Posts tagged ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’

February 21, 2011

Rees Lloyd: A Tale of Two Americas on Washington’s Birthday in the Age of Obama

by lewwaters


As many Americans pause on this Washington’s Birthday Holiday (renamed “President’s Day” by Act of Congress which should be reversed) to remember and reflect on what America was and represented at home and abroad in the Age of President and Commander-in-Chief George Washington, soldier and self-declared patriot, it is well to reflect on what America has become and represents at home and abroad in the Age of President and Commander-in-Chief Barack Hussein Obama, non-soldier and self-declared “progressive.”

That it is a tale of two very different Americas on Washington’s Birthday 2011 in the age of Obama, as to American values, the kind of nation America now is, and what America now represents at home and abroad, is reflected in two publications on Washington’s Birthday Holiday: One from the New York Post headlined “Hero’s unwelcome,” pertaining to acts at Columbia University, President Obama’s alma mater; and the other from, headlined: “Heroes: Stop Destroying Our Military,” pertaining to the American military, Gen. George Washington’s alma mater.

read more »

February 10, 2011

Military Heroes Issue Joint Statement Urging Fight To Reinstate Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell

by lewwaters

By Rees Lloyd (reposted with authors permission)

Comrades, Colleagues and Patriots: Two of America’s greatest living military heroes — Admiral and former U.S. Senator Jeremiah A. Denton (USN, ret.), a P.O.W. for seven years, seven months in Vietnam; and Maj. Gen. Patrick H. Brady (USA, ret.), Medal of Honor recipient (Vietnam) — have issued an urgent joint statement published today by and its “Whistleblower” magazine, calling on all Americans, and veterans in particular, to take a stand and fight for reinstatement of the “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” policy to prevent the transformation of the American military by the creation of a “quad military” (homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, and transgender).

[Heroes to Congress: Stop destroying military]

Among the most decorated military heroes in American history, Admiral Denton and Gen. Brady, both of whom have appeared as guests on The Victoria Taft Show on KPAM 860, condemn the rushed repeal of DA/DT by the post-election, lame duck 111th Congress of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and President Obama as a “danger” to the military and to the nation. They urge the newly elected 112th Congress to reinstate DA/DT.

read more »

December 26, 2010

Repeal Lame Duck Democrats Destruction of DA/DT in 112th Congress

by lewwaters

Contributed by Rees Lloyd

As a former enlisted man who joined the Army at the age 17, as do many recruits, I know about the enormous power of non-commissioned and commission officers over the lives of those in the enlisted ranks. I think it is unconscionable for members of House, Senate, and the White House to congratulate themselves on voting to compel young enlisted men and women to serve under openly practicing homosexual non-coms or officers, including predatory homosexuals, who may have a sexual rather than military interest in them, and who have enormous power to retaliate if their advances are rejected.

Just how does a young man or woman subject to military discipline, culture, and control, protect himself or herself, and seek redress, from unwanted sexual interest, advances, or assaults? A member of the military in the ranks is often at the mercy of non-coms or officers, including in duty assignments which can not only be the worst of unwanted duties but assignments which can put them in harm’s way at risk of loss of limbs or life.

Simply stated: Military life is not civilian life. A victim of “sexual harassment,” predation, or actual assault in the military cannot respond to such sexual abuse as can a person in civilian life. Enlisted personnel cannot, without great fear of retaliation, report a non-com or officer for homosexual misconduct. A member of the military cannot respond to an advance by a homosexual non-com or officer with crude language, or threats of physical action that would be used in a civilian situation. A member of the military cannot physically ward off unwanted homosexual contact by a non-com or officer without risk of court martial for a major crime, i.e., “assault on an officer.” A member of the military cannot file a complaint with local police, or with local, state, or federal agencies enforcing anti-discrimination laws. A member of the military cannot sue a homosexual molester, or the predatory homosexual’s employer, i.e., the military branch in which the victim serves.

read more »

December 21, 2010

Patty Murray Out of the Closet: Brags of Disdain for Straight Troops

by lewwaters

I have long maintained that Washington State’s senior senator, Patty Murray has no real appreciation of love of our Military, in spite of her public proclamations of just that. Last evening, December 20, 2010, she all but openly admitted her disdain in an email expressing her happiness over her voting to repeal the so-called ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy implemented by former president Bill Clinton in 1993.

Murray’s email said,

“Last week, I proudly cast my vote for legislation to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy. For far too long, men and women with the courage and commitment to serve our nation have been asked to hide the truth about who they are. This is shameful, it’s bad policy, and it needed to end. In a speech on the Senate floor prior to final passage, I urged my colleagues to repeal this failed policy and told the story of Major Margaret Witt, from Washington state, who was discharged under DADT.”

While Murray’s words are wrapped in gushing praise, she obviously did not bother to actually discuss the issue with front line combat Troops, but relied upon claims of a small segment of people in the Military who knew they would be ousted for declaring their sexuality and did so anyways.

read more »

December 19, 2010

Will Repeal of D.A.D.T. Lead to the Reinstatement of the Draft?

by lewwaters

As all know, the Senate passed the repeal of the controversial Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy implemented by former president Bill Clinton that allowed Gays to serve in the Military, so long as they keep their sexuality to themselves. All that is left now is for Barack Obama, who campaigned on repealing the policy and allowing Gays to openly declare their sexuality within the ranks of the Military to sign it into laws and for the Pentagon.

Repeal passed by a 65 – 31 margin in the Senate, 8 Republicans abandoning so-called Republican principles and joined by 2 Independents to help Democrats pass their long sought after repeal. Sens. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mark Kirk of Illinois, George Voinovich of Ohio, Richard Burr of North Carolina, John Ensign of Nevada and Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine.

Repeal had earlier passed in the lame duck House by a margin of 250-175, 14 Republicans abandoning those so-called Republican principles there. Judy Biggert (IL), Mary Bono Mack (CA), John Campbell (CA), Anh ‘Joseph’ Cao (LA), Mike Castle (DE), Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL), Charles Djou (HI), David Dreier (CA), Vern Ehlers (MI), Jeff Flake (AZ), Ron Paul (TX), Todd Russell Platts (PA), Dave Reichert (WA) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL)

Massachusetts traitorous Senator, John ‘F’in Kerry said of the repeal, “The military remains the great equalizer. Just like we did after President Truman desegregated the military, we’ll someday look back and wonder what took Washington so long to fix it.”

Kerry has a decade’s long history of being wrong on issues.

read more »

December 17, 2010

Obama’s Organizing for America pushing for DREAM Act and Repeal of DADT

by lewwaters

Barack Obama’s group set up to persuade citizen’s to buy into his agenda is working overtime today. With our country in dire straits, unemployment increasing, jobs drying up, national debt spiraling out of control and all of the maladies facing the nation, isn’t it odd that the main focus remains to be on passing the backdoor amnesty act for children of ILLEGAL Aliens brought to the country when young and caving into Gays who want to force acceptance of their sexuality upon the country.

Don’t believe me? I received the following just today in my email.

And, to make sure you do it right with the proper words, they even supply you a script to go along with the names and phone numbers of who to call to encourage calling legislators to pass these bills.

Shouldn’t we worry first about getting the nation back on sound economic footing?

Do you appreciate your name and phone number being given out to strangers on an email list?

December 16, 2010

Is Repealing DADT Really All That Important Right Now?

by lewwaters

Just in case no one has noticed, our country is in deep trouble. We are spiraling ever downward into an economic depression that seems to have no end. We are borrowing more than ever before, national debt doubling in just 2 years, unemployment is approaching unheard of highs not seen since the 1930’s, jobs are drying up, states are going bankrupt, people’s homes are being foreclosed on, the government is taking over banks all of the time, bailing out large corporations on the brink of disaster and congresses major worry is letting Gays serve openly in the Military?

Why is this even being considered at this time? With all of the problems we are facing, will allowing Gays to openly declare their sexuality in the ranks improve anything in the country?


read more »

October 15, 2010


by lewwaters

By Attorney Rees Lloyd (Cross posted with authors permission)
October 15, 2010

In the midst of the national debate over the military policy of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” pertaining to homosexuals, there is now revealed an apparent attempt by the Obama administration to impose what amounts to a reverse “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” policy on heterosexual troops who speak in opposition to open homosexuality in their ranks and by their officers.

More particularly, active duty troops are apparently facing express or implied threats under the regime of President Barack Hussein Obama that if they speak out against open homosexuality in the military, they should “get out” of the military.
The Washington Times, which first exposed this, has called for an investigation by the Army Inspector General. It reports in part:

“In an August incident reported by The Washington Times but denied by the Pentagon, Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, the deputy chief of Army personnel and co-leader of the working group’s policy team, reportedly used derogatory terms to describe service members who might resist implementation of a new LGBT [Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, and Transgender] policy.

“According to sources cited by the Times, one of whom signed a published letter (see Page B2 for a new letter), during an open forum with 500 troops in Stuttgart, Germany, Gen. Bostick suggested that persons disagreeing for reasons of religious conviction would have to ‘get with the program’ or get out. Given conflicting accounts, the Army inspector general should investigate immediately to determine exactly what happened.”

If Gen. Bostick did indeed make this statement, just what does it mean? Is our nation now moving from “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” if you are a homosexual, to “get with the program or get out” of the military service if you are a heterosexual who “for reasons of religious conviction” speaks in opposition to open homosexuality in the military?

Whether or not those express words were spoken, active duty personnel should be given not threats but assurances that there will be no retaliation if they express disagreement with a policy of open homosexuality in the military, with its attendant circumstances of limited privacy, including in housing, sleeping quarters, latrines, showers, etc., with even less privacy in the field.

The issue of DA/DT is a complex one in which there is great disagreement and debate. The most important issue is whether open homosexual activity in the military, expressed by speech or conduct, will have a detrimental impact on military capability. Members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff do not agree on the impact; members of the House and Senate have not been able to agree; experts in military matters have not been able to agree. It is an issue of extreme importance– the military defense of the nation, the primary responsibility the Founding Fathers imposed on the National Government which they created.

It is an important and unfinished debate with lasting implications, and need for continuing, serious study before imposition of a policy of open homosexual conduct on those who serve.

Indeed, if the policy of open homosexuality by word and deed is imposed, it amounts to a transformation of the military from the time of General George Washington in the War of Independence until the war being fought against terrorism today.

Now, it appears, the persons most impacted by the ultimate decision, the soldiers, sailors, marines, air force and coast guard personnel, are to be excluded from the national debate by any speech activity other than support of open homosexuality in their ranks, even if their objection is based — or perhaps because their opposition is based — upon “religious conviction.”

This ban on speech activity would include in the particular, of course, enlisted personnel over whom homosexual officers, commissioned and non- commissioned, with a sexual interest in others of the same sex, have all but total power over enlisted men and women in the lower ranks.

Will the military now begin advertising for recruits with media messages which include the warning: “Persons who do not support open homosexuality in the military, particularly if based on religious conviction, need not apply?”

Is this policy of open homosexually in the military, with an apparent gag order on military personnel who do not support it, a policy desired and supported by members of the military, or by the American people — the military defense of whom, from enemies foreign and domestic, is the primary duty, above all other duties, of the National Government, particularly the Presidency, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers?

Is this apparent threat, express or implied, to military personnel to the effect that they must silently go along with open homosexuality in the military, or get out of the military, how Americans, who send their sons and daughters off to serve their country, desire the American military, and the American nation, to be “transformed?”

President and Commander-In-Chief General George Washington forbade open homosexuality in the Revolutionary Army, and literally “drummed out of service” and publicly denounced an officer who made a homosexual attempt on an enlisted soldier. Every successor President and Commander-in-Chief has followed a policy precluding open homosexuality.

Now, self-described “progressive” President and Commander-in-Chief Barack Hussein Obama intends to transform the military by imposing a policy approving of open homosexuality. And he is apparently attempting to achieve that transformation by silencing troops who may desire to speak in opposition.

Obama, unlike most who serve in the enlisted ranks, has led a privileged life, attending private not public school while young, and later attending elite college and universities, although he has caused his records at those elite schools sealed from inspection for reasons unexplained.

Like so many other privileged, elitist “progressives” in his administration, Obama never deigned to serve a day in the military to defend American freedom. Others, most much less advantaged than Obama, who was the farthest thing from disadvantaged, went to military service, including war. He went to Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard.

Thus, Obama knows nothing personally of the impact of open homosexuality on those who do serve in the military — especially the impact on enlisted men and women over whose careers, and lives; their homosexually interested officers have all but absolute power.

There should be a full and detailed investigation by the Army IG, and by the appropriate committees of House and Senate, as to whether our American military personnel are being subjected to threats, express or implied, that if they speak of their opposition to Obama’s policy of open homosexuality in the military, they should “get out” of the military.

More immediately, President Obama, as Commander-in-Chief, aware of the accusations, should expressly and publicly repudiate any attempt by those under his command to silence troops, whether by threat or otherwise. Obama ought to publicly pledge that he will protect troops from threats or retaliation for expressing opposition to Obama’s policy of open homosexuality.

Indeed, those soldiers, sailors, marines, air force and coast guard personnel, should have no less right to speak in opposition to open homosexuality in the military than those who support it — even if their opposition is based on “religious conviction.”
Most importantly, Americans should not remain silent while Obama silences the troops who defend Americans, including with their lives.

© 2010 Rees Lloyd – All Rights Reserved

REES LLOYD is a longtime civil rights attorney and veterans activist whose work has been honored by, among others, the California Senate and Assembly, and numerous civil rights, workers rights, and veterans’ rights organizations. He has testified as a constitutional expert at hearings before the U.S. House and Senate representing The American Legion.

He has been profiled, and his work featured, by such varied print media as the Los Angeles Times and American Legion Magazine, and such broadcast media as ABC’s Nightline and 20/20, Fox News In The Morning, and, among others, by Hannity. His writings have appeared in a variety of national, regional, and local newspaper, magazine, and other publications. He is a frequent radio commentator and a sought after speaker.


Mirrored in this “Go gay at any cost” attitude permeating society from “progressives” is the ignoring of bullying of Christian students on college campuses by gay students, activists and faculty. Mike Adams writes about that at Eight Straight Suicides on