Rumsfeld "The Witchfinder General" & Others in Bush Administration Guilty - Responsible For Wide-spread Detainee Abuse
Gen. McCaffrey War Hero Turned War Profiteer Doesn't Put Country First Over Profits!
Anyway again and again we are reminded that War Profiteering is a serious problem in the United States. Simply put War is Profitable. The Bush Regime and the Pentagon have no problem using the media to sell their message to the American people. Now add those who are interested in making large amounts of money are willing to use their positions and their expertise to shape their expert opinion to appease the administration or the Pentagon while acting as lobbyists for private defense contractors. The privatizing of war by the Bush Regime has been rather lucrative for various private businesses from Hallibuton and Kellogg Brown & Root or DynCorp & mercenaries such as Blackwater. But how can one trust military personnel or members of the administration if a large part of their concern is not US Security but personal gain either immediately or at some future date.
So let's begin with the latest on Blackwater.
Back to Blackwater: So Eugene Robinson at the Washington Post claims, and rightly so I think, that prosecuting a few members of Blackwater for their criminal actions is a start but is not enough. There should be a full investigation of Balckwater and other outsourced mercenaries in Iraq. Then if necessary there should be criminal charges laid against the the CEOs of these companies . There should also be an investigation into whether or not government or Pentagon officials are also to blame by either encouraging these mercenaries that they could do whatever they wished without fear of prosecution. If this leads to the executive branch then so bet it.
A Whitewash for Blackwater?Tuesday 09 December 2008 By Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post
...As with the torture and humiliation of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison, our government is deflecting all scrutiny from the corporate higher-ups who employed the guards -- to say nothing of the policymakers whose decisions made the shootings possible, if not inevitable.
Prosecutors did not file charges against the North Carolina-based Blackwater firm -- the biggest U.S. security contractor in Iraq -- or any of the company's executives. The whole tragic incident is being blamed on the guards who, prosecutors say, made Baghdad's Nisoor Square a virtual free-fire zone.
Special armored vehicles could have cut casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan by 80% but lobbyists worked hard to ensure that other vehicles were puchased instead thereby putting American Troops unnecessarily in harm's way.But then again business is business and those in positions of authority and power were more concerned with profits .
"Pentagon ignored danger of roadside bombs, report charges" By DAVID GOLDSTEIN Dec. 09, 2008 McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON -- The military ignored steps before the invasion of Iraq that could have prevented the staggering number of casualties from roadside bombs, the Pentagon's acting inspector general charged Tuesday.
The IG's report says that the military knew years before the war that mines and homemade bombs, which the military calls "improvised explosive devices," would be a "threat . . . in low-intensity conflicts" and that "mine-resistant vehicles" were available.
"Yet the military did not develop requirements for, fund or acquire" safer vehicles, the report says. The military invaded Iraq in 2003 "without having taken available steps to acquire technology to mitigate the known mine and IED risk to soldiers and Marines."
Even after the war was under way, as the devices began taking a deadly toll and field commanders pressed for vehicles that were better protected from roadside bombs, the Pentagon was slow to act, the report says.
----
In a related article in The New York Times there is the detailed account of an American retired general McCaffery who acted as an expert on CNBC & to the defense department yet was a shill working for a defense contractors. So he played a dual role as profiteer and propagandist. His analysis of what was happening in Iraq or Afghanistan varied according to what was best for him rather than what was best for America's security. Once again War is profitable for some Americans and the more wars the better otherwise the defense contracts might disappear or not be as lucrative as they are. And once again the media failed to reveal all of this so called " unbiased experts "or " consultants " connections with the the Bush administration, The Pentagon and with defense contractors who had hired him.It is no wonder that so many of these characters are in favor of more wars rather than something as non -profitable as diplomacy.
So whether these individuals are former military personnel or private citizens who may make millions off of a defense contract are so gung-ho about America showing off its military might by invading one country after another. These days they are trying to get the government to increase its presence in Afghanistan and possibly invade Pakistan or Iran or Syria because there are billions to be made.
"Through seven years of war an exclusive club has quietly flourished at the intersection of network news and wartime commerce. Its members, mostly retired generals, have had a foot in both camps as influential network military analysts and defense industry rainmakers. It is a deeply opaque world, a place of privileged access to senior government officials, where war commentary can fit hand in glove with undisclosed commercial interests and network executives are sometimes oblivious to possible conflicts of interest. " New York Times
Here are some excerpts from the article:
" One Man’s Military-Industrial-Media Complex "The New York Times/ Nov 29, 2008 by David Barstow
In the spring of 2007 a tiny military contractor with a slender track record went shopping for a precious Beltway commodity.
The company, Defense Solutions, sought the services of a retired general with national stature, someone who could open doors at the highest levels of government and help it win a huge prize: the right to supply Iraq with thousands of armored vehicles.
Access like this does not come cheap, but it was an opportunity potentially worth billions in sales, and Defense Solutions soon found its man. The company signed Barry R. McCaffrey, a retired four-star Army general and military analyst for NBC News, to a consulting contract starting June 15, 2007.
Four days later the general swung into action. He sent a personal note and 15-page briefing packet to David H. Petraeus, the commanding general in Iraq, strongly recommending Defense Solutions and its offer to supply Iraq with 5,000 armored vehicles from Eastern Europe. “No other proposal is quicker, less costly, or more certain to succeed,” he said.
Thus, within days of hiring General McCaffrey, the Defense Solutions sales pitch was in the hands of the American commander with the greatest influence over Iraq’s expanding military.
“That’s what I pay him for,” Timothy D. Ringgold, chief executive of Defense Solutions, said in an interview.
General McCaffrey did not mention his new contract with Defense Solutions in his letter to General Petraeus. Nor did he disclose it when he went on CNBC that same week and praised the commander Defense Solutions was now counting on for help — “He’s got the heart of a lion” — or when he told Congress the next month that it should immediately supply Iraq with large numbers of armored vehicles and other equipment.
General McCaffrey, 66, has long been a force in Washington’s power elite. A consummate networker, he cultivated politicians and journalists of all stripes as drug czar in the Clinton cabinet, and his ties run deep to a new generation of generals, some of whom he taught at West Point or commanded in the Persian Gulf war, when he rose to fame leading the “left hook” assault on Iraqi forces.
But it was 9/11 that thrust General McCaffrey to the forefront of the national security debate. In the years since he has made nearly 1,000 appearances on NBC and its cable sisters, delivering crisp sound bites in a blunt, hyperbolic style. He commands up to $25,000 for speeches, his commentary regularly turns up in The Wall Street Journal, and he has been quoted or cited in thousands of news articles, including dozens in The New York Times.
His influence is such that President Bush and Congressional leaders from both parties have invited him for war consultations. His access is such that, despite a contentious relationship with former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, the Pentagon has arranged numerous trips to Iraq, Afghanistan and other hotspots solely for his benefit.
At the same time, General McCaffrey has immersed himself in businesses that have grown with the fight against terrorism.
...General McCaffrey did in fact emerge as a tough critic of Mr. Rumsfeld, describing him as reckless and incompetent. His central criticism — that Mr. Rumsfeld fought the Iraq war “on the cheap” — reflected his long-stated views on waging war. But it also dovetailed with his business interests. And his clashes with Mr. Rumsfeld were but one facet of a more complex and symbiotic relationship with the Bush administration and the military’s uniformed leaders, records and interviews show.
With a few exceptions General McCaffrey has consistently supported Mr. Bush’s major national security policies, especially the war in Iraq. He advocated invasion, urged building up the military to sustain the occupation and warned that premature withdrawal would invite catastrophe.
..In an article earlier this year, The New York Times identified General McCaffrey as one of some 75 military analysts who were the focus of a Pentagon public relations campaign that is now being examined by the Pentagon’s inspector general, the Government Accountability Office and the Federal Communications Commission. The campaign, begun in 2002 but suspended after the article’s publication, sought to transform the analysts into “surrogates” and “message force multipliers” for the Bush administration, records show. The analysts, many with military industry ties, were wooed in private briefings, showered with talking points and escorted on tours of Iraq and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
The Pentagon inspector general is investigating whether special access gave any of these analysts an improper edge in the competition for contracts.
Meanwhile more bad news for President Bush & the Hits Keep Coming
"
Bipartisan Report: Rumsfeld Responsible for Detainee Abuse "
Thursday 11 December 2008 by Joby Warrick, The Washington Post
Senate Committee finds officials made decisions that led to offenses against prisoners.
A bipartisan Senate report released today says that former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other top Bush administration officials are directly responsible for abuses of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and charges that decisions by those officials led to serious offenses against prisoners in Iraq and elsewhere.
The Senate Armed Services Committee report accuses Rumsfeld and his deputies of being the principal architects of the plan to use harsh interrogation techniques on captured fighters and terrorism suspects, rejecting the Bush administration's contention that the policies originated lower down the command chain.
"The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of 'a few bad apples' acting on their own," the panel concludes. "The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees."
"
Bipartisan Report: Rumsfeld Responsible for Detainee Abuse "
Thursday 11 December 2008 by Joby Warrick, The Washington Post
Senate Committee finds officials made decisions that led to offenses against prisoners.
A bipartisan Senate report released today says that former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other top Bush administration officials are directly responsible for abuses of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and charges that decisions by those officials led to serious offenses against prisoners in Iraq and elsewhere.
The Senate Armed Services Committee report accuses Rumsfeld and his deputies of being the principal architects of the plan to use harsh interrogation techniques on captured fighters and terrorism suspects, rejecting the Bush administration's contention that the policies originated lower down the command chain.
"The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of 'a few bad apples' acting on their own," the panel concludes. "The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees."
But claims of widespread abuse of detainees goes back to at least 2004 for example :
"New Papers Suggest Detainee Abuse Was Widespread"
By R. Jeffrey Smith and Dan Eggen Washington Post ,Wednesday, December 22, 2004
The Bush administration is facing a wave of new allegations that the abuse of foreign detainees in U.S. military custody was more widespread, varied and grave in the past three years than the Defense Department has long maintained.
New documents released yesterday detail a series of probes by Army criminal investigators into multiple cases of threatened executions of Iraqi detainees by U.S. soldiers, as well as of thefts of currency and other private property, physical assaults, and deadly shootings of detainees at detention camps in Iraq.
and from Human Rights Watch in 2006: U.S.: More Than 600 Implicated in Detainee Abuse April 25, 2006
Two years after Abu Ghraib scandal, new research shows that abuse of detainees in U.S. custody in Iraq, Afghanistan, and at Guantánamo Bay has been widespread, and that the United States has taken only limited steps to investigate and punish implicated personnel.
A briefing paper issued today, “By the Numbers,” presents findings of the Detainee Abuse and Accountability Project, a joint project of New York University’s Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, Human Rights Watch and Human Rights First. The project is the first comprehensive accounting of credible allegations of torture and abuse in U.S. custody in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo.
And in June of this year from John Lasseter at The Huffington Post:
American soldiers herded the detainees into holding pens of razor-sharp concertina wire, the kind that's used to corral livestock.
The guards kicked, kneed and punched many of the men until they collapsed in pain. U.S. troops shackled and dragged other detainees to small isolation rooms, then hung them by their wrists from chains dangling from the wire mesh ceiling.
Former guards and detainees whom McClatchy interviewed said Bagram was a center of systematic brutality for at least 20 months, starting in late 2001. Yet the soldiers responsible have escaped serious punishment
and so it goes,
GORD.
No comments:
Post a Comment