The training materials and slide shows, obtained by J. Christian Adams, a former Justice Department employee, show that the stand-down order to address “Extremism in the Ranks” targeted traditionalists, constitutionalists and conservatives.
The documents portray conservative service members as racists, white supremacists and anti-government extremists, but they do not give any examples from within the military.
Instead, the “Strategy” document explains, without explanation, that identity politics—including service members on the basis of their race, sex, gender, ethnicity and sexuality—will strengthen the military.
“If we don’t eliminate extremist behaviors from our Navy, then racism, injustice, indignity and disrespect will grow and keep us from reaching our potential—an inclusive, respectful, professional fighting force that answers the Nation’s call.”
In the training handbook for officers, the Pentagon lists “Do’s and Don’ts of Facilitation” for its identity-politics radicalization course.
They tell officers to “be alert to to statements about Prohibited Behavior … which rely on inaccurate or misleading assumptions, misperception or myth.” Then they must fix “these inaccuracies in a resolute, respecftul manner.”
While the teaching guidelines are vague, the Pentagon reminds officers that “Prohibited Behavior” will come from “anti-government extremists” as demonstrated by “recent events,” a veiled reference to the Capitol Hill protest.
The documents threaten officers with “the full range of administrative and disciplinary actions,” including discharge and criminal prosecution, if they fail in their “duty to reject” so-called anti-government ideas and to “root out extremism.”
Like the Big Tech companies’ amorphous “community guidelines,” the Pentagon tells officers to use vague standards to police free speech.
“Speech that incites violence or criminal activity that threatens to undermine our government and Constitution is not protected by the First Amendment,” the training materials list under prohibited activities.
In his analysis of the prohibited activities, Adams wrote that the Pentagon misunderstands the First Amendment because “speech that ‘threatens to undermine our government’ is completely protected by the First Amendment.”
In fact, he said, it was a core component of what distinguished US democracy from a totalitarian autocracy.
“The Pentagon’s grotesque characterization of the law is borrowed from the criminal codes of dictatorships,” Adams wrote. “The whole concept of ‘undermining’ is the flimsy legal standard that sent millions to the Gulags and guillotine.”
Overall, the handbook outlines a neutered, progressive Constitution that protects citizens against nothing except discrimination but does not secure their fundamental, God-given liberties as outlined in the bill of rights.
“Together, our Constitution, laws, and policies prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, ethnicity, national origin, sex (including gender identity), sexual orientation, or religion,” the training materials state.
The documents advise service members to exercise “caution” when “expressing purely personal opinions” and “writing a personal letter to the editor or a personal posting on social media.”
Service members could face punishments if their social-media activities include “liking any material that promotes discrimination based on … gender identity”—that is, opposing the transsexual agenda.
Once inside the classroom, the program itself looks like a safe-space style struggle session in which participants vent their emotions and accuse others of hate crimes.
“Has anyone witnessed a Supremacist or Extremist Activity while serving in the Navy? How did it make you feel?,” the training materials tell officers to ask service members.