May 10, 2009
Obama’s DADT Promises Emptier Every Day; Meanwhile, Proxy Channels Jeff Spicoli
Iraqi vet “Faggot.”
Original & story at the Navy Times.
“On September 10th, 2001,” begins chapter one of Nathaniel Frank’s new book, Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines Military and Weakens America, “the United States government intercepted two phone calls placed from Afghanistan between Al Qaeda operatives. ‘Tomorrow is zero hour,’ said one of the voices. ‘The match is about to begin,’ came another ominous line. The National Security Agency intercepts millions of messages every hour, but these calls came from sources deemed to be high priority. They were, of course, spoken in Arabic, so they made their way to a translator’s queue, waiting to be interpreted. Unfortunately, in the fall of 2001 our government did not have enough Arabic linguists to translate the messages quickly. The phone calls were not translated until two days later, on September 12, 2001. It was two days too late.
“The terrorist attacks of September 11th, as every American knows, changed everything. Almost immediately, a national consensus emerged, if only briefly, that nothing should stand in the way of true reform of the nation’s broken intelligence apparatus. Nothing should stop a thorough and efficient re-orientation of our national security perspective, which must immediately be geared toward fending off future terrorist attacks. Nothing, that is, except letting gays in uniform take part in the fight. The story of the ongoing purges of gay soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines with language skills critical to waging the war on terrorism pits political expediency and moral dogma against national security, social scientific research and common sense. It is a story that shines a spotlight on certain truisms that Americans seem to grasp only when it’s too late, and then to promptly forget until the next time it’s too late: that prejudice is generally self-defeating rather than productive, and that it nearly always has unexpected consequences. …
“The firing of gay Arabic language specialists during America’s war on terrorism is a particularly stark illustration of the gay ban’s costs to national security. And so it’s no surprise that the Pentagon has not been forthcoming about the number of linguists fired. In 2004, when Palm Center researchers asked the Pentagon for the total discharge figures of gay linguists (including all foreign language specialties), they were told that figures only existed since 1998. It took a Freedom of Information Act request and pressure from members of the House Armed Services Committee to force the Pentagon to release even these incomplete figures, which landed at 73 discharges of language specialists from the Defense Language Institute between 1998 and 2004. Of these, 17 were Arabic speakers, 11 spoke Russian, 18 studied Korean, 6 were training in Persian-Farsi, and the rest studied other languages.
“Then in February, 2005, a GAO report was released that included figures dating back to 1994 — the period when data was not supposed to have existed. Those figures were even more troubling. According to the GAO report, 757 troops with ‘critical occupations’ant were fired under the policy. These included voice interceptors, interrogators, translators, Explosive Ordinance Disposal Specialists, signal intelligence analysts, and missile and cryptologic technicians. Three hundred twenty-two fired service members had skills in what the military deems ‘an important foreign language.’ Fifty-four of them spoke Arabic. Ian Finkenbinder makes fifty-five. And counting. …
“[M]ore than 55 Arabic language specialists are no longer working for the U.S. military because they are gay. In the two years following 9/11 alone, 37 language experts were discharged under the policy, with skills in Arabic, Korean, Farsi, Chinese and Russian. The purging of gay language specialists has seen no respite in the years after 9/11, despite ongoing pleas by military and political leaders to increase the numbers of Arabic translators.”
Unfriendly Fire is a fascinating read, even for those of us not directly impacted (on a daily basis, at least) by “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (and for those of us who have great difficulty understanding the desire to join the military, but who shrug our shoulders and commit ourselves to seeing DADT overturned, because it’s a matter of equality, because it’s something our LGBT brothers and sisters want to do, and because — first and foremost — it’s the right thing to do for the nation).
Our admiration for Arabic linguists multiplied exponentially with the revelation of what these men and women have to go through: “To complete a course in a traditional romance language,” explains Frank, “Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese — requires a 25-week training regimen. But Arabic is what DLI [the Defense Language Institute] calls a ‘category 4′ language. Along with Chinese, Japanese and Korean, Arabic is the hardest for English-speakers to learn, and the course lasts 63 weeks for basic knowledge. Because it’s not a ‘cognate’ language for English-speakers — not one that shares the roots of the Germanic or Romantic family language trees — most American students hit the books for several hours each night, after taking up to seven hours of class every day. Arabic reads from right to left, has no capital letters and its characters run together like cursive, making it difficult for the untrained to distinguish them without months of practice. The year after 9/11, the number of students graduating from all American colleges and universities with an undergraduate degree in Arabic was a whopping six. Six.”
“Because of its difficulty for native English speakers, and because of how long and challenging the course is, only the strongest students at DLI are selected to take Arabic. Most students make their language choices under the considerable sway of their teachers. Many are told to take an easier course of study.”
That said, is there any question how special these skills are — and how foolish is a nation that so easily discards qualified translators, especially since 9/11?
Which brings us to President Barack Obama’s inexplicable waffling on repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Let’s see if we can track Obama’s pendulum swings without suffering whiplash:
November 29, 2007: “As president, I will work with Congress and place the weight of my administration behind enactment of the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which will make nondiscrimination the official policy of the U.S. military. I will task the Defense Department and the senior command structure in every branch of the armed forces with developing an action plan for the implementation of a full repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. And I will direct my Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security to develop procedures for taking re-accession requests from those qualified service members who were separated from the armed forces under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and still want to serve their country. The eradication of this policy will require more than just eliminating one statute. It will require the implementation of anti-harassment policies and protocols for dealing with abusive or discriminatory behavior as we transition our armed forces away from a policy of discrimination. The military must be our active partners in developing those policies and protocols. That work should have started long ago. It will start when I take office.” (Senator Barack Obama to the Human Rights Campaign)
April 11, 2008: “Barack Obama said he’s confident he could end the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy for gays in the military, but he won’t make it a criteria for serving on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. … Obama said ending the policy, which was instituted during Bill Clinton’s administration, is something he could ‘reasonably’ get done if elected.” (”Obama: I’ll end don’t-ask, don’t-tell,” Daily News)
November 25, 2008: “A member of Barack Obama’s transition team is denying media reports that the president-elect has decided to delay efforts to repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ until 2010. An Obama transition team spokesperson, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the decision on how to approach repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ which prohibits gays from serving openly in the military, would be made after more experts have joined the Obama administration. ‘These decisions will not be made before the full national security team is in place,’ the spokesperson said.” (”Obama team denies it will delay ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal,” Washington Blade)
January 14, 2009: “In a response to a question on the Web site Change.gov asking whether Obama would get rid of the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs said: ‘You don’t hear politicians give a one-word answer much. But it’s “Yes.”‘ Gibbs on Wednesday expanded on his answer, saying, ‘There are many challenges facing our nation now and the president-elect is focused first and foremost on jump-starting this economy. So not everything will get done in the beginning but he’s committed to following through’ with ending the policy against being openly gay in the military.” (”Obama aide: Ending ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ must wait,” CNN)
February 1, 2009: “The Obama administration is telling the Pentagon and gay-rights advocates that it will have to study the implications for national security and enlist more support in Congress before trying to overturn the so-called ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ law and allow gays to serve openly in the military, according to people involved in the discussions. … At the Pentagon, officials say they have been told not to expect the administration to seek to lift the ban quickly. One senior officer, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the press, said staff officers for Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have been told it will be several months at the earliest — possibly not even this year — until the top brass will be formally asked to weigh in on a change in policy. And even then, he said, the military has been assured it will have wide latitude to undertake a detailed study of how a change in the policy would affect the military. Mullen told reporters earlier this month that he is aware of the president’s ‘intent to do this,’ but ‘there are no more specifics with respect to when.’” (”Obama seeks assessment on gays in military: No rush to repeal ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’,” Boston Globe)
March 29, 2009: Secretary of Defense Robert Gates: “Well, it continues to be the law. And any change in the policy would require a change in the law. We will follow that law whatever it is. That dialog though has really not progressed very far at this point in the administration. I think the President and I feel like we’ve got a lot on our plates right now and let’s push that one down the road a little bit.” (”Gates on DADT: ‘Let’s push that one down the road a little bit’,” ThinkProgress)
April 16, 2009: “Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates made clear on Thursday that any repeal of the military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law would have to be undertaken slowly, and suggested that it might not happen at all. ‘If we do it,’’ Mr. Gates told reporters on his plane enroute to Rhode Island, ‘it’s important that we do it right, and very carefully.’” (”Gates Cautious on Repeal of Ban on Gays in Military, New York Times)
April 30, 2009: The White House Web site yanks Obama’s commitment to repealing DADT, replacing it with “changing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in a sensible way that strengthens our armed forces and our national security…” (and “disappears” more than a few other top-priority issues, substituting mushy language about “anti-discrimination employment laws” and reiterating his separate-but-equal “support” for “full civil unions” — whatever that means, as civil unions, no matter how “full,” do not equal marriage — and “federal rights for LGBT couples”).
May 1, 2009: The White House Web site brings back the word “repeal,” albeit “couched in the same terms about being done in a ’sensible way.’”
May 5, 2009: Obama “intends” to “fulfill” his “commitment,” maybe by summer: “In January, Sandy Tsao, an army officer based out of St. Louis, MO, told her superiors that she is gay — a violation of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law. Tsao then wrote to President Obama, urging him to change the DADT policy: ‘I do hope, Mr. President, that you will help us to win the war against prejudice.’ On May 5, Tsao received a handwritten letter from Obama with a pledge to repeal DADT at some point… In the letter, Obama wrote that he is ‘committed to changing our current policy’ but that ‘it will take some time to complete (partly because it needs Congressional action).’ Yesterday, Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA), who has sponsored legislation repealing DADT, discussed the issue with Rachel Maddow, saying, ‘I’d like to see us move it by this summer, and I think we can.’” (”Obama sends handwritten letter to gay soldier ousted from the military promising to repeal DADT,” ThinkProgress)
May 8, 2009: “…for more than a month, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen and most recently national security adviser and former Marine General James Jones have made clear that if repeal is on the agenda, it is pretty far down. In a Washington Post profile, Jones said that when Obama was under pressure recently to review the ban on gays in the military, Jones went to see him and advised him to avoid taking on another issue. He said Obama agreed.” (”Obama, activists lose momentum over ‘don’t ask’,” San Francisco Chronicle)
And today?
“I like that. ‘I don’t know.’ That’s nice. ‘Mr. Hand, will I pass this class?’ Gee, Mr. Spicoli, I don’t know!“
Mr. Hand (Ray Walston)
Fast Times at Ridgemont HighMay 10, 2009: Notes Towleroad (with kudos to Andy for being able to endure the Sunday-morning talking-head shows):
Obama Security Adviser on Repeal
of Military Gay Ban: ‘I Don’t Know’On This Week, George Stephanopoulos discussed the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” with National Security Adviser General James Jones and Senator John McCain.
Said Jones: “It has to be a uniform policy for all members of the military in order to function as a military has to function. We will have long discussions about this. It will be thoughtful. It will be deliberative. The president I know will reach out to fully understand both sides or all sides of the issue before he makes a decision. I don’t know [if it will be overturned]. We’ll have to — the president has said that he is in favor of that. We’ll just wait — we’ll have to wait and see — as a result of the deliberations and as a result of the — in the months and weeks ahead. We have a lot on our plate right now. It has to be teed up at the right time so — to do this the right way.”
Stephanopoulos also asked Senator John McCain about it. Said McCain: “In my view, the policy has been working, and it’s been working well.”
Video at the link.
“‘I don’t know?’ The answer should have been a one-word answer ‘Yes,’ said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. ‘Jones’s answer, along with Secretary Gates’s remarks to the Army War College on April 16, make it clear that a calculated political decision has been made that the President is not going to take “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” on publicly-himself-and instead his defense team is doing it.’ … SLDN had hoped this president would offer leadership, not give in to some throw away study or commission. The right approach would be a presidential working group that focuses solely on implementation and reports back to the president with recommendations within 90 days.” (”Obama Caving to Senior Military Leadership, Religious Right on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’,” Servicemembers Legal Defense Network)
Meanwhile, Lt. Dan Choi remains the latest casualty of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“Choi is not the first servicemember to be dismissed because of his sexuality under the Obama administration, but his dismissal stands out because of his noted skills. Choi is an infantry platoon leader in the New York National Guard who is fluent in Arabic. He graduated West Point and recently returned from Iraq.” (”Arabic Linguist Fired From Army For Being Openly Gay,” CBS News, May 8, 2009)
Fluent in Arabic.
Which brings us right back to square one:
“On September 10th, 2001, the United States government intercepted two phone calls placed from Afghanistan between Al Qaeda operatives. ‘Tomorrow is zero hour,’ said one of the voices. ‘The match is about to begin’…
Related:
Lesbian Navy Captain Commits to Ending DADT
September 11, 2007Ninth Circuit Rules on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Appeal
May 23, 2008Women in Uniform Disproportionately Affected by “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Law
June 23, 2008Memorial to Gay Air Force Veteran Leonard Matlovich Dedicated in San Francisco
November 24, 2008Video: Leonard Matlovich, 21 Years Ago
December 5, 2008DADT Pushback: Told You So, Obama Fans (Or: Sorry, Queers, Obama Just Broke Another Promise to You)
February 4, 2009Who’s responsible for the yellow streak on Obama’s back?
Elaine Donnelly: One Nasty, Anti-Gay, Misogynistic Piece of Work
May 2, 2008“Just Bonkers” Elaine Donnelly Star Nutjob at “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Hearing
July 24, 2008Professional Hysteric Elaine “Bonkers” Donnelly To Rear Ugly Head Again at Secret Military Gay-Bashing Bash
October 1, 2008Speaking of Anti-Gays Wet and Ripe for Armageddon…
November 22, 2008
Posted by: Sapphocrat
Tweet This Post!
Filed Under: Barack Obama, Homeland Insecurity, Homophobia, Military/DADT
