WASHINGTON – Critics are charging that the Pentagon report on repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was rigged to come to conclusions preordained by the Obama administration, which promised to lift the policy in order to attract homosexual supporters during the 2008 presidential campaign.
“That was the mandate that was given to the Department of Defense, to make that outcome occur,” said retired Army Col. Dick Black.
“Can we trust the government under Obama to have asked fair questions? Not a chance,” said Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality. “It was a fait accompli if there ever was one. The whole project was stacked in favor of Obama’s agenda. It was not a matter of ‘if,’ but ‘how’ the change should go forward. I wouldn’t call the numbers trustworthy.”
The “Report of the Comprehensive Review of the Issues Associated with a Repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell'” is based on extensive surveys of U.S. troops.
“One hundred forty-five thousand people in uniform answered the questionnaire, and tens of thousands were reached in other ways,” said Secretary of Defense Robert Gates at a Pentagon news conference yesterday.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, added that the “main thrust” of the report was combat effectiveness, readiness, and cohesion.
“The data was very compelling” in respect to those issues, said Mullen.
Ninety-two percent of soldiers said they would be able to work with open homosexuals, said DOD General Counsel Jeh Johnson.
“We believe the U.S. military can [make] this change,” said Gen. Carter Ham, commander of U.S. forces in Europe.
But critics challenge whether the survey was a fair assessment of soldiers’ attitudes, suggesting it was designed to arrive at the conclusion preferred by the Obama administration, which quashed opposing views.
“When this study was first announced, Lt. Gen. Mixon, the commander of our forces in the Pacific, publicly encouraged soldiers to speak out on the issue. He was told in no uncertain terms to shut up or get out of the service,” said Black, a former Marine combat officer and Army lawyer.
“I find it most difficult to believe troops honestly support homosexuals in the military,” Black continued. “That’s silly, there’s no way that 92 percent could be a legitimate figure.”
“They never asked whether they should accept homosexuals,” said Bob Knight, senior writer for Coral Ridge Ministries. “Lots of this is based on the fact that people haven’t had trouble with ‘gays,’ but that’s because good behavior on the part of homosexuals should be attributed to the policies in place [banning open homosexuality].”
“The troops were given no option to express support for the law, that says homosexuals are not permitted to serve in the military. They were not asked about transgenders in the military, they were not asked about zero tolerance, about courses to change attitudes,” said Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness. “If the disruption to the military is limited, that will be because the only people who would be left in the military would be people who are not opposed to this.”
“This is a profoundly radical experiment with the military,” said Black. “Unfortunately many of the political leaders in both parties have no military experience, so there’s no way they can connect the dots. They envision it’s no different than working in an office setting.
“They are altering a policy that in one form or another has existed since the time of the Continental Army. General George Washington was the first commander of the armed forces to prohibit homosexuals from serving, and he did this at a time when he was desperately short of manpower. He needed every musket he could bring to bear, but he knew that homosexuals would be so disruptive to military discipline that he eliminated them.”
“What a disaster,” said LaBarbera. “The Pentagon’s plan calls for a gradual transition, and they plan to use that time to ‘educate’ the troops about proper attitudes toward homosexuality. When we start talking about educating the troops, we’re talking about indoctrination.
“They say chaplains won’t be made to teach anything they don’t believe in. But will they be allowed to preach anything the military doesn’t believe in, like the Scriptural passages condemning homosexual behavior?
“I don’t know what planet those guys are living on, but on this planet ‘gay’ rights certainly undermine the rights of people who disagree,” LaBarbera continued. “They’re either naïve or they’re not willing to say what will obviously happen down the road. Greater and greater advance of ‘gay’ rights down the road with the goal of changing soldiers’ minds.
“It’s a sad day. We’re really becoming a postmoral country.”
“This is hardly the first time the Democrats have used social experimentation with the military,” said Black.
“For example, the Doolittle Commission instituted by Harry Truman in the wake of the Second World War. The commission felt we should be more egalitarian, so they weakened the rank structure. As a result the U.S. was almost driven into the sea when the North Koreans attacked during the Korean War. They tightened up many of those rules in the wake of the Korean War.
“[Secretary of Defense] Robert McNamara collapsed good order and discipline during the Vietnam War with Project 100,000, a policy where they brought in troops with low IQs and criminal records. It took a highly disciplined military force and turned it almost into a dangerous mob in certain places. It was so bad in Camp Lejeune they could no longer have individual guards walking post with loaded rifles. They had to put them in pairs with a radio, so they could call for help if they were attacked.”