"You have been told that the President has a plan! But Congressman Barney Frank confirmed to us this week that the President still is not fully committed to repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell this year. And if we don't seize this moment it may not happen for a very long time," he told the assembled crowd, inviting them to join him and Capt Jim Piertrangelo on a march to the White House. At the White House, Theola Labbe-DeBose (Washington Post) reported, "Shortly before 2 p.m., Park Police came upon two men who had chained themselves to a section of the iron fence on the north side, said David Schlosser, a police spokeman. Officers told the men they did not have a permit for their demonstration and gave them three warnings about the violation."
On Friday, the two appeared before a judge. Yusef Najafi (Metro Weekly) reports that Choi and Pietrangelo entered not guilty pleas this morning in court and are taking their cases to trial.
Dan Choi: There are other people who are oppressed that have the chains on them in their hearts. There were many times when people would say when you go and get arrested, it's difficult because your hands are restrained and the movement is a little bit stymied or halted on the physical level. But it is my hope that the larger movement, even with the chains on it, will do nothing but grow to the point where it cannot be controlled by anything but that freeing and that dignified expression of getting arrested for what you know is absolutely morally right. There was no freer moment than being in that prison. It was freeing for me and I thought of all the other people that were still trapped, that were still handcuffed and fettered in their hearts and we might have been caged up physically but the message was very clear to all of the people who think that equality can be purchased with a donation or with a cocktail party or with tokens that are serving in a public role. We are worth more than tokens. We have absolute value. And when the person who is oppressed by his own country wants to find out how to get his dignity back, being chained up and being arrested, that's how you get your dignity conferred back on you. So I think that my actions, my call, is to every leader -- not just gay leaders, I'm talking any leader who believes in America, that the promises of America can be manifest. We're going to do it again. And we're going to keep doing it until the promises are manifest and we will not stop. This is a very clear message to President Obama and any other leader who supposes to talk for the American promise and the American people, we will not go away .
When President Harry Truman decided to integrate units of the military in 1947, he did it. He issued an Executive Order and that was that. He didn't do a year-long study. He didn't waffle. He didn't whimper or whine.
He was so unlike Barry O.
Barack wants you to believe that a year-long study means Don't Ask, Don't Tell gets repealed. But a year-long study that started in January 2010 ends in January 2011. Point? Between the two dates in November 2010 -- mid-term elections. When Dems will lose some seat.
Currently, the Democratic leadership in Congress isn't even united on the move. For example, US House Rep. Ike Skelton strongly opposes repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. In the Senate, you have some leadership including Senators Roland Burris and Kirsten Gillibrand. But the Senate's 800-pound guerilla on this issue is Carl Levin who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Thursday, Levin held a hearing on Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The Committee heard from Lt. Jr. Grade Jenny L. Kopfstein and Maj. Michael D. Almy who were discharged under Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The Committee also heard from would-be social critic Gen. John Sheehan who saw "social engineering," "Socialism" and "unionization" creeping into the world's militaries. Why, he insisted, allowing gays to serve resulted in the Dutch facing disaster in Srebrenica -- a claim he sourced to a man who doesn't appear to have existed and a claim rejected by the United Nations' 2002 report and the Dutch Embassy in DC.
Here's that section of the testimony.
Commitee Chair Carl Levin: General, you've been the NATO Supreme Allied Commander and I assume that as NATO Commander that you discussed the issue with other military leaders of our allies. Is that correct?
Gen John J. Sheehan: Yes, sir, I have.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Did you -- did they tell you, those allies who allow open service of gay and lesbian men and women, did they tell you that they had cohesion and morale problems?
Gen John Sheehan: Yes sir they did. If you don't -- l beg the indulgence --
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Sure.
Gen John J. Sheehan: Most of this Committee knows that current militaries are a product of years of development. They reflect societies that they are theoretically paid to protect. The Europen militaries today are a product of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Nations like Belgium, Luxenberg, the Dutch, etc. firmly believed that there was no longer a need for combat capability in the militaries. As a result, they declared a peace dividend and made a concentrated effort to socialize their military. That included the unionization of the militaries. It included open homo - homosexuality demonstrated in a series of other activities. But with a focus on peace keeping missions because they did not believe the Germans were going to attack again or that the Soviets were coming back. That led to a force that was ill-equipped to go to war. The case in point I'm referring to is when the Dutch were required to defend Srebrenica against the Serbs. The battalion was under strength, poorly led and the Serbs came into town, handcuffed the soldiers to telephone poles, marched the Muslims off and executed them. That was the largest massacre in Europe since WWII.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: And did the Dutch leaders tell you it was because there were gay soldiers there?
Gen John J. Sheehan: It was a combination --
Committee Chair Carl Levin: But did they tell you that? That was my question.
Gen John J. Sheehan: Yes. They included that as part of the problem.
That there were gay soldiers among the Dutch --
Gen John J. Sheehan: The combination was the liberalization of the military. A net effect, basically social engineering.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: The -- You said that no special accommodations should be made for any member of the military.
Gen John J. Sheehan: Sure.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Are members who are straight, who are heterosexual allowed in our military to say that they are straight and heterosexual? Are they allowed to say that? [Long pause as Levin waits for an answer before adding] Without being discharged?
Gen John J. Sheehan: Are they allowed to say --
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Yeah.
Gen John J. Sheehan: -- sexuality.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Are they allowed to say "Hey, I'm straight. I'm heterosexual." Can you say that? Without being discharged.
Gen John J. Sheehan: There's no prohibition to my knowledge.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Is that a special accommodation to them?
Gen John J. Sheehan: [Long pause] I wouldn't consider it a special accommodation.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Why would it be a special accommodation then to someone who's gay to say 'Hey, I'm gay.'? Why -- why do you call that special? You don't call it special for someone who's heterosexual or straight. Why do you believe that's a special accommodation to someone who's gay?
Gen John J. Sheehan: I think the issue, Senator, that . . . we're talking about . . . really has a lot to do with the individuals. It has to do with the very nature of combat. Combat is not about individuals, it's about units. We're talking about a group of people who declared openly sexual attraction to a particular segment of the population and insist and continue to live in intimate proximity with them. That allows them to --
Comittee Chair Carl Levin: You allow that for heterosexuals?
Gen John J. Sheehan: Yes.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: You don't have any problem with that?
Gen John J. Sheehan: Don't have any problem. But that --
Committee Chair Carl Levin: You don't have any problem with men and women serving together even though they say they're attracted to each other?
Gen John J. Sheehan: That's correct.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: That's not a special accommodation?
Gen John J. Sheehan: No.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Okay. But it is special to allow --
Gen John J. Sheehan: It' is because it identifies the group as a special group of people who by law make them ineligible for further service.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: But the whole issue is whether it ought to be, whether they ought to be ineligible? Whether we ought to keep out of our service.
Gen John J. Sheehan: That's correct. the current debate, the current law clearly says --
Committee Chair Carl Levin: No I know what the law says, the question is should we change the law?
Gen John J. Sheehan: My recommendation is no.
Senator Carl Levin: No, I understand. And can you tell us which Dutch officers you talked to who told you that Srebenica was in part caused because there were gay soldiers in the Dutch army?
Gen John J. Sheehan: Uh, Chief of Staff of the Army who was fired by the Parliament because they couldn't find anybody else to blame.
Committe Chair Carl Levin: And who was that?
Gen John J. Sheehan: Hank van Brummen.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Pardon?
Gen John J. Sheehan: Hank van Brummen.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Why is the burden to end the discriminatory policy based on people who would end the discriminatory policy? Why do the people who want to end the policy have to show that it would improve combat effectiveness? If we're satisfied it would not harm combat effectiveness and for many who would be allowed to serve they would then be permitted to serve without discrimination and without harm. Why is that not good enough for you?
Gen John J. Sheehan: Because the force that we have today is probably the finest fighting force we have in the world.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: And maybe we could have an equally fine or even better force but if it's equally fine -- if you could be satisfied that it's no harm to combat cohesion or effectiveness, would that be satisfactory to you?
Gen John J. Sheehan: No. I think it has to be demonstrated, Senator.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: That there be an actual improvement.
Gen John J. Sheehan: An actual improvement.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: No harm wouldn't be good enough for you?
Gen John J. Sheehan: No. The reason I say --
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Pardon?
Gen John J. Sheehan: The reason I say that, Senator, is we've gone through this once before in our lifetime. You were in the Senate at the time. It was called the
Great Society. When it was deemed that we could bring into the military categories fours and fives and help the military out and make it part of a social experiment. Those categories fours and fives almost destroyed the military.
Commitee Chair Carl Levin: I don't know what that has to do with this issue.
Gen John J. Sheehan: Well it has to do with the issue of . . . being able to demonstrate that the . . . change in policy is going to improve things. We were told . . . that this was going to help out combat strength. Combat deployable strength. It didn't. It did just the opposite. It drove people out. So I think the burden has to be on demonstrating that something's going to become better, not hoping that it will become something better.
Committee Chair Carl Levin: Well I think the burden of people -- the burden to maintain a discriminatory policy is on the people who want to maintain the policy. Not on the people who want to end it.
Mainly what he shared appeared to have been that, during Vietnam, he appears to have been propositioned or felt up by a squad leader as evidenced by his testimony which began, "Senator, my experience, homosexual marines create problems in the battlefield."
Shifting points of views and verb tenses, he told a lurid story of steamy groping, hands under clothing, in the foxholes as the rest of the unit remained unaware. It was a purple prose tale, in which strapping young American males were little more than dainty Lillian Gishes strapped to the railroad tracks by mustache twisting men. He insisted, "I would stipulate that from my days in Vietnam in the early sixties when I had this sergeant that almost got a combat patrol killed."
As with all of his 'facts,' the whole thing seemed to be the product of an overactive imagination.
Sentator Kay Hagan noted that despite being titled Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the policy repeatedly asks when "third parties" provide tips. Maj. Almy didn't tell. His e-mails were violated and an investigation into his life begun leading to his being asked by a superior officer if he was gay? Even then, "I didn't tell. The Air Force asked. And I refused to answer the question. So I think, while it's true I never made a personal -- or a public statement to the military, I was still thrown out."
Senator Roland Burris raised the issue of the racial integration of the military and confronted Sheehan with, "You talk about the bright and the best. We don't know if we've got the bright and the best serving in our military service until we let everyone serve with their best distinction, best ability."
By contrast, Senator John McCain just wanted to hear the sound of his own (high-pitched) voice. He repeatedly interrupted the two witnesses discharged under Don't Ask, Don't Tell, refusing to allow them to speak and then claimed no one could explain the issue to him. McCain, more than any other Republican on the Committee, makes it clear that the Republicans are digging into fight any change to Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Which brings us back to why the policy needs to be repealed now, while Democrats control both houses of Congress.