Total Chaos

Well, I guess Gates was right on one thing: The military can't deal with fast action.

Via Pam's House Blend, this little tidbit on part of the reaction to Judge Virginia Phillips' injunction against enforcement of DADT:

Email from Richard C. Harding, The Judge Advocate General, U.S. Air Force:

Members of The Judge Advocate General’s Corps,

On 12 October 2010, a federal district judge of the Central District of California issued an injunction barring the enforcement or application of 10 USC 654, commonly known as the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" statute. A copy is attached. At present, the United States Government is contemplating whether to appeal and to seek a stay of the injunction. In the meantime, effective 12 October, the Department of Defense will abide by its terms, as follows:

The District Court "permanently enjoins defendants United States of America and the Secretary of Defense, their agents, servants, officers, employees, and attorneys and all persons acting in participation or concert with them or under their direction or command from enforcing or applying the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Act and implementing regulations, against any person under their jurisdiction or command."

The District Court further "orders defendants United States of America and the Secretary of Defense immediately to suspend and discontinue any investigation, or discharge, separation, or other proceeding, that may have been commenced under the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Act or pursuant to 10 USC 654 or its implementing regulations, on or prior to the date of this Judgment."

Further guidance on this and related issues will be provided as it is made available by DoD. Inform your commanders of this injunction and its terms. Direct any questions to the Administrative Law Division, AF/JAA.

RICHARD C. HARDING
Lieutenant General, USAF
The Judge Advocate General

Meanwhile, a gay serviceman discharged under DADT tried to re-enlist:

With a briefcase full of commendations under his arm, Omar Lopez walked into an Austin, Tex., recruiting office Wednesday. Mr. Lopez, 29, had served nearly five years in the Navy. He was honorably discharged in 2006 for “homosexual admission,” according to documents he carried. He wanted to re-enlist.

But recruiters turned him away hastily, saying they had no knowledge of any injunction or any change in military policy.

The DoJ, of course, is going to appeal, and has filed a request for an emergency stay of the injunction. Their "argument" is the Working Group:

In support of the President’s decision to seek a congressional repeal of the law, and as directed by the Secretary of Defense, the Department of Defense has established a high-level Working Group that is currently conducting a comprehensive review of the statute and how best to implement a change in policy in a prudent manner. The Working Group is nearing completion of its report to the Secretary, which is due on December 1. The immediate implementation of the injunction would disrupt this review and frustrate the Secretary’s ability to recommend and implement policies that would ensure that any repeal of DADT does not irreparably harm the government’s critical interests in military readiness, combat effectiveness, unit cohesion, morale, good order, discipline, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.

But it seems the Working Group's is playing with a stacked deck:

The Pentagon task force charged with examining the issue is "well along" in formulating recommendations, and the ruling is not expected to affect its work, another senior military officer.

The task force found deep resistance to the idea of repealing the law in some elements of the armed services, especially within the combat units, an officer familiar with the findings said. But the surveys also have found segments of the military who were not overly worried about allowing gays and lesbians to serve, the officer said.

There's been a huge amount of commentary on how badly flawed the surveys were, and how prejudicial the wording of some of the questions included was. I've also seen reports by some people (who are not presently in the armed forces) detailing how they participated in the survey. I'm going to take a step back for a longer look and guess what -- I come up with one conclusion: the whole idea of the survey was bullshit from Day 1. The survey was developed by an outside contractor commissioned by the DoD, and it's not brain surgery to figure that the DoD got exactly what it asked for. There was never any intention of doing this honestly.

Don't expect anything from the "fierce advocate." Odds are he's working for a trade-off, probably in Afghanistan. Besides, it's only a bunch of fags who are affected.