Twitter “Raj”

TWITTER-SPHERE

Part 2 – The Twitter “Raj”

Continued from Part 1 – Twitter Can “Kill” You

TWITTER “RAJ”

A Spoof

By

VIKRAM KARVE

Dear Reader – have you seen the James Bond Movie “Tomorrow Never Dies”…?

“Tomorrow Never Dies” is the 18^th James Bond Film – produced in 1997.

The plot of this movie is centered around a power-hungry “Media Mogul” who tries manipulate and influence events to provoke global war to in order to create “advance” headlines for the launch of his latest news channel.

Yes – this “Media Baron” has become so powerful that he can manipulate/influence events globally. This enables him to write headlines and design front pages in advance of big news events – and then make the events happen – in order to boost the Sales and TRP Ratings of his newspapers and TV Channels.

In effect – this “Media Magnate” has become more powerful than governments.

This movie was produced 22 years ago in 1997 – when Social Media (SM) did not exist – and Mainstream Media (MSM) was all powerful.

Today – Social Media (SM) has dethroned Mainstream Media (MSM).

And – of the various Social Media Platforms/Applications – the most powerful is Twitter.

Twitter is a micro-blogging and social-networking service launched 13 years ago in 2006.

Today – Twitter is the largest source of “Breaking News” and a hotbed of World Politics.

Most Powerful People – Heads of Governments/Nations, Political Leaders, Celebrities, Business Tycoons, Intellectuals, Activists – almost all influential people use Twitter (besides the common man).

Organisations extensively use Twitter too – to communicate and for Customer Service and Public Relations (PR).

The entire world has become dependent on Twitter.

Twitter has become all-powerful – like the “Media Mogul” in the James Bond Movie “Tomorrow Never Dies”.

Political Leaders and Heads of Nations have become totally dependent on Twitter.

Earlier – Heads of Nations would announce important decisions via Media Briefings (Press Conferences).

Today – Twitter has replaced the traditional “Press Conference”.

Political Leaders “Tweet” their decisions and views.

This dependence of world leaders on Twitter has given Twitter immense power over them and made them vulnerable to manipulation by Twitter.

It is the same with all people and organisations who are dependent on Twitter.

In the absence of any alternative microblogging platform – Twitter has total monopoly.

Monopoly creates Hegemony.

Thus – Twitter has become tremendously powerful – a hegemony.

There is saying that “Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely”.

Has this syndrome affected Twitter and motivated Twitter to treat its “customers” in a high-handed and arbitrary manner….?

I first realized the arbitrary power of Twitter a few years ago when my first Twitter Account @vikramkarve was hacked.

I observed that a Russian seemed to have hacked my account and was tweeting in Russian language from my Twitter Handle.

My followers noticed these Russian Tweets too and they wondered what was happening.

I took up the issue with Twitter – but nothing happened.

I don’t remember exactly – but to the best of my knowledge – Twitter expressed their inability to restore my account back to me.

I realized that I had lost my Twitter Account and all my followers too.

After a few weeks – as advised by a friend – I opened another Twitter Account with a new Handle @vikramwkarve  

This Twitter Account became popular – and over the years – I gained a lot of followers.

A few days ago – when I opened Twitter in the morning – I saw shocked to see a message on the screen:

“Your account (@vikramwkarve) is currently suspended. For more information, please log into twitter.com”

I logged on to Twitter.

After perusing the Twitter Rules – I was certain that there was no justification for Twitter to suspend my Account – since I had not violated any Twitter Rules.

Also – Twitter gave no reason for suspending my account suddenly – without any prior intimation – in a most unilateral and arbitrary manner.

Isn’t this action by Twitter against the principles of natural justice….?

Interestingly – in the Twitter Rules – there was a disclaimer – maybe to cover up any mistakes on the part of Twitter:

“Unfortunately, sometimes a real person’s account gets suspended by mistake, and in those cases we’ll work with the person to make sure the account is unsuspended”

Well – if my Twitter Account has been suspended by mistake – why hasn’t Twitter restored it so far despite my following the proper procedure/instructions and filing an appeal to unsuspend my account…?

Yes – I have filed an appeal to unsuspend my account 3 days ago.

In reply to my appeal – all I have received is message from Twitter saying that they are working on it and it may take a few days – a very vague statement without any deadline for restoration of my Twitter Account.

(I would also like to emphasize that Twitter has not given any reason as to why they have suspended my Twitter Account – either prior to suspending my account – or in their email acknowledging my request to unsuspend the account).

(I have described the details in Part 1 of this article -> Twitter Can “Kill” You)

Since there is no way to communicate with Twitter – I do not know whether my Twitter Account will be restored or not – or after how many days it will be restored.

Or – will I lose my Twitter Account @vikramwkarve forever – in the same way as I lost my first Twitter Account @vikramkarve a few years ago…?

My Tweets are my Creative Legacy and my Intellectual Property.

Is it fair for Twitter to obliterate my creative work and destroy my intellectual property in a most arbitrary manner…?

By unfairly suspending my Twitter Account – Twitter has hurt me immensely.

Injustice to one individual may seem insignificant in Twittersphere.

Now – just imagine – if Twitter suddenly suspends the Twitter Account of a prominent person or an important organisation – won’t this cause damage to them and put them at an unfair disadvantage vis-à-vis their competitors and rivals…?

Apart from the “overt” brutal step of suspending accounts – there may be other “covert” subtle ways of manipulation (like “Shadow Banning”).

If deployed against politicians/parties – especially at the time of elections – can’t such overt and covert social media “stratagems” have an impact on the political situation – due to the excessive dependence of politicians and political parties on social media platforms, especially Twitter – considering the immense power and extensive reach of the social media…?

On a broader level – is it not possible to manipulate public opinion by using such social media tactics…?

And worse – suppose the Twitter Account of a “VIP” is hacked…?

Just imagine the consequences.

Isn’t it possible that Fake Tweets from Heads of Governments/Nations may result in devastating consequences…?

If twitter accounts of prominent persons or organisations are hacked and fake malicious tweets are sent out from these accounts – will it not ruin reputations, affect relations and influence situations….?  

If you think that hacking Twitter Accounts of “VIPs” is not possible – let me tell you that a few days ago there was news that the Twitter Account of the Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was hacked.

If the Twitter CEO can’t protect his own Twitter Account – what can one say about the security of other accounts…?

I don’t know if it is true – but someone told me that it is automated “bots” who take important decisions like suspending accounts.

If this is true – it is indeed a scary situation – where control of the Social Media has been handed over to “machines”.

The Moot Question is:

Is there any control on Social Media – especially powerful platforms like Twitter which have tremendous influence…?

Are most governments clueless about how to control the Social Media…?

And – those who have a clue – are they helpless – as they fear that the powerful and influential Social Media can exploit their dependence on the Social Media by overt and covert means…?

Does the judiciary have jurisdiction on Social Media Platforms which are based in Foreign Countries…?

Who has jurisdiction over Social Media, especially Twitter…?

Why are the “powers that be” unable to break the monopoly of the few Social Media Giants who rule the roost – like Twitter – who enjoys total monopoly on microblogging…?

It seems that the only country which has been able to control Social Media is China.  

The majority of Western social media platforms are blocked in China, including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube and many others.

Also – in China – there are alternate multiple local Social Media Platforms like WeChat, Weibo etc in lieu of Facebook, Twitter etc.

While one doesn’t advocate extreme steps like banning of Social Media Platforms – why can’t other countries develop alternative Social Media Platforms to have healthy competition and reduce the absolute monopoly and hegemony of Twitter, Facebook etc…?

In India – we have the “Make in India” slogan.

Can’t India use the expertise of its huge pool of talented software professionals to create and develop alternative Social Media Platforms to compete with Twitter, Facebook etc - like China has done…?

Also – does India have a “Regulator” for Social Media (Twitter, Facebook etc) – a Regulator to whom citizens can raise their grievances against Social Media Platforms…?

When one talks of “regulation” – activists raise the bogey of “Freedom of Speech” and “Freedom of Expression”…?

But – what about cases like mine – where Twitter has throttled my Freedom of Expression by arbitrarily suspending my Twitter Account…?

In a democracy – will a citizen’s Freedom of Expression remain at the mercy of the Social Media…?

Dear Reader – as I told you – my Twitter Account @vikramwkarve has been suddenly suspended by Twitter 3 days ago without giving me any reason.

I feel that this has been wrongly done since I have not violated any Twitter Rules – which I have clearly explained in Part 1 of this article.

In my opinion – Twitter has made a mistake by suspending my Twitter Account @vikramwkarve.

Maybe – this mistake has been done by an automated “bot”.

I have appealed to Twitter to correct their mistake and restore my account.

Twitter has acknowledged receipt of my appeal – but nothing has happened so far – though 3 days have elapsed.

They say that “the proof of the pudding is in the eating”.

Just to test whether the government has any power over Twitter – I have raised a grievance to the Ministry of Information Technology (IT) and Information & Broadcasting (I&B) regarding the arbitrary and erroneous suspension of my Twitter Handle @vikramwkarve – which was gone without even intimating me the reason for suspension – which is against the principles of natural justice – especially since I have not violated any Twitter rules.

Let’s see what happens.

If nothing happens – will it indicate that the government has no control on Twitter and the Social Media…?

At the macro-level – has Twitter become a hegemony which no one can control...?

In view of its worldwide reach and unbridled power – which has given Twitter tremendous dominance – has Twitter become a most influential tool for Information Warfare – especially Psychological Operations (PSYOP) for Perception Management...?

(To be continued in Part 3 – Social Media – The Most Powerful Information Warfare Tool…) 

VIKRAM KARVE

Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:

1. This story is a fictional spoof, satire, pure fiction, just for fun and humor, no offence is meant to anyone, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.

2. All stories in this blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the stories are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:

No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve (All Rights Reserved) 

This Blog Post is Part 2 of my series of articles on Twittersphere - continued from Part 1 - my blog post Twitter Can “Kill” You posted in my blog at url: https://karvediat.blogspot.com/2019/09/twitter-can-kill-you.html

Adultery in Uniform – Section 497 Scrapped – Ramifications for Armed Forces

ADULTERY in UNIFORM 

Section 497 Scrapped – Ramifications for Armed Forces

A Spoof

By

VIKRAM KARVE

Disclaimer: I am not a “legal eagle” – nor am I a “Sea Lawyer”. This article is a spoof, a piece of humor, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.

Today’s “Section 497 Verdict” has struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code is given below: 

497. Adultery.—Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor.

With the above Section 497 scrapped – henceforth – it is not a crime for married persons to indulge in consensual extramarital sexual activities (although it may be a ground for divorce).

Will there be any ramifications of the “Section 497 Verdict” on the Defence Services…? 

One wonders whether the Armed Forces will treat “consensual extramarital sex” between Married Military Personnel as acceptable and lawful…? 

By the way – the term “stealing affections” is the military euphemism for “adultery”. 

So – will adultery or “stealing affections” of wives/husbands of fellow military personnel no longer be an “offence”...? 

(Before I attempt to answer the question – Dear Reader – let me remind you once again that I am no “legal eagle” – nor am I a “Sea Lawyer” – and – being a Naval Veteran – I shall let my imagination run wild in the context of the Navy – with the hope that some “expert” Army /Air Veterans will like to “pontificate” on the implications of the “Section 497 Verdict” on their respective services…) 

Will Navy treat “consensual extramarital sex” between Married Naval Personnel as lawful…?

Will adultery and extra-marital affairs become acceptable in the naval environment…?

Will “Stealing the Affection” of a Brother Officer’s Wife not be considered an “offence”…?

If YES – it is fine.

If NO – how will the Navy tackle adultery, extramarital affairs and “Stealing Affection” cases in the Naval Environment…?

Prior to the “Section 497 Verdict” that has decriminalized Adultery – Navy could use Section 77 of the Navy Act to punish Naval Personnel committing adultery which was then an offence under Section 497 of IPC.  

(Section 77 of the Navy Act provides for punishment of Naval Personnel for Civil Offences)

Now – after the scrapping of Section 497 – adultery is no longer a punishable offence under the IPC – so – Naval Personnel indulging in extramarital sexual affairs (including “Stealing Affections” of Brother Officers’ Wives) – they do not commit any “civil” offence – hence – Section 77 of the Navy Act is not applicable.

So – in case the Navy wishes to punish extramarital sex among Naval Personnel/Families – will the Navy take recourse to the “catch all” provisions of The Navy Act, 1957 which can be used to label almost anything as an “offence”…?  

One wonders whether these provisions were deliberately made ambiguous so that they become “all encompassing” and can be “interpreted” as convenient by senior officers.

Let us have a look at these three sections of the Navy Act (Sections 53, 54 and 74 in Chapter VIII – Articles of War)

(The “Articles of War” are a set of regulations – the statutory provisions in the Navy Act that regulate and govern the conduct of Officers and Sailors of the Navy)

SECTION 54 of THE NAVY ACT, 1957 

Cruelty and conduct unbecoming the character of an officer

Section 54

(1) Every officer subject to naval law who is guilty of cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years or such other punishment as is hereinafter mentioned.

(2)  Every officer subject to naval law who is guilty of any scandalous or fraudulent conduct or of any conduct unbecoming the character of an officer shall be punished with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to two years or such other punishment as is hereinafter mentioned.

Firstly – this section applies to officers only. So – sailors cannot be punished under this section.

Secondly – “consensual sex” cannot be treated as “cruelty” – so Section 54 (1) is not applicable.

Now – as far as Section 54 (2) is concerned – the “moot question” is:

Can “stealing the affection of a brother officer’s wife” be deemed to be “scandalous or fraudulent conduct or conduct “unbecoming” the character of an officer”…? 

SECTION 74 of THE NAVY ACT, 1957

Offences against good order and naval discipline

Section 74

Every person subject to naval law who is guilty of an act, disorder, or neglect to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline, not hereinbefore specified, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or such other punishment as is hereinafter mentioned.

Whereas Section 54 was applicable only to Naval Officers – Section 74 applies to all Naval Personnel.

The “moot question” is:

Can adultery or “extramarital sex” between Naval Personnel/Families be deemed an act “to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline”…?

As I said earlier – the phrase “to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline” is quite subjective in nature since the exact meaning of the term “to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline” has not been precisely defined and interpretation may depend on the perception of the senior officer.

A conservative “prudish” officer may feel that consensual extramarital sex is an act “to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline” – whereas a liberal “broad-minded” officer may think otherwise. 

SECTION 53 of THE NAVY ACT, 1957

Uncleanness or indecent acts

Section 53

Every person subject to naval law who is guilty of, –

(a)  uncleanness; or

(b)  any indecent act;

shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may be extend to two years or such other punishment as is hereinafter mentioned.

Here – the “moot question” is:

Can “consensual sex” be deemed an “unclean” or “indecent” act…? 

Or – does sex become “unclean” or “indecent” only when sex is “extramarital”...? 

Is it valid to say that “intra-marital” sex is “clean” and “decent” – but – “extra-marital” sex is “unclean” and “indecent”…? 

What is “clean” and what is “unclean” – what is “decent” and what is “indecent” – it depends on the perception of the senior officer.

Of course – in the Naval Environment – Public Display of Extra-Marital “Affection” by Naval Personnel may be deemed “indecent” – but can “Private Sexual Activity” be deemed “indecent”…?

(During my long Naval Career – I had not come across anyone being punished for an “unclean” act or “indecent” act – so – I wondered if Section 53 had ever been used to punish a Naval Officer/Sailor.  So – I searched on the internet – and I found a News Report which said that a sailor had been found guilty under Section 53(b) of the Navy Act)

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

What will be the ramifications of the “Section 497 Verdict” on the Armed Forces…?

Will adultery no longer be taboo in the military environment…?

Will “Stealing the Affection of a Brother Officer’s Wife” no longer be an “offence” in the Armed Forces…?

Or – will the Armed Forces use “catch all” rules/regulations (like Sections 53, 54 and 74 of Navy Act) to punish Adultery…?

(I am not sure but I feel that Army and Air Force Acts too have similar provisions like Sections 53, 54 and 74 of Navy Act…)

Will there be a  Fraternization Policy  for consensual sex among Military Personnel/Families…?

Dear Reader – please comment and tell us – what do you think will happen…? 

After the “Section 497 Verdict” – how will the Armed Forces treat “Adultery” in the Military Environment…?

Will “Stealing the Affection of a Brother Officer’s Wife” be treated as lawful and acceptable…? 

VIKRAM KARVE

Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved. 

Disclaimer:
1. This story is a spoof, satire, pure fiction, just for fun and humor, no offence is meant to anyone, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.
2. This story is a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the story is a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:
No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.
Copyright © Vikram Karve (all rights reserved)

377 in Uniform – Will there be any ramifications of the “Section 377 Verdict” on the Military…?

377 in UNIFORM

A Spoof

By

VIKRAM KARVE

Disclaimer: I am not a “Legal Eagle” – nor am I a “Sea Lawyer”. This article is a spoof, a piece of humor, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.

The recent “Section 377 Verdict” decriminalized part of the 158-year-old colonial era provisions of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was introduced in 1861 during the British Rule of India.

Modelled on the Buggery Act of 1533 (Britain’s first law to make Buggery or Sodomy a crime) – Section 377 criminalized sexual activities “against the order of nature” – including sexual activities between persons of the same-sex.

Now – after part decriminalization – Section 377 will not apply to consensual same-sex acts between homosexuals, heterosexuals, lesbians and other sexual minorities.

Thus – henceforth – it is lawful for persons of the same sex to indulge in consensual sexual activities.

Will there be any ramifications of the “Section 377 Verdict” on the Defence Services…?  

One wonders whether the Military will treat “consensual sex” between “Same-Sex” Military Personnel as acceptable, moral and lawful…?

(Before I attempt to answer the question – Dear Reader – let me remind you once again that I am no “legal eagle” – nor am I a “Sea Lawyer” – and – being a Naval Veteran – I shall give you my “imaginings” in the context of the Navy with the hope that some “expert” Army, Naval and Air Veterans and Legal Eagles “pontificate” on the implications of the “Section 377 Verdict” on their respective services. Also – please treat this article as a spoof, a piece of humor – so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.…)  

Will Navy treat “consensual sex” between “Same-Sex” Naval Personnel as lawful…?

Will consensual buggery/lesbianism between Naval Personnel be acceptable…?  

If YES – it is fine.

If NO – how will the Navy tackle such “same-sex” acts of buggery and lesbian-sex between Naval Personnel…?

Prior to decriminalization of consensual same-sex acts – Navy could use Section 77 of the Navy Act to punish Naval Personnel indulging in buggery or lesbian-sex which was then an offence under Section 377 of IPC. 

(Section 77 of the Navy Act provides for punishment of Naval Personnel for Civil Offences)

Now – after part decriminalization of Section 377 – consensual same-sex acts are no longer a punishable offence under the IPC – so – Naval Personnel indulging in consensual buggery or lesbian-sex do not commit any “civil” offence – hence – Section 77 is not applicable.

So – in case the Navy wishes to punish consensual buggery or lesbian-sex among Naval Personnel – will Navy take recourse to the “catch all” provisions of The Navy Act, 1957 which can be used to label almost anything as an “offence”…?  

One wonders whether these provisions were deliberately made ambiguous so that they become “all encompassing” and can be “interpreted” as convenient by senior officers.

Let us have a look at these three sections of the Navy Act (Sections 53, 54 and 74 in Chapter VIII – Articles of War)

(The “Articles of War” are a set of regulations – the statutory provisions in the Navy Act that regulate and govern the conduct of Officers and Sailors of the Navy)

Cruelty and conduct unbecoming the character of an officer

Section 54

(1) Every officer subject to naval law who is guilty of cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years or such other punishment as is hereinafter mentioned.

(2)  Every officer subject to naval law who is guilty of any scandalous or fraudulent conduct or of any conduct unbecoming the character of an officer shall be punished with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to two years or such other punishment as is hereinafter mentioned.

Firstly – this section applies to officers only. So – sailors cannot be punished under this section.

Secondly – “consensual sex” cannot be treated as “cruelty” – so Section 54 (1) is not applicable. 

Now – as far as Section 54 (2) is concerned – the “moot question” is:

Can a “consensual same-sex act” between officers be deemed to be “scandalous or fraudulent conduct or conduct “unbecoming” the character of an officer”…?

Offences against good order and naval discipline

Section 74

Every person subject to naval law who is guilty of an act, disorder, or neglect to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline, not hereinbefore specified, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or such other punishment as is hereinafter mentioned.

Whereas Section 54 was applicable only to Naval Officers – Section 74 applies to all Naval Personnel.

The “moot question” is:

Can a “consensual same-sex act” between Naval Personnel be deemed an act “to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline”…?

As I said earlier – the phrase “to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline” is quite subjective in nature since the exact meaning of “to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline” has not been precisely defined and interpretation may depend on the perception of the senior officer.

A “conservative” officer may feel that consensual buggery and lesbian-sex are acts “to the prejudice of good order and naval discipline” – whereas a “broad-minded” officer may think differently.

Uncleanness or indecent acts

Section 53

Every person subject to naval law who is guilty of, –

(a)  uncleanness; or

(b)  any indecent act;

shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may be extend to two years or such other punishment as is hereinafter mentioned.

Here – the “moot question” is:

Can a “consensual same-sex act” between Naval Personnel be deemed an “unclean” or “indecent” act…?

Is it valid to say that “heterosexual acts” are “clean” and “decent” – but “homosexual acts” are “unclean” and “indecent”…?  

What is “clean” and what is “unclean” – what is “decent” and what is “indecent” – it depends on the perception of the senior officer.

Of course – Public Display of “Affection” by Naval Personnel may be deemed “indecent” – but can “Private Sexual Activity” be deemed “indecent”…?

(During my long Naval Career – I had not come across anyone being punished for an “unclean” act or “indecent” act – so – I wondered if Section 53 had ever been used to punish a Naval Officer/Sailor.  So – I searched on the internet – and I found a news report which said that a sailor had been found guilty under Section 53(b) of the Navy Act)

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

What will be the ramifications of the “Section 377 Verdict” on the Armed Forces…?

Will private consensual sex (buggery/lesbian-acts) between “same-sex” military personnel be acceptable in the Armed Forces…?

Or – will the Armed Forces use “catch all” rules/regulations (like Sections 53, 54 and 74 of Navy Act) to punish consensual same-sex acts…?

(Do Army and Air Force Acts have similar provisions like Sections 53, 54 and 74 of Navy Act…?)

Will there be a Fraternization Policy for Same-Sex Relationships among Military Personnel…?

Dear Reader – please comment and tell us – what do you think will happen…? 

VIKRAM KARVE

Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved. 

Disclaimer:
1. This story is a spoof, satire, pure fiction, just for fun and humor, no offence is meant to anyone, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.
2. This story is a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the story is a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:
No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.
Copyright © Vikram Karve (all rights reserved)