DEFCAN webpage launched

The Defence Conservative Action Network is progressing full steam ahead. DEFCAN launched its webpage last week and you can visit it by clicking here.

Already soldiers are coming forward with disturbing stories of discrimination.

In the last week there have been reports that soldiers have been told that they cannot wear Christian items, such as a Crucifix, while homosexual members have been encouraged to wear emblems that display their political flag, the rainbow.

And others have reported that they have been threatened with dismissal for honestly answering questions about their views on contentious decisions, such as the employment of women in front line combat roles.

These reports deserve further investigation and they highlight the pressing need for the establishment of the Defence  Conservative Action Network.

If you are a Defence member and wish to raise concerns about discrimination against conservative or Christian members, please go to the DEFCAN webpage and send through any information you wish to highlight. If you want to highlight the problems that radical social policy change is having on Defence capability, DEFCAN is ready to listen and then take action on your behalf.

DEFCAN is also interested in speaking to Defence members who are unhappy with the ADF’s deliberate support for and participation in the deeply offensive, highly political and extremely divisive Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras. If you would like to help restore public confidence in the ADF’s political impartiality and are offended that the proud uniforms of the Navy, Army and Air Force are embarrassingly paraded down Oxford Street, please let DEFCAN know.

DEFCAN understands exactly how perilous it is for Defence members to raise their concerns in the current intolerant and politically correct ADF environment. DEFCAN will not release your name without permission but it needs to speak to all concerned Defence members so that a robust, strong and coherent strategy is devised to restore integrity to decision making within the ADF.

Finally, if you would like to have your say about recent controversial policy decisions taken by the ADF, DEFCAN also has a short two minute survey.

Already hundreds of responses have been received and the results are coming in loud and clear:

  • 82% do not support the employment of women in front line combat roles.
  • 92% oppose ADF participation in the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras.
  • 70% believe that all ADF members should be able to attend political and social events that they support in uniform if the ADF continues to participate in the Mardi Gras .
  • 96% oppose the ADF’s decision to provide free sex-change surgery for soldiers.
  • 87% are concerned about ongoing Islamic immigration while the ADF is at war with those who fight for Islamic beliefs.
  • 95% believe that the risk of Islamic violence in Australia will rise over the next decade.
  • 97% believe that it is wrong for the ADF to sack Defence members for their conservative political views and traditional Christian beliefs.
  • 87% believe that it is inappropriate that some senior officers now think that Defence policy allows vilification of Christianity.
  • 70% believe that ADF members will be treated unfavourably if they do not hold politically correct views on front line combat roles for women, homosexuality, sex-change operations or Islam.
  • Only 15% of people believe that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been successful.

The ADF’s hierarchy have gone to great lengths recently to give the impression that they are listening to the public and serving members when it comes to its social policy decisions and direction. These results blow that propaganda out of the water.

The ADF hierachy have not been listening to anyone but the radical revolutionaries who seek to use Defence to force unwanted social change on Australian society. It’s time the hierachy started listening to the majority.

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of eight children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On

6 Comments

  1. History is repeating itself with the Attack on Boys & Scouting – particularly after former US Sec 4 Defense Gates oversaw the pimping of the Military to the Gaystapo.

    The Homo-Nazi Reich Destroyed the Boy Scouts in a similar manner – and forced all young Boys in to the ‘hitler youth’- which was run by the Homo-Anal Coprophile Founder of the Nazi movement (Hitler’s mentor & boyfriend – at least until hitler assassinated him in an internal homosex power struggle) – Ernst Rohm

    These Boys were forced in to military service and a Hitler Youth SS Division fought the allies in Normandy – and Gates is ushering the same Coprophile Pederasts back in to power again, as part of the Misandry (Hatred of Men & Boys, Masculinity & Normal Heterosexuality) that defines this age of Abomination.
    SEE:
    The Strange, Strange Story of Gay Fascists.- by Johann Hari.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-strange-strange-story_b_136697.html

    The lost boys of Afghanistan by: JOEL BRINKLEY.
    http://www.startribune.com/opinion/101505674.html

    BTW – Eleanor Hancock (a Senior Lecturer in History at the Australian Defence Force Academy at the University of New South Wales) actually wrote an Apologetic Biography of Ernst Rohm you may find interesting, if only for the few facts about Rohm’s Coprophile Pederasty shared with his syphilitic prostitute protege / boyfriend (at least until he had Rohm assassinated in the ‘night of the long knives’- Adolf Hitler.

    BTW – Rohm’s leadership of the Homosex Terrorist ‘SA’ Storm Troopers who opened Dachau for political reeducation of the masses tracks modern ‘tolerance laws’ rather closely. Of course Hancock had to Censor a whole lot of the other relevant stuff about that Homo-Nazi Reich that she deliberately leaves out, or probably would have lost her lucrative job too.

    I suggest reading “The Pink Swastika” http://www.pinkswastika.com for the (deliberately) missing details

    Post a Reply
  2. What encouraging news. May I offer a suggestion for consideration. A DEFCAN flyer that can be distributed? If Bernard thinks it is a good idea, would there be any flyer design wizards who could work on a design for DEFCAN? The rest of us could make an initial one off donation for the first print run. They could then be letter box dropped in military housing estate areas, left casually around the military work place (fellas lets be honest how many of us picked up reading material left in the toilet cubicles, or on the card table during boring exercises [those of us who carried our packs mainly in vehicles ie, RAEME] and flicked through it? May as well leave a good pamphlet rather than the typical material you find (or used to 20 years ago when I served)

    Post a Reply
    • Hi Bob – that is a great idea. I will look into it but unfortunately I will be rather busy for the next month. What we need to do is build an organisation that is not reliant on one person and that can build and grow. I hope DEFCAN will do that.

      Post a Reply
  3. One consequence of these wrong ADF practices is the engendering of moral cowardice: “you must now behave contrary to your legitimate beliefs, or you will be punished and excluded”. What quality of leadership can personnel expect when officers are required to be moral cowards, in a courage-rich environment?

    Furthermore, if current military commanders now reserve the power to unilaterally and lawlessly vary serious conditions of service at their whim, as in these cases, their wrongs – under the cloak of authority – are eroding the authority of formal command – essential to the military function. This not only increases risk for our people in harm’s way, and Defence mission effectiveness, it but also erodes taxpayer support for the Defence and Security budget outlays, which are in a pathetic state. In this environment, what money there is will be spent badly, or at least sub-optimally, anyway.

    Post a Reply
    • When I was training as an officer cadet we were always taught that moral courage was more important than physical courage. I am not sure that the hierarchy even believe in moral courage anymore.

      Post a Reply
      • Bernard, I would not follow the hierarchy, such as we have today into battle nor would I let them follow me.
        I would not feel safe knowing that my backup was a person lacking in courage of any type.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares