There is more to say about the testimony of Gen. John Sheehan, USMC (Ret.) who was invited to speak before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 18 in support of the 1993 law stating that homosexuals are not eligible for military service. Among other things, Gen. Sheehan confronted the constantly-repeated, thinly-reasoned claim that the American military should adopt liberal social policies in our military:
In response to an announcement by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates regarding the results of a 45-day review of the so-called "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy, Elaine Donnelly, President of the Center for Military Readiness, issued the following statement:
Now that we are about to get a European-style health-care system, do we want a European-style military too? This was the underlying question discussed at a March 18 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on legislation to repeal the 1993 law stating that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in the military.
The story of recently-resigned Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) is reminding members of Congress why it would be unwise to recruit professed homosexuals and bisexuals for our military. Former Navy Lt. Cmdr. Massa reportedly had a history of inappropriate sexual approaches against male subordinates while he was in the Navy.
We appreciate the efforts and support of all commentators who have stepped up to write and speak for active-duty troops whose voices otherwise would not be heard on the issue of gays in the military:
-Retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, former Air Force Chief of Staff, surprised us with his article, which makes excellent points even though he endorses the de facto policy "Don't Ask, Don't Tell": Don't Ask, Don't Change
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) has introduced legislation to repeal the 1993 Eligibility Law. His bill, S. 3065, is nearly identical to H.R. 1283, a bill sponsored by Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA). Lieberman has several liberal co-sponsors, but it is significant that he did not get the support of a single Republican co-sponsor.
-Jen Mascio, Politico: Lieberman Bill Would End "Don't Ask"
March 3 House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Personnel Subcommittee Hearing
Rep. Susan Davis (D-CA) conducted a hearing with the two co-chairs of the Pentagon's Comprehensive Review Working Group, DoD General Counsel Jeh Johnson and Army General Carter Ham, and with the DoD Under Secretary for Personnel & Readiness, Clifford L. Stanley. Committee members repeatedly asked Mr. Johnson and General Ham about their plans to conduct a review of the issue, including a survey of active-duty troops. In response to persistent questions from HASC Personnel Subcommittee Ranking Member Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), working group co-chairman Johnson agreed that the committee should answer two key questions: Is there evidence that current law is harming military readiness? Secondly, Would repeal of current law improve military readiness?
In testimony before Congress this week, leaders of the four military services were questioned on their personal and professional views regarding President Barack Obama's plan to repeal the law making homosexuals ineligible for military service. Their answers to questions from congressional leaders showed that they have not been persuaded by gay activists' arguments for open homosexuality in the United States armed forces. These leaders bear the ultimate responsibility for the consequences of such misguided proposals, giving their insights preponderant weight.
As with a lot of things coming out of the Obama Administration these days, the more questions that are asked, the worse its ideas look.
A month ago, in his State of the Union address, the President said, "This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."
A wave of contrary analysis has emerged in opposition to the misguided plan proposed to Congress this week on the issue of gays in the military. On Tuesday, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates revealed a proposal before the Senate Armed Services Committee that would weaken enforcement of existing law, Sec. 654, Title 10, which makes homosexuals ineligible for military service, while also undertaking an internal Pentagon "study" aimed at implementing repeal of that law. Problem: The Pentagon doesn't get to make laws.
In their testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee today, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff should not compromise principle by proposing an unworkable plan to undermine the 1993 law regarding homosexuals in the military (Section 654, Title 10). As reported by the Washington Post, the testimony that Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen are expected to deliver suggests an irresponsible plan that would incrementally eviscerate the law by unilaterally suspending its enforcement for specious reasons.
The political earthquake that occurred on Tuesday, electing Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown to replace the late Ted Kennedy in the United States Senate, was more than the first election of a Republican senator from that state since 1972. At his victory party Senator-elect Brown drew national applause when he declared,
"Our Constitution and laws exist to protect this nation. They do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime. In dealing with terrorists, our tax money should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them."
Gay activists who are trying to impose their radical agenda on the military are floating several "trial balloon" proposals to get their way despite strong opposition from military leaders and personnel, members of Congress, and the general public. The following are some of the most egregious bad ideas that media reports have revealed since October 2009:
On November 9 the Boston Globe and other major media misrepresented a private paper commissioned by the gay-activist Michael D. Palm Center as if it were a genuine research report of the RAND Corporation. This was not a RAND study; it was done by a RAND employee on her own time, together with an academic associate. The authors were Laura Miller, Ph.D., who is employed as a researcher at RAND, and Bonnie Moradi, Ph.D. of the University of Florida.
As Elaine Donnelly wrote in her article featured in "National Review Online Hot" last week, the Army has been making compromises in apparently small matters, such as uniform standards for religious minorities, in order to advance "diversity" as a primary goal. In larger matters, reported "diversity" groupthink and reluctance to give offense apparently led some Walter Reed officials to "tolerate" the intolerable. According to NPR, their official inaction when Capt. Nidal Hassan displayed jihadist attitudes inadvertently led to the vicious attack at Fort Hood that took fourteen lives. Now the news media and a number of respected commentators are starting to stress the same theme: Officials who are responsible for the dangerous pursuit of "diversity" at all costs must be held accountable. These are recent examples:
Some ironies are more than cruel. On the day that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan approached Fort Hood armed with guns, he may have passed a newsstand selling copies of the November 9 edition of Army Times. On the cover was a photograph of a Sikh soldier wearing a beard, mustache and turban with his uniform, drawing attention to this headline, "Regs Make Way for Religion – Sikh, Muslim Allowed to Incorporate Customs Into Army Dress."
Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrissee, Acting Deputy Chief of Staff for Army Personnel (G-1), had granted a "religious accommodation" exception for Capt. Kamaljeet Singh Kalsi, a Sikh physician. Without providing a reason for special treatment, General Farrissee's October 22 letter stated that Capt. Kalsi would be allowed to wear uncut hair, a turban and beard with his uniform. The Army may revoke the religious accommodation, granted for Kalsi alone, at any time. Another Sikh awaiting dental board results expects a similar personal waiver.
In recent weeks several influential, pro-military writers have published excellent articles countering the multi-million dollar Gays in the Military Campaign (GIMC):
Cal Thomas revealed the social-engineering agenda behind the Navy's effort to put women in the submarine service and to repeal the 1993 Homosexual Ineligibility Law:
TownHall: "Don't Ask, Tell, or Legitimize"
During an appearance on CNN's "AC 360" program with Anderson Cooper on Tuesday, October 6, Army National Guard 1st Lt. Daniel Choi aggressively attacked both Elaine Donnelly and more than 1,000 Flag & General Officers for the Military. Lt. Choi, who is fighting a discharge due to professed homosexual conduct, displayed a side of his personality unlike the sympathetic figure that he has been trying to portray as a former Arabic linguist who graduated from West Point in 2003.
With the help of Anderson Cooper, who conducted the interview as an unabashed advocate of repealing the law, Daniel Choi made a statement that was simply untrue. When Elaine mentioned that more than 1,150 high-ranking officers had personally signed a formal statement in support of the 1993 Eligibility Law, Daniel Choi falsely described the Flags & General Officers for the Military (FGOM) as being "in their seventies and eighties," and living in "senior citizen centers" where Elaine "collected" their signatures.
The Center for Military Readiness is pleased to join with the leaders of many respected pro-defense groups in expressing concern about current decisions that are weakening our defenses against long- and short-range ballistic missiles.
CMR has been wondering for some time why it is that the Washington Times, thought to be a conservative newspaper, more often than not covers the gays in the military story from the standpoint of those pushing for repeal of the law. This article, for example, quotes Elaine Donnelly briefly but primarily focuses on the perspective of the "LGBT Left."