Tag Archives: combat

Why not the lesser of THREE evils?

Posted on by
Reply

Whatever you do, don’t call it a timetable! White House says US and Iraq have agreed to set a ‘general time horizon’ for the reduction of US combat forces in Iraq.

Pentagon report calls for even steeper troop drawdown than Obama is calling for.

McCain fires Phil Gramm. As Keith Olbermann put it last night, McCain’s economic plan will now have to be called the Phil Gramm memorial economic plan.

Here we go again. McCain war buddy and surrogate Bud Day says “the Muslims” are the enemy. McCain refuses to repudiate those comments.

Reagan policy advisor and Conservative activist Larry Hunter endorses Barack Obama.

Pot calls kettle black. Nancy Pelosi calls Bush “a total failure.”

Obama is considering Chuck Hagel (R) for VP? Gawd help us!

Poll: 75% say gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military.

Excerpts from Thomas McCullock’s notes July 19, thomasmc.com.

Gitmo is reincarnation of Con Son Island

Posted on by
5

the abyss stares back at youWhen you delete data on a computer, actually you only erase pointers to the data. The files remain, but you’ve eradicated the addresses of where to find them. Likewise, to get away with a crime, you eliminate the witnesses who could point the finger at you. Luckily internet search engines are still proving impervious to “cleaners” due to the proliferating network of memory hole archivists and blogger sidewalk barkers. Try this at home: Google “tiger cages.” Think you’ll see images of tigers? Hardly! While Americans are being led to infer that John McCain was mistreated by his North Vietnamese jailers, let’s revisit how our forces treated the communist civilian captives. There was a precedence for Guantanamo. Vietnamese non-combatant detainees were caged on an offshore island prison called Con Son.

Row of tiger cages on Con Son Prison
The occasional pots held lye which the guards threw unto the prisoners for purposes of “hygiene.” When the Con Son brutality was found out, the victims were transfered to worse quarters called “cow cages.”

Shall we stand our ground with Obama?

Posted on by
Reply

The man who brought Democrats out of the closet, our presumptive Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Barack Obama, will be speaking in Colorado Springs Wednesday night at the Broadmoor. WHETHER OR NOT you hope he gets elected, do we remind Obama and the Democrats he rode in on, that the American and world peoples need real change? “Change” does NOT mean: endorsing FISA, funding more war, staying in Iraq, bullying Iran, or not promising universal health care. Can you name anything Barack Obama is going to do for you? He’ll withdraw the “combat troops” (10%) from Iraq? Come put your two cents before the eyes of these presumptive progressives. MEET US 6PM WED. AT THE BROADMOOR. There’s nothing wrong with Obama that the voice of the people can’t fix. You know there’s only one way to make sure he hears it!
Broadmoor West
UPDATE: The event will be held at BROADMOOR WEST, behind the lake. The best car and foot traffic will still pass our original spot.

Afghans persist in face of annihilation

Posted on by
5

Horror! The Taliban is reported to have taken back a half-dozen Afghan towns around Kandahar. It’s an inevitable development of course, the catastrophic consequences of which will be equally unavoidable if America sticks to its guns on the matter. Refugees are already pouring out of the areas. Are they fleeing the Taliban fighters? From the reports of our jingoist embed press, how will we ever know? I’m pretty sure the Afghan refugees are fleeing our retaliatory air strikes, which are certain as rain to blanket every living occupant now determined by US precision weapons to be dark skinned combatants. It will be like Waco without the interminable siege. Who are we kidding? Our unmanned drones are named “Predators” and “Reapers.” They’re armed with missiles of “Hellfire.”

PCMS wildfire initiates Army PHASE 1B

Posted on by
Reply

Bridger Fire initiates US Army scorched earth policy
PINON CANYON MANEUVER SITE, Colo- The US Army refused assistance in fighting the PCMS Bridger Fire, and now it’s jumped the Pergatoire River and is leading the aquisition of PARCELS 1B and 2A, a year ahead of the Army’s until now thwarted expansion schedule.

Pictured above is an enhanced diagram of a leaked Army map, revealing the expansion planned to create the USA Joint Combat Training Center which will occupy the full Southeastern corner of Colorado. A legend is posted below.

PCMS (blue) Existing Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site
PHASE 1 (green) years 1&2, Wildlife Buffer
PHASE 1a (purple) year 3
PHASE 1b (maroon) year 3
PHASE 2a (yellow) year 4
PHASE 2b (lavender) years 5-10
PHASE 3a (dark grey) year 11
PHASE 3b (grey) year 12
PARCEL 2 (orange) years 13-16
PARCEL 5 (light grey) years 17-18
JCTC (rose) expansion to Oklahoma and Kansas borders

McCain was dubbed the “POW Songbird”

Posted on by
4

An excerpt from prisoner of war John McCain’s November 9, 1967 interview for the North Vietnamese newspaper NHAN DAN:
McCain told vietcong about US attack procedures
Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain have released a fact sheet on the highly decorated hero’s service in Vietnam. If this is reminiscent of the Swiftboat shits against John Kerry, at least these vets have the official records and news reports. Apparently John McCain III crashed a total of five planes, received one and a half medals per hour of service, and while the admiral’s son was pampered in the Hanoi Hilton, his extensive singing earned him the name “POW Songbird.”

FACT SHEET: Military record of John Sidney McCain III

Both McCain III’s father and grandfather were Admirals in the United States Navy. His father Admiral John S. ”Junior” McCain was commander of U.S. forces in Europe – later commander of American forces in Vietnam while McCain III was being held prisoner of war. His grandfather John S. McCain, Sr. commanded naval aviation at the Battle of Okinawa in 1945.

McCain III, like his father and grandfather, also attended the United States Naval Academy. McCain III finished near the bottom of his graduating class in 1958.

McCain III lost five U.S. Navy aircraft

1 – Student pilot McCain III lost jet number one in 1958 when he plunged into Corpus Christi Bay while practicing landings.

2 – Pilot McCain III lost another plane two years later while he was deployed in the Mediterranean. ”Flying too low over the Iberian Peninsula, he took out some power lines which led to a spate of newspaper stories in which he was predictably identified as the son of an admiral.

3 – Pilot McCain III lost number three in 1965 when he was returning from flying a Navy trainer solo to Philadelphia for an Army-Navy football game. McCain III radioed, ”I’ve got a flameout” and ejected at one thousand feet. The plane crashed to the ground and McCain III floated to a deserted beach.

4 – Combat pilot McCain III lost his fourth on July 29, 1967, soon after he was assigned to the USS Forrestal as an A-4 Skyhawk combat pilot. While waiting his turn for takeoff, an accidently fired rocket slammed into McCain Jr’s. plane. He escaped from the burning aircraft, but the explosions that followed killed 134 sailors, destroyed at least 20 aircraft, and threatened to sink the ship.

5 – Combat pilot McCain III lost a fifth plane three months later (Oct. 26, 1967) during his 23rd mission over North Vietnam when he failed to avoid a surface-to-air missile. McCain III ejected from the plane breaking both arms and a leg in the process and subsequently parachuted into Truc Bach Lake near Hanoi. After being pulled from the lake by the North Vietnamese, McCain III was bayoneted in his left foot and shoulder and struck by a rifle butt. He was then transported to the Hoa Lo Prison, also known as the Hanoi Hilton.

1973 New York Daily News labeled POW McCain III a “PW Songbird”

On McCain III’s fourth day of being denied medical treatment, slapped, and threatened with death by the communist (they were demanding military information in exchange for medical treatment), McCain III broke and told his interrogator, ”O.K., I’ll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital.” U.S. News and World Report, May 14, 1973 article written by former POW John McCain.

It was then that the communist learned that McCain III’s father was Admiral John S. McCain, the soon-to-be commander of all U.S. Forces in the Pacific. The Vietnamese rushed McCain III to Gai Lam military hospital (U.S. government documents), a medical facility normally unavailable for U.S. POWs.

By Nov. 9, 1967 (U.S. government documents) Hanoi press was quoting McCain III describing his mission including the number of aircraft in his flight, information about rescue ships, and the order of which U.S. attacks would take place.

While still in North Vietnam’s military hospital, McCain III gave an interview to prominent French television reporter Francois Chalais for a series titled Life in Hanoi. Chalais’ interview with McCain III was aired in Europe.

Vietnamese doctors operated on McCain’s Leg in early December, 1967. Six weeks after he was shot down, McCain was taken from the hospital and delivered to a U.S. POW camp.

In May of 1968, McCain III allowed himself to be interviewed by two North Vietnamese generals at separate times.” May 14, 1973 article written by former POW John McCain In August 1968, other POWs learned for the first time that John McCain III had been taken prisoner.

On June 5, 1969, the New York Daily News reported in a article headlined REDS SAY PW SONGBIRD IS PILOT SON OF ADMIRAL,

“…Hanoi has aired a broadcast in which the pilot son of United States Commander in the Pacific, Adm. John McCain, purportedly admits to having bombed civilian targets in North Vietnam and praises medical treatment he has received since being taken prisoner…”

The Washington Post explained McCain III’s broadcast:

“The English-Language broadcast beamed at South Vietnam was one of a series using American prisoners. It was in response to a plea by Defense Secretary Melvin S. Laird, May 19, that North Vietnam treat prisoners according to the humanitarian standards set forth by the Geneva Convention.”

In 1970, McCain III agreed to an interview with Dr. Fernando Barral, a Spanish psychiatrist who was living in Cuba at the time.

The meeting between Barral and McCain III (which was photographed by the Vietnamese) took place away from the prison at the office of the Committee for Foreign Cultural Relations in Hanoi (declassified government document). During the meeting, POW McCain sipped coffee and ate oranges and cakes with the Cuban.

While talking with Barral, McCain III further seriously violated the military Code of Conduct by failing to evade answering questions ”to the utmost of his ability” when he, according government documents, helped Barral by answering questions in Spanish, a language McCain had learned in school. The interview was published in January 1970.

McCain III was released from North Vietnam March 15, 1973

In 1993, during one of his many trips back to Hanoi, McCain asked the Vietnamese not to make public any records they hold pertaining to returned U.S. POWs. McCain III claims, that while a POW, he tried to kill himself.

McCain III was awarded “medals for valor” equal to nearly a medal-and-a-half for each hour he spent in combat

For 23 combat missions (an estimated 20 hours over enemy territory), the U.S. Navy awarded McCain III, the son of famous admirals, a Silver Star, a Legion of Merit for Valor, a Distinguished Flying Cross, three Bronze Stars, two Commendation medals plus two Purple Hearts and a dozen service medals.

“McCain had roughly 20 hours in combat,” explains Bill Bell, a veteran of Vietnam and former chief of the U.S. Office for POW/MIA Affairs — the first official U.S. representative in Vietnam since the 1973 fall of Saigon.

“Since McCain got 28 medals,” Bell continued, “that equals to about a medal-and-a-half for each hour he spent in combat. There were infantry guys — grunts on the ground — who had more than 7,000 hours in combat and I can tell you that there were times and situations where I’m sure a prison cell would have looked pretty good to them by comparison. The question really is how many guys got that number of medals for not being shot down.”

No one is faulting John McCain for collaborating with his Vietnamese captors. He survived captivity, however arduous or not. It is enough to say he is a survivor. It would be too much though to call him a hero.

USA acronyms want Pinon Canyon again

Posted on by
Reply

May 8 PSA from the DECAM/NEPA coordinator at the FCPAO:
(Release 08-056)
 
FORT CARSON, COLO.– Part of GTA effort: USA issues NOI to prepare an EIS for bringing IBCT and CAB to USAFC and the PCMS, against the NAA. PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS (to hear NAA!) are May 20 in TAD, May 21 in COS (6:30PM Crowne Plaza Hotel) and May 22 in LHX.

Glossary:
PSA -Public Service Announcement
DECAM –Directorate of Environmental Compliance and Management
NEPA –National Environmental Policy Act
FCPAO -Fort Carson Public Affairs Office
GTA –“Grow the Army”
USA -United States Army
NOI -Notice of Intent
EIS -Environmental Impact Statement
IBCT -Infantry Brigade Combat Team (3,900 soldiers)
CAB -Combat Aviation Brigade (2,800 soldiers)
USAFC –United States Army Fort Carson
PCMS –Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site
NAA -No Action Alternative

TAD -Trinidad, Colorado
COS -Colorado Springs
LHX -La Junta (Airport codes)

Wikipedia explains this GWOT acronym:

AWR — (Alpha Whiskey Romeo) Allah’s Waiting Room. When engaged, insurgents have a tendency to flee to the same building (the AWR), at which point the troops radio in an air strike.

Blackwater Thugs: Fallujah “heroes”?

Posted on by
1

There’s a War-drum-beating propaganda special coming on this evening on one of the cable history channels… The teaser says “When four Blackwater private security contractors were brutally murdered and their bodies hung up for everybody to see” BULLSHIT…

They went into Fallujah to pick a fight, knowing that neither the Iraqi government nor the United States Government would prosecute them for their CRIMES, …but the Sunni Militia DID, under THEIR laws.

Our newly moderated Troll said the Private Contractors were “doing security work (at Pete Field) so American Troops could be freed up to fight for your rights in Iraq”…

Except Air Force SP’s aren’t exactly a combat unit. Of course, sending cops over there to enforce Imperial Martial Law is really really fighting FOR freedom.

And of course, sending mercenaries over there to back up those cops, who only truly want to imprison, torture or kill ONLY those naughty Iraqi people who object to the Invasion Liberation of their country… and fail to greet their liberators with flowers… and fail to bow before the Natural Superior Culture of the Empire Liberation Forces… and fail to lick their goddamned jackboots…

Support Our Homeless Troops

Posted on by
7

COLORADO SPRINGS- I watched yesterday as a group of homeless men disbanded beneath an underpass. I remarked how their yet unbent frames and close-shaved heads made them appear more menacing than usual. Then I noticed one had a graphite prosthetic calf, and I thought about our vets who disappear themselves into being vagabonds. Homelessness is elective you could say, like despondency or suicide. If one in four of America’s homeless are veterans, why not tell us what that fraction amounts to? They must know.

Americans were just leaked the number of suicides among our soldiers and veterans. It’s more even than have died in the Iraq war. We hear about the seemingly haphazard suicides, self-destructive acts and reckless endangerments, but who puts it together? Did you imagine the tally as a result of the war would be so high?

Probably the incidence of PTSD, they say now 30%, is equally under-documented. Who will contravene with the VA, the DoD and the State Department to give us the real totals?

Americans recently honored the 4,000th US casualty in Iraq. What was THAT milestone for? The American Friends Service Committee had been circulating a collection of army boots –Eyes Wide Open, before the number became unmanageable– to correspond to the official US losses. It didn’t occur to me how some military families might feel left out by that count. What about the non-combat deaths, or the wounded who expire stateside? What about the suicides, or the brain-dead? What about the broken bodies who would be over-represented by a pair of boots, who would need a single boot, or none at all?

What is the real figure so far, of US lives sacrificed to the war? What fraction of a Vietnam wall memorial are they setting aside for the true casualty count? Enough for ten thousand? Is our tally of wasted-lives several times that?

I want to know where are the yokels who make a big deal about supporting the troops? Where are they while homeless vets look for heat and food? Where is the support for young men haunted to the point of committing suicide? Is that yellow sticker on your car the furthest extent to which you support the troops? Do you hope your sticker remains obscured in the garage until the homeless vets pass?

I hope the yellow ribbon Support the Troops sticker comes to mean you’re good for a meal, a ride, a place to sleep, or spare change for a drink. I didn’t support the troops, what they did and still do, or the trouble they find themselves in now that their killing duty is served. You encouraged them, you’re still welcoming them home and cheering their continued deployment. You broke these young men, now support them.

Cesar Sandino versus the US drug fiends

Posted on by
Reply

Sandino official postal sealEmiliano Zapata was assassinated on this day, April 10, 1919.
 
The Poncho Villa or Emiliano Zapata of Central America, who like Zapata gave his name to a rebel movement that would eventually oust American imperialism from its shores, was Augusto Cesar Sandino. Did you know that is where the Sandinistas of Nicaragua (FSLN) got their name?

La soberanía de un pueblo no se discute,
se defiende con el arma en la mano.

Cesar Sandino fought an undeclared war against US Marines, which made him an illegal combatant. When Sandino captured a US aviator, tried him for having bombed innocent civilians, and sentenced him to hang –in American eyes, outside of the law– the US declared Sandino and his fighters to be terrorists and exempt from protection under the Hague Conventions.

Sandino fought the Americans for six years until he was assassinated during a cease-fire in 1933 by the Samoza regime which would rule Nicaragua with America’s backing until 1979. After 1979 Ronald Reagan and his Contras would redouble US persecution of the Nicaraguans.

The above image depicts a Nicaraguan freedom fighter about to decapitate a vanquished US marine. This served as Sandino’s official postal stamp. Sandino was equally eloquent in words:

Come on you pack of drug fiends, come on and murder us on our own land. I am waiting for you on my feet at the head of my patriotic soldiers, and I don’t care how many of you there are. You should know that when this happens, the destruction of your mighty power will make the Capitol shake in Washington, and your blood will redden the white dome that crowns the famous White House where you plot your crimes.

Resource Wars of the future and now

Posted on by
Reply

Why is it that none of the US and its power allies in Western Europe want to get out of their occupation of Iraq, Somalia, and Afghanistan, and even are planning to extend the fighting into more and more countries? Who are the true enemies as seen by the US rulers? Is it just Iraq and Afghanistan who are the principals involved from the point of view of the Rumsfields, Rices, Bushes, and Cheneys, not to mention the Obamas, Clintons, Gores, and Carters? What is the true reason for this fighting?

Many reasons have been offered up, including saving us from WOMD, bringing democracy to the Arab world, and liberating women, amongst others. Critics of the fighting, tend to say that the reason is to bring a police state to America, and to build up the companies of the military-industrial complex, who are always looking to max out their profits. I find none of the reasons just listed thoroughly convincing by themselves, though ordinary Americans have found all of these reasons to be in effect to some degree or other.

Most of the commentary about these wars centers on Iraq, and to a lesser degree Afghanistan. But there is a much wider field of combat that is mostly absolutely neglected by our intellectuals and press, since they cannot seem to bring themselves to see the war in other areas that is underway. Occasionally, some tidbit of news drops forth from the press in regard to Pakistan, Somalia, Gaze, and Lebanon, but these places are mere min or extensions of the Iraqi conflict in the minds of Americans. However, the elite think tanks and the Pentagon see much of this conflict quite differently than the Average Hometown Joe and Average Hometown Jane, and the talking heads that dish out the constant flood of misinformation about everything.

Believe it or not, but the ruling powers that run our European and assorted English speaking countries are worried about the ecology of Planet Earth. In short, they simply do not see enough to go around in the years ahead, and like the selfish thugs that the rich are, there is no plan to attack this problem with a shared vision that includes the lower classes, as well as themselves. Surprised?

When the rich look on a map, they see billions upon billions of lower class rabble that may get increasingly out of hand, as world resources begin to diminish. They see it better to grab 100% control now, than to wait until their response is purely defensive (from their point of view). Many of ‘the rabble’ actually habitat ares that have many of the scarce resources the rich of the planet hope to grab control over. They live in China, India, Russia, Indonesia, Nigeria, Brazil, and Pakistan to name just a few of the countries that are ‘loose’ from the point of view of the US government.

Two countries stand out amongst this group of countries with huge populations, for the nuclear weapons they still have from when they were ruled by Marxist-Leninist oriented leaderships. Those 2 countries are China and Russia, who now are impoverished (for the average citizen living inside their borders) capitalist societies. The US is the principle market population for world sales, and does not want to give up this position at all. But it is if current trends continue without any military conflict being forced on China and Russia by the US.

The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are an opening battle in a world wide Resource War, that the Powers running it think will go on for a 100 years PLUS. They have a rational viewpoint of where they are from their point of view, and it is crazy to oppose them as they see it. It is for all of us to decide who is crazy and who is not?

Iraq contractor deaths counted in digits

Posted on by
Reply

Revealed: two more US contractors were killed in Iraq. Their bodies discovered after they had been captured last year. The FBI has asked the families not to comment publicly. Plus, this latest report came with more gruesome detail than Americans are accustomed. Something about severed fingers.

Family members blabbing would certainly mar the news blackout under which our contractor mercenaries are concealed. Americans are told nothing about private warrior activities or casualties. Only by researching the number of US life insurance claims filed, listing Iraq as the place of death, was the Boston Globe able to tally 1,123 deaths in the Iraq private sector.

Though the condition of the two bodies are not being revealed, one of the bodies had been alive recently enough to provide a finger which his captors sent to expedite negotiations. Enclosed with it were fingers from three other captive contractors, whose bodies have not yet turned up. Perhaps the fingers were the proof our investigators asked for, that the captors held who they say they held, and that their captives were still alive.

Separating combatants from their fingers has a long precedent in war, in particular the index and middle finger, aka trigger fingers. This ensured that if your captive was released, he would no longer be able to wield a rifle against you.

Except for today’s report, severed fingers in Iraq hadn’t made the news. We don’t know, for example, which finger, or if this had been the first for Crescent Security Group Guard Paul Johnson-Reuben. Only FBI agents would know if hostage fingers arrive on a monthly basis, as a reminder or status check on the lives being negotiated. Do ten digits mark a captive’s expiration date?

Isn’t it interesting that the FBI is handling the case? Why not the CIA, nor INTERPOL, who handle international crimes, instead of our domestic investigators? To me this suggests something about the international jurisdiction of sovereign Iraq.

Betrayus redux

Posted on by
1

So, now, the one general Bush could find willing to be his bag-man and “take one for the Team” is apparently not happy taking one for the Team, and taking another one for the Team, and then taking another one…

Apparently, the Surge is not working as splendiferously as Mr Bush lies to us. It’s gotten so bad the trained liars are circumventing the story by screaming about shit that means absolutely nothing, but does keep our minds off the fact that the situation in Iraq sucks much dog. And now even Petraeus is saying it.

The latest “scandal! Outrage! there must be Blood shed!” is about a presidential candidates preacher saying that (gasp!) there’s RACISM IN AMERICA!

Hard to follow an act like that. WC Fields or Foy or one of those Last of the Vaudevilleans, great actors, said you should never try to follow an act involving animals or children. I guess the Chimp and his ministry of Lies kinda qualify as both.

But the slaughter goes on… sure, you can keep the boot heel firmly on the necks of the conquered, provided you’re willing to spend the economy of your entire nation to do it.

Then one day, you have to let up, you can’t keep the boot heel on the neck forever. Physical and logistical impossibility.

But it’s not really as sad and pathetic as it seems…

actually, it’s much much worse…

Maybe that’s part of the reason Bush is willing to put the already overstretched military, most of the combat-ready brigades are already in the line of fire, in the line of Further and More intense Fire with his really stupid idea to jump a nation with 5 times the population of the nation they can’t govern effectively.

Some of the Military in town here have called this “sedition” to say things like that.

The actual charge of sedition is to teach the violent overthrow of the government and laws of the united states.

George Bush has not only TAUGHT this doctrine, he and his Gang of Thugs have accomplished it. And put in place a system wherein they might be able to make their Terroristic Dictatorship permanent.

Soldiers and Airmen read this, I know because when I first looked for the blog (not knowing the name) I googled “camp casey colorado springs” and got a discussion forum for soldiers, who were saying that we are seditious.

Fellas, your Commander in Thief is the one committing sedition. You guys swore the same oath I did, and incidentally, the one Bush swore once when he joined the National Guard and twice as POTUS, to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign AND Domestic. That would be the same Constitution he and his group of thugs Openly Declared they would eliminate, by whatever means they considered necessary. The one Bush called “just a piece of goddamned paper” in one of his Imperial Hissie Fits when he was informed that the actions he was proposing were unconstitutional.

He wants to use you as instruments of his Imperial Will, and is willing to make a burnt offering of YOUR blood in the sands of Arabia, but, if you notice, not HIS blood.

To deny this, or denounce this, you first have to read it. Some of your officers will want to suppress this idea by mocking it into disappearing. Or use your muscle to Threaten it into disappearing.

The Romans tried that with Judaism and Christianity.

How’d that work out for y’all?

And I say that because you are the heirs to that empire. Have fun trying to destroy an idea.

You’ll drive yourselves mad trying.

Ask your General with the name of a Roman Legionnaire.

Ask your president whose foreign policy is an exact copy of that offered by Emperor Caligula “Let them hate, so long as they Fear”.

Bush does math…2nd verse…

Posted on by
Reply

There’s a problem with the accounting of War Dead. We’re constantly told that we must be wrong about the number of “enemy” or civilian dead, but there’s more…

The 4000 combat deaths to date,… weeelllll … Mr Bush ordered a change in accounting, allowable statistics and other standards have been ‘tweaked” to reflect the notion that All Is Well and we’re somehow winning HIS war.

The incidental death count for coalition soldiers was over 10,000… until people who didn’t immediately die on the battlefield, committed suicide because of combat-induced PTSD, committed Homicide due to combat-induced PTSD… accidents, diseases they wouldn’t have caught on the streets of, say, Colorado Springs… “friendly” fire… died from their wounds while in the hospitals or being transferred to a hospital…
well, their deaths were suddenly NOT COUNTED.

This is nothing new, they used the same accounting standards during the Korean conflict and of course VietNam.

When this was brought into the open they changed the standard…

And, at a time when the casualty count was really really inconvenient for them… changed it right back.

Happy Romantic War, Mr Bush. You’re going to be unemployed in just over 10 months, maybe you’ll actually get to live your fantasy of going and fighting for your money.

Egypt thwarts Israeli starvation of Gaza

Posted on by
5

Egypt thwarts Israel’s efforts to starve their Palestinian captives in Gaza. Masked gunmen in Palestine were responsible for tearing down part of the metal barrier separating Egypt from Gaza in the town of Rafah, but now Egyptian leader Mubarak has announced his intention to allow residents of Gaza to resupply themselves in Egypt with the food and necessities being deprived them by the Israeli blockade.
Palestinians breach the wall into Egypt in defiance of Israeli blockade. Today we are all Palestinians.

“Masked gunmen?” That certainly paints the usual negative picture. Is it fair to label either Hamas or Fatah as [lawless] gunslingers? All warring participants in Palestine and Iraq are masked. Israeli soldiers, Iraqi trainees collaborating with the Americans, even many of the Americans have their faces concealed. Needless to say every combatant is armed with guns. How descriptive is it then to identify Palestinian upstarts in such terms? The Palestinians who dared break down the barrier in Gaza have to obscure their identities to prevent subsequent retaliatory Israeli air-strikes on their particular homes and families. They do it also to avoid arrest and indefinite incarceration in Israeli prisons. Even boys conceal their faces with scarves or kaffiyeh when they throw stones at the Israeli tanks.

If the armed Palestinians had fired on Egyptian border guards, perhaps there might have been cause to call them gunmen. Otherwise the description seems just as biased as another side saying Palestinian saboteurs interrupt Israel’s smooth running genocidal solution in Gaza.

Stealing Muslim women from terrorists

Posted on by
6

What is Greg Mortenson teaching the children of Pakistan?I’m afraid my Neo Liberal roots are showing. Greg Mortenson is delivering a lecture at CC on January 15th and I hardly know how to object. I too believe that the fate of mankind depends on education.

However, where have I the right to hold such a belief system, mine, above others? You can call Islam a religion for uneducated poor people, and be mostly right, as indeed the same applies to all fundamentalist absolutists. But that is only to regard education in the liberal sense, with its belief that a secular utopia awaits man’s bettering himself through progress. Technology, medical advances, and the celebration of the individual lead mankind where exactly? To a healthier, more antiseptic life certainly, civil discourse often, but to chaos and nihilism so far, quickly.

Fundamentalist Luddite religious systems may not take man to the moon, but they do ensure spiritually grounded lives, full families, and the same for all foreseeable descendants. Which model is likely the more sustainable? If we posit that the greater percentage of mankind need such intellectual tethers, to whom do you entrust their guidance? Allah or Coca Cola?

The West may think it offers salvation to the women of Islam, but is it true? Are the middle class advocates of women’s rights prepared to take in their rescuees? A Muslim wife’s life is at the mercy of Muslim males, and we’ve been treated to horrific accounts. How do they compare to what capitalism has to offer? Those liberated from the Koran can look forward to the certainty of exploitation by globalization bosses be they man or woman, regulated by amoral corporations and corrupt officials, now without the comfort of leading lives of spiritual purpose.

Isn’t the jury still out on the West’s liberated women? They’re having fewer children, that’s for certain.

White knights like Mr. Mortenson offer a gift horse that indeed cannot deliver. Meanwhile of course our soldiers and free trade carpetbaggers quietly pile on inside. Mortenson’s book Three Cups of Tea has been requisitioned by the Defense Department and issued to our counter-insurgency forces, probably to teach the Hearts and Minds lingo, hopefully not worse.

Mortenson’s visit to Colorado Springs is being sponsored by a new department of UCCS, the Center for Homeland Security, I kid you not! It’s a major now offered by UCCS, established with funding from the Pentagon, staffed with retired military instructors, and chaired by career CIA officer Steve Recca. Look him up, his name is tied completely to CIA activities. As they say in the intelligence biz, he’s totally “mobbed up.”

The tag line to Mortenson’s book tour is to use education outreach as an alternative means to combat terrorism. While it is a refreshing change-up to our direct war making against terrorism, I can’t imagine behaving cavalierly toward Islam is going to endear us greatly. Osama didn’t want US feet on the ground in Saudi Arabia. Do Muslims in general want westerners building schools for their girls in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Could stealing their young women be seen as anything but a provocation for a terrorist response?

US is not sniping indiscriminantly 1-2-3

Posted on by
1

The good news is that US sniper teams may not be shooting at everyone they come across anymore, as has been alleged though seldom reported. After all, the rules of war apply to snipers just as they would ordinary soldiers or paintballers: don’t shoot at someone who’s not a combatant, who’s unarmed, or who’s otherwise surrendering. But under pressure to up their kills, US snipers are defying the Hague Conventions with such innovations as 1) bait/entrapment, 2) getting go-ahead to assassinate, and 3) using fingerprint identification to confirm eligibility for execution.

1. Bait and switch
The Asymmetric Warfare Group issues to US snipers “drop items,” insurgent-type items which may be planted on Iraqis they’ve shot, but much more productively, to use as bait to lure passing Iraqis, tempting empty-handed civilians to become item-wielding insurgents whom you don’t have to get permission to shoot. The Washington Post reports:

“Baiting is putting an object out there that we know they will use, with the intention of destroying the enemy,” Capt. Matthew P. Didier, the leader of an elite sniper scout platoon attached to the 1st Battalion of the 501st Infantry Regiment, said in a sworn statement. “Basically, we would put an item out there and watch it. If someone found the item, picked it up and attempted to leave with the item, we would engage the individual as I saw this as a sign they would use the item against U.S. Forces.”

2. Under suspicion is as good as being condemned
US snipers are executing targets if they can be confirmed as being suspects. With the cross hairs of your sniper scope aimed at your chosen Iraqi or Afghan, you can await authorization to pull the trigger based on learning the person’s identity, whether by informer or a shouted inquiry. Then according to the US rules of engagement you can terminate him. Here’s an example from the International Herald Tribune.

“From his position about 100 yards away, Master Sergeant Troy Anderson had a clear shot of the Afghan man standing outside a residential compound in a small village near the Pakistan border last October. And when Captain Dave Staffel, the Special Forces officer in charge, gave the order to shoot, Anderson fired a single bullet into the man’s head, killing him instantly.

…the shooting, near the village of Hasan Kheyl last October, was a textbook example of a classified mission completed in accordance with the American rules of engagement. The men said such rules allowed them to kill Buntangyar, whom the American military had designated a terrorist cell leader, once they positively identified him.”

3. Coming soon: fingerprint and biometric matching
In early 2008 US snipers will be given a more efficient system for making split decisions about whether their target may be summarily liquidated. Now with the subject in your sights, you can await instructions from an intelligence database about whether your target has a fingerprint, retina scan, or biometric profile in the records as a suspected insurgent. In which case, be he standing idle, detained or captive, you can shoot him. Read this account from the Washington Post about the JEFF:

“…the Joint Expeditionary Forensics Facilities (JEFF) project or “lab in a box,” analyzes biometrics. It will be delivered to Iraq at the beginning of 2008, the Navy said, to help distinguish insurgents from civilians.

…the military has been scanning the irises and taking the fingerprints of Iraqis, feeding a biometrics data base in West Virginia. To date, a few ad hoc labs have processed about 85,000 pieces of evidence taken from weapons caches or roadside devices.

Each collapsible, sand-colored, 20-by-20-foot unit has its own generator and satellite link. If things go as planned, data will beamed to the Biometric Fusion Center to check against more than a million Iraqi fingerprints.

The next stage is to miniaturize, create “a backpack lab,” so that soldiers who encounter a suspect “could find out within minutes” if he’s on a terrorist watch list, [says the JEFF weapon designer] “A war fighter needs to know one of three things: Do I let him go? Keep him? Or shoot him on the spot?”

Jamie Leigh Jones is still locked in a box

Posted on by
2

Jamie Leigh Jones KBR HalliburtonWhen they teach in math class about the square roots of numbers, you invariably encounter the paradox of negative numbers. Since neither two positive factors nor two negatives can produce a negative, you’re told the square root of a negative is “irreducible” and you must leave the equation be. It turns out that this explanation was really a matter of convenience, because later in the year students revisit the square root of -1 and learn it can be called an imaginary number. Now you were expected to solve the equation, and zoom, math took off from there. I remember feeling betrayed that math had become an abstraction, so comfortable was I to be stuck at the simpler impasse.

I use this analogy to contemplate some oversimplifications about law which are being used to temper moral indignation at the machinations of our government. We’re told, for example, that we’ve subverted the rule of law in Iraq, that enemy combatants are not covered by the Geneva Conventions, that Guantanamo Cuba falls neither under Cuban law nor our dominion. We’re told the International Criminal courts do not have jurisdiction over Americans and we’re told our contractor-mercenaries are exempt from anyone’s prosecution. Those legal impediments to justice are not only imaginary, to say it in legalese, they’re balderdash.

My math teacher had a educational reason to maintain that the square root of -1 was unsolvable. Whatever motive does anyone have to keep the American public in the dark about the suspension of human rights?

NBC has just trumpeted the tragic case of Jamie Leigh Jones, but presumes simultaneously to reinforce the aforementioned balderdash. Two years ago Jones was gang raped by KBR coworkers in Iraq and kept in a shipping container until she was able to convince one of her keepers to lend her a cell phone. Her father then called a congressman who called the State Department who sent agents over to KBR’s compound in the Green Zone to set her free. Since that time, the feds have dropped the case, the rape-kit evidence has gone missing, KBR claims it has been ordered to conduct no investigation, and Jones is left with no recourse but to file a civil suit. Now she is being told that an arbitration clause in her contract prevents her from doing even that.

The truths being asserted, as indignant as they might make us feel, are that contractors in Iraq are outside the reach of any law. Specifically Iraqi law, as dictated by Viceroy Bremer’s famous contractor indemnity clause, but by inference, US law, because Iraq is a “sovereign nation,” and International Law, because otherwise our whole country could be held accountable for what it’s perpetrated there.

I’ve even read it asserted that two years marks the expiration of Jone’s right to redress from her attackers. Wherever have you heard of so short a statute of limitation for rape?

Another assumption attempts to bolster the impregnability of arbitration clauses which have become de rigueur in corporate employment contracts. Such clauses may forbid civil litigation, rightfully, but do not preclude responsibility for criminal acts. The supposed ambiguity that Jones’ rape cannot be considered a crime is to build a crock upon a sham. No contract may dictate that a assignee consents to be the victim of a crime. Sorry boys.

Likewise, the concept of Iraq being a lawless state is our Defense Department’s wet dream. We may administrate Iraq like the Wild West, as it may for now be under our screws, but like everywhere else on the globe, Iraq is protected by international law. You might also find lawyers who will argue that any lands under the authority of our government are bound by the US constitution period.

The only thing standing between the KBR miscreants and fair judgment is our government’s determination [not] to apply the law. If the media wanted to report that all Blackwater KBR killer rapists are indemnified exclusively by Bush decree, that would be the truth.

Thank you Miss Jones for pressing on with your accusations and lawsuit. Please don’t let the disinformation discourage you.

Gitmo operating manual leaked

Posted on by
4

Wiki Leaks has obtained an updated copy of the Standard Operating Procedures for CAMP DELTA. They’ve posted both a DOC and PDF version available for download as it is UNCLASSIFIED. Due to the document’s size, the transparency group is inviting everyone to study and comment. Already revealed: certain detainees are hidden from the International Red Cross, the use of psychological torture, both violations of the Geneva Conventions. Below is the table of contents:
 
Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures
Headquarters, Joint Task Force – Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO)
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba – 1 March 2004

Contents (listed by paragraph and page number), page iv
Camp Delta Rules, page ix
Chapter 1
Introduction, page 1.1
Purpose ? 1-1, page 1.1
Minor SOP Modifications ? 1-2, page 1.1
References ? 1-3, page 1.1
Explanation of Abbreviations and Terms ? 1-4, page 1.1
JDOG Mission and Commander’s Intent ? 1-5, page 1.1
Responsibilities ? 1-6, page 1.1
U.S. Personnel Standards of Conduct ? 1-7, page 1.2
General Protection Policy ? 1-8, page 1.3

Chapter 2
Command and Control, page 2.1
Chain of Command ? 2-1, page 2.1
Physical Plant ? 2-2, page 2.1
Camp Delta Operations ? 2-3, page 2.1

Section I – Personnel, page 2.1
Detention Operations Branch ? 2-5, page 2.1
Detention Services Branch ? 2-6, page 2.2

Section II – Functions, page 2.2
Detention Operations Center (DOC) ? 2-7, page 2.2
Record Keeping ? 2-8, page 2.3

Chapter 3
Detainee Reception Operations, page 3.1
Overview ? 3-1, page 3.1
Infantry Support Operations ? 3-2, page 3.1
Land Movement ? 3-4, page 3.2
In-processing Security ? 3-5, page 3.2
Inbound and Outbound Operations DMO ? 3-6, page 3.4
Linguist Support ? 3-7, page 3.4
Facility Support ? 3-8, page 3.4

Chapter 4
Detainee Processing (Reception/Transfer/Release DMO) page 4.1
Purpose ? 4-1, page 4.1
Initial Processing ? 4-2, page 4.1
Documents ? 4-3, page 4.1
Preparation for Processing ? 4-4, page 4.1
Personnel Requirements ? 4-5, page 4.1
In-Processing Procedures ? 4-6, page 4.1
MP Escort Responsibilities ? 4-7, page 4.2
Clothing Removal Rome (Station 1) ? 4-8, page 4.2
Shower (Station 2) ? 4-9, page 4.2
Cavity Search (Station 3) ? 4-10, page 4.2
Dressing/Shackle Exchange (Station 4) ? 4-11, page 4.2
DNA Sample (Station 5) ? 4-12, page 4.2
Height And Weight (Station 6) ? 4-13, page 4.2
DRS In-Processing (Station 7) ? 4-14, page 4.3
ID Wristband/Dossier (Station 8 ) ? 4-15, page 4.3
Fingerprint (Station 9) ? 4-16, page 4.3
Camp Rules (Station 10) ? 4-17, page 4.3
Post processing ? 4-18, page 4.3
Reporting ? 4-19, page 4.3
Behavior Management Plan ? 4-20, page 4.3

Chapter 5
Detention Facility Operations, page 5.1
Section I –
Rules of Engagement (ROE) and Rules for the Use of Force (RUF) ? 5-1, page 5.1
Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) Use ? 5-2, page 5.3
Camp Rules ? 5-3, page 5.2

Section II –
Daily Reports ? 5-4, page 5.1

Incident Reports ? 5-5, page 5.2
SPOT Reports ? 5-6, page 5.2
Serious Incident Reports ? 5-7, page 5.3
Discipline Records ? 5-8, page 5.3

Section III –
Guard Mount ? 5-9, page 5.3
Change of Shift Procedures ? 5-10, page 5.3
Equipment Chit System ? 5-11, page 5.4

Section IV –
DOC Operations ? 5-12, page 5.6 Public Address System ? 5-13, page 5.4
Radio Discipline ? 5-14, page 5.4
Building Maintenance ? 5-15, page 5.6 Video Camera/ Combat Camera ? 5-16, page 5.8

Section V –
Evidence and Contraband Procedures ? 5-17, page 5.4
Investigations ? 5-18, page 5.8
Section VI – Other Agencies

Section VII – Training

Chapter 6
Cell Block Operations, page 6.1
Section I – Security Procedures
Overview ? 6-1, page 6.1
Headcounts ? 6-2, page 6.1
Searches ? 6-3, page 6.1
Searching the Koran ? 6-4, page 6.1
Keys ? 6-5, page 6.2
Food Tray Slot (“Bean Hole”) Covers ? 6-6, page 6.2
Applying Restraints (“Shackling”) ? 6-7, page 6.2

Section II – Support Operations
Shower and Exercise ? 6-8, page 6.3
Detainee Mess Operations ? 6-9, page 6.3
Laundry / Linen ? 6-10, page 6.4
Barber ? 6-11, page 6.4
Other Personnel ? 6-12, page 6.4
Library Books ? 6-13, page 6.5
Medical Appointments ? 6-14, page 6.5

Section III – Documentation and Reporting
Block Documentation ? 6-15, page 6.5
Passive Collection ? 6-16, page 6.7
Cell Block Report ? 6-17, page 6.7

Section IV – Block Maintenance
Inspections and Inventories ? 6-18, page 6.7
Cleaning ? 6-19, page 6.7
Equipment Maintenance ? 6-20, page 6.7

Section V – Detainees
Detainee Standard of Conduct ? 6-21, page 6.7
Detainee Identification Band ? 6-22, page 6.8
Uniform and Dress Rules ? 6-23, page 6.8
Personal Hygiene and Appearance ? 6-24, page 6.8
Detainee comfort during inclement weather 6-26, page 6-10

Chapter 7
Sally Port Operations, page 7.1
Sally Ports ? 7-1, page 7.1
Sally Ports 1 And 8 ? 7-2, page 7.1
Sally Ports 3 And 9 ? 7-3, page 7.4
Sally Ports 4 And 10 ? 7-4, page 7.5
Detainee Medical Clinic Gate ? 7-5, page 7.5
Roving Sally ? 7-6, page 7.6
Weapon Boxes ? 7-7, page 7.6
Badge ID Process? 7-8, page 7-6?

Chapter 8
Detainee Behavioral Management, page 8.1
Purpose ? 8-1, page 8.1
Provision of Basic Needs ? 8-2, page 8.1
Discipline Process ? 8-3, page 8.1
Loss of Exercise ? 8-4, page 8.2
Loss of Hot Meals ? 8-5, page 8.2
Comfort Items ? 8-6, page 8.2
Detainee Classification System ? 8-7, page 8.2
GTMO Form 508-1 ? 8-8, page 8.4
Level 5 (Intel) Blocks ? 8-9, page 8.4
Confiscation of Items ? 8-10, page 8.5
Special Rewards ? 8-11, page 8.7

Chapter 9
Segregation Unit Operations, page 9.1
Section I – In-Processing
In-processing and Documentation ? 9-1, page 9.1
Placement for Intelligence Purposes ? 9-2, page 9.1
Section II – Operations
Block Operations ? 9-3, page 9.1
Extension Request processing ? 9-4, page 9.2

Chapter 10
NAVSTA Brig Operations, page 10.1
Purpose ? 10-1, page 10.1
Transport to NAVSTA Brig ? 10-2, page 10.1
Personnel Support Requirements ? 10-3, page 10.1
Medical Support Requirements ? 10-4, page 10.1
Meals ? 10-5, page 10.1
Exercise ? 10-6, page 10.1
Showers and Laundry ? 10-7, page 10.1
Special Orders for Guard Staff ? 10-8, page 10.2
Visitation ? 10-9, page 10.2
Use of the Television ? 10-10, page 10.3

Chapter 11
Escort Operations, page 11.1
General ? 11-1, page 11.1
Escort Control ? 11-2, page 11.1
Priority of Escorts ? 11-3, page 11.1
Escort Teams ? 11-4, page 11.1
Vehicle Usage ? 11-5, page 11.3
Equipment Maintenance ? 11-6, page 11.4
Communications ? 11-7, page 11.4
Distinguished Visitors ? 11-8, page 11.4
NAVBASE Hospital Escorts ? 11-9, page 11.4

Chapter 12
Detainee Property, page 12.1
Authorized Personnel ? 12-1, page 12.1
Property handling ? 12-2, page 12.1

Chapter 13
Detainee Mail Operations, page 13.1
Types of Mail ? 13-1, page 13.1
Incoming Mail ? 13-2, page 13.1
Outgoing Mail ? 13-3, page 13.1
ICRC Mail ? 13-4, page 13.2
Cleared Mail ? 13-5, page 13.3
Redacted Mail ? 13-6, page 13.3
Held Mail ? 13-7, page 13.3
Mail screening ? 13-8, page 13.3
Mail Transmittal Records ? 13-9, page 13.4
Mail for Detainees Held at Locations Other Than GTMO ? 13-10, page 13.4
Mail Sent Directly to Detainees ? 13-11, page 13.4
Incorrectly Addressed Mail ? 13-12, page 13.5
Mail for Released Detainees ? 13-13, page 13.5
Detainees in Special Housing ? 13-14, page 13.5
Detainees with More Than 12 Items of Mail ? 13-15, page 13.5
Detainees Passing Mail between Cells ? 13-16, page 13.5

Chapter 14
Intelligence Operations, page 14.1
General ? 14-1, page 14.1
Force Protection ? 14-2, page 14.1
Significant Activity Report ? 14-3, page 14.1
Disturbance Matrix ? 14-4, page 14.1
Communication Matrix and Link Diagram ? 14-5, page 14.1
Leadership Matrices ? 14-6, page 14.1
Items of Intelligence Value ? 14-7, page 14.1
Detainee Mail screening ? 14-8, page 14.1
Operational Intelligence ? 14-9, page 14.2
Source Operations and Reports ? 14-10, page 14.2
Duties ? 14-11, page 14.2
JIIF Guard Personnel ? 14-12, page 14.2
SCIF Security ? 14-13, page 14.3

Chapter 15
Linguist Operations, page 15.1
General ? 15-1, page 15.1
Organization ? 15-2, page 15.1
Roles and Responsibilities ? 15-3, page 15.1
Camp Delta Operations ? 15-4, page 15.1
Detainee In-Processing Operations ? 15-5, page 15.2
Document Exploitation (DOCEX) ? 15-6, page 15.2
DOCEX Translation Guidelines ? 15-7, page 15.3
DOCEX Quality Control ? 15-8, page 15.3
Detainee Library ? 15-9, page 15.3
Passive Collection of CI Information ? 15-10, page 15.5
Intelligence Reference Guide for Linguists ? 15-11, page 15.5
Security Considerations ? 15-12, page 15.5

Chapter 16
Religious Support, page 16.1
Section I – Accommodation of Religion
Chaplain ? 16-1, page 16.1
Religious Practices ? 16-2, page 16.1
Chaplain Requests ? 16-3, page 16.1
Fasting Requests ? 16-4, page 16.1

Section II – Muslim Detainee Religious Practices
The Muslim Prayer ? 16-5, page 16.2
Friday Prayer Service ? 16-6, page 16.2
Muslim Fasting ? 16-7, page 16.2
Muslim Holiday – Eid ? 16-8, page 16.2
Dietary Practices ? 16-9, page 16.3
Medical Practices ? 16-10, page 16.3
Wear and Appearance of Clothing ? 16-11, page 16.3
Showers and Hygiene ? 16-12, page 16.3
Religious Accommodation ? 16-13, page 16.3

Section III – Islam
Cultural Considerations ? 16-14, page 16.3

Section IV – Christian Detainee Religious Practices
The Christian Prayer ? 16-15, page 16.4
Christian Holidays ? 16-16, page 16.4
Religious Items ? 16-17, page 16.5

Section V – Muslim Funerals
Muslim Funeral and Burial Rites ? 16-18, page 16.5
Washing the Body ? 16-19, page 16.5
Shrouding the Body ? 16-20, page 16.5
Procedures for the Burial ? 16-21, page 16.6

Chapter 17
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), page 17.1
Personnel ? 17-1, page 17.1
Operations ? 17-2, page 17.1
ICRC Visitation Rules ? 17-3, page 17.1
Levels of Visitation ? 17-4, page 17.1

Chapter 18
Food Service, page 18.1
Responsibilities ? 18-1, page 18.1
Operations ? 18-2, page 18.1
Duties ? 18-3, page 18.1

Chapter 19
Medical, page 19.1
Section I – Procedures
Restraint Procedures ? 19-1, page 19.1
Dispensing of Medications ? 19-2, page 19.1
Sick Call ? 19-4, page 19.2

Section II – Emergencies
Emergency Sick Call ? 19-5, page 19.2
Emergency Condition Responses ? 19-6, page 19.2
Combat Lifesavers ? 19-7, page 19.3

Section III – Medical Problems
Voluntary Total Fasting and Re-feeding ? 19-8, page 19.4
Bodily Fluids ? 19-9, page 19.4
Heat Category Measure ? 19-10, page 19.5

Section IV – Facilities
Detention Hospital ? 19-11, page 19.6

Chapter 20
Repair and Utility, page 20.1
Work Orders ? 20-1, page 20.1
Tool Accountability ? 20-2, page 20.2

Chapter 21
Force Protection, page 21.1
Section I – Precautions
Searches ? 21-1, page 21.1
Security Inspections and Vulnerability Assessments ? 21-2, page 21.1
Fire Prevention Precautions ? 21-3, page 21.1

Section II – Measures
Change in FPCON ? 21-4, page 21.1
Alert Roster/Recall Roster ? 21-5, page 21.7
Brevity Codes for Implementation of FPCON Levels ? 21-6, page 21.7

Section III – Alert Systems
Duress Condition ? 21-7, page 21.7
NAVBASE Siren System ? 21-8, page 21.8

Section IV – Weapons
Weapon Conditions ? 21-9, page 21.8
Weapons and Ammunition Storage Facility ? 21-10, page 21.8

Chapter 22
Key Control, page 22.1
Overview ? 22-1, page 22.1
Key Custodian ? 22-2, page 22.1
Key Control Register ? 22-3, page 22.1
Key Access Roster ? 22-4, page 22.1
Key and Lock Accountability ? 22-5, page 22.1
Key Issue Procedures ? 22-6, page 22.1
Emergency Procedures ? 22-7, page 22.2

Chapter 23
External Security Operations, page 23.1
Conduct of Infantry Soldiers ? 23-1, page 23.1
Task Organization ? 23-2, page 23.1
Infantry FPCON Actions ? 23-3, page 23.1
Tower Operations ? 23-4, page 23.1
Debrief Format ? 23-5, page 23.2
External Positions ? 23-6, page 23.2
Special Instructions ? 23-7, page 23.3
Mounted Patrols ? 23-8, page 23.4
Listening Posts (LP)/Observation Posts (OP) ? 23-9, page 23.5
Ammunition handling ? 23-10, page 23.5
Worcester TCP ? 23-11, page 23.5
Gardner TCP ? 23-12, page 23.7
Blocker Position (BP) ? 23-13, page 23.8

Chapter 24
Initial Reaction Force (IRF) Operations, page 24.1
Section I – Preparation
Team Organization ? 24-1, page 24.1
IRF Team Equipment ? 24-2, page 24.1
Additional Equipment ? 24-3, page 24.1
Training ? 24-4, page 24.1
Brevity Code ? 24-5, page 24.2

Section II – Operations
IRF Team Guidelines ? 24-6, page 24.2
IRF Team Use ? 24-7, page 24.2

Section III – Documentation
Verbal Reporting ? 24-8, page 24.3
Written Reporting ? 24-9, page 24.3

Chapter 25
Quick Response Force (QRF) Operations, page 25.1
Mission ? 25-1, page 25.1
Requirements ? 25-2, page 25.1
Notification Procedures ? 25-3, page 25.1
Ammunition Numbers and Accountability ? 25-4, page 25.1
Uniform ? 25-5, page 25.1

Chapter 26
Military Working Dogs (MWD), page 26.1
Responsibilities ? 26-1, page 26.1
Operations ? 26-2, page 26.1
Training ? 26-3, page 26.2
Logistics ? 26-4, page 26.2

Chapter 27
Operational Security (OPSEC) and Deceptive Lighting Plan, page 27.1
Purpose ? 27-1, page 27.1
Responsibilities ? 27-2, page 27.1
Punitive Action ? 27-3, page 27.1
Essential Elements of Friendly Information (EEFI) ? 27-4, page 27.1
Prohibited Activity ? 27-5, page 27.1
Deceptive Light Plan ? 27-6, page 27.2

Chapter 28
Public Affairs, page 28.1
Operations ? 28-1, page 28.1
Themes for Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) ? 28-2, page 28.1
Detainee International Public Information Themes ? 28-3, page 28.1

Chapter 29
Transitions, page 29.1
Section I – To Camp IV
Preparation ? 29-1, page 29.1
Process ? 29-2, page 29.1
Movement to Camp IV ? 29-3, page 29.1

Section II – For Transfers
Preparation ? 29-4, page 29.1
Process ? 29-5, page 29.1
Movement to Camp IV ? 29-6, page 29.2
Standing Orders ? 29-7, page 29.2

Chapter 30
Delta Block Mental Health Facility (MHF), page 30.1
Section I – Operations
Overview ? 30-1, page 30.1
Staffing ? 30-2, page 30.1
Watch ? 30-3, page 30.1
Non-Acute Section ? 30-4, page 30.1
Video Monitoring Station ? 30-5, page 30.1
Interview Cells ? 30-6, page 30.1
Delta Acute Section and Self-Harm Precautions ? 30-7, page 30.1

Section II – Operations
Self-Harm Precautions Guidelines ? 30-8, page 30.1
Shower and Exercise ? 30-9, page 30.1
Dispensing of Prescribed Medication and Medical Sick call Procedures ? 30-10, page 30.1
Detainee Behavioral Management Matrix ? 30-11, page 30.1
Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) Use ? 30-12, page 30.1
Medical Records ? 30-13, page 30.1
Crisis/Mass Casualty Response ? 30-14, page 30.1

Section III – Restraint and Seclusion
Purpose ? 30-15, page 30.1
Background ? 30-16, page 30.1
Definitions ? 30-17, page 30.1
Indications ? 30-18, page 30.1
Practice Authority ? 30-19, page 30.1
Critical Elements ? 30-20, page 30.1
Doctor’s Order ? 30-21, page 30.1
Training ? 30-22, page 30.1
Performance Improvement ? 30-23, page 30.1

Section IV – Personnel
Combat Stress Reactions ? 30-24, page 30.1
Interpreters ? 30-25, page 30.1

Chapter 31
Supply Operations, page 31.1
Waste Disposal ? 31-1, page 31.1
Camp Supply Rooms ? 31-2, page 31.1
Supply Requests ? 31-3, page 31.1
Computer Requests ? 31-4, page 31.1
MRE Sanitization ? 31-5, page 31.1

Chapter 32
Emergency Action Plans (EAPs), page 32.1
Attempted/Actual Self Harm ? 32-1, page 32.1-2
Mass Disturbance ? 32-2, page 32.2
Power Outage ? 32-3, page 32.4
Hostage Situation? 32-4, page 32.5
Death ? 32-5, page 32.5
Medical Emergency ? 32-6, page 32.5
Radio Range Ambulance access (emergency) 32.6a page 32.6
Fratricide ? 32-7, page 32.7
Fire ? 32-8, page 32.8
Bomb Threat / Discovery / Explosion ? 32-9, page 32.9
Mass Casualty Incident (MCI) ? 32-10, page 32.10
Evacuation Routes ? 32-11, page 32.14
Destructive Weather ? 32-12, page 32.15
Escape and Apprehension (“Orange Sherbet”) ? 32-16, page 32.17
Camp Coordinated Contraband Search & Seizure (“Clean Sweep”) ?32-16, page 32.17
Intrusion Detection System (IDS) Alarm T-SCIF ? 32-16, page 32-17

Chapter 33 Camp 4 Standard Operating Procedures
Commander’s Intent ? 33-1, page 33.1
Manning Requirements ? 33-2, page 33.1
Leave Policy ? 33-3, page 33.1
Chain of Command (Command and Control) ? 33-4, page 33.1
Service and Support ? 33-5, page 33.1
Personnel Responsibilities ? 33-6, page 33.2
General Rules ? 33-7, page 33.5
Bay Rules ? 33-8, page 33.6
Compound Recreation / Central Recreation Yard Rules ? 33-9, page 33.7
Central Shower/Bath Rules ? 33-10, page 33.8
Mess Yard Rules ? 33-11, page 33.8
Bay Leader Duties and Responsibilities ? 33-12, page 33.9
Laundry/Linen Exchange ? 33-13, page 33.9
Personnel and Detainee cleaning ? 33-14, page 33.10
Radio Call Signs ? 33-15, page 33.10
Fire Evacuation Plan ? 33-16, page 33.11
“OPERATION SNOWBALL” ? 33-17, page 33.11
Gator Maintenance ? 33-18, page 33.12
Logbooks ? 33-19, page 33.13
Radio/Telephone Transmissions ? 33-20, page 33.13
NIPR Account ? 33-21, page 33.13
Break Area ? 33-22, page 33.13
Sally Port Storage Lockers ? 33-23, page 33.13
P.A. Intercom and Announcement System ? 33-24, page 33.13
Detainee Movement from/to Camp 4 ? 33-25, page 33.13
Medical Personnel/Medication Distribution ? 33-26, page 33.14
Assigned Personnel Duty Uniform ? 33-27, page 33/14
Detainee Movement Operations (DMO) ? 33-28, page 33.14
Duress and IRF Codes ? 33-30, page 33.15

Chapter 34
Commissions, page 34.1
Quick Reaction Force (QRF) Teams ? 34.1, page 34.1
Disturbance in the courtroom ?34.2, page 34.1
Medical Emergency ? 34.3, page 34.2
Fire ?34.4, page 34.2
Bomb Threat ?34.5, page 34.3
React to an Ambush along the convoy route ? 34.6, page 34.3

Information Not Covered By the Camp 4 SOP ? 34-7, page 34.4
Forms Found in Appendix C of the Camp Delta SOP (To Be Added At A Later Date) ? 34-8, pages 34.4

APPENDIXES
A. References
B. Camp Delta Forms

Glossary
Index

The War in Iraq

Posted on by
Reply

the war no more
In my opinion, noted chronicler Ken Burns, whom I otherwise respect, does Americans a great disservice to title his multimedia WWII homage THE WAR.

I do resent the President and his enablers admonishing Americans for what may or may not be appropriate behavior “in a time of war.” We were not “at war” during the Cold War or the War on Drugs. And the War on Terror is equally an [existential, so-called] abstraction. Fighting terrorists, including the invasion of Afghanistan, is a police action. If we are talking about apprehension. Missile strikes are extra-judicial assassination. Undeclared military aggression.

But since our soldiers are being sent to war, and there is profound anti-war revulsion, and congress is being asked to collude by providing war funding, and we are detaining combatants which at a minimum should be awarded Prisoner of War status, we cannot escape discussing Iraq as a war, and most notably as an illegal war.

So when Ken Burns calls his WWII tome THE WAR, isn’t it more than slightly dismissive of veterans of all combat since? The Vietnam War lasted three times as long as WWII, to Baby Boomers it was the war. The Korean War, termed a “conflict” to avoid having Congress refuse a declaration of war, is now called the Korean War, even tragically the Forgotten War. World War One before it was The First World War, was known as The Great War, even the War to End All Wars. De facto it WAS THE WAR, but imagine anyone thinking to call it that in the midst of WWII.

Does Burns mean to deny [The] Iraq [War] its significance, even as he might suggest it lacks the legitimacy of WWII, the Just War? As Iraq casualties and atrocities slip from the headlines, it’s hard to see the diversion of WWII nostalgia as helpful.

Iraq may turn out to be simply the opening salvo of THE WAR declared by the corporate west on all of humanity. It deserves its due.

The face of legally blind patriotism

Posted on by
13

Prosthetic eye with Marines emblemGunnery Sergeant Nick Popaditch lost his eye in the assault on Fallujah. His new glass prosthetic features a holographic emblem of the US Marine Corps.
 
This Veterans Day, Sergeant Popaditch was awarded a medal for pioneering an innovative combat technique. Presuming an ambush, Popaditch called in an airstrike, then drove his tank forward under cover of the C-130 gunship before its firestorm had subsided. As a result Popaditch was injured, but in his words: “(We were) just inflicting a devastating number of casualties on the enemy, and we did it in a way that no one had ever done before.”

This is the same tank commander immortalized on magazine covers in 2003 smoking his cigar as he assisted in toppling Saddam’s statue in Firdos Square. Articles told later of Popaditch’s tank named “Carnivore” storming Fallujah in retaliation for the contractors killed by jubilant Iraqis. Now he’s grabbing attention with his Few-The-Proud cornea. When we recoil at WWII accounts of the Death’s Head Regiment and other unthinkably morose nomenclature and regalia of the enthusiastic Nazis, can we fathom the imaginative horrors of our own X-Box-born killers?

Popaditch acted courageously by venturing into an ordnance maelstrom to certain injury. But whose kind of hero?

Greens and the energy companies

Posted on by
Reply

Everybody says they’re for helping out the environment these days, and yet nobody seems to be for protecting the environment that much. After all, who is going to say they are for dumping a pile of personal refuse into the middle of the city park, so to speak?

The most prolific talkers about the need to save the environment are the supporters of the world wide Green Party Movement. This political movement was formed because neither the Marxists nor the capitalists of the world seemed to take the issue seriously enough. Still, today the real issue is, does the Green Movement itself take saving the environment all that seriously? Unfortunately I think that the answer is really… NO, it does not. Why is that conclusion warranted?

Let’s take a look at the energy companies and the Green Movement, for example, and what do all the Green supporters always seem to advocate? They basically seem to advocate nothing. They usually talk about finding new non-polluting energy sources and turning to that as replacement for oil, coal, and nuclear. They advocate that individuals use less energy personally. They advocate less personal consumerism, but they don’t advocate much any real change in the structure of who runs the energy businesses, which is in private hands.
Is that really advocating for protecting the environment in a serious manner?

These energy companies are monstrous in size and are the major multi-nationals in the world. Can their structure just be allowed to stay as it is now, and the earth can be protected by that? Are these energy companies in private hands going to respond to reason and turn to ‘clean’ fuels in lesser amounts? We have to keep in mind that the rest of the multi-nationals demand humongous amounts of energy to be supplied to them for production, transportation, and sales.

Demanding that individuals reduce personal consumption while humongous multi-nationals should merely remain organized as they are is not a serious plan to combat ecological disintegration. Where is the Green Movement’s call to take these companies out of private hands and control their management so that profit making is not their single orientation? Have we missed something here, because allowing private ownership of multi-national energy corporations is not going to conserve Earth?

The Greens have to do what many countries have had to do in the past to be a movement that can seriously change the world. Many countries when confronted by huge multi-nationals that wanted to merely loot national resources and make a profit off that, nationalized these companies. They took them over and took back some of the loot taken into private hands by the super rich. It was necessary to do so, just as it is still necessary to do this with today’s humongous energy conglomerates. In short, the Green Movement must stop just making demands that individual peons change their consumer habits, and demand that energy multi-nationals be nationalized.

The Green Movement, to save Earth’s ecology, has to change from being a group of nice individuals talking intellectually about good things, and become a Movement that has serious demands that can actually effect serious change if implemented. Nationalize the energy multi-nationals now!

Think that costs too much in the long run? Then think some about how these companies have directed the spending of $2 1/2 trillion dollars PLUS into occupying Iraq and Afghanistan? Save some money and help save the planet from non-sustainable production directed by private owners looting Earth for private profit.

The Woolseys- a Mom and Pop War Profiteering Team

Posted on by
1

Suzanne Woolsey is vice chair of the Colorado College Board of Directors. Her husband will be speaking this Thursday at the school, and all three of their kids graduated from there. The following opinion piece by Evelyn Pringle is reprinted in whole below.

January 17, 2005
Mom & Pop War Profiteering Team – Woolseys
By Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, Ohio

The Defense Policy Board (DPB) is a hand-picked group of 30 people that advises Bush administration officials on matters such as whether and when to go to war, or not. The current group was selected by Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith, and approved by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Everyone who is anyone in the arms and defense industry knows that palling up to DPB members is the ticket to getting a Pentagon contract.

Shortly after the war in Iraq began, the April 10, 2003 New York Times pointed out that several board members stood to benefit financially from the war. It reported that the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) documented that 9 of the members were “linked to companies that have won more than $76 billion in defense contracts in 2001 and 2002.”

Promote War & Garner Positions For Profits

One of the members mentioned who stood to profit was R. James Woolsey. In addition to being a member of the DPB, Woolsey also sits on Navy and CIA advisory boards; and he is also a founding member of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI), a private group that was specifically set up by Bush in 2002, to find ways to increase public support for a war against Iraq.

Let me say right here and now that I think bold lines are crossed when people like Woolsey, who promote a specific war, financially benefit from their successful promotion. There should be a law that requires a standard recusal from all war profits by any policy advisor who advocates sending our young men and women off to die in that same war.

And I don’t know about anybody else, but I’ve never heard of our government forming a group of promoters to rally support for a war before. I dare anyone to try and convince me that this war profiteering scheme wasn’t well planned and managed from the get-go.

Mom & Pop Team Of War Profiteers

I would rate the husband and wife team of James and Suzanne Woolsey up there as one of the most blatant examples of war profiting that I‘ve ever seen. They both remain policy advisors on Iraq, even though they both work for private firms that do business there. James has long wanted to use US military might to transform the Middle East. “And he has pushed for war with Iraq as hard as anyone, even before the terrorist attacks of Sep 11, 2001,” according to the April 8, 2003 Global Policy Forum.

That’s right – long before 9/11. In January 1998, James signed the now infamous letter to Clinton from the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) calling for regime change in Iraq (which Clinton trashed). In 1998, he also successfully lobbied to pass the Iraq Liberation Act (ILA), which allocated nearly $100 million for the Iraqi opposition, mainly the Iraq National Congress (INC), headed by none other than Ahmed Chalabi.

9/11 – Gift To Profiteering Team

The lobby for the war in Iraq immediately moved into high gear after 9/11. Within days, the DPB convened to discuss how they could use 9/11 to justify a war in Iraq. James was sent overseas to try to find a link between Saddam and bin Laden. He returned with the tale that an unnamed source had told the Czech intelligence that in April, 2001, he had observed a meeting between the lead 9/11 skyjacker and an Iraqi agent in Prague.

Even though the tale was deemed not credible by US, British, Israeli, and French, intelligence agencies, it became the basis of a major neo-con disinformation campaign against Saddam on cable news shows and editorial pages in major US newspapers.

James himself wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that said a foreign state had aided Al Qaeda in preparing the 9/11 attacks and pointed to Iraq as the prime suspect. In fact, James even went so far to allege that Saddam was behind the 1993 WTC bombing and the anthrax letters sent out after 9/11. In large part, the propaganda campaign was successful. A poll conducted in late 2002, showed that over half of those polled believed that Saddam was somehow linked to 9/11.

Woolsey & Chalabi – Secret Long-Time Buddies

Just when I think I have seen every dirty filthy angle by which money can be made in the war profiteering trade, something else turns up. I recently discovered a little tid-bit that I was unaware of. In addition to getting $100 million tax dollars allocated for the INC and Ahmed Chalabi in 1998, James also became lawyer and adviser to Iraq’s “President in Waiting” in the same year.

With the help of the media, James must have forgot to mention this obvious conflict of interest while he was alleging collusion in 9/11 between Chalabi’s enemy Saddam and bin Laden. This relationship definitely should have been made public before the war began because of its relevance to the truth or falsity of the justification given for waging war in Iraq to begin with.

Back in 1998, Chalabi sought legal help from Woolsey to secure the release of 6 of his INC associates from the detention center in Guam, even though the CIA said they were threats to US interests. James successfully freed Chalabi’s minions and mowed a path for the so-called Iraqi defectors to feed bogus information to US intelligence teams.

The false information about WMDs and collusion between Saddam and bin Laden, that originated from the relationship of Chalabi and Woolsey, along with the resulting diversion of financial and military resources to Iraq, and away from the real terrorist bin Laden, has left the US with a limited ability to project military power anywhere else in the world. Any unexpected conflict would be a disaster with the military so overstretched in Iraq, and it looks like in large part, we can thank Woolsey and Chalabi for this predicament.

And as it turns out the CIA was right. One of men Woolsey freed, Aras Habib Karim, went on to become Chalabi’s Chief of Intelligence, and has since leaked classified information to Iran, and is currently under investigation by the FBI. I wonder if James is representing the guy now?

James & Booz Allen Hamilton

At the same time that they were advocating for war in Iraq, its more than obvious that James and Suzanne Woolsey were positioning themselves for a future in defense-related firms, with an eye on the anticipated war profits.

James is a shining example of how the revolving door policy works in Washington. Although he left his position as director of the CIA in 1995, he remained a senior advisor on intelligence and national security policies.

And he also now works for several private firms that do business in Iraq. According to Citizens for Public Integrity, in July, 2002, James joined Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting firm that “had contracts worth more than $680 million” that year.

In May, 2003, in his capacity as a vice president of Booz Allen Hamilton, James was a featured speaker at a seminar entitled “Companies on the Ground: The Challenge for Business in Rebuilding Iraq.” He spoke of the potential business opportunities in the reconstruction of Iraq and how Bush planned to steer the contracts to US companies. Approximately 80 corporate executives paid $1100 to listen to what he had to say.

May, 2003 was only 2 months after the war began. If not for his advisory positions in the Bush administration, how would James possibly be able to put together a investor seminar with information on how to make money in Iraq?

In addition, “Booz Allen is a subcontractor for a $75-million telecommunications project in Iraq. The company does extensive work for the Defense Department as well. Recently, the Navy awarded it $14 million in contracts,” according to the Aug 15, 2004 LA Times. In true Dick Cheney style, James said in an interview that “he had not been involved in Booz Allen’s Iraq contracts,” the Times reports. But then it really doesn’t matter whether he was involved in a particular contract or not, because as a Vice President of the firm, he benefits from profits resulting from all contracts.

Besides his recent statement to the Times belies the title of his own May, 2003 seminar which was: “Companies on the Ground: The Challenge for Business in Rebuilding Iraq.” What is he trying to say? That he never got paid for speaking at that seminar? That none of the 80 executives that attended ever contacted Booz work in Iraq? Yea right. James & Paladin Capital Group

James positioned himself all over the map. He is now a principal in the Paladin Capital Group, another defense-related firm. In part, here is how the firm describes itself on its web site, Paladin Homeland Security Fund, L.P. Investment Strategy

As widely reported in public media, billions of dollars are being appropriated by the United States and foreign governments for replenishment of military stockpiles, deployment of new means to create more secure societies and creation of new standards, equipment, technologies and policies for coping with and recovering from the myriad forms of terrorism and attack. … the General Partner believes that the Federal and State governments … and indeed governments throughout the world, will look to … private enterprise to address these issues. The General Partner believes that the private sector thus will look to expend billions of dollars to execute defense and security plans for security in the public sector and to deploy growth equity to produce the products and services that non-governmental organizations will require.

Fund Management

Operation of the Fund starts with an experienced management team. … additional individuals who have prominent and distinguished records in relevant fields, including security, defense and information and technology sciences, have associated with Paladin Capital in connection with the Fund. These additional principals of the Fund include R. James Woolsey, …

The Fund’s Principals have extensive domestic and international experience in fund investments and in originating, underwriting, closing, monitoring and exiting investments similar to those that are proposed for the Fund. The additional Principals, including Mr. Woolsey, … have extensive and distinguished track records in service within the security, defense and related fields.

Investment Guidelines Characteristics

Small to medium-sized, worker-friendly companies with the following characteristics: Must relate to defense, prevention, coping or recovery from disaster. Dual use: commercial and government applicability for products and services.

Surely no one could ever allege a possible conflict of interest between James serving on 3 defense-related boards (Navy, DPB, & CIA) with the US government and his involvement with this firm.

Global Options – James & DPB Member Livingstone

James is also plugged into Global Options, which is headed by his fellow DPB member Neil Livingstone. In addition to sitting on the DPB, Livingstone has served as a Pentagon and State Department advisor and has long called for overthrowing Saddam.

Livingstone was already promoting war against Iraq back in 1993, when he wrote an editorial for Newsday that said the US “should launch a massive covert program designed to remove Hussein.” Well 11 years later, it looks like he finally got his wish, and just like his pal James, Livingstone is a regular speaker at investment seminars on Iraq.

Global Options provides contacts and consulting services to firms doing business in Iraq and “offers a wide range of security and risk management services,” according to its website. Although James admits that he is a paid advisor at Global Options, he again says the work he does at the firm does not involve Iraq. And of course I believe him (not).

Suzanne – Better Half Of Profiteering Team

From 1993 – 2003, Suzanne was an executive with the National Academies, an institution that advises the government on science, engineering, and medicine. There’s probably no big money to be made in that position and that’s probably what motivated Suzanne seek a more potentially profitable government position.

And she sure found one. According to the Aug 15, 2004 LA Times, Suzanne is a trustee of a little-known arms consulting group that had access to senior Pentagon leaders directing the Iraq war.

Although she had zero experience with military or national security matters, in 2000 she became a trustee at the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA), a nonprofit corporation paid to do research for the Pentagon. During the attack against Iraq, the IDA provided senior Pentagon officials with assessments of the operation.

Through this position, Suzanne had unlimited insider access to valuable information. For instance, the Times reported that in a June 3, 2003, briefing, Brigadier General Robert Cone of the Army, described the group‘s operation. ”This team did business” within the Army Central Command ”on a daily basis, by observing meeting and planning sessions, attending command updates, watching key decisions being made, watching problems being solved, and generally being provided unrestricted access to the business of the conduct of this war,” Cone said, according to a transcript of the session.

The question is did Suzanne use the info to benefit the family business? I’ll let the reader be the judge. She was appointed to “Fluor’s board in January 2004, while Fluor and a partner, AMEC, were competing for two federal contracts to do reconstruction work in Iraq. A little more than a month after she was named, Fluor and AMEC got both contracts, with a combined value of $1.6 billion,” according to the LA Times.

Although a Fluor official refused to discuss why Suzanne was chosen for the job, the official confirmed SEC filings that show, “Fluor pays outside directors (like Suzanne) $40,000 a year, plus stock options and additional fees for attending meetings,” the Times reports.

As for the financial worth of her stock in the company, its looking good. Fluor’s stock has risen steadily since the war in Iraq began. The Times reports that in August, 2004, it was $45 a share, up from a little more than $30 a share in March 2003. Reports filed with the SEC show Suzanne owns 1,500 shares of Fluor stock.

With Fluor making a bundle, it only stands to reason that all the more money can be funneled back into the Woolsey piggy bank. SEC filings show that Fluor reported that its revenue for the first quarter of the current fiscal year from work in Iraq totaled ”approximately $190 million. There was no work in Iraq in the comparable period in 2003,” reports the Times.

I would be willing to bet that any defense related firm would have given an arm and a leg to find out what was being said during those IDA meetings and war planning sessions. Oh of course I’m not suggesting that Suzanne was feeding Fluor information before she came on board and that‘s why she was hired. But at the same time, its sure difficult to think of any other reason why she would be hired.

Here’s another profiteering trick that I would never have thought of. Suzanne even managed to get paid while she gathered the insider information. Tax records show that in 2003, she was paid $11,500 for serving on the IDA. Who wouldn’t want this gal on their team?

The overlapping public and private associations of the Woolsey’s are merely 2 examples of the all too familiar pattern in the Bush administration, in which people who play key roles in advising officials on policies, are involving themselves financially with firms in related fields. And it should be noted that the profiteering is certainly not limited to war policies. Its rampant in every area of policy within the Bush administration.

Long-Term War – Thriving Family Business

Hands down, James should be awarded a plaque for being the #1 Iraq War Monger, and it should say: “What could be more sickening than a war-hungry non-combatant? A war-hungry non-combatant reaping profit from the blood of slaughtered women, children and men of Iraq,” (Bill Berkowitz).

War-hungry James is still hard at it; promoting war for as far as the eye can see. On August 15, 2004, the LA Times reported that, “Last month, Woolsey appeared at a … news conference to announce the creation of a group called the Committee of the Present Danger, which he said would attempt to focus public attention on the threat ”to the US and the civilized world from Islamic terrorism.”

On September 29, 2004 he participated in a forum entitled: “World War IV: Why We Fight, Whom We Fight, How We Fight,” sponsored by the Committee on Present Danger and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. I wonder how many people who went to the polls on Nov 2, 2004, realized that a vote for Bush meant rubber-stamping more of World War IV?

Plan To Destroy and Conquer Iraq

The Iraqi citizens had no say-so in the Bush administration’s decision to bomb the hell out of their country and the Iraqi people, now suffering the most as a result of the war, are not allowed to be involved in making decisions about the reconstruction of Iraq.

In comments that could have been made yesterday, Naomi Klein described what would happen to the Iraqis under Bush’s war plan in the April 14, 2003 issue of the Guardian, “A people, starved and sickened by sanctions, then pulverized by war, is going to emerge from this trauma to find that their country had been sold out from under them. They will also discover that their new-found “freedom” – for which so many of their loved ones perished – comes pre-shackled by irreversible economic decisions that were made in boardrooms while the bombs were still falling. They will then be told to vote for their new leaders, and welcomed to the wonderful world of democracy. ”

Every one of her predictions has come true and Iraqis may be worse off than we realize. Klein reports that on October 13, 2004, Iraq’s “health ministry issued a harrowing report on its post-invasion health crisis, including outbreaks of typhoid and tuberculosis and soaring child and mother mortality rates,” while at the same time the “State Department announced that $3.5 billion for water, sanitation and electricity projects was being shifted to security.”

How can anybody in their right mind expect the Iraqi people to be grateful to America for all this good fortune?

Stop The War Profiteering

It seems to me that we’ve taken our eye off the ball here. Granted, the web of corruption is bad enough in itself, but too little consideration is being given to the Iraqi lives at stake. Every profiteering dollar bilked or wasted is a dollar that could be spent on improving Iraq’s basic living conditions like getting water, sanitation and electricity up and running again, or training Iraqi police and military forces, or developing jobs for Iraqis.

Instead our tax dollars are being funneled back to profiteers like the Woolseys, over the backs of not only our dead soldiers; but over 100,000 dead Iraqis as well. The administration had the chance to rebuild Iraq, and at the same time earn the trust of the Iraqi people, but instead it chose to rape and torture innocent Iraqi prisoners, raid the reconstruction fund, and deprive the Iraqis of everything essential to normal human life. The blatant acts of corruption by the occupational authority and US contractors have given the Iraqis every reason under the sun to mistrust the motives of Americans who say they want to help rebuild their country. And how can we expect their opinions to change as long as the obvious corruption continues?

If we ever expect to regain the trust of Iraqis, we have to stop the Woolseys, and others like them, who engage in this filthy, disgusting trade. For starters, I say all Bush war profiteers should be given 2 options: they can either recuse themselves from advising government officials on any matter of national security period, or they can donate all profits made through affiliations with defense-related companies to soldiers wounded in the war and families of soldiers killed in the war.

While this would definitely be a good first step, I won’t hold my breath while waiting to see which option the greedy war-mongers choose.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0501/S00107.htm

Unlawful Combatant Private Contractors

Posted on by
14

Private contractors illegal enemy combatants
Here’s a rare photo of some private security contractors in Iraq. In the wild west they were called guns for hire. Incorporated they became Pinkertons and so continued a long tradition of reviled professional soldiers, Hessians, Swiss Guards, Gurkhas, usually associated with totalitarian regimes, not democracies.

Our government and media won’t use the term mercenaries, but they do perseverate on not having any official means to restrain their dogs of war. APPARENTLY Iraq law doesn’t touch them, ALAS, neither does American military law. We benefit from their ruthless methods but bear no responsibility DEAR GOD when someone catches them/us at it.

Bush and Co are eating their cake and having it in everybody’s faces as well. No accountability for our private contractor mercenaries? What is our own definition of UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANTS? Not that it’s any excuse to lock irregular soldiers away without due process, or to deny anyone their human rights, but certainly asymmetric warriors fit the bill for illegal combatants.

Can you believe that our diplomats and upper echelon will not go anywhere without these mercenary escorts? They’re confined to the Green Zone until Blackwater is cleared of its latest shooting spree. What about US soldiers as escorts? Our generals and statesmen do not trust our own troops for their safety. These private hired killers are the US Praetorian Guard, and our leaders claim they fall under no one’s authority?

What this administration and the press and every talking head war monger pay careful attention to ignore is that international law has jurisdiction over all their crimes. When you hear some military expert pensively mulling over with great dismay the untread gray area of indemnified private contractor actions. It’s silly subterfuge. International war conventions, Geneva Article 47 for example, have without ambiguity codified and condemned mercenaries and war criminals alike.

Tasers in the hands of human nature

Posted on by
2


I happened upon videos of cops tasering arrestees. Gruesome scenes of obvious sadistic indulgence. Sometimes prolonged and repeated.

While the taser has become a popular tool for the police to deal with uncooperative subjects, it’s hard not to see pure sadism in the guise of standard operating procedure. The police bark their orders (usually, “put your hands behind your back”) and give a warning about using the taser. If still no compliance, zap.

Rather, ZAAAAAAAAAAP. Then the officer repeats his instruction. If the subject is still dealing with the pain, or is disoriented by having fallen, or cannot register the policeman’s command, no matter, ZAAAP again. More howls, more uncomprehending, ZAAAP, ZAAAP, until the officer deems it safe enough to sit on the subject and pull the subject’s hands behind the back himself to apply the handcuffs.

Try laying stomach down on your bed and raising your arms to clasp your hands behind your back. Of course you can do it, but it’s very easy to feel like you cannot. Imagine if you are recovering from the pain of the electroshock, or you’re bruised from hitting the ground, or perhaps you are disoriented from alcohol, as in many of the cases.

While tasers do appear to be reducing our peace officers’ exposure to physical contact with suspected criminals, did we mean to remove the human, humane element of their task? We didn’t hire robots for the job, for example. We probably intended, and we pay police accordingly, to exercise some elbow grease.

The job description for a police officer must include apprehending suspected lawbreakers humanely. We don’t authorize them to shoot suspects or drive Mack trucks into them, even if some law-enforcement researcher was to discover a non-lethal way that could be done.

With tasers, aren’t we touching on the abrogation of the right to due process under law? A person is innocent until proven guilty, we all know that, but it applies here because a person suspected of a crime must not be punished before their day in court. Police maintain that the taser is not a means of punishment, but instead is a non-lethal method to induce compliance with recalcitrant subjects. Putting aside the already numerous taser fatalities, the taser would have to be non-painful as well to comply with the 14th Amendment. Viewing the videos, it’s plain to see that tasers are excruciatingly painful and are being used by policemen as torture devices. Even to threaten to use the device is torture. Torture and the threat of torture is banned by international convention.

I must admit a cynical enjoyment of some of these taser videos. The large majority of subjects not cooperating with the police are drunk. In these videos, they were pulled over for drunk driving or for a domestic disturbance influenced by alcohol. I sympathize with the officers who cannot get through to those people, especially when they are derisive and combative.

The drunks try to avoid the commands they’re given using tactics of delay or distract or abuse. Of course, how much responsibility should they bear for behavior not entirely under their own control? When tasered a drunk writhes in pain like everyone else, but you wonder if he will have any memory of it later. Perhaps this plays a part in an officer’s thinking. The drunk, lost in a chemical state, is suspected of jeopardizing the safety of others, but can be judged on the spot for trying the officer’s patience, the taser becomes a means of instant payback. Traditionally, excessive force would have served this function, but at least the policeman would have had to weigh his interest in exerting the effort. The taser makes it too easy to make the wrong decision.

I wouldn’t trust myself with a taser, I’m too jaded. I already lament the social plague that is alcoholism. There are of course many root problems which our society needs to address. But so also, the alcoholic’s behavior is sometimes vehemently proclaimed to be voluntary. Our having to deal with the adversity and endangerment which alcoholics bring is too often not voluntary. In these videos, I take a vicarious pleasure in stopping that drunk. As long as drunks want to subject the rest of us to their drunkenness, and won’t show contrition until morning, we’ll want to indulge our equal and opposite discomfort and Zap ’em.