I think you raise some important questions. And we don’t know the circumstances of her “outing”.
It doesn't matter. DADT is very clear. If you are found to be homosexual, you are out. The article says: Witt was suspended in 2004 and subsequently discharged under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy after the Air Force learned she had been in a long-term relationship with a civilian woman.
That's against the rules.
As for JuliaH's contention :So, was she good at her job?
What does that have to do with military policy? Rules are rules.
How about a lack of moral character and ethics? Just a couple symptoms of the homosexual disorder that the politically correct and the morally corrupt leftists pretend is "normal". After all, penguins do it...
Take a morally devoid selfish pervert, label them with the "gay" progressive good housekeeping seal of approval and VOILA -we see a noble leftist cause -a sexual orientation justice initiative -a legally fought civil rights case in the making. All this premised upon how one CHOOSES to get their sexual gratification AND all this outside the authoritative domain of the elites attempting to impose it...
Federal Appeals Court Strikes Blow to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" - May 22nd, 2008
-excerpt:
Yesterday afternoon the Federal Appeals Court for the 9th Circuit dealt a significant blow to the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. The ACLU of Washington represents a decorated Air Force Major, Margaret Witt, who was discharged for being in a relationship with another woman. In its decision, the court ruled that the Air Force must prove that discharging Major Witt is necessary for purposes of military readiness. While the court stopped short of striking down "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," it made it clear that following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, the military has a much higher burden in justifying the ban:
We hold that when the government attempts to intrude upon the personal and private lives of homosexuals, in a manner that implicates the rights identified in Lawrence [v. Texas], the government must advance an important governmental interest, the intrusion must significantly further that interest, and the intrusion must be necessary to further that interest. In other words, for the third factor, a less intrusive means must be unlikely to achieve substantially the government's interest.
Obama Avoids Test on Gays in Military - May 19th, 2009
-excerpt:
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration has decided to accept an appeals-court ruling that could undermine the military's ban on service members found to be gay.A federal appeals court in San Francisco last year ruled that the government must justify the expulsion of a decorated officer solely because she is a lesbian. The court rejected government arguments that the law banning gays in the military should have a blanket application, and that officials shouldn't be required to argue the merits in her individual case.
The administration let pass a May 3 deadline to appeal to the Supreme Court. That means the case will be returned to the district court, and administration officials said they will continue to defend the law there.
The move "takes the issue off the front burner," as a trial and subsequent appeals could take years before the question returns to the Supreme Court, said an official familiar with the matter.
The decision comes as President Barack Obama attempts a balancing act on gay rights. He was elected with strong support from the gay community and promised action on a number of issues. But mindful of the complex politics, the White House has moved slowly.
Lesbian seeks reinstatement to Air Force in trial - Sep 12th, 2010
-excerpt:
Justice Department lawyers representing the Air Force note that the case has put them in the position of defending a law neither the president nor the department itself believes is good policy. Defense Secretary Robert Gates also favors repealing the 1993 law, which prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but allows the discharge of those who acknowledge being gay or are discovered to be engaging in homosexual activity.Government lawyers nevertheless insist Witt's firing was justified—and that the panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not know the extent of her conduct when it sided with her in 2008. That conduct included a long-term relationship with a civilian woman, an affair with a woman who was married at the time and two earlier relationships with fellow servicewomen, Witt acknowledged in a deposition in May.
It was a 2004 e-mail from the husband of the married woman to the Air Force chief of staff, Gen. John Jumper, that prompted the investigation into Witt's sexuality.
We do know the circumstances of her outing - the husband of her civilian lover dropped a dime on her.