User Picture

Chuck Hagel’s False Flag: Why Are Pro-Choice Senators AWOL in the War on Military Women

By: Nick_Hentoff Wednesday February 13, 2013 6:10 pm

Female soldiers train at the Cultural Support Assessment and Selection program at Fort Bragg.

On the same day that the Department of Defense announced the end of the ban on women in combat, a study revealed an increase in the number of unintended pregnancies among military women. February’s Obstetrics & Gynecology noted that 10.5 percent of military women reported an unplanned pregnancy in the past year, a rate higher than the general population. The report mirrored a similar finding published in the September 2011 issue of Contraception Journal.

Army woman

US Army photo by Cpl. Clifton D. Sams

The findings of the surveys are particularly disturbing since unwanted pregnancies are a special problem for members of the armed forces serving overseas. Since 1996, Federal law has banned abortion-related services on US military bases and facilities. According to the National Abortion Federation, the Federal law banning military abortion services “is a blatant disregard for the reproductive rights of female soldiers and also constitutes a direct threat to their health and welfare.” One of the chief defenders of the law has been President Obama’s nominee to be the next Secretary of Defense, Senator Chuck Hegel. As Secretary of Defense, Hagel will be responsible for providing health care to over 200,000 female soldiers, military wives and their daughters.

The normally vocal reproductive rights lobby has, for the most part, either remained silent, or endorsed Hegel’s nomination outright. Every Democratic Senator has endorsed Hagel’s nomination, including staunch reproductive rights advocates like Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), and his nomination appears certain. Senator Shaheen went so far as to praise Chuck Hagel for serving “as a voice of pragmatism and principle” in the Senate.

It is difficult to reconcile the Chuck Hagel described by Senator Shaheen with the Chuck Hagel who argued, during his first senate campaign in 1995, that he did not believe that rape or incest were necessary exceptions to laws prohibiting abortion. An article on Hagel’s abortion record by Adam Serwer in last December’s Mother Jones cited Hagel’s matter-of-fact statement that “if I want to prevent abortions, I don’t think those two exceptions are relevant.” It is also difficult to reconcile Senator Shaheen’s pragmatization of Hagel with a twelve year Senate voting record that was an anti-choice crusade against access to safe reproductive health care for American women. Senator Hagel’s more notorious anti-choice votes include:

  • his 2000 vote to block the repeal of the Federal ban on abortions on military bases and DOD facilities.
  • his 2005 vote against spending $100 million to reduce teen pregnancy by education and contraception.
  • his 2006 vote to require health care facilities to notify the parents of minors who receive out of state abortions.
  • his 2007 vote in favor of barring organizations that perform abortions from receiving HHS grants.
  • his 2008 vote to make it a Federal crime to transport minors across state lines for an abortion.

According to the 20052006 and 2008 “Congressional Record on Choice,” NARAL’s member of Congress scorecard on reproductive rights, Senator Hagel consistently received a score of “0″ because of his extreme anti-choice voting record. It is not surprising that he also received a 94% score from the National Right to Life Committee. Less than 5 years after receiving his last “0″ score from NARAL, Secretary of Defense nominee Hagel promised his former Senate colleagues that if he is confirmed he “will ensure female service members are given the same reproductive rights as civilian women.”

U.S. Airforce F-15 Pilots at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska

Military women stationed overseas are often faced with serious logistical, financial and command support problems in accessing safe reproductive health care. Soldiers are required to pay for their own abortions, including the cost of transportation to a safe health care provider, and must be granted a medical leave from their commanding officer. When they can’t afford to pay for a flight back to the United States, or have a commanding officer who is hostile to reproductive rights, female service members are left to fend for themselves in countries where they often don’t speak the language. A 2002 General Accounting Office Report on “DOD’s Women’s Health Care” revealed that:


Did Christopher Dorner Get A Raw Deal From The LAPD? Does It Matter? Read the Court’s Opinion in his Disciplinary Appeal and Judge for Yourself

By: Nick_Hentoff Saturday February 9, 2013 11:37 pm


The manifesto of former LAPD officer and accused cop-killer Christopher Dorner contains detailed allegations of racism, brutality and a culture of  corruption within the LAPD. “The department has not changed since the Rampart and Rodney King days. It has gotten worse,” Dorner wrote.Support is growing for Dorner’s efforts to expose LAPD misconduct, if not for the extreme violence of his actions.

Dorner claims that he was fired from the LAPD because he reported his field training officer, Sergeant Teresa Evans, for committing police brutality by kicking a mentally-ill suspect in the face during an arrest. Police treatment of the seriously mentally ill received press attention in 2012 after three Fullerton, California, police officers were arrested, charged and ordered to stand trial in the beating death of Kelly Thomas, a mentally ill homeless man. In Dorner’s case, he was the one who was brought up on charges, for filing a false police report, and brought before an LAPD disciplinary review board.

At his disciplinary hearing, Dorner’s version of events was supported by the testimony of the alleged victim of Sergeant Evan’s brutality and corroborated by the man’s father.  LAPD police Captain Donald Deming, who was Dorner’s Seargent at the time he reported his brutality allegations against Evans, testified that Dorner’s performance was satisfactory while he was under his supervision. The disciplinary hearing officers chose to believe Sergeant Evans, found that Dorner had filed a false police report and terminated his employment with the LAPD.

There is a lot of public sentiment that Dorner’s motivations for launching his blood feud with the LAPD are moot because he is a serial killer. The police routinely deal with dangerous people and the fact that someone who complains about  police misconduct is alleged to have committed horrific crimes does not, in and of itself, moot their allegations

Did Christopher Dorner get a raw deal from the LAPD? Read the court opinion in Dorner’s appeal of his firing and judge for yourself.

UPDATE: Sunday, February 10:  Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck announced that he has ordered the investigation into the 2009 firing of Christopher Dorner reopened. 

CP from The Rule of Wolves

Civilians Gunned-Down in LAPD’s Frantic Manhunt for Alleged Cop-Killer Chris Dorner

By: Nick_Hentoff Friday February 8, 2013 10:57 am
LAPD funeral


Dorner Claims Racism, Harassment and Corruption Launched His Blood Feud Against The LAPD

LOS ANGELES – At first glance it seemed excessive, even for the LAPD.  Heavily armed protective details – on the look-out for a fugitive cop killer bent on revenge – unleashed a barrage of bullets on not just one, not two, but three innocent civilians in two separate incidents. The fact that the civilians were female, and could not possibly have been mistaken for the big, black, burly male suspect, has to have raised concern among Los Angelenos, particularly if they drive a blue pickup truck. Apparently, the civilians in both incidents were driving a truck similar to the one that authorities believed was being driven by former LAPD officer Christopher Dorner.  Dorner’s burning pickup truck was eventually found on a remote forrest road near Big Bear, California.

When you read his uncensored manifesto – which is rambling but surprisingly lucid as far as mass shooter manifestos go – you will see why the LAPD is  so unerved they are shooting at anything that moves. In addition to being a former police officer, the author of the manifesto is a highly trained former Navy reserve lieutenant and Iraq war veteran who the LA Times reports was a member of a mobile inshore undersea warfare unit. Dorner’s manifesto claims he has access to heavy duty military weapons including shoulder-launched surface to air missiles capable of taking out police helicopters, and a Barrett .50 sniper rifle that can be fired accurately out to a distance of half a mile (3,000 feet – 910 m), and beyond. The Barrett is capable of piercing brick and concrete block walls and the exterior of armored personnel carriers. It is used by civilian law enforcement agencies to stop moving vehicles by penetrating and disabling the engine block.

Dorner’s grievances are very detailed, are directed at specific members of the LAPD, and he is very, very angry:

I never had the opportunity to have a family of my own, [so] I am terminating yours. . . . I will conduct DA operations to destroy, exploit and seize designated targets. If unsuccessful or unable to meet objectives in these initial small scale offensive actions, I will reassess my BDA and re-attack until objectives are met. I have nothing to lose. My personal casualty means nothing. Just alike AAF’s, ACM’s, and AIF’s, you can not prevail against an enemy combatant who has no fear of death. An enemy who embraces death is a lose, lose situation for their enemy combatants.

Hopefully your analysts have done your homework. You are aware that I have always been the top shot, highest score, an expert in rifle qualifications in every unit I’ve been in. I will utilize every bit of small arms training, demolition, ordnance, and survival training I’ve been given.

Do you know why we are unsuccessful in asymmetrical and guerrilla warfare in CENTCOM theatre of operations? I’ll tell you. It’s not the inefficiency of our combatant commanders, planning, readiness or training of troops. Much like the Vietnam war, ACM, AAF, foreign fighters, Jihadist, and JAM have nothing to lose. They embrace death as it is a way of life. I simply don’t fear it. I am the walking exigent circumstance you created.