Saving Soldiers from Gay Death<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
By Cliff Kincaid
 
There is a simple reason why the gay rights lobby is trying to rush through repeal of the Pentagon's homosexual exclusion policy. They know that a comprehensive review of a proposed change would disclose the substantial evidence that admission of open and active homosexuals would put our troops in further danger through exposure to tainted blood.  In fact, evidence to this effect is already in the hands of top military commanders and Pentagon officers.
 
The Pentagon understands that 19,000 soldiers already have HIV/AIDS and that some -- if not most -- came down with the deadly disease through prohibited gay sexual conduct.  It is common sense that opening the ranks to open and active homosexuals would only increase this problem.
 
Here's another critical fact that a comprehensive review would disclose --there is no blood test that can be guaranteed to screen HIV and other deadly diseases out of the blood supply once the gay males, who are currently prohibited from donating blood, are welcomed into the services.
 
Meantime, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council reports in a blockbuster new study that the evidence indicates that a disproportionate number of assaults in the military are committed by homosexuals.
 
The evidence, in short, already demonstrates a significant problem of homosexual misconduct in the Armed Forces, even though such behavior is supposed to be prohibited.
 
Oblivious to the demonstrated need to tighten up rather than loosen the current policy, the Washington Post has editorialized in favor of a quick congressional vote, saying it is "reprehensible" to keep homosexuals out of the military. One of the Post's leading editorial writers, Jonathan Capehart, is a homosexual activist who used to cover gay sex clubs. 
 
The gay rights lobby is labeling as "offensive" a new video that exposes homosexual misconduct in the Armed Forces and wants it taken down from YouTube. They have not pinpointed one factual inaccuracy in the film or in the heavily documented 60-page report by Dale O'Leary that forms the basis of it. 
 
Their desperation is being guided by the realization that male homosexual conduct is directly linked to tainted blood and deadly diseases such as HIV/AIDS, and that no cure or vaccine has yet been found.
 
They don't want the public to learn about cases such as Johnnie Lamar Dalton, a soldier who came down with HIV and then infected a boy he met in a gay online chat room. Dalton went to prison, but homosexuals in the Armed Forces coming down with HIV/AIDS cost at least $18,000-$20,000 a year per patient.
 
A comprehensive review, which would also take into account the views of our soldiers currently fighting two wars, was promised to our troops before any legislative action was to be taken. The comprehensive review was to be completed by December and was part of the questionable deal that Defense Secretary Robert Gates made in order to accommodate President Obama's irresponsible campaign pledge to admit open gays, no matter what the consequences to military readiness, order, and discipline.
 
The promise to our troops would be broken if the Congress votes now to admit open and active homosexuals into the ranks.
 
The gays and their allies, however, don't care about the troops. They want their "rights" and they want them now. They simply don't care if a premature policy change causes thousands of our soldiers to leave the Armed Forces in disgust and dismay and thousands more never to sign up because they don't want to room or shower with individuals sexually attracted to them.
 
When the gays realized that the November elections would probably mean more conservatives being elected to Congress and more opposition to repeal of the policy, they decided to accelerate their demands and called on their congressional allies, led by Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, to move up the schedule. That is why Congress is right now in the midst of debating this far-reaching policy change.
 
In short, Gates and our troops have had the rug pulled out from under them. When the vote was moved up to the present time, Gates could have resigned in protest. But he decided to go along with the campaign to force open homosexuals into the ranks. 
 
While Gates is reluctantly joining the liberal politicians and Obama himself in playing politics with soldiers' lives, top military commanders are remaining firm in their opposition to a premature and reckless change in policy without all of the evidence being gathered and evaluated.
 
Senator John McCain, top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, is proving to be a true profile in courage in the current circumstances. He has assembled the views of our top commanders on his web site and is leading the opposition to what Levin and the others are trying to do.
 
McCain notes that the four Service Chiefs -- General George W. Casey, Jr, U.S. Army; Admiral G. Roughead, U.S. Navy; General James T. Conway, Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps; and General Norton A. Schwartz, U.S. Air Force -- have again stated their position that a comprehensive review must be completed before any legislative action is taken to repeal the homosexual exclusion policy known as "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT).
 
General Casey tells McCain that "repealing the law before the completion of the review will be seen by the men and women of the Army as a reversal of our commitment to hear their views before moving forward."
 
General Schwartz says, "I believe it is important, a matter of keeping faith with those currently serving in the Armed Forces, that the Secretary of Defense commissioned review be completed before there is any legislation to repeal the DA/DT law.  Such action allows me to provide the best military advice to the President, and sends an important signal to our Airmen and their families that their opinion matters." 
 
They are exactly correct, of course. What they may not realize is that the promise to our troops and their families is being broken because the liberal politicians are more committed to the gay rights agenda than the survival of our troops in battle. Our troops have become cannon fodder in the gay rights campaign to force their views and acceptance on the rest of us. The rights of gays are now supposed to take precedence over our soldiers' lives.
 
A matter of life and death, gay males can't donate blood but Levin and his allies want them in the service anyway, put in a position where they could be called upon to donate blood and could bleed on their fellow soldiers.
 
While the gay rights lobby and their backers in the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress smear anybody drawing attention to this problem as a "hate-monger," the facts are the facts. Their real agenda is censorship of the truth about the health hazards of the gay lifestyle.
 
The civilian sector is not immune to this kind of special interest politics. The Obama Administration, working with the same liberal politicians pushing repeal of DADT, is also considering lifting the ban on gay men donating blood. That means that civilians could soon be facing the same deadly threat now stalking our soldiers on the battlefield.
 
 
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.