Mar 2010 | Banned by the US Postal Service!

The following letter was part of a FRI mailing that was rejected by a US Postal Inspector for being “obscene” and for inciting “forcible resistance against the government.” The mailing also included our February 2010 newsletter, discussing ‘gays in the military.’ FRI believes the reaction of the Postal Service is both unwarranted and unfounded. Judge for yourself…

February 2010

Dear Supporter,

Well, a Democrat is President, and gays-in-the-military is up again for debate!

This month’s newsletter deals with this issue, as do the excerpts of the following Feb. 8 letter from a Captain to Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

“This letter is in response to your shocking statement last week that you advocate homosexuals openly serving in the military services. I seriously question the wisdom of your position… I am a retired Navy Captain… and… in my more than 31 years of active duty, I commanded two ships, served as Executive Officer on two ships, commanded Coastal Squadron ONE (Swift Boats) in Vietnam, and was Chief Staff Officer on an Amphibious Squadron.… I received a Juris Doctorate from the Hastings College of Law. Like you, I encountered homosexuals throughout my Navy career and in civilian life. Unlike you, I do not find they are more deserving than non-homosexuals or that they constitute a viable or necessary body of troops for the defense of our country.

“My experience is Naval… the best analogy to a ship at sea is a prison…. During my enlisted service, homosexuals seemed to be a clumsy lot. They had a tendency to repeatedly fall headfirst down an engine room ladder. Some were even known to trip on deck and “fall” overboard. The crew had a way of policing themselves to eliminate homosexual advances.… It has been my experience that if sexual favors are available aboard ship, some enterprising sailor, petty officer, or officer will find a way to take advantage of the offer. There is usually a senior/junior relationship in such exchanges and the senior partner will reward the junior with preferential treatment, such as duty assignments, watches, leave, liberty, and advancement. Such preferential treatment can’t be hidden from other crewmembers and tends to destroy the chain of command, discipline and morale. If a Chief Petty Officer, for example, is having sexual relations with a non-rated sailor, it will have an adverse impact on those petty officers between the two in the chain of command.… That sexual misconduct in the Navy exists to this day is obvious. I recall that a lesbian ring was discovered on the USS NORTON SOUND back in the late 60’s or early 70’s. At about the same time my wife, now a retired Navy Commander,… was aware of many cases of homosexuality involving the WAVES assigned to the Barracks. I also recall that one of the cruisers returning from the First Gulf War reported 40% of the female crewmembers were pregnant after a six-month deployment.

“In all my years of service, I never encountered a Commanding Officer who ‘asked’ a subordinate if he was a homosexual…. In regard to heterosexual behavior, the UCMJ also proscribes common law marriage under the heading of Unlawful Cohabitation (with or without evidence of sexual intercourse). It sanctions adultery and prostitution (for both the prostitute and the patron). In the case of an officer, merely “consorting with a notorious prostitute” constitutes an offense, again even without evidence of sexual intercourse. The problem is that common law marriage is legal in 11 states and the District of Columbia. I don’t believe that adultery is a criminal offense in any state today. And in my home state of Nevada, even prostitution is legal. I don’t recall you asking Congress to legalize heterosexual sodomy, adultery, prostitution, or common law marriage. There are many punitive articles in the UCMJ that have no relationship to the satisfactory performance of military duties, yet you single out homosexuals for preferred treatment. Again, I must ask ‘why?’

“The argument I hear most often expounded by the homophiles is that the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy deprives the military of outstanding young men and women who want nothing more than to defend their country and that they have the ability to operate a radar, or a gas turbine, or a gun as well as a heterosexual. That can’t be true.… But, even if it were true, are homosexuals really worth the administrative problems they would create by their mere existence? The Navy, today, does not willingly accept GED holders… Minor criminal records are a bar to enlistment. Visible tattoos and piercings are not permitted. Are these aberrations more damning than sodomy? Is it your contention that cohabitors, adulterers, prostitutes, young men and women with tattoos, those with only GEDs, or the obese cannot serve as well as homosexuals? If so, what is your empirical evidence to support such an argument? If we get to pick and choose which laws we uphold, which laws are next on the line to ignore? Carnal Knowledge? I would think a service man or woman who has sex with a minor (Carnal Knowledge) could perform military duties as well, if not better, than a homosexual. At least we don’t have children in combat, or in the military at large, for them to accost.…

“Have you considered the likelihood that some of the homosexuals will request sex change procedures… Do you also advocate same-sex marriage or ‘partnerships?’  Will the homosexual’s partner be entitled to dependents’ benefits, including health care, BAQ, military base access, and commissary and exchange privileges? Will they be entitled to military housing? Would they be entitled to sex change procedures at government expense?

While serving as Executive Officer on USS CATAMOUNT (LSD-17) in 1967, one of the Radarmen was arrested by local police. While inventorying his personal effects a photograph of the sailor performing fellatio on another male was discovered. The police turned the photo over to the Shore Patrol, who forwarded it to me. During an investigation it was determined that five of the ship’s Radarmen were involved in a male prostitution ring. They declared that while in Radarman Class ‘A’ School at Treasure Island, their instructors convinced them that they could augment their military pay by providing homosexual services to gays in San Francisco. They took advantage of the opportunity presented and continued such activity in San Diego. CATAMOUNT sailed absent several Radarmen and the Class ‘A’ School lost several instructors. Are these otherwise competent Radarmen the type of sailors you want on your ships? I hope not!

Lawrence R. Jefferis, Captain, U. S. Navy (Ret.), Las Vegas, NV 89117

Can whining, posturing, and screaming about ‘rights’ get those who are dysfunctional into the cat bird seat? Seems so — at least for most liberals. Straights can’t have sex in the barracks but gays might pull it off. Those whose sexual activities disproportionately spread disease, cost everyone else money and security, and seldom produce children are on the cusp of getting preferred status.

Please, send FRI $25 or more this month and we will send you a copy of our latest statistical report about rapes in the military – drawn from official Defense Department reports! Plus, a complete copy of Captain Jefferis’ letter.

How about it, will you help FRI fight this latest madness? Please respond today! We, and the U.S. Military, need your support…