DADT: Read the Fine Print ...

Post Now Admits Open Gays Can NOT Join Military

BY Cliff Kincaid

December 21. 2010

The law that was passed says the homosexual exclusion policy can only be lifted if it can be demonstrated by military authorities that the change will not adversely affect military readiness, recruitment, and retention.

Only two days after it proclaimed the end of the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy, The Washington Post is now admitting that open homosexuals can NOT join the military services. “‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ ban on gays won’t change immediately,” was the headline over the article in the print edition of the paper. The on-line version was different. It said “‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ repealed: What’s next?”

As previously noted by Accuracy in Media, the votes in Congress to “repeal” the policy have not actually repealed it. The law that was passed says the homosexual exclusion policy can only be lifted if it can be demonstrated by military authorities that the change will not adversely affect military readiness, recruitment, and retention.

“On Monday, Pentagon officials repeatedly declined to predict how long they would need, saying only that they would proceed at a ‘methodical’ and ‘deliberate’ pace,” the Post is now saying.

An Associated Press story noted that defense officials must certify that “the change will not damage combat readiness.” AP noted that Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwarz told the troops that “the current law remains in effect.”

Indeed, AP reported that Pentagon spokesman Marine Col. Dave Lapan “stressed that the ban on open service is still in effect, and any service member who decided to declare he or she was gay would risk enforcement of the current law—which calls for removal from service.”

In order to secure the vote of Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that “neither he [Admiral Mullen] nor I would sign a certification until we were satisfied, after having consulted with each of the Service Chiefs and Combatant Commanders, that risks to combat readiness, unit cohesion, and effectiveness had, in fact, been mitigated, if not eliminated, to the extent possible for all Services, commands, and units.”

The law, however, specifically states that the changes must be “consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.” The option of changing the policy as long as the negative impact is just “mitigated” is not there.

Senator Webb, a highly-decorated combat Marine in Vietnam and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee, voted for the “repeal” anyway.

In a statement opposing the overturning of the homosexual exclusion policy, Jimmie L. Foster, national commander of The American Legion, said that “The American Legion remains convinced a repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ cannot be easily implemented and could compromise the effectiveness of crucially needed fighting forces.”

It is now apparent that the new policy cannot be easily implemented without major negative consequences. Which means that it will be practically impossible for Gates and Mullen to truthfully certify that the change will not undermine military order, recruiting, and retention.

DADT - It's not too late ...

The Headlines Are Wrong: "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Has Not Been Repealed

By Cliff Kincaid - Accuracy in Media

The headlines said that the Pentagon's homosexual exclusion policy had been repealed. "'Don't ask, don't tell' is repealed by Senate; bill awaits Obama's signing," was the headline over the front page article in The Washington Post by Ed O'Keefe.

But the article went on to note, in the 22 paragraph, that top military leaders must find or certify that changes to the current policy "must not affect troop readiness, cohesion or military recruitment and retention." How is this possible when Marine Commandant General Jim Amos has already said that the changes would cost lives?

Calling repeal a major distraction, Amos said, "I don't want to lose any Marines to the distraction. I don't want to have any Marines that I'm visiting at Bethesda [National Naval Medical Center, in Maryland] with no legs be the result of any type of distraction."


The Post went on, "Even after the finding, lawmakers will be able to hold hearings for two months to review the Pentagon's policies and procedures for accepting openly gay troops, according to congressional aides familiar with the matter."
This leaves open the door for Rep. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), the incoming chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, to hold hearings. McKeon opposes repeal and praised Amos for his comments.


McKeon had told reporters that he wanted to hold hearings that would include rank-and-file service members along with military leaders. "I would really like to hear from battlefield commanders," McKeon said. "I would like to hear from battalion commanders, I would like to hear from company commanders on the front lines in Afghanistan and Iraq to see what their feelings are."


The New York Times story on the "repeal" simply noted, "The repeal will not take effect for at least 60 days while some other procedural steps are taken. In addition, the bill requires the defense secretary to determine that policies are in place to carry out the repeal 'consistent with military standards for readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention.'"


The "procedural steps" that are part of the bill give the new conservative-controlled House an opportunity to derail the repeal policy.


In terms of recruiting, Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness points out that the Pentagon survey of the troops found that if open homosexuals were admitted, 32 percent of Marines said they would leave the service sooner than planned, and 16.2 percent would consider an early end to their careers. Among Army combat arms personnel, 21.4 percent would leave sooner than planned, and 14.6 percent would think about leaving.


These losses "could put remaining troops in greater danger, and break the All-Volunteer Force," Donnelly points out.
So will Congress approve the changes, knowing that they could result in the return of the military draft?


As the Times indicates, the specific language of the bill is that the repeal must be "consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces."
The burden is on the gay rights lobby to prove that the changes would have no negative effect on any of the above. How can they prove such a thing when the Pentagon has already concluded that the change is risky and faces opposition from as many as 60 percent of our combat troops?


Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.