American military filled with rape and abuse and when the victim complains they get a senior officer who backs the rapist. Senior prosecutor in military resigned because of this and is now president of an anti-corruption organization to defend women raped in the military from the lies of senior officers.

From New York Times magazine.

Nov 26 2014

PRESS RELEASE: Former Air Force Chief Prosecutor Colonel Don Christensen (Ret.) Named President of Protect Our Defenders

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 26, 2014 Contact: Brian Purchia, brian@protectourdefenders.com

*** PRESS RELEASE *** 

FORMER AIR FORCE CHIEF PROSECUTOR COLONEL DON CHRISTENSEN (RET.) NAMED PRESIDENT OF PROTECT OUR DEFENDERS 

After Serving Over Two Decades in the U.S. Air Force, Colonel Christensen Retires from the Military to Effect Change and Speak Out Against the Sexual Assault Epidemic — Calls for Fundamental Reform to Broken System; Col Christensen Successfully Prosecuted the Fighter Pilot at the Center of the Aviano Scandal, But the pilot’s Conviction was Overturned by a Conflicted and Biased Chain of Command

Washington DC – Today, in a cover story that will appear in the New York Times Magazine on Sunday, Colonel Don Christensen announced that he has left the United States Air Force after 23 years and will become President of Protect Our Defenders (POD). Having served for four years as the Chief Prosecutor of the U.S. Air Force—the longest time for anyone who has held that position—as well as a defense attorney and a judge in a number of high profile cases. Col Christensen brings a unique, perspective to the ongoing sexual assault crisis in the military, and has witnessed first hand the failures of the military justice system.
In his role as Chief Prosecutor, Col Christensen was responsible for managing military prosecutors all over the world. Among the many cases he chose to prosecute personally in this role was one of the most high profile cases in recent Air Force history—the case at Aviano Air Base in Italy, where Lt Colonel James Wilkerson was found guilty of aggravated sexual assault, sentenced to a year in jail, and dismissed from the Air Force. In that case, Lt General Craig Franklin, the convening authority, overturned the conviction and freed his fellow fighter pilot, reinstating him back into the Air Force against the recommendation of his own legal counsel.

Col Christensen’s released the following statement regarding his decision to leave the military in order to speak out in support of fundamental reform:
“As a military prosecutor, I have personally seen the abuse and injustice victims of sexual assault face in the military,” said Col Christensen. “At first, I truly believed as the Chief Prosecutor of the Air Force I could help fix the broken military justice system from the inside. But after Aviano, where I watched at least 30 commanders, some of whom served as convening authorities, come to the defense of Wilkerson after he was convicted of sexual assault and blatantly attack the prosecution, judge, investigators, and the jury, this changed. I realized that in order to see substantial change, I would need to leave the Air Force, breaking a military tradition that has been a part of my family for over 150 years.”
“The military justice system is fundamentally broken. Your rapists’ boss should not decide whether to investigate or prosecute a sexual assault allegation or pick the jury. The decision to prosecute is a legal decision that must be entrusted to professional, legally trained prosecutors, the jury should be randomly selected, not hand picked by the accused’s commander. The military justice system must be changed. I am leaving the institution I love and joining Protect Our Defenders in order to fix this broken system.”
Col Christensen’s family has a history of American military service dating back to the Civil War. His family has served this country’s military for six generations; his great-great-great grandfather enlisted in the Army in the 1850s and served through the entirety of the Civil War; his great-great-grandfather fought at the Battle of Little Big Horn; his great-grandfather served on the Mexican border in the Army’s efforts against Pancho Villa; his Grandfather served in three wars including World War II; and his father flew 102 combat missions over Vietnam.
Protect Our Defenders’ Founder Nancy Parrish released the following statement:
“We are honored and humbled that Colonel Don Christensen has decided to join Protect Our Defenders, to stand with survivors and help us end the epidemic of sexual assault in the military, and stop the retaliation against victims. Col Christensen has dedicated his life to the military, and his distinguished career speaks for itself. Prior to the Wilkerson case, Col Christensen was named the top litigator in the entire U.S Air Force in his Officer Performance Report (OPR). With over two decades of experience as a military prosecutor, defense attorney, and judge, Col Christensen knows the ins and outs of our military justice system. He has seen, up close and personal, the lack of justice victims too often receive in the military justice system, which puts a victim’s fate in the hands of the rapists’ boss rather than professional, legally trained experts.
“Col Christensen could have stayed in the military, instead, he has chosen to honor his family’s commitment to service, and fight to improve the military that he loves. Col Christensen’s focus will be to push to reform the Uniform Code of Military Justice by calling on the President and members of Congress to enact fundamental reform.”
Robert D. Shadley, Major General, U.S. Army (ret) and Protect Our Defenders’ Advisory Board Member who led the 1996 Aberdeen sexual assault scandal investigation released the following statement:
“I know Don Christensen and he is the perfect choice to lead Protect Our Defenders in the fight to eradicate sexual assaults from our armed forces. The prevalence of rape and sexual assault undermines military readiness and fixing this broken system will strengthen our military by improving unit cohesion and troop morale. Throughout his esteemed military career, protecting victims and seeking justice for survivors has always been Don’s top priority. I know how much love and respect Don has for the United States military, and there is no doubt in my mind that he will do everything he can to improve the institution that he served in for so long.”
As a first step in his new role, Col Christensen is looking to our Commander-in-Chief, President Obama, to take a stand for justice and to support fundamental reform. Last year the President told victims he has their back and will support them. Since issuing that statement, the American public has been shocked by countless military sexual assault scandals from an Associated Press investigation this past February that exposed rapists receiving no punishment and commanders failing to prosecute sexual assault cases at U.S. Military bases in Japan; up to and including recent scandals at Fort Leonard Wood, and the Air Force Academy. Protect Our Defenders calls on President Obama to make good on his commitment to victims and support an independent and impartial military justice system.
–
New York Times: The Military’s Rough Justice on Sexual Assault
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/magazine/the-militarys-rough-justice-on-sexual-assault.html?ref=magazine&_r=1
[VIDEO] NBC News: Woman in Air Force sexual assault case speaks out
http://www.today.com/video/today/51159896#51159896
Associated Press: Documents reveal chaotic military sex-abuse record
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/documents-reveal-chaotic-military-sex-abuse-record-1
St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Former drill sergeant found guilty in sexual misconduct case at Fort Leonard Wood
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/former-drill-sergeant-found-guilty-in-sexual-misconduct-case-at/article_299d20de-a395-5321-ba8c-6743769d06de.html
Colorado Springs Gazette: Report: West Point football team recruited high school athletes with booze, women
http://gazette.com/report-west-point-football-team-recruited-high-school-athletes-with-booze-women/article/1540172
ABC News: Air Force Cadet’s Secret Story: I Blew the Whistle on Football Players and Sex Assaults
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/air-force-cadets-secret-story-blew-whistle-football/story?id=26524925
About Protect Our Defenders: Protect Our Defenders is a human rights organization.  We seek to honor, support and give voice to the brave women and men in uniform who have been sexually assaulted while serving their country, and re-victimized by the military adjudication system – a system that often blames the victim and fails to prosecute the perpetrator. Learn more about Protect Our Defenders at www.protectourdefenders.com or on Facebook at http://facebook.com/ProtectOurDefenders or follow us on Twitter at https://twitter.com/ProtectRDfnders.
Protect Our Defenders partners with Attorney Susan Burke, Burke PLLC to advance lawsuits filed against the DoD and service academies for repeatedly ignoring rape, sexual assault and harassment, failing to prosecute perpetrators and retaliating against the victim.

###

Share Post:

STATEMENT: Protect Our Defenders Calls on President Obama to Stand With Victims of Sexual Assault and Fix the Broken Military Justice System Ahead of the President’s 1-Year Deadline

New York Times Magazine: The Military’s Rough Justice on Sexual Assault

Response to letter from Senator McCain head of Senate Military Group to me and my response:

Response to letter from Senator McCain head of Senate Military Group to me and my response:

June 30, 2016

Rabbi David E. Eidensohn

Monsey, NY 10952

I contacted various senators in Washington, DC regarding the drive to draft women into the military. I opposed this on the ground that an enormous number of women are abused sexually and it gets worse every year, although the Defense Department has struggled since 2004 to stop it. If a woman joins the army voluntarily, that is her decision if she wants to be in a situation of abuse and I am limited in my complaints. But how can the military force a woman into the military by drafting her, where everybody knows that rape and abuse is rampant, is getting worse, and is so bad that abused women don’t usually bother reporting it? One reason is that the complaint goes to a senior military commander who sometimes rules that the rapist is innocent and then begins a process of destroying the name of the complainer. This information and much more is on the website of US senator Kirsten Gillibrand in the section on the military. I have also a 700 page on abuse from the Defense Dept FY2012.

The senior senator on the military is Senator John McCain. I expressed my reservations about the draft and he responded as follows:

June 30, 2016

Mr. David Eidensohn 2 Phyllis Terrace Monsey, NY 10952-2724 Dear Mr. Eidensohn:      Thank you for contacting me to relay your concerns regarding female service members in combat roles in the military. I appreciate you taking the time to share your views with me.  I sincerely apologize for the delay in my response.      Over two years ago the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made the decision to open certain combat roles for women. I do not feel that Congress should overturn this decision made by our military leaders. As you know, female service members are serving in hostile locations around the world and in all branches of the military. Many women have made the ultimate sacrifice through their service, and our nation owes them a deep debt of gratitude.        The military services are currently working to ensure we maintain the very same high standards that separate the quality of the United States military from the rest of the world — particularly the standards for our elite special forces units.         Again, thank you for contacting me on this important matter. Please feel free to contact me on this or any other matter in the future.            Sincerely,         John McCain         United States Senator  JM/ak

Senator McCain’s letter has nothing to do with my complaints, as is obvious. Of course, he has to answer many letters and maybe he just has them put into general sections. This letter was obviously not about my complaints but included in the pile of letters and emails that opposed women being in the army, which was not the topic of my complaint, as I mention above. I say simply that to draft a woman against her will when you know she has a good chance of being abused and even raped is wrong. And furthermore, until the military somehow finds a way to put men and women in the same army without abuse, they should not draft any women. But on second thought, what can Senator McCain answer to my complaints about abuse in the military?

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand demanded an investigation into very serious complaints against the Defense Department and the huge amount of abuse and what it seems are questionable and even lies perpetrated at the highest level of the military and Defense Department.

Senator McCain refused the demand of Senator Gillibrand to investigate charges against the military despite the fact that it was backed by many senators of both parties and important sections of the country. He has no answer.

 But I should be grateful for Senator McCain for writing to me. At least he proved that he tries to be polite. But is he polite to the women who are raped? And if he has no answer to this, this itself is an answer. It is an answer that raped women are not something he is interested in.

Any senator who wants to draft women knowing that many will be abused and even raped, should be ashamed, not a senator, and not even consider himself a decent human being.

Sincerely,

David Eidensohn

845-578-1917

From US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's website Pentagon misled Congress about military abuse: http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov .

Pentagon misled lawmakers on military sexual assault cases

By RICHARD LARDNER

Apr. 18, 2016 5:26 PM EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon misled Congress by using inaccurate or vague information about sexual assault cases in an effort to blunt support for a Senate bill that would make a major change in how the military handles allegations of sexual misconduct, an Associated Press investigation found.

Internal government records that summarized the outcomes of dozens of cases portrayed civilian district attorneys and local police forces as less willing than senior military officers to punish sex offenders. The documents buttressed the Pentagon's position that stripping commanders of their authority to decide which crimes go to trial — as the Senate legislation proposes — will mean fewer victims will get justice because there will be fewer prosecutions.
But in a number of the cases, the steps taken by civilian authorities were described incorrectly or omitted, according to AP research and interviews. Other case descriptions were too imprecise to be verified.

There also is nothing in the records that supports the primary reason the Pentagon told Congress about the cases in the first place: To cast top military brass as hard-nosed crime fighters who insisted on taking the cases to trial after civilian law enforcement said no.

The records were obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by the advocacy group Protect Our Defenders, which provided the documents exclusively to AP. The nonprofit group on Monday said it found no evidence that any case was prosecuted at a commander's insistence.
Former Navy helicopter pilot Lt. Paula Coughlin, a member of the group's board of directors, called on Congress to hold hearings on what she called "this latest deception."

Military representatives defended the accuracy of the information sent to Congress.
The bulk of the cases involved soldiers. Army spokeswoman Tatjana Christian said the case descriptions were written by service attorneys who had "personal and direct knowledge of the circumstances." She said they contacted the local authorities in each case to ensure the description was accurate, although there is no indication of that in the summaries. The Army declined to make a service official available for an interview.

Previously, the more than 90 cases had been discussed publicly only as statistics that underpinned the Pentagon's objections to the Senate bill, the Military Justice Improvement Act.

Three years ago, Navy Adm. James Winnefeld, then the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned a Senate panel that if approved, the bill would result in fewer sexual assault cases going to trial. Winnefeld retired from military service last year.

In response to the AP's reporting, Joint Chiefs of Staff spokesman Richard Osial described the information that Winnefeld provided the committee as a snapshot based on data that was supplied by the military services. "He had confidence to go with it," Osial said.

The consequences could be significant if lawmakers believe they were misinformed. A backlash may stoke additional support for the Senate bill that's failed to pass largely because of the military's strident opposition. Another vote on the legislation could come as early as June.
The legislation aims to stop sexual assaults by stripping senior officers of their responsibilities to decide whether to prosecute sexual assault cases and giving that authority to seasoned military trial lawyers. Protect Our Defenders, a nonpartisan organization, supports the bill.
"Someone at the Pentagon should be held accountable," said retired Col. Don Christensen, the organization's president and the former chief Air Force prosecutor. "Whether you agree or disagree with the policy, every senator — especially those who repeated the claim or based their vote on the claim — should be outraged."

The often unflattering image of civilian law enforcement projected in the records also runs counter to the close working relationships local prosecutors told AP that they've forged with the uniformed legal staffs at military installations in their jurisdictions — far from the contentious political climate in Washington.

Civilian prosecutors said it's not unusual to transfer a sexual assault case to the military for investigation or prosecution, particularly when the incident occurred off post and involved two or more service members. Yet these referrals are routinely depicted as refusals, leaving the impression the charges would not have been pursued had military authorities not stepped in.
"It's offensive that they would say they would prosecute cases that we would not," said Jaime Esparza, the district attorney for El Paso County, Texas, where the Army's 1.1 million-acre Fort Bliss is located.

At Fort Drum in upstate New York, the Army took credit for prosecuting a soldier who had been previously convicted for the possession of child pornography but was never discharged from the service. The soldier, whose identity AP could not confirm, also failed to register as a sex offender. After being allowed to stay in uniform, he groped a girl and also sent her sexually explicit messages. He then was court-martialed and sentenced to five years in prison.
Kristyna Mills, the district attorney in New York's Jefferson County, where Fort Drum is located, disputed the Army's conclusion that her office turned the case down. She said the decision to allow the Army to take it was a "collaborative effort" made with the legal staff at Fort Drum.

"It is extremely rare that my office 'declines to prosecute' a case unless there are serious evidentiary issues that we feel cannot be overcome," Mills said.

In another case, the sheriff's office in Macomb County, Michigan, launched an investigation of Marine Corps Staff Sgt. D.C. Hagler, who was suspected of child pornography and indecent exposure, according to the records. But Hagler was stationed in Iraq. So the sheriff asked the Naval Criminal Investigative Service to take over what had become an international probe. Yet this is among the cases cited by Winnefeld as an instance where the military had to step in after civilian authorities wouldn't act.

Marine Corps spokesman Maj. Clark Carpenter said the service is "not in a position to characterize" Winnefeld's testimony. Carpenter said the individuals who prepared the summaries "had personal and direct knowledge of the circumstances" and that the Marine Corps does not provide information to Congress unless it's first been "reviewed by a higher authority."

The Senate legislation, which is sponsored by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., was first introduced in the spring of 2013 and has won the backing of at least 50 senators. But the legislation has twice failed on the Senate floor to meet a 60-vote filibuster threshold.
The dispute over Gillibrand's bill centers on the power that senior officers known as convening authorities have to send charges to trial and select jury members. Gillibrand and a bipartisan group of lawmakers argue that the system is archaic and ripe for bias, particularly for sex crimes. Victims may be reluctant to step forward, fearing they won't be believed or that they'll be retaliated against if they file a complaint.

But the bill's detractors have said fewer sex offenders will be caught and convicted if Gillibrand's bill ever becomes law. And that's where the sexual assault cases factored into the debate.

Winnefeld told the Senate Armed Services Committee in July 2013 that there were 93 sexual assault cases that military commanders insisted on taking after civilian authorities said no. Of the cases that had gone to trial at the time, more than half ended with a conviction, he said.
"I worry that if we turn this over to somebody else, whether it is a civilian DA or a nonentity in the military, that they are going to make the same kind of decisions that those civilian prosecutors made," said Winnefeld, who was the nation's second highest ranking military officer at the time. "I worry that we are going to have fewer prosecutions if we take it outside the chain of command."

Opponents of Gillibrand's bill seized on Winnefeld's remarks. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., has cited the cases several times since the admiral testified, saying each one represents a victim who would never have had their day in court if Congress curbed the authority of commanders.
"The importance of these cases is that they show definitively that commanders don't sweep sexual assault cases under the carpet," said Sarah Feldman, McCaskill's spokeswoman. "On the contrary, the numbers continue to prove that commanders aggressively pursue courts-martial."

But there's no indication in the records of any direct intervention by commanders in the 93 cases or others listed in the documents. Each appears to have followed the steps mandated by the military's legal code: Senior officers cannot refer cases to a general court-martial unless uniformed attorneys known as staff judge advocates have first advised them that the evidence warrants the charges. So the argument that excluding commanders from the decision to prosecute will mean less justice for victims is a flawed one, according to proponents of Gillibrand's bill.

"Charges should not be sent to trial to set an example or show a commander is tough," said Christensen, the president of Protect Our Defenders.

Not all the case descriptions had enough information to independently verify if they were correct. The Army convicted Sgt. Cecil Saddler of raping a 10-year autistic girl in a case Winnefeld singled out as heinous. Saddler, who was stationed at Joint Base Langley-Eustis in Virginia, was sentenced to 35 years in prison in August 2011.

The Army's description said that the commonwealth's attorney in Virginia declined to prosecute Saddler but provided no additional identification. Virginia has 120 commonwealth's attorneys — the state's name for its elected, independent prosecutors — but no central database that keeps track of cases.

AP contacted the offices of four commonwealth's attorneys near Fort Eustis, where the crime occurred, and none of them had any record of Saddler's case. A spokeswoman at Joint Base Langley-Eustis said in order to get the name of the office, the AP would need to submit a FOIA request, a process that can take months to get a response.

Other descriptions omitted key details about the level of involvement by local authorities. A case from San Diego County, California, illustrates that point. The summary said the office of the district attorney in San Diego refused to move forward with sexual assault charges against a soldier because of insufficient evidence. But county court records and interviews provide a much different account.

Army Sgt. Paul Henson was convicted at Fort Knox, Kentucky, in February 2013 of sexually assaulting a teenage girl in Carlsbad, California. He was sentenced to two years confinement and was released after serving 18 months.

The assault occurred in July 2010, but the Carlsbad Police Department didn't learn of the incident until nearly nine months later when it received a report from a police department in another state. By then, Henson was long gone from California. But the Carlsbad police investigated the allegations and the San Diego County District Attorney's office issued an arrest warrant for unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.

After Henson was found guilty in military court, the district attorney's office consulted with the victim and her family and elected not to proceed. She had testified at the Army trial in Kentucky and they were concerned about putting her through another one. But the sexual assault charge against Henson in California wasn't dropped until May 2015.

The imprecision in an Army case description resulted in a serious but untrue accusation against the office of the prosecuting attorney in Pierce County, Washington, where Joint Base Lewis-McChord is located. The summary said the office declined to prosecute a soldier accused of rape and then destroyed forensic evidence that had been collected the day after the assault.
John Sheeran, the office's assistant chief criminal deputy, said Pierce County elected not to prosecute because of concerns the charges couldn't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. But he said his office did not destroy evidence. That was done by the local police department — which held the evidence — after it was informed no charges were being filed.

That's a distinction with a difference and one that should have been recognized by the Army attorneys who wrote the summary.

"If the implication is that prosecutors are reckless with evidence, it is problematic," Sheeran said. The Army also did not inform local law enforcement that it needed evidence preserved for a possible prosecution, he said.

"Let's not kid ourselves," Sheeran said. "Anybody can cherry pick cases."
___
Associated Press writer Julie Watson in San Diego contributed to this rep

From US Senator from NY Kirsten Gillibrand from her website http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov . Great corruption in military and abuse especially of women.

The American Military is full of rape and abuse of women. Now they want to draft all women? And almost nobody is complaining -  Dovid Eidensohn

Comprehensive Resource Center for the Military Justice Improvement Act

Introduction

Over the last three years, there has been a stream of national headlines and new investigative reports exposing the military’s failure to combat sexual assault in the ranks and/or provide a military justice system that holds assailants accountable in order to maintain good order and discipline. Despite incremental reforms passed in the last two National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA), and a sharp focus on the issue of military sexual assault in Congress, the most recent Pentagon survey found that 62 percent of women who reported being sexually assaulted experienced retaliation. The amount of retaliation remains unchanged from 2012, while the estimated number of unwanted sexual contacts remains at 2010 levels – an average of 52 new cases every day.
The latest FY 2015 SAPRO report by the Defense Department shows military leaders failing at its mission of “zero tolerance” for sexual assault first stated over twenty years ago. The report showed that 75 percent of the men and women in uniform who have been sexually assaulted lack the confidence in the military justice system to come forward and report the crimes committed against them. The most current data also shows a current climate where 76 percent of servicewomen and nearly half of servicemen said sexual harassment is common or very common. A climate where supervisors and unit leaders were responsible for sexual harassment and gender discrimination in nearly 60 percent of all cases demonstrates a system deeply in need of further reform before there can be trust in the chain of command.
Additionally, Senator Gillibrand and Human Rights Watch (HRW) independently released reports that demonstrate how poorly survivors are treated and how few rapists are ever punished. HRW found that service members who reported a sexual assault were 12 times more likely to suffer retaliation than see their offender, if also a service member, get convicted for a sex offense. Much like the 2013 case file request, the 2014 cases expose a troubling command culture that seems to favor the higher-ranking accused, and also seems to value closing cases over pursuing justice. In this group of case files, there were multiple instances of commanders choosing not to proceed to court-martial despite a recommendation from the military investigating officer that probable cause existed. Shockingly, the review found a case where the accused confessed to a sexual assault, but was allowed to be discharged in lieu of trial and faced no legal consequences or appropriate punishment. That an admitted sex offender was allowed to go and live freely in an unsuspecting community suggests a disturbing disregard for public safety. The Human Rights Watch’s report is available here. Senator Gillibrand’s report is available here.

The Military Justice Improvement Act

The carefully crafted Military Justice Improvement Act is designed to reverse the systemic fear that survivors of military sexual assault describe in deciding whether to report the crimes committed against them. Repeated testimony from survivors and former commanders says the widespread reluctance on the part of survivors to come forward and report is due to the bias and inherent conflicts of interest posed by the military chain of command’s current sole decision-making power over whether cases move forward to a trial. This reform moves the decision whether to prosecute serious crimes to independent, trained, professional military prosecutors while leaving military crimes to the chain of command. In fact, the decision whether to prosecute 37 serious crimes uniquely military in nature, plus all crimes punishable by less than one year of confinement (Article 15, non-judicial punishment), would remain within the chain of command (see excluded offenses here.)
After earning the support for the second straight Congress of a bipartisan majority of Senators, this common sense proposal was unfortunately filibustered again meaning the fight to pass this critically needed reform will continue. 
Many of our allied modern militaries have already moved reporting outside of the chain of command, such as Britain, Canada, Israel, Germany, Norway and Australia. At a September 2013 hearing, military leaders from Australia, the United Kingdom, Israel and Canada testified on how changes they’ve made to their justice systems — including the one up for debate in the Senate — haven’t diminished the accountability of commanders or their ability to maintain good order and discipline.
The Military Justice Improvement Act has been endorsed by Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA), Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN), National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Protect Our Defenders, and the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women just to name a few. The bill is also supported by dozens of U.S. military flag officers, including the first female three-star General of the Army, Claudia Kennedy, UCMJ experts and major newspaper editorial boards across the country.

Torah Women at Risk and Nobody Cares

Tragedy - Senate Votes for Women to be Drafted

The following is a brief paragraph from the New York Times describing the vote of the Senate of the United States to draft women along with men if and when the government requires a draft. Until that time, men and women who come of age must apply to Select Service or face penalties. Here is the paragraph from the Times:

On Tuesday, the Senate approved an expansive military policy bill that would for the first time require young women to register for the draft. The shift, while fiercely opposed by some conservative lawmakers and interest groups, had surprisingly broad support among Republican leaders and women in both parties.

Incredibly, the Orthodox who have so many effective people who spend much energy on getting government programs for Yeshivas, etc., were no where to be found in this issue. We have no leadership. And now women may be called up for the draft, and when the government needs them, for military matters, they must service, everywhere. Since this is against the Torah and a cardinal sin for a woman to be in an army with men, all Orthodox women will suffer. And since men cannot enter a mixed army, they, too, are forbidden to join the army.

Three thousand women in fiscal year 2012 claimed to be abused sexually. The government who made the report says that this was less than fifteen percent of the actual number. But many ladies are afraid or disinterested in reporting their suffering, but the actual number is probably around twenty thousand women mostly young ones who were abused seriously. And not one major rabbinic group fought this draft rule. Today in shull we were discussing a teaching from a holy person of the earlier generations, that before Moshiach comes, some people who are apikorsim will become major rabbis. Maybe that is what they should teach in Yeshivas and the Agudah Convention.

Federal Stats on Abuse in the Military - Draft for Women is Unthinkable, but the Government is Ready to Do it

As it seems that the congress and the president are preparing the country for draft, when that is necessary, to include woman as well as men. Federal Law requires the Department of Defense to provide annual reports about sexual abuse in the military. The latest report that I have is 729 pages containing many results of thorough investigations. The report on Fiscal Year 2012 adds this:

The number of sexual assaults reported to DoD authorities in FY12 does not necessarily reflect the number of sexual assaults that occurred in FY12.  

¡  Civilian research indicates victims only report a small fraction of sexual assaults to law enforcement.  For example, of the 1.1 million U.S. civilian women estimated to have experienced nonconsensual vaginal, oral, or anal penetration in 2005, only about 173,800 (16 percent) said they reported the matter to police.  For the estimated 673,000 U.S. civilian college-aged women who experienced nonconsensual vaginal, oral, or anal penetration, only about 77,395 (11.5 percent) indicated they reported it to the police.^[1]  The definition of sexual assault used in this college sample refers to penetrating crimes only.  Consequently, it captures fewer crimes than the DoD definition of sexual assault, which encompasses both penetrating and non-penetrating sexual offenses, and attempts to commit these offenses.

This reporting behavior is mirrored in the U.S. Armed Forces.  Over the past 6 years, the Department estimates that fewer than 15 percent of military sexual assault victims report the matter to a military authority

At any rate, assuming that "fewer than 15 percent of military sexual assault victims report the matter to a military authority" that says that about 85% of those abused did not report it. If the report says that in Fiscal Year 2012 about 3,000 people, mostly young women, reported serious abuse, and if that is less than fifteen percent of the true total, what is the true total? The true total is roughly twenty thousand molested and abused people, mostly young women.

We must also keep in mind that the military is desperate to curb sexual abuse, and it tries everything, but nothing works. Things just get worse, not better, even after all of the efforts, studies, and huge monies spent. Things just get worse.

Because anytime, anywhere, that men and women are together, there are going to be problems. There are no exceptions. Harvard University recently released a study about Harvard abuse and found that 72.7 percent of women in Harvard were sexually abused, many, about twenty percent, by instructors.

See our post on this blog about Harvard. At any rate, we have quoted these disgusting facts, because the government seems determined to call up women to the draft if there is one, and this would seem to be backed by the Supreme Court in a previous ruling, as we explain there.

It is a cardinal sin for a woman to be with men in the army or anywhere else. The American army is now thoroughly mixed with men and woman working together almost everywhere. It is thus very sinful for even a man to answer the draft and live in the military where men and women are constantly sinning, willingly or by force. But women are a very serious problem because some of them may end up committing suicide, not just because of abuse, but because a Jewish woman cannot live in such an environment of terrible sin. HaShem Yerachem. And yes, nobody besides this blog is complaining about it, as far as I know. I speak to a lot of people and they have all types of responses that "it will never happen" which just shows they don't read the papers.

[1] Kilpatrick, D., Resnick, H., Ruggiero, K., Conoscenti, L., & McCauley, J. (2007). Drug-Facilitated, Incapacitated, and Forcible Rape: A National Study.   End quote: On my computer it came out that this information is on page 70 but since WORD changes the original study that was PDF although the text is the same the pages may not be. Nonetheless, it is generally easy to find the sections in the 729 page report that have the statistics and realities of how much problems there are.

U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of NY Attacks Senate for Failure to Solve Abuse in Armed Forces

Gillibrand Statement On Senate's Failure To Vote On Military Justice Improvement Act

June 14, 2016

Washington D.C. – U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand issued the following statement following the Senate’s failure to vote on the bipartisan Military Justice Improvement Act:
“I am deeply upset that the Senate closed the National Defense Authorization Act without even debating military sexual assault and the Military Justice Improvement Act specifically. The bipartisan amendment has previously earned the support of a majority of Senators twice before and is widely supported by Veterans Service Organizations, retired military members, sexual violence NGOs, military law experts and most importantly military sexual assault survivors. 
“When the Department of Defense tells us they estimate there are over 20,000 sexual assaults on service members each year, that nearly 8 out of 10 of those attacked do not report the incident and that 62% of those brave souls who do report then face retaliation – often from someone in their chain of command who is supposed to protect them – how can it be possible that the Senate refuses to even debate reforming this system? The Department of Defense has buried its head in the sand on sexual assault for over 25 years and today the U.S. Senate joined them. Despite evidence uncovered by the Associated Press that the DoD misled members of the Senate on sexual assault cases, this simple reform was blocked from even being considered by this Senate. They used to just filibuster the bill, but now they won’t even debate it – pushing this national scandal to the shadows. I think that sends a shameful message to military sexual assault survivors. 

“We know today that the men and women in the military who are sexually assaulted do not get a fair chance to get justice in the current system. Today, I am saddened to say the same appears to be true from the U.S. Senate. Given this abject failure on behalf of Congress, I will again call on President Obama, the Commander of Chief, to fulfill his responsibility to service members and take action to give them a system of justice worthy of their sacrifice. In December of 2013 President Obama put the Department of Defense on notice that they had one year to show ‘the kind of progress I expect’ before considering additional reforms. The data does not lie – significant progress has not been made, retaliation remains exactly where it was then and in the case of unrestricted reporting we have actually gone backwards from last year.  

“The question for the Senate and the President shouldn’t be, ‘have we done enough to combat military sexual assault’, but rather, ‘have we done everything we can to fight this epidemic?’ The answer to that question is a resounding 'no', and brave service members pay the price every day for our inaction. In recent surveys and in their countless stories, survivors tell us they lack faith in the command-controlled system. They simply fear that nothing will be done or they will be retaliated against for reporting. I don’t know why the President and members of the Senate refuse to believe them. 

“Today is a setback in our fight on survivors’ behalf, but it is no more than that. I will continue to advocate for reform, and I refuse to back down or go away from fighting for survivors on this issue. Whether it is this President and Congress or the next, we will not give up until we can provide service members with a system of justice that is fair.”

###

---

Press 

72% of Women in Harvard Are Molested - Should they be drafted in the American army?

Terrible Abuse of Women in Harvard - 72.7% abused. Now Obama wants to draft women in the military?

By Rabbi Dovid E. Eidensohn

Here we quote some findings in the lengthy study of sexual assault at Harvard published in the Harvard Gazette of September 21, 2015 with comments of the President of Harvard Dr. Faust.

“Women at Harvard College appear especially vulnerable to sexual assault, the survey said… The survey found that sexual harassment is a problem for women students all across the University, with 72.7 percent of undergraduate women reporting an incident of harassment during their time at Harvard, while fewer than 62 percent of undergraduate women in the broader 27-school survey reported such incidents.

Almost half of Harvard’s female graduate and professional School students reported being harassed, and 21.8 percent of these women said a faculty member had sexually harassed them.

“We must commit ourselves to being a better community than the one the survey portrays,” Faust wrote in her email. “It is up to all of us to ensure that Harvard is a realization of our ideals, not our fears… confident that the University will respond to their needs.

Confidence in the University’s ability to handle sexual assault cases vigorously and appropriately varies widely.

Although 61 percent of all Harvard students think the University is “very or extremely likely” to take a report of sexual assault seriously, only 43 percent of female undergraduates at the College and at the Division of Continuing Education said they feel that way.

Asked if they thought the University would conduct a fair investigation of any reported assault claim, 41 percent of Harvard students said they were only “somewhat” certain officials would do the job properly, while 29 percent said the process was “very” likely to be fair. Female undergraduates were a bit more skeptical, with 45 percent saying a fair investigation was “somewhat” likely.

But when asked how likely University officials were to take action against an offender, 46 percent of female undergraduates said they had little or no confidence that they would. In addition, 84 percent expressed some doubt any action would be taken. Overall, 68 percent of Harvard students surveyed were dubious of follow-through against offenders.”

 I am very curious what solutions Dr. Faust has for preventing abuse suffered now by over seventy percent of Harvard women. Maybe she can start by identifying the twenty percent of abusers who were faculty members in graduate and professional school students.

And does Dr. Faust believe that all women should

 be drafted?

Will Orthodox Women Get Drafted in American Army?

I greatly fear that American women will be forced to register to be drafted in the American army. When I use to mention this to most people they dismissed my worries. But now, as of June 6, 2016, the Washington Post writes that the head of the Senate committee on Army and Defense, Senator John McCain, is open to drafting women. A vote in the House by a few dozen representatives who are involved with military issues revealed a majority of pro-draft for women.

President Obama has been working toward this and now it seems he has it. What was his plan and why must we fear that he won this battle?

In 1981, the Supreme Court of the U.S. in Rostker v. Goldberg 453 U.S. 57 ruled that the practice of requiring only men to register for the draft was constitutional. The justices voted by 6-3 that since women did not participate in war, there was no reason to draft them. This became the accepted policy of the Military Selective Service Act until today, although Jimmy Carter wanted to include women in the MSSA. Another president, Obama, decided to change the MSSA by having the military accept women for combat. This was a process that took some years to achieve as ladies had to be trained in various areas that required strength most women did not have. A lady was trained to fly a jet plane off of an air craft career and she crashed into the ocean and died. But the process continued under Obama until some women were able to do difficult combat tasks. At that point, when women were already volunteering for the military and were participating in shooting battles, and were now being trained for full participation in all kinds of fighting, it was obvious that the ruling of the Supreme Court to exempt women from the draft was no long feasible. And now there is no longer any legal basis to exempt women from the military and the draft. When we recognize that President Carter wanted a draft for women even when they did not do fighting, and that three Supreme Court justices agreed that women should be drafted without their fighting, we see that the issue is a complex one. Now, especially, it will be very difficult to reverse the Supreme Court ruling and the feeling of many that men and women must be drafted in the Military Selective Service Act.

My mechuton Rav Eliezar Brizel of Jerusalem explained to me that the sin of a woman joining the army is not because of a fear of sin. It is because a woman may not be under the control of anyone other than a father and a husband. If the government drafts a woman to say Tehilim an hour each day, or some similar matter, it means the government has a control over her, and is forbidden.

Thus, it is forbidden for the government to have any control over a woman. But for a woman to be drafted into an army of men, or men and women, is a hideous problem. If an army is comprised of men and women, it is a sin for men or women to go there, because the army itself is a place of sin and abuse. The fines and jail that can result from this will be a big problem.

Inventing Invalid Gittin and Making Mamzerim

Recently a terrible disgrace of coercing a husband to give a GET by denying him his children, getting him fired  and constant threats that got worse and worse, was perpetrated by a Beth Din. It is takeh hefker what is happening today. Dovid Feinstein worked so hard to restore Shmuel Kaminetsky, the mamzer-maker, to be the Gadol of Agudas Yisroel and other places where the Satan wears a Talis. There are people out there who tell women to remarry without a GET, or because they claim that the marriage disappeared in ways that nobody agrees to, and there are for all of this mamzer-making,crowds of people shouting with happiness that at last somebody has spit on the Torah's ruling about these matters. What will be tomorrow? Mamzerim.

There is a huge network of people on the treifeh filth of Facebook who cheer on husbands who are broken and mangled and give a forced GET. I went onto Facebook and asked this question: The halacha is clear that a forced GET is invalid, see Rashbo in teshuva volume IV number forty. But you have decided that the Torah is wrong, and you want to permit a woman to remarry without a kosher GET. Such a woman has a child with her forced and invalid GET and her child is a mamzer. The child grows up, and is enrolled in a school where mamzerim are a problem. The child eventually will find out that he is a mamzer. Nothing can be done about it except to go to the Reform "Rabbis" who invent remarriage without a GET and who declare that the marriage disappeared, or that forcing a husband even murdering  him is proper if he refuses a GET. But the vast majority of Jewish people are going in the other direction, becoming more and more frum.

Reb Yosef Shalom Elyashev died at the age of a hundred plus with a thousand progeny. A secular Israeli newspaper published this and guess what: Everybody knows it. Throughout the Torah or Jewish world, Orthodox children are flowing in great numbers, may it increase. But the secular Jew has a child and a dog. The child goes to Japan and marries a gentile lady, and the dog doesn't vote. The strongest element in Israel's army used to be the Communist Kibbutsniks, or similar such people. Today, the strongest pro-army element in Israel is the frumeh, although in some ways they are Modern Orthodox and may be strongly involved with the state, nonetheless, the future generals wear yarmulkas, and things are going to get much stronger in that direction. An Orthodox Israeli Colonel used to visit Washington DC regularly to discuss with the marines and the American soldiers various military techniques. When he refused to let a woman sing at some event there was an uproar. But he is the Colonel who went into Gaza and fought it out bullet for bullet, and he is the future, not the ladies singing.

As we get stronger and stronger and more charedi and more charedi, children from funny or forced Gittin are going to have more and more problems marrying if they are really Orthodox. And even to get a person with a mamzer problem a shidduch with somebody not so religious is hard, because if a mamzer has a child that child will also be a mamzer, and even a person who is right now not Orthodox, doesn't want to burn their bridges behind them and have a child that will disgrace the family and all he marries.

I once dealt with gedolei hador in Israel and America, including Reb Moshe Feinstein and Reb Shmuel Zalman Aurebach, about a questionable mamzer. I was heavily involved. I will just say this: Never in my life did I see a person with the yiras shomayim of the problem person, a doubtful mamzer. And anyone who takes a Jewish neshomo that can reach the top and make a mamzer out of them will not have to explain anything to me, but in a Higher World, they take these things very seriously. And all of those who participated in mamzer making will say their piece to the Mighty Angels of Accusing and Destruction, and let them educate these angels on the glories of making mamzerim.

Critical Letter from Elaine Donnelly about Drafting Women in America

PLEASE READ THIS LETTER: ALL WOMEN MAY HAVE TO LEAVE AMERICA IF THESE BILLS PASS. AND MEN WILL NOT BE ABLE TO JOIN THE MILITARY FILLED WITH WOMEN. WE WILL HAVE TO LEAVE AMERICA. FIGHT THIS! IT IS OUR ONLY HOPE. Dovid Eidensohn ELAINE DONNELLY Center for Military Readiness May 16, 2016 TO: Rabbi David Eidensohn RE: "Draft America's Daughters" Language Must be Dropped from Defense Bills  Dear Rabbi Eidensohn,   Liberals and feminists are about to score a huge victory at the expense of military women, men in the combat arms, and even civilian women who have no idea that some Republicans are joining with near-unanimous Democrats in making them subject to Selective Service obligations, including a possible future draft, on the same basis as men. We need your help to turn this around and there isn't much time. Recently, the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) narrowly approved language titled "Draft America's Daughters" as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2017 (HR 4909) This wasn't supposed to happen, but it did, on a committee roll-call vote of 32-30. An uproar ensued, and we were encouraged by signs that our efforts on the House side were starting to make a difference. Early last week three amendments, two of which would strike the offending language on the floor of the House were filed with the Rules Committee by Chairman Pete Sessions (R-TX) and HASC Chairman "Mac" Thornberry (R-TX). Then came the inexplicable news that Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, conducting his closed-door markup of the Senate version of the National Defense Authorization Act, (S. 2814), successfully sponsored legislation to impose Selective Service obligations on unsuspecting civilian women.  (Sen. McCain has also called for another controversial idea -- a commission to study of some sort of national service.) The "Draft America's Daughters"legislation, and similar legislation sponsored by Senator McCain have no place in the defense bill. This is a two-page summary of reasons why, and this is a link to the news release we sent out last Friday: House, Senate Should Drop "Draft America's Daughters" Language from Defense Authorization Bills  Please contact your own representatives in the U.S. House and Senate directly. Fast action is needed because: The House NDAA (HR 4909) will come up for a floor vote sometime this week, May 16-20. The Senate is likely to vote next week, May 23-27 (not confirmed). You can reach both representatives and senators on the phone (U.S. Capitol Switchboard 202/224-3121) or through the lawmakers' website comment sections. You can easily locate those website pages by going here: Contacting the Congress. Let your representatives and senators in Washington, D.C. know that they will be held accountable for any vote to "Draft America's Daughters." Finally, I hope you will consider helping CMR with a generous tax-deductible contribution. Our funds are low at the worst possible time. We need your help to continue doing original research, and producing reliable analyses of everything harmful that is being done to our military. Contributions in any amount will be appreciated, but hope you will consider being extra generous at this critical time.    You can use our secure and convenient website by clicking below. The CMR page also provides a form to download for tax-deductible contributions in the mail. Thank you for taking action on legislation that is both anti-women and anti-military. Military readiness and national security are at risk, and our military has suffered enough.   I hope to hear from you soon.    See what's happening on our Face Book site

Center for Military Readiness, P. O. Box 51600, Livonia, MI 48151 SafeUnsubscribe™ dddeid@verizon.net Forward this email | Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by elaine@cmrlink.org in collaboration with Try it free today