For Immediate Release: July 21, 2011
Contact: Diane Gramley 1.814.271.9078 or 1.814.437.5355
Repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Based on Lies as Military is Misused
(Harrisburg) — The American Family Association of Pennsylvania (AFA of PA), a statewide pro-family group who also advocates for a strong military, has contacted each of Pennsylvania’s 19 Congressmen as well as Senator Bob Casey, Jr. and Senator Pat Toomey. Each has been sent the copy of a Department of Defense Inspector General Report recently leaked by a concerned individual in the Pentagon and asks for immediate hearings. This document exposes the lies that were used in December to overturn the law banning homosexuals in the military.
“Many were doubtful of the November 11th Washington Post article which, using the information leaked to them by an unnamed source, stated that 70% of the military saw no harm in repealing so-called Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates ordered an investigation of the leak to be completed by the end of December; the final report was issued on April 8, 2011 and immediately buried at the Pentagon. Why? Because it exposes some very troubling tactics used to convince Congress that the military was okay with repeal. This totally ignored the concerns voiced by our military since the Executive Summary was being written three days before the first service members even took part in the surveys. This IG report tells how the process was twisted in the politically motivated effort to force homosexuality on our troops,” commented Diane Gramley, President of the AFA of PA.
Here are some of highlights in the Department of Defense Inspector General report which were included in the cover letter sent to the 21 elected officials representing Pennsylvania in Washington, DC:
1.) The purpose of the Pentagon Working Group process was not to ‘study’ the issue, but ‘to gain momentum in support of a legislative change during the ‘lame duck’ session of Congress following the November 2, 2010, elections.’ (p. 20).
2.) “On or about July 4, 2010, three days before Service members received the CRWG ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ survey, Mr.[Jeh] Johnson read portions of ‘an early draft’ of the executive summary of the draft Report to a former news anchor, a close personal friend visiting Mr. Johnson’s home. As ‘a personal favor’ the news anchor provided advice regarding syntax, sentence structure, and suggestions for persuasive writing . . . .” (page 5)
3.) “Witnesses testified that the key leaked data point cited in the Washington Post, as well as other media outlets and politicians following the improper disclosure, was the survey statistic that ‘more than 70 percent of respondents … said the effect of repealing the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy would be positive, mixed or nonexistent.’ According to one public affairs officer, ‘This 70 percent figure got everybody’s attention.’ We observed that the 70 percent figure reported in the media, while present in the draft Report’s executive summary, was derived from just one of the 102 survey questions submitted to Service members.
The relevant survey question asked the following:
‘If ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is repealed and you are working with a Service member in your immediate unit who has said he or she is gay or lesbian, how, if at all, would it affect how Service members in your immediate unit work together to get the job done?’
“The survey inquiry yielded the following responses:
Very Positively 6.6%
Very Negatively 10.9%
No Effect 19.9% (DoD IG Report, p. 15, emphasis added)
“[T]o reach the conclusion that 70 percent of respondents said repeal would have positive, mixed, or no effect on a unit’s ability to work together to get a job done, the CRWG combined four survey results categories to derive the 70 percent figure: Very Positively; Positively; Mixed; and No Effect. If Mr. O’Keefe’s and Mr. Jaffe’s sources had 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’: Very Negatively; Negatively, Mixed, and No Effect.” (DoD IG Report, p. 21, emphasis added)
4.) “Early evidence suggested that the primary source of the information was someone who had a strong emotional attachment to the issue of furthering a repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and probably had ‘assumptions going in’ that the CRWG’s findings would ultimately reveal that repeal would not be supported by a majority of Service members. In addition, e-mails from the Washington Post reporters suggested that the source was not a ‘disinterested party,’ and other evidence
showed the source carefully disclosed specific survey data to support a pro-repeal agenda. We consider it likely that the primary source disclosed content from the draft Report with the intent to shape a pro-repeal perception of the draft Report prior to its release to gain momentum in support of a legislative
change during the ‘lame duck’ session of Congress following the November 2, 2010, elections.” (DoD IG Report, p.20)
“Immediate hearings must be called before certification takes place. Repeal was a politically motivated stunt to get President Obama in the ‘good graces’ of homosexual activists. The effectiveness of our military and our national security is at risk if this repeal goes forward. Our military was misused and abused during this process and will be the guinea pigs during this social experiment. Sixty percent of our combat troops say allowing homosexuals in the military will negatively impact their unit’s effectiveness. We cannot ignore these politically motivated tactics to undermine our military,” Gramley concluded.
The number 13,000 dismissed under DADT is thrown out there as an horrific number, but during the same time period since 1993:
- four times as many (55,790)military personnel were dismissed because of weight standard violations
- three times as many servicewomen (39,454) left the service due to pregnancy
- seven times as many (90,302) for drug abuse.
# # #