CLIMATE IS RIGHT
FOR IT NOW.
AND I THINK ACROSS AMERICA,
I THINK TOO, THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE.
BUT I AM JUST ONE OF THEM
AND I HAVE DONE A POLL.
SO BUT MY SENSING IS THAT
IT'S THE RIGHT TIME
ACROSS-THE-BOARD.
SO YES.
>> I JUST WONDER BECAUSE YOU
SAY ACROSS AMERICA.
WE'VE SEEN SOME SAME-SEX
MARRIAGE PROPOSALS GO DOWN,
MOST NOTABLY IN CALIFORNIA
AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
CALIFORNIA A LOT, A PLACE
THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE DIDN'T
EXPECT.
SO YOU DO WONDER IF THE
SENSIBILITY REALLY HAS
CHANGED ENOUGH THAT THERE
WILL BE ACCEPTANCE FOR THIS
WITHIN THE MILITARY IF JUST
EVEN OUTSIDE OF THE REGULAR
CIVILIAN BASE IT IS NOT A
GIVEN.
>> YOU RAISE A GOOD POINT.
AND THAT IS PROBABLY A
DIFFERENT DISCUSSION BUT THE
MARRIAGES, I THINK, THAT
INVOLVES ANOTHER ASPECT OF
GAY RIGHTS.
AND YOU KNOW, WHAT THE
POPULATION IS THINKING ABOUT
THAT, THAT ISN'T REALLY
INVOLVED HERE WHEN WE ARE
TALKING JUST ABOUT,
INITIALLY ANYWAY, ABOUT
MEMBERSHIP, OPEN MEMBERSHIP
IN THE MILITARY.
AM AND THE MILITARY HAS
EVOLVED.
YOU ASKED THAT QUESTION.
I KNOW THAT THROUGH MY 30
YEARS IN ITS MILITARY.
AND I KNOW THAT 20 YEARS AGO
WE COULDN'T HAVE THIS
CONVERSATION.
I DON'T SAY THAT IT WAS
RIGHT TO BE DIFFERENT 20
YEARS AGO.
I AM JUST SAYING IT IF THE
REALITY, THE MILITARY HAS
CHANGED.
>> TRAVIS, ARE YOU SHAKING
YOUR HEAD.
DO YOU FEEL THE SAME THING?
BECAUSE I KNOW THAT YOU ARE
READY TO GO BACK IN IN IF
THIS IS REVEAL -- REPEALED.
>> RIGHT.
YOU KNOW, I DO FEEL THAT
WITH THE REPEAL, THERE IS
GOING TO BE SOME OUTLIAR
INCIDENTS, I'M SURE.
YOU CAN'T SAY IT IS TO THE
GOING TO HAPPEN.
BUT THE MILITARY OPERATES ON
DISCIPLINE.
WE ARE VERY DISCIPLINED
GROUP.
AND TO THINK THAT YOU KNOW,
BY OPENING THE GATES, IF YOU
WILL, TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO
OPENLY SERVE IS GOING
TO-- IS GOING TO CAUSE A
PROBLEMS, WELL, THERE ARE
SYSTEMS IN PLACE, MECHANISMS
IN PLACE.
WE ARE A VERY DISCIPLINED
GROUP AND I REALLY FEEL
THAT-- THAT THOSE MECHANISMS
WILL TAKE PLACE, WILL HAPPEN
IF SOMETHING SHOULD HAPPEN,
LIKE SOME SORT OF CRIME OR
HATE CRIME OR SOMETHING LIKE
THAT.
>> AND THERE IS A CALL HERE
TO WAIT AT LEAST UNTIL THE
PENTAGON FINISHES ITS REVIEW
WHICH IS UNDERGOING RIGHT
NOW, SHOULD BE FINISHED
AROUND THE BEGINNING OF
DECEMBER WHY THE CALL TO
WAIT FOR THE PENTAGON
REVIEW?
WHAT SIGNAL IS THAT GOING TO
SEND TO WAIT FOR THAT, WAIT
FOR THEIR CONCLUSIONS?
>> WELL, MY OPINION ON THAT
IS THAT THERE ARE PROBABLY
MANY MOTIVATIONS FOR WAITING
FOR THE PENTAGON REVIEW.
SOME PEOPLE LET'S GIVE THEM
THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT,
ARE WAITING BECAUSE THEY
HONESTLY FEEL THAT THE
PENTAGON OUGHT TO HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO LAYOUT SOME
PLANS AND SOME STEPS THAT
THEY WANT TO TAKE SO THAT
THEY CAN USE THEIR NEW
POLICY IN TO PLACE IT WILL
BE-- IT'S TO THE GOING TO BE
EASY JUST BECAUSE IT'S
RIGHT.
IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT.
SO THAT MOTIVATION IS OUT
THERE.
THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO
ARE DELAYING ANYWAY POSSIBLE.
IN MY OPINION IT'S BETTER TO
GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE VOTE
NOW AND DO IT NOW JUST
BECAUSE FOR THE POLITICAL
REASON.
IT'S MORE EXPEDIENT AND YOU
ARE LIKELY TO GET IT DOWN
AND YOU MIGHT HAVE MORE
TROUBLE LATER.
BUT THOSE WHO SAY THEY WANT
TO WAIT FOR THE REVIEW AND
HAVE THE RIGHT REASONS, YOU
KNOW, I CAN'T FAULT THEM FOR
THAT I JUST THINK IT'S
BETTER TO DO IT QUICKLY.
>> ON YOUR POINT THAT THINGS
NEED TO CHANGE, I MEAN TO
IMPLEMENT THIS NEW POLICY OR
I GUESS TO REPEAL THE POLICY,
TO JUST HAVE IT THIS WAY,
ARE THERE INFRASTRUCTURE
CHANGES?
WHAT WILL NEED TO HAPPEN.
WHAT WILL NEED TO CHANGE
SYSTEMICALLY AND PERHAPS
EVEN PHYSICALLY IN ORDER TO
ALLOW THIS TO SORT OF GO
FORTH EASILY AS EASILY AS IT
CAN?
>> IF YOU DON'T MIND I WOULD
LIKE TO STEP BACK FOR A
SECOND AND ADDRESS SOMETHING
TO THAT AS WELL.
THERE SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE
BIT 6 MISINTERPRETATION OF
WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT
MILITARY WORKING GROUP IS.
AND I WAS AT THE PENTAGON
TWO WEEKS AGO AND I MET WITH
THEM.
AND THEY ARE VERY CLEAR ON
THEIR MISSION WHICH IS HOW
TO BEST REVEAL OR IMPLEMENT
THE REPEAL OF DON'T ASK
DON'T TELL.
NOT WHETHER IT SHOULD.
THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO
BELIEVE THAT THE PURPOSE OF
THAT GROUP IS TO DECIDE
WHETHER THEY SHOULD REPEAL
DON'T ASK DON'T TELL.
NOW AS FAR AS INFRASTRUCTURE
AND THINGS THAT SHOULD
HAPPEN.
>> WHICH IS PROBABLY WHAT
YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT,
PART OF WHAT THE PENTAGON IS
LOOKING AT.
>> EXACTLY.
AND THEY WANT TO KNOW WELL
WHAT POLICIES NEED TO BE
CHANGED.
WHAT KIND OF PROGRAMS NEED
TO BE IMPLEMENTED TO ALLOW
FOR A SMOOTHER I GUESS
TRANSITION TO ALLOW GAYS AND
TO OPENLY SERVICE.
>> THERE ARE PEOPLE, YOU
HEAR THE ARGUMENT, WELL, IF
I AM A MAN IN THE SHOWER I
DON'T WANT TO BE NEXT TO A
GAY MAN IN THE SHORE WE ARE.
>> TO BE QUITE HONEST, THEY
ARE THERE NOW.
THEY ARE-- IT IS ESTIMATED
65,000 TROOPS WHO ARE GAY
AND LESBIAN WHO ARE SERVING
RIGHT NOW NEXT TO THOSE
PEOPLE, THEY ARE LIVING IN
THE SAME VILLAGE, SAME
BARRACKS, SHOWERING IN THE
SAME SHOWERS.
THEY ARE THERE.
AND MOST LIKELY THE PEOPLE,
MANY PEOPLE WHO HAVE A GAY
OR LESBIAN ROOMMATE PROBABLY
ALREADY KNOW THAT THEIR
ROOMMATE IS GAY OR LESBIAN.
SO I REALLY THINK THAT I
CAN'T SAY IT IS GOING TO BE
A PERFECT TRANSITION.
BUT I THINK OVER TIME IT
GOING TO REALLY BE A
NONISSUE.
>> TRAVIS MENTIONED
DISCIPLINE THIS GOING TO
COME FROM THE TOP DOWN BUT
IF RIGHT NOW THERE IS
RELUCTANCE AMONG THE LEADERS
OF THE FOUR BRANCHES AND
EVEN SENATOR JOHN McCAIN IS
NOT ON BOARD WITH THIS AND
HE'S PROBABLY OUR MOST
VISIBLE WAR VETERAN
POLITICIAN OUT THERE, HOW IS
THAT GOING TO TRANSLATE?
WHAT KIND OF PSYCHOLOGY IS
GOING TO FOLLOW THAT?
>> WELL, I THINK THE
DISCIPLINE THING IS THE KEY
HERE.
AND LET ME ANSWER THAT IN A
SECOND.
BUT WHAT TRAVIS IS SAYING IS
CORRECT.
HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT BY ITSELF
IS NOT THE THREAT TO UNIT
COHESION OR MORALE THAT WAS
WRITTEN INTO THE LAW IN '93.
IT IS CONDUCT IN CERTAIN
CIRCUMSTANCES.
JUST LIKE WE HAVE
FRATERNIZATION AND SEXUAL
CONDUCT BETWEEN MALE AND
FEMALE IN THE ARMY, IN
CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS
FORBIDDEN BECAUSE OF EFFECT
ON UNIT COHESION AND MORAL.
HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT WOULD BE
COVERED IN THE SAME WAY.
HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT THAT GOES
ON IN THE CONFINES OF A
PRIVATE HOME OR SOMEPLACE
ELSE, I MEAN THAT, UNDER
THIS NEW LAW, I'M SURE THAT
WILL BE PART OF WHAT IS
ALLOWED.
AND VERY NORMAL FOR PEOPLE
TO ACCEPT THAT.
IN TERMS OF THE CHIEFS, I
WOULDN'T SAY THEY ARE
RELUCTANT.
I WOULD SAY THEY ARE
CAUTIOUS IT I DON'T KNOW
THEIR PERSONAL FEELINGS BUT
CLEARLY THEY ARE CAUTIOUS.
EVEN THE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN
THE MOST OUTSPOKEN GENERAL
CONWAY, COME DANT OF THE
MARINES SAID IF WE ARE GOING
DO THIS, LET'S GET IT DONE
NOW.
LET'S NOT DOWDEL, LET'S MOVE
FORWARD QUICKLY AND GET THIS
DONE.
>> AS WAS THE CASE IN OUR
LAST SEGMENT THIS ALSO WILL
GO FOR A VOTE AND BE
CONSIDERED THIS WEEK SO WE
WILL BE FOLLOWING.
THANK YOU BOTH FOR JOINING
US.
>> AND COMING UP NEXT,
COMEDY ON CENTRE STAGE.