Cuddling Male Soldiers
& Rogue DoD Contractors
& Rogue DoD Contractors
The New York Times on Monday reported on independent Pentagon contractors establishing a network of spies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, who were recruited to track and kill alleged militants, and a photo with the story caught my gay eye. It showed a screen-capture of a post from the AfPax.com site clearly featuring hunky soldiers in their uniforms embracing.
The Times explained how the site came to exist and what its purpose would be:
[The contractors] proposal was to set up a reporting and research network in Afghanistan and Pakistan for the American military and private clients who were trying to understand a complex region that had become vital to Western interests. They already had a similar operation in Iraq — called “Iraq Slogger,” which employed local Iraqis to report and write news stories for their Web site.
[Former CNN producer Eason] Jordan proposed setting up a similar Web site in Afghanistan and Pakistan — except that the operation would be largely financed by the American military. The name of the Web site was Afpax.
The site is dormant and it appears the last updates on it were in September 2009. However, under the headline "Oakley Man Love: Cuddling Soldiers, Fake Shades," AfPax.com shared this homo-erotic image:
The caption reads: "These counterfeit Oakley sunglasses were purchased today (September 3, 2009) at a supermarket in Kabul. The cost: 500 afghanis or 10 USD."
Other than the cute headline, no other reference is made to the sexy gay imagery on the cardboard display box. (And who knew there were supermarkets in Afghanistan?)
Very interesting that whoever is behind marketing the fake Oakleys believes the best photo to hawk the wares is an image of two beefy male soldiers who display warm affection between them. The counterfeiters would mint a handsome penny using such a display in the Castro neighborhood's clothing stores.
1 comment:
Perhaps the cuddler on the left is female? I mean, the haircut is standard issue and camo is hardly flattering to the figure, so maybe?
No?
Yeah, okay.
Sister Mary FP
Post a Comment