By last count, I’ve written 19 posts over the last four years about the Pentagon getting rid of well-trained military linguists, who help translate intercepted terrorist messages in a time of war, because they happen to be gay. My 20th has some vaguely encouraging news — the linguists are still getting kicked out, but at least Congress is asking questions about it.
Lawmakers who say the military has kicked out 58 Arabic linguists because they were gay want the Pentagon to explain how it can afford to let the valuable language specialists go.
Seizing on the latest discharges, involving three specialists, members of the House of Representatives wrote the House Armed Services Committee chairman that the continued loss of such “capable, highly skilled Arabic linguists continues to compromise our national security during time of war.”
This is exactly why I keep writing about it. I believe America has determined enemies who want desperately to do us harm. To help keep us safe, we need to intercept terrorists’ messages and act on them, but that’s challenging because there aren’t that many well-trained linguists volunteering for military duty. Here we have dozens of skilled, able-bodied, patriotic Americans — exactly what the nation is looking for — but the government told them to go away. It came down to a basic choice: let these Americans help keep protect us vs. get rid of the gays. The Bush administration prefers the latter.
Marine Maj. Stewart Upton, a Pentagon spokesman, said the Defense Department is enforcing the law. “The Department of Defense must ensure that the standards for enlistment and appointment of members of the armed forces reflect the policies set forth by Congress,” he said. James Joyner, who appears to disagree with the DADT policy, argues, “[T]his longstanding policy is a matter of public law, not military whim. It would be ‘criminal’ for commanders not to obey it.”
But therein lies the rub: the military appears to be willing to ignore the policy.
One sailor discharged in the latest incident, former Petty Officer 2nd Class Stephen Benjamin, said his supervisor tried to keep him on the job, urging him to sign a statement denying that he was gay. He said his lawyer advised him not to sign it, because it could be used against him later if other evidence ever surfaced.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Benjamin said he was caught improperly using the military’s secret level computer system to send messages to his roommate, who was serving in Iraq. In those messages, he said, he may have referred to being gay or going on a date.
“I’d always been out since the day I started working there,” Benjamin said. “We had conversations about being gay in the military and what it was like. There were no issues with unit cohesion. I never caused divisiveness or ever experienced slurs.”
On a “whim,” Benjamin’s commanding officers apparently overlooked his sexual orientation, until he misused a computer system to send a private email — the same system 69 other straight soldiers were misusing the same way. For whatever reason, the military arbitrarily decided not to worry about Benjamin’s sexual orientation when he talked about it, but chose to throw him out of the military after he sent an email to his roommate. Apparently, others who used the computer system were not punished. If there’s any logic to this, I don’t see it.
As for Congress:
Democratic Rep. Marty Meehan, who has pushed for repeal of the law, organized the letter sent to Skelton requesting a hearing into the Arab linguist issue.
“At a time when our military is stretched to the limit and our cultural knowledge of the Middle East is dangerously deficient, I just can’t believe that kicking out able, competent Arabic linguists is making our country any safer,” Meehan said.
The letter, signed by about 40 House members, says that, with the latest firings, 58 Arab linguists have been dismissed from the military under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. It said Congress should decide whether this application of the policy “is serving the nation well.”
Here’s a hint: it’s not.
I’d love to see a hearing on this. I want to see House Republicans step up and say, “It’s more important to hate gays than protect Americans from terrorists.” Please. Paul Cameron, one of the nation’s leading anti-gay activists, is already on record agreeing with the notion that he’d “rather die in a terrorist attack than suffer through an uncomfortable shower with a gay.” Let’s see who in Congress is willing to say the same thing.
Post Script: Much to my embarrassment, after writing this, I noticed that Kevin Drum seems to have run an extremely similar post an hour ago. I hate it when that happens. Great minds think alike, right Kevin?