Politicians don't want real military leaders.  They want low-profile soldiers willing to sell out for the next promotion and call it "just following orders." Unfortunately, "sensitivity training" and feminization efforts throughout the armed forces are successfully separating members from the morals they need to resist such re-education efforts.

       When junior officers see this on a daily basis is it no wonder that the armed forces cannot keep these young, mid-grade officers -- even by offering sizeable bonuses for staying? The drastic plunge in morale during the 1990s is directly linked to a purging of real "warriors" from the armed forces.  This purge started in the aftermath of the Tailhook '91 scandal and continues today as we consciously "feminize" our once proud, strong military.

       The techniques used to corrupt and passify our officer corps are quite similar to the indoctrination techniques used by the Chinese on captured American GIs during the Korean War. Allegedly, the mostly young, poorly trained and uneducated GIs performed questionably during their imprisonment by the Chinese.  The alleged misconduct by captured GIs is recorded in the extensive debriefings of the soldiers upon their return.  These reports describe the " indoctrination" or "re-education" methods used by the Chinese.

       Today, our senior military leadership doesn't recognize that this approach is being used to gain acceptance of the "feminization" of our nation's combat arms. Regardless, these high-ranking military leaders are morally responsible for their failure to resist.  In the face of our knowledge of the Korean War POW experience, they have no excuse for their lack of resistance.

       These "behavior modification" techniques used on our military have been perfected over the years and used in our teacher training programs and in our universities during the past 30 years, and so they offer no surprises. These techniques are being used every day, in nearly every walk of our lives.  These attempts to change the worldview of the populace have become mainstream in America.

       Most Americans have not yet recognized that these methods are morally corrupt.

       These techniques, applied by the Chinese, worked on our Korean War POWs.  According to the best data available: Only 5 percent resisted the enemy indoctrination; 15 percent were consistent, dedicated, hard-core collaborators with the enemy; The other 80 percent were rendered "passive" by their captors' "sensitivity training" methods and stood for nothing but their own survival.

       The Chinese indoctrination methods are strikingly similar to the methods now incorporated in the sensitivity training that is given to our military personnel by professional "facilitators."  These methods were developed in the United States by Kurt Lewin during and immediately after World War II.  His disciples, utilizing his T-group, small-group encounter techniques, are legion in this country today.  They are called "facilitators" or "change agents."  This process seems to be as effective in feminizing our military as it was in breaking down the resistance of our GIs while in Chinese captivity.

       What do we learn from the Korean War POW experience?
       (1)  We learn that small, peer pressure encounter groups -- using "sensitivity training" techniques-- are very effective in breaking resistance to conform to another's will.

       (2)  We learn that those 80 percent of individuals who were rendered passive under the enemy's indoctrination program, had little knowledge of our country's history, heritage and unique place in the panorama of nations in history.

       (3)  We learn that many of these young men (18 to 24 years old) were simply not hardened to the real world.  That is, according to one of the ex-POWs, "some American mothers had given their sons everything in the world, except a belief in themselves, their culture, and their manhood.  They had, some of them, sent their sons out into a world with tigers without telling them that there were tigers, and with no moral armament." And when they were placed in the hands of a brutal, ruthless, barbaric enemy, they had nothing to sustain them --nothing to prepare them for survival in a land of "tigers."

       (4) We learn that many of those in the passive 80 percent were not their brother's keeper.  That is, they did not have a strong Christian morality.

       Anyone alive in America today will recognize these same failures rampant across our culture.  We are being manipulated by our power elites toward the same end. The purpose of their social engineering?  To slowly but surely replace our constitutional republic, handed down to us by our Founding Fathers, with a socialist utopia of their own "enlightened imagination."

       We reject recognition of these parallels at our peril.