Uncategorized

Military Commanders: Wait for Completed Study Before Allowing Gays to Serve in the Military

May 26, 2010 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – Despite objections from military commanders, a vote to repeal the ban on homosexuals serving in the military is planned for this Thursday, May 27th, in both the Senate and the House.

The planned vote violates a commitment Congress made to the Armed Forces that a study would be completed before any vote was taken to repeal the long-standing ban on homosexuals serving in the military. The broken commitment is the result of immense pressure placed on the Washington politicians by homosexual advocacy groups.

However, today the four Services Chiefs, in separate letters, voiced their opinion that tomorrow’s planned vote was breaking a commitment to the men and women of the Armed Forces that their voices would be heard before any change on the statutory ban.

The letter of General George W. Casey, the Army Chief of Staff, was typical of the sentiments of all four Service Chiefs.

“I remain convinced that it is critically important to get a better understanding of where our Soldiers and Families are on this issue, and what impacts on readiness and unit cohesion might be so that I can provide informed military advice to the President and Congress.

I also believe that repealing the law before 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.”

See all four letters by clicking below.

• General Casey (USA) Letter
• General Conway (USMC) Letter
• Admiral Roughead (USN) Letter
• General Schwartz (USAF) Letter

The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, is encouraging responsible members of Congress not to vote for any bill, regardless of its language, that has as its aim the ultimate repeal the ban.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, “Repeal of the ban on homosexuals serving in the military has nothing to do with making our Armed Forces more effective. It is already the best military force in the world. Repeal of the ban is nothing but a political payoff to homosexual advocacy groups for their campaign support.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Additional links:

http://cmrlink.org/CMRDocuments/Casey ltr to McCain DADT.pdf
http://cmrlink.org/CMRDocuments/Conway ltr to McCain DADT.pdf
http://cmrlink.org/CMRDocuments/Roughead Letter to McKeon DADT.pdf
http://cmrlink.org/CMRDocuments/Schwartz Letter to McKeon DADT.pdf

TMLC Calls New Medal for “Courageous Restraint” A Dangerous Idea

May 14, 2010 by

ANN ARBOR, MI –A British proposal to grant medals for “Courageous Restraint” to troops in Afghanistan who avoid the use of deadly force at a risk to themselves is making the rounds in NATO. No final decision has been made on the medal, although General Stanley A. McChrystal, U. S. Commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, recently stated a new medal isn’t the answer.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, called the idea ridiculous and dangerous.

Said Thompson, “Our troops are already doing an admirable job following the Rules of Engagement (ROE). But when the Taliban purposely uses civilians as human shields, civilian casualties are a tragic, but not uncommon result. The proposed medal will only cause the Taliban to increase their reliance on this cowardly tactic. It will encourage U.S. soldiers to do nothing in the face of danger. And it will lead to the institutionalization of inaction. We need a military that has a bias for action, not inaction.”

The Thomas More Law Center played an instrumental role in the successful defense of Marine LtCol Jeffrey Chessani against criminal charges arising from the so-called November 19, 2005 “Haditha Massacre.”

In that case, a Marine convoy was ambushed by insurgents after a roadside bomb went off destroying a Humvee, killing one Marine, and seriously injuring two others. The Marines immediately received fire from the ambushing insurgents, who were shooting from nearby, civilian-occupied homes.

A four-man fire team responded as they were trained: they cleared several houses occupied by the armed insurgents. In the ensuing room-by-room, house-by-house gun battle, 8 insurgents and several civilians were killed. For their obvious heroism, the four men and LtCol Chessani were rewarded with criminal courts-marital.

Continued Thompson, “We can’t have soldiers hesitating at a crucial moment when facing the enemy. It could mean their death, or the death of their comrades. Ultimately, the ‘restraint’ promoted by this award will cost American lives.”

Listed below are several articles discussing the Courageous Restraint Medal:

• Rules Of Engagement To Die For – Strategy Page
• Hold fire, earn a medal – Navy Times May 12, 2010
• McChrystal: No need for a different medal – Navy Times May 13, 2010
• Medal for “Courageous Restraint” – Rush Limbaugh
• Senior British Army officer wants soldiers in Afghanistan to be awarded for fighting with ‘courageous restraint’ – Daily Mail (UK)

Congress Should Not Repeal Law Denying Eligibility of Homosexuals to Serve in the Military

April 28, 2010 by

Our National Security is at Stake; Your Help is Needed to Stop Homosexuals from Serving in Military

April 27, 2010 by

Our National Security is at Stake; Your Help is Needed to Stop Homosexuals from Serving in Our Military

The Obama administration and Congress are moving quickly to repeal the longstanding statutory ban on homosexuals serving in the military by this Memorial Day!

Over 1,100 distinguished retired Admirals and Generals urged the existing ban be maintained. In a statement released in 2009, they expressed their great concern about the impact a repeal of the ban would have on “morale, discipline, unit cohesion, and overall readiness.”

Please contact your members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees immediately. Let them know that you expect them to oppose this radical social experiment on our military, which will irreversibly degrade their war fighting capability. Ask your family and friends to do the same.

Most military commanders, when allowed to freely speak, oppose repeal of the ban on homosexuals serving in the military:

• Over 1,100 distinguished retired admirals and generals.
• Marine General Peter Pace, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, publicly stated in 2007 that homosexual conduct is immoral and the military should not condone it by allowing gays to serve in the military.
• The current Commandant of the Marine Corps, General James T. Conway, told Congress that his advice to the President and Congress was to keep the ban on homosexuals as it is.
• The Army Chief of Staff, General George W. Casey, Jr., told Congress he had serious concerns about the impact of a repeal of the ban on a military currently engaged in two wars.
• The commanding general of the Army in the Pacific, Lt. General Benjamin R. Mixon, was publicly reprimanded when he publicly opposed the ban and called on troops and their families to fight the repeal of the ban.

Some points why the ban should be maintained:

• As stated in current law, there is no constitutional right to serve in the military.
• The military is historically selective about who can join, based on age, weight, physical fitness, health, drug usage and more.
• Open homosexuality would destroy unit cohesion, good order and discipline.
• Military life is drastically different from civilian life. Troops are on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week, sharing sleeping quarters, showers, and other living areas in conditions that the law describes as “forced intimacy.”
• According to one poll, 10% of military personnel say they will quit if homosexuals are allowed to serve openly.
• Accepting homosexual men in the military will expose service members to higher risks of health problems, including AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.
• Young enlisted personnel will be potentially compromised by inappropriate conduct, including sexual advances by higher ranking homosexuals.
• As most serving in the military are Christians, the ban will cause religious conflicts as their faith considers homosexual conduct a sin.

Military men and women, our sons and daughters, should not be subjected to an involuntary social experiment, and our nation should not have to pay the high price for President Obama’s political promises to left wing activists.

The Center for Military Readiness has developed an excellent 2-page policy analysis, which will give you a quick background of the issues. You may read it by clicking below.

CMR Policy Analysis -February 2010

Action on this issue may be completed by Memorial Day. So it is imperative you let your Congressmen and Senators know that you expect them to oppose this radical social experiment on our military.

Take this opportunity to make a difference in this important cause. Please forward to family and friends.

Because most military voices are muzzled by their commander- in- chief and his political appointees in the Pentagon, your immediate action is required to ensure their voices are heard in Congress! Please write or call your elected representatives today.

Ads to Help American Muslims Escape Retaliation for Leaving Islam Back on Miami Dade Buses

April 22, 2010 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – It was the first time help was publicly offered to people threatened under Islam’s death penalty for leaving Islam. The ads on Miami-Dade buses stated, “Fatwa on your head? Is your family or community threatening you? Leaving Islam? Got questions? Get Answers!”

Although the bus ads began running on Tuesday, April 13th, they were pulled two days later, after CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations), an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land terrorism trial, pressured the Miami-Dade County Transit Authority into removing bus panel ads, claiming they were “offensive to Muslims.” However, CAIR’s victory over the First Amendment was short lived.

The Transit Authority reversed its decision when the organization that paid for the ads announced it had obtained the services of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, and attorney David Yerushalmi to challenge the Transit Authority’s decision violating the constitutional right to free speech and a breach of the advertising contract.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “It’s a bitter irony that American blood is being shed in Iraq and Afghanistan to defend their Islamic Constitutions, while Islamic organizations right here in America are attempting to squelch the constitutional rights to Free Speech of American citizens. I’m pleased the Transit Authority quickly corrected their error and this travesty.”

The “Leaving Islam” ads were paid for by the Freedom Defensive Initiative, a new organization begun by bestselling author Robert Spencer, and Pam Geller.

The day after the bus ads were pulled, Mr. Yerushalmi and the Law Center’s Senior Trial Counsel, Robert Muise, were preparing a federal lawsuit, including a motion for a temporary restraining order, which was planned for filing on Monday, April 26, 2010.

However, in a last ditch effort to amicably resolve the controversy, Mr. Yerushalmi conferred with the Miami-Dade county attorneys who agreed the ads should not have been pulled. Not only will the original 10 king-sized ads go back up on the Transit Authority buses, but an additional 20 king-sized bus ads will be displayed at no additional charge. The ads are expected to go back up by early next week.

Traditional Islamic law dealing with “Apostasy,” that is, leaving one’s religion, prescribes the penalty of death. A recent case in point is the story of Rifqa Barry, the seventeen year old Ohio girl, who fearing for her life, ran away from home after her parents discovered she converted to Christianity.

CAIR relies on the fact that most Americans are ill-informed about Islam. So it has no compunction about portraying itself as a civil rights organization and Islam as a religion of peace. CAIR’s co-founder Omar Ahmad, declared to California Muslims in a 1998 speech that:

Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.

Americans have a right to know the truth. Islam is a religion of intolerance and violence.

• The Koran commands pious Muslims to engage in a holy war (Jihad) in order to impose Islam and Shariah law on the entire world.

“Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.” (Koran 9:5)

• On Nov. 5, 2009, at Ft Hood, Texas, American-born Muslim, Army Major Nidal Malik Hassan, shouting “Allah Akbar,” gunned down over 40 of his fellow soldiers, killing 13 and wounding 30.

• Since 9/11 there have been more than 15,000 Islamic terrorist attacks throughout the world, according to a website that tracks these matters.

• On March 7, 2010, Muslim gangs in Nigeria shouting “Allah Akbar” viciously butchered 500 defenseless Christian men, women and children.

• Anjem Choudary, a leading Muslim radical in the United Kingdom, recently admitted that Islam is not a religion of peace, and that there is a place for violence in Islam.

• On October 28, 2009, American- born Lugman Ameen Abdullah, was killed in a shoot out with FBI agents in Dearborn, Michigan. He was the leader of a Detroit Mosque. He wanted to establish a separate Islamic nation within the United States.

• On May 7, 2007, 6 Muslim men were arrested by the FBI for their plan to attack Ft. Dix, New Jersey and “kill as many soldiers as possible.”

• In March, 2010, American born Sharif Mobley was arrested in Yemen as a terrorist. Mobley had worked in 3 different New Jersey nuclear plants in the past few years.

• Also, in March, 2010, two American women who converted to Islam were arrested in a plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist who drew a cartoon that made fun of the Prophet Mohammed.

In every country where Islam dominates, Christians, Jews and other non-Muslim minorities are persecuted and reduced to second class citizens or worse yet, murdered.

Thomas More Law Center Asks Court to Stop Enforcement of the Individual Mandate of Health Care

April 8, 2010 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – In an effort to expedite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision of the newly enacted health care reform act, today, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a motion in Federal District Court for a preliminary injunction, requesting the court to enjoin the enforcement of the individual mandate provision of the law. [Click here to read attached Motion & Brief].

Moments after the health care bill was signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010, TMLC filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of itself and four Michigan residents who object to being forced by the federal government to purchase health care or face a federal penalty. The basis for the lawsuit and the motion is that Congress exceeded its authority under the Constitution by mandating that private citizens purchase health care coverage or face a penalty.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel for TMLC, commented, “If Congress can use the Commerce Clause to force people to purchase insurance based on the mere fact that they exist or face federal penalties, then there is no limit to the power of Congress. Our case is about the constitutional limits of our federal government. Everyone agrees the health care system needs reform. But that doesn’t mean Congress is allowed to violate the Constitution in the process.”

As the Congressional Budget Office noted as early as August 1994, “A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.” As stated in the papers filed this morning in federal court, “The Health Care Reform Act represents an unprecedented encroachment on the liberty of all Americans . . . by imposing unprecedented governmental mandates that restrict their personal and economic freedoms in violation of the Constitution.”

The lawsuit and this motion are being handled by Robert Muise, TMLC Senior Trial Counsel, and David Yerushalmi, an associated private attorney with law offices in New York, Washington D.C., and Arizona. Under local rules of the court, the government will have 21 days to respond.