Barack Obama

An Air Force staff sergeant with more than 12 years of military service reports he may be medically discharged for failing to support the indoctrination planned under President Obama’s push to create an atmosphere of openly homosexual behavior in the military ranks.

The cost of Obama’s drive to repeal the longstanding “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” practice under which soldiers were not asked about their sexual orientation if they didn’t make a public spectacle of it remains undetermined.

Obama and his appointees in the Pentagon last week “certified” that there will be no impact on the military if openly homosexual behavior is allowed, setting off a chain of programmed events that in 60 days is supposed to create that setting.

A critic of Obama’s warned that he was creating a “San Francisco Military” with the move.

“It is not surprising that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen and President Barack Obama would pull the trigger on the military on a Friday afternoon, making it less likely that anyone will report on the many ‘thorny issues’ and serious social problems expected to ensue,” said Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness.

Take a guided tour into the future of the U.S. military once homosexuality is welcomed with open arms. Read Whistleblower’s special issue, “DROPPING THE ‘H’-BOMB,”  online FREE here!

“Nevertheless, on the day that President Obama signs a paper ‘certifying’ that no harm will come to the military when repeal is implemented, he will own the San Francisco Military that he has created,” she said.

“The Friday afternoon move indicates that this is nothing to be proud of. It is an obvious political payoff to activists of the (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) LGBT Left, delivered at the expense of combat soldiers and Marines whose voices were heard but ignored during last year’s Pentagon ‘Working Group’ process that was put on just for show,” she said.

The staff sergeant, James Moran, told WND he now is awaiting word from a military medical board regarding his future.

He said an earlier evaluation found, “He was unable to keep his personal opinions out of the office.”

Moran said he served four years in the Marines in the 1990s and then enlisted in the Air Force after 9/11 because he wanted to do his patriotic duty.

He had been in Germany only a few months when Congress voted to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. He said he heard about the repeal and voiced his concerns about its potential impact.

“I voiced my concerns over the repeal to the people I work with,” Moran said. “As a Christian I was raised in America, and there were some things I was raised to believe are wrong, and one of them was homosexuality.”

Moran said he raised the issue with his doctor, because he wanted someone to whom he could speak confidentially.

However, he said, the physician started the process that has led to his hearing before a medical board, and he’s now waiting to learn whether a “psychiatric condition” will be used to remove him.

He said, “After I was removed from my clinic, I was having a hard time personally. So I went to the mental health doctor to let him know the things that had happened and to talk to him and to get some direction and help.

“About a week later, a week after I was removed, they had to give me some kind of paperwork saying why I wasn’t in that clinic anymore. Then, when the commander asked me, I had already seen the doctor once or twice on my own, so I didn’t think it would be a problem,” Moran explained.

Moran said he believes his commanding officer had a different reason for his actions, which eventually included a directive for Moran to go through a required “counseling.”

“He sent me so that the red tape and paperwork would officially allow the Air Force to reach a conclusion regarding me and have me kicked out,” Moran said. “Once it is command directed, then you have to go. And then your future depends on the decision of the doctors and the board.”

He said the evaluation determined, “I could not adapt and adjust to the military due to my own conscience and strongly held personal beliefs in religion.”

The natural result of that determination, he said, would be his removal from the military.

But the crux of the issue is not his adaptability; it is his religious faith, he said.

“They don’t judge my religious beliefs. They in fact say I’m entitled to them. However, they do not allow me to discuss Jesus with other military members or sin as the Bible says.

“The military has adopted a position that religion is personal and anyone offending others will be punished, in my view,” Moran said.

Moran now is awaiting the results of the medical board to find out if he will be discharged from the Air Force.

The Air Force and the Department of Defense did not respond to WND’s request for comment.

Obama portrayed his promotion of homosexuals in the military as a termination of a discriminatory practice targeting the behavior. It also is viewed widely as a payoff to homosexuals who supported him during the 2008 election.

“We have taken the final major step toward ending the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law that undermines our military readiness and violates American principles of fairness and equality,” Obama said at the time.

Retired Army Command Sgt. Maj. J. D. Pendry said the issue has never been about service.

“It is unknown at this stage how many might retire or decide to leave at the end of their terms when they may otherwise have remained,” Pendry said. “Our nation’s most trusted institution has been used by liberal politicians to normalize homosexuality. This was never about service.”

There have been a number of reports about concern expressed by military members or forces such as the Army’s Special Forces and the Navy SEALS.

“Interviews with current and former commandos reveal that to maintain unit cohesion of Army Green Berets, Navy SEALs or other elite covert warriors, the military services and U.S. Special Operations Command need to make a special effort to ensure both homosexuals and heterosexuals know the rules of conduct,” the Washington Times said.

“I’m unsure how the Defense Department will define ‘openly gay’,” said one Green Beret officer. “I can envision all sorts of new regulations or changes to existing ones, class after class, accusations flying, and more strains on our soldiers. We will spend hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions, to establish the new rules of the road and to implement them.”

The White House promotion of its action did not even mention a study by the government itself that concluded the “fix” was in for the promotion of homosexuality in the military whether it would create damage or not.

That 33-page report, uncovered by the Center for Military Readiness,  marked “For Official Use Only,” describes an “Investigation of improper disclosure of For Official Use Only information from the Comprehensive Review Working Group draft report.”

It reveals that the inspector general of the Department of Defense concludes that the fix – maybe even handed down by the White House – was in before the military ever started asking soldiers and sailors about how opening the ranks to homosexuals would affect the nation’s defense.

It was that report that famously was quoted as affirming “70 percent” of the nation’s military members believe the repeal of the long-standing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” practice of allowing homosexuals to serve as long as they kept their sexual lifestyle choices to themselves would have either “a neutral or positive impact on unit cohesion, readiness, effectiveness and morale.”

However, the inspector general documents show the co-chairman of the commission working on the assessment, Jeh Johnson, “read portions of ‘an early draft’ of the executive summary … to a former news anchor, a close personal friend visiting Mr. Johnson’s home” three days before service members even were given the survey.

A source provided the IG report, which aimed to determine who prematurely released information about the study, to Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness. Donnelly analyzed the documentation and warned that it suggested Congress was deceived, probably deliberately, by those with a pro-repeal agenda.

Congress then voted during its lame-duck session last winter for the repeal.

“Contrary to most news accounts, the ‘Comprehensive Review Working Group’ process was not a ‘study,'” she told WND. “Its purpose was to circumvent and neutralize military opposition to repeal of the law.”

She said, “The vaunted DoD ‘Survey of the Troop’s was pre-scripted even before the survey began.

“The DoD Inspector General report revealed that misleading survey results, which obscured the strong opposition of 60 percent of combat troops and 67 percent of Marines, were prematurely and improperly leaked to the Washington Post in order to promote the campaign to repeal the 1993 law.”

Donnelly explained that days before the survey to military members – supposedly to determine whether having open homosexuality in the ranks would be a detriment – was distributed to members of the military, Johnson “was seeking advice from a ‘former news anchor’ on how to write the report’s executive summary more ‘persuasively.'”

Further, “The DoD IG report concluded that someone who ‘had a strongly emotional attachment to the issue’ and ‘likely a pro-repeal agenda’ violated security rules and leaked selected, half-true information to the Washington Post,” she explained.

That was the “70 percent” figure that has been discussed as the percentage of active-duty and reserve troops “not concerned about repeal of the law.”

“The DoD did not correct the unauthorized ‘spin,’ which was widely publicized and cited on the floor during Senate debate. The ultimate result of this travesty was a rushed vote to repeal the law regarding homosexuals in the military.”

However, the actual responses were that military members who believe the change would impact units “very positively” totaled 6.6 percent, “positively” 11.8 percent, “mixed” 32.1 percent, “negatively” 18.7 percent, “very negatively” 10.9 percent and “no effect” 19.9 percent.

The only way the 70 percent figure can be reached is to combine “very positively,” “positively,” “mixed” and “no effect.” But this combination counts people with “neutral positions” as favoring the change, she noted.

Donnelly’s research explained that taking those same figures and putting them on the other side, that is, lumping them with “negatively” and “very negatively,” would produce a total of almost 82 percent of the soldiers who believe the results of the change would be “negative or neutral.”

The IG said exactly that:

We considered that the primary source’s likely pro-repeal sentiment was further demonstrated by his/her inclusion of the key 70 percent figure in the information provided to the Washington Post. … Had [the source] desired to further an anti-repeal bias for the article, he/she could likewise have combined four results categories from that same survey question to conclude that “82 percent of respondents said the effect of repealing the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy would be negative, mixed or no effect.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: At the request of one congressional member of the House Armed Services Committee, in early April WND sent to committee members, including Rep. Duncan Hunter, as well as staffers, 150 copies of the special Whistleblower issue, “DROPPING THE ‘H’-BOMB: As Obama and Congress force open homosexuality on America’s military, soldiers are fighting back.” Get your copy of this power-packed Whistleblower issue that has been widely acclaimed by Medal of Honor recipients and other military heroes as the best single argument against repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.