The French Prime Minister was guest for the hour on Charlie Rose on Mar 15. Video here:

http://www.charlierose.com/


lenal

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION .....

Comment by topo gigio — March 16, 2007 @ 3:59 pm

“Now if you want to tell us something about YOUR experiences with the VA, THAT might be interesting."

"But unless Lord Cornmuffin was in the bed next to you, I don’t need to hear about him…again.”

Comment by John Galt — March 18, 2007 @ 5:23 pm

JOHN GALT REPLIES: A bunch of the old boys down to the local feed store this morning were all guffawing and gesticulating and exclaiming and carrying-on, laughing while slapping their hands on their thigh, and suchlike, as countryfolk do when among themselves with no tourists or Albany people around, and they are confronted with something amusing, as they were this morning with topo gigio calling “CORNBURY” Spitzer a CORN MUFFIN …..

“Oh, that topo gigio is a kick, ain’t it, Luke?” said one old boy.

“Calling that Cornbury Spitzer a CORN MUFFIN!”

“Why what will that topo gigio come out with next?”

And with that, they all got to speculating as to what that might be ….

And that brings us to any experiences that I might I have had with the VA Hospital ….

Which are really irrelevant to anything that is being discussed in here, as I understand it, anyway ….

To me, the Stratton VA Hospital is a place where old veterans go to die after being tortured in drug experiments, and it is a place where one of our disabled veterans’ community was indeed “snatched right out of his tracks” in the lobby of the emergency room of the Stratton VA Hospital on the morning of August 22, 2001 when he appeared at the emergency room desk and announced his name ….

That “Snatching” based on a FRADULENT INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER that official Stratton VA Hospital records show originated at the NORTHEAST HEALTH-owned Samaritan Hospital in Troy, New York, from whence it made its way over the wires as a fax to the Rensselaer County Office Building and the Office of the Rensselaer County District Attorney under Kenneth Bruno, where it came, upon information and belief, into the hands of New York State Police Investigator Chris O’Brien, and then it went back into the wires again, in the form of a fax, out of Rensselaer County, and through Albany County, to a VA Police Officer named Arnold E. Kirkum at Stratton who kept detailed records of who was doing or saying what at any given time in connection with the unlawful psychiatric incarceration of this disabled veteran …..

And upon receipt of this FRADULENT INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER, Kirkum put in place procedures to capture this disabled veteran should he appear at the Stratton VA Hospital that morning of August 22, 2001, which he did, seeking sanctuary ….

And as is confirmed in the sworn affirmation of Assistant New York State Attorney General Lisa Ullman to Rensselaer County Supreme Court Justice George B. Ceresia, Jr., dated August 16, 2002:

LISA ULLMAN, being a duly licensed attorney in the State of New York and an ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL in the offices of Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, does hereby affirm under penalties of perjury pursuant to CPLR 2106:

1. I am an ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL ON THE STAFF OF ELIOT SPITZER, Attorney General of the State of New York, ATTORNEY for the State respondents in this proceeding.

I HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED THIS CASE AND AM FAMILIAR WITH THE FILE.

I make this affirmation in opposition to PETITIONER’S (PLAINTIFF) motion for leave to reargue and renew.

2. This proceeding was commenced by pro se petitioner PLAINTIFF under Article 78 of the Civil Procedure Law and Rules (”CPLR”), who requested a court order compelling the release of certain mental health records.

SPECIFICALLY, PETITIONER HAD BEEN INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED TO THE VETERAN’S ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL PURSUANT TO MENTAL HYGIENE LAW 9.45 FOR SEVERAL HOURS ON AUGUST 22, 2001, and had obtained redacted versions of documents pertaining to that COMMITMENT.

IN THIS PROCEEDING, HE SOUGHT A COURT ORDER COMPELLING RESPONDENTS TO PROVIDE HIM WITH UNREDACTED VERSIONS OF THOSE DOCUMENTS.

This disabled veteran was in fact captured at the Stratton VA Hospital and he was in fact placed in a locked cage on the tenth floor of the Stratton VA Hospital as if he were some kind of wild animal, instead of a human being who is an honorably discharged disabled combat veteran with two purple hearts and a silver star ….

And to us disabled combat veterans out here in the countryside who have been watching this matter of this FRADULENT INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT since it happened, this August 16, 2002 ULLMAN AFFIRMATION is significant for two reasons, to wit:

ULLMAN STATES: “I make this affirmation in opposition to PETITIONER’S (PLAINTIFF) motion for leave to reargue and renew.”

Why ULLMAN was in opposition to this disabled veteran’s motion to renew or reargue was because the disabled veteran was attempting to get into evidence before Justice Ceresia a sworn affidavit of the Albany, New York Police Officer who went to the Stratton VA Hospital on the afternoon of August 22, 2001, and got this disabled veteran released from custody, after making a demonstration to the doctor holding the disabled veteran in custody at the Stratton VA Hospital, a Dr. Cox, that there was no legal or lawful basis for the confinement, since it was based on a FRAUD ….

The official record of the incident filed with the Stratton VA Hospital by this Dr. Cox on August 22, 2001 makes it clear that he released the disabled veteran because of the direct intervention of the Albany Police officer in what was an unlawful imprisonment, and his record makes it clear that both the Albany Police Officer and the disabled veteran were concerned about the legality of the imprisonment ….

The authors of which were being protected by the Office of New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer ….

Which is what Assistant New York State Attorney General Lisa Ullman was before Judge Ceresia to accomplish:

“IN THIS PROCEEDING, HE SOUGHT A COURT ORDER COMPELLING RESPONDENTS TO PROVIDE HIM WITH UNREDACTED VERSIONS OF THOSE DOCUMENTS.”

Northeast Health refused to inform the disabled veteran as to who had caused him to be unlawfully incarcerated in the secure mental facility of the Stratton VA Hospital pending transport back to the secure mental facility of the Northeast Health-operated Samaritan Hospital in Troy, so that this disabled veteran could seek REDRESS against them …

And Assistant New York State Attorney General Lisa Ullman was appearing before Judge Ceresia on behalf of Eliot Spitzer and Northeast Health to make sure the disabled veteran never did know, so that he would have no way of filing civil rights charges against anyone, while the statute of limitations expired, keeping this disabled veteran away from justice forever ….

And so ….

That, little mouse, is what I believe to be at issue, here ….

WHY DID THE OFFICE OF NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ELIOT SPITZER TAKE THE POSITION IN THIS MATTER THAT IT DID, FIGHTING SO HARD BEFORE JUDGE CERESIA TO SUPPRESS THE SWORN TESTIMONY OF AN ALBANY POLICE OFFICER WHO HAD WITNESSED A CRIME INVOLVING A DISABLED VETERAN HERE IN NEW YORK STATE?

We disabled veterans out here, little mouse, have the feeling from your words above here and throughout this forum that you are young, and brash and hale, and hearty, cocky and well-to-do, and that you never had to dirty your own hands serving in combat, and that you and many others in here are contemptuous of us less fortunate folks out here in the countryside who Ulla seems to be in touch with, and speaking for, and so be that ….

To us, however, this is quite a serious issue, and it has been unresolved now for far too many years, as if the money and power of Eliot Spitzer allow him to treat one of us in this manner ….

To which I would have to reply ….

To you ….

And this governor, who we understand never had to do any military service on behalf of our nation himself:

WE ARE DISABLED COMBAT VETERANS, MR. GOVERNOR SPITZER, AND WE WILL NOT BE DISRESPECTED ….

NOR WILL WE BE MISTREATED, NOR ALLOW ONE OF OUR OWN TO BE ….

AND WHEN ONE HAS BEEN, AS IN THE CASE OF THIS AUGUST 22, 2001 UNLAWFUL INCARCERATION AT THE STRATTON VA HOSPITAL IN ALBANY BASED ON A FRAUD COMMITTED IN TROY …

WE WILL NOT STAY SILENT ABOUT IT …

ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ACTIONS OF THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE IN THIS MATTER CALL INTO QUESTION ELIOT SPITZER’S OWN FITNESS TO TAKE CARE THAT ALL OF OUR LAWS ARE FAITHFULLY EXECUTED, AS HIS OATH TO OUR CONSTITUTION REQUIRES HIM TO DO …

AND IT FURTHER CALLS INTO QUESTION THAT VERY OATH ITSELF, WHICH WE WOULD SAY ELIOT SPITZER SWORE FALSELY …

Based on the actions of the Office of the New York State Attorney General under Eliot Spitzer in this matter of the suppressing of this sworn testimony by this Albany Police officer ….

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4085#comments

"AP: Mold, Leaky Roofs Beset VA Clinics"

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer

39 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Veterans Affairs' vast network of 1,400 health clinics and hospitals is beset by maintenance problems such as mold, leaking roofs and even a colony of bats, an internal review says.

The investigation, ordered two weeks ago by VA Secretary Jim Nicholson, is the first major review of the facilities conducted since the disclosure of squalid conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

A copy of the report was provided to The Associated Press.

Democrats newly in charge of Congress called the report the latest evidence of an outdated system unable to handle a coming influx of veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Investigators earlier this month found that the VA's system for handling disability claims was strained to its limit.

"Who's been minding the store?" said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.

"They keep putting Band-Aids on problems, when what the agency needs is major triage."

The report found that 90 percent of the 1,100 problems cited were deemed to be of a more routine nature: worn-out carpet, peeling paint, mice sightings and dead bugs at VA centers.

The other 10 percent were considered serious and included mold spreading in patient care areas.

Eight cases were so troubling they required immediate attention and follow-up action, according to the 94-page review.

Some of the more striking problems were found at a VA clinic in White City, Ore.

There, officials reported roof leaks throughout the facility, requiring them to "continuously repair the leaks upon occurrence, clean up any mold presence if any exists, spray or remove ceiling tiles."

In addition, large colonies of bats resided outside the facility and sometimes flew into the attics and interior parts of the building.

"Eradication has been discussed but the uniqueness of the situation (the number of colonies) makes it challenging to accomplish," according to the report, which said the bats were being tested for diseases.

"Also, the bats keep the insect pollution to a minimum which is beneficial."

In other findings:

_In Oklahoma City, secondhand smoke from an outside smoking shelter sometimes infiltrated the building through the women's restroom.

_Deteriorating walls and hallways were common, requiring repair, patch and paint in 30 percent of patient areas in Little Rock, Ark.

_Numerous unspecified "environmental conditions" affected the quality of the building in New York's Hudson Valley, with the private landlord repeatedly refusing to fix problems.

The VA is taking steps to relocate to another facility.

_Roof leaks or mold at facilities such as Hudson Valley; North Chicago, Ill.; Indianapolis; Puget Sound, Wash.; Portland, Ore; and Fayetteville, Ark.

Veterans groups said they were concerned about the findings but also appreciated the VA's aggressive efforts to identify problems.

"We now expect these problems to be corrected immediately and not shelved due to insufficient funding or because the proper care and treatment of our wounded veterans is no longer in the national spotlight," said Joe Davis, spokesman of Veterans of Foreign Wars.

John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents 150,000 VA workers, added:

"Clearly the problems facing the VA require increased funding as well as better oversight."

In response, Nicholson this week ordered "immediate corrective action" to fix problems, with full accounting provided to the VA.

He noted that an overwhelming majority of the issues were normal "wear and tear" items.

In many cases where there were roof leaks or mold, officials had begun action to order patches or repairs, the department said.

In some instances, they were moving to new facilities.

"The level of detail in the reports and the corrective actions enumerated demonstrate your responsiveness to my request," Nicholson wrote in an order Monday to VA medical center directors.

In interviews, VA officials said they were somewhat reassured by the report, which they said indicated no red flags rising to the level of problems at outpatient facilities at Walter Reed in Washington, D.C., one of the premier facilities for treating those wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Walter Reed is a military hospital run by the Defense Department.

Critics long have said problems of military care extend to the VA's vast network, which provides supplemental health care and rehabilitation to 5.8 million veterans.

But VA officials noted that despite some problems, the VA health system consistently outperforms private-sector hospitals in customer satisfaction.

"There was no imminent threat of harm to patients," said Louise Van Diepen, chief of staff to VA's acting undersecretary for health, Michael Kussman.

"We have no indication to lead us to believe there is a smoking gun."

"Could it happen?"

"Yes."

"But we're doing everything we can prospectively to monitor the situation," she said.

Three high-level Pentagon officials have been forced to step down after the disclosures last month at Walter Reed.

The controversy also has led to investigations by congressional committees, a presidential task force and the Pentagon.

A separate review of the VA system for handling disability claims is under way to determine how to cut through bureaucratic delays, confusing paperwork and long appeals process as thousands of veterans return home from Iraq and Afghanistan.
___

On the Net:

Department of Veterans Affairs: http://www.va.gov/

"Marine unit ordered out of Afghanistan"

By ROBERT BURNS, Associated Press

Last updated: 4:43 p.m., Friday, March 23, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Marines accused of shooting and killing civilians after a suicide bombing in Afghanistan are under U.S. investigation, and their entire unit has been ordered to leave the country, officials said Friday.

Army Maj. Gen. Francis H. Kearney III, head of Special Operations Command Central, ordered the unit of about 120 Marines out of Afghanistan and initiated an investigation into the March 4 incident, said Lt. Col. Lou Leto, spokesman at Kearney's command headquarters in Tampa, Fla.

It is highly unusual for any combat unit, either special operations or conventional, to have its mission cut short.

A spokesman for the Marine unit, Maj. Cliff Gilmore, said it is in the process of leaving Afghanistan, but he declined to provide details on the timing and new location, citing a need for security.

In the March 4 incident in Nangahar province, an explosives-rigged minivan crashed into a convoy of Marines that U.S. officials said also came under fire from gunmen.

As many as 10 Afghans were killed and 34 wounded as the convoy made an escape.

Injured Afghans said the Americans fired on civilian cars and pedestrians as they sped away.

U.S. military officials said militant gunmen shot at Marines and may have caused some of the civilian casualties.

President Hamid Karzai condemned the incident, which was one among several involving U.S. forces in which civilians were killed and injured.

Leto, the spokesman at Special Operations Command Central headquarters, said the Marines, after being ambushed, responded in a way that created "perceptions (that) have really damaged the relationship between the local population and this unit."

Therefore, he said, "the general felt it was best to move them out of that area."

Gilmore said the Marine company would complete its overseas deployment with the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which is the larger unit it sailed with from Camp Lejeune, N.C., in January, but it will no longer operate in Afghanistan.

Of the four Marine Special Operations Command companies that have been established since the command was created in February 2006, the one ordered out of Afghanistan was the first to deploy abroad, Gilmore said.

By September 2008 there are to be nine companies operating as part of two special operations battalions, he said.

For years the Marines resisted creating special operations units, arguing that would run counter to their philosophy of viewing all Marines as elite fighters and not singling out elements as special.

But former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld pressed them to establish a separate command -- the Marine Special Operations Command -- to train and equip forces for the multi-service Special Operations Command.

There are about 25,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, mostly conventional combat forces and support units.

"Officers blamed for Tillman case errors"

By LOLITA C. BALDOR and SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writers

1 hour, 16 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Nine officers, including up to four generals, should be held accountable for missteps in the aftermath of the friendly fire death of Army Ranger Pat Tillman in Afghanistan, a Pentagon investigation will recommend.

Senior defense officials said Friday the Defense Department inspector general will cite a range of errors and inappropriate conduct as the military probed the former football star's death on the battlefront in 2004, said one defense official.

The official, who like the others requested anonymity because the Army has not publicly released the information, said it appears senior military leaders may not have had all the facts or worked hard enough to get the facts of what happened on April 22, 2004, when Tillman was killed by members of his own platoon.

Dozens of soldiers — those immediately around Tillman at the scene of the shooting, his immediate superiors and high-ranking officers at a command post nearby — knew within minutes or hours that his death was fratricide.

Even so, the Army persisted in telling Tillman's family he was killed in a conventional ambush, including at his nationally televised memorial service 11 days later.

It was five weeks before his family was told the truth, a delay the Army has blamed on procedural mistakes.

The latest investigation has focused on how high up the chain of command it was known that Tillman's death was caused by his own comrades.

Officers from the rank of colonel and up will be blamed in the report, according to one officer who has been informed of the findings.

According to the officials, the report will not make charges or suggest punishments, but it will recommend the Army look at holding the nine officers accountable.

One defense official said it appears the inspector general will not conclude there was an orchestrated cover-up in the investigation.

Tillman's father, Pat, said Friday he had no intention of commenting on the inspector general's report until he had heard an Army briefing on Monday.

That day, the Army plans to release the report and a second related to the killing.

The other report is by the Army Criminal Investigation Command, which will focus on whether a crime, such as negligent homicide, was committed when Tillman's own men shot him.

One defense official said it appears the investigation did not find any criminal intent in the shooting.

Tillman's case drew worldwide attention in part because he had turned down a multimillion-dollar contract to play defensive back for the Arizona Cardinals in order to join the Army Rangers after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The report's release comes with the Bush administration under fire from the public and Congress for the war in Iraq.

Though the Afghanistan conflict has not drawn nearly so much criticism, the report could add to the drumbeat of negative stories the administration has had to endure over the treatment of wounded soldiers and the long deployments of U.S. troops.

To date, the Army has punished seven people for the Tillman killing, but no one was court-martialed.

Four soldiers received relatively minor punishments under military law, ranging from written reprimands to expulsion from the Rangers.

One had his pay reduced and was effectively forced out of the Army.

The Army, which requested the inspector general review last year, said in a statement released Friday that it "plans to take appropriate actions after receiving the inspector general's report."

The officials declined to name any of the officers the report will implicate.

The commander of Tillman's 75th Ranger Regiment was Col. James C. Nixon.

Last year he was named director of operations at the Center for Special Operations at MacDill Air Force Base, Fla.

Nixon knew within about two days that Tillman's death was fratricide, another officer involved in the investigations told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

Previous investigations of the case have focused on the facts of the incident and sought to answer questions of whether it was a fratricide.

The report's findings were first reported on Friday by CBS News.

Tillman died in Afghanistan's Paktia province, along the Pakistan border, after his platoon was ordered to split into two groups and one of the units began firing.

Tillman and an Afghan with him were killed.

A specialist at the time of his death, he was posthumously promoted to corporal.

Since the incident, the Army has moved to improve the notification procedures and now requires an officer to review initial casualty information and verify that the families have been told the best, accurate information.
___

Associated Press writer Scott Lindlaw reported from San Francisco.

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION ....

Comment by topo gigio — March 25, 2007 @ 10:23 pm:

On another matter…lying seems to be the modus operandi for the Bush administration.

Libby lied (and got convicted), Gonzales lied (and hopefully will soon be fired), the administration lied about Tillman to get some mileage out of the football connection, they lied about WMD’s, Rice lied about a lot of things IMHO, Cheney has been lying since the day he was born, Rumsfeld was so arrogant that he even believed his own lies, Bush is either lying or most likely is incredibly stupid as he tells us to just give it a little more time in Iraq for things to “work”.

Actually, lying to the American people has been the way of our government for quite a while now (Nixon lied, Clinton lied though about non-governmental stuff, Ollie North lied).

It certainly is a sad state of affairs that this is what the U.S. has come to represent — a pack of liars.

Cheery, huh?

Comment by John Galt — March 26, 2007 @ 8:51 am:

topo gigio, if one goes back and reads Miracle at Philadelphia by Catherine Drinker Bowen, an authoritive little work about the 1787 federal Constitutional Convention, one actually finds your sentiments echoed in there, by the delegates to the federal Constitutional Convention, many of whom were classically-educated, and so, had extensive knowledge of the Roman Republic, the Roman Empire, and the Greek states which existed before Rome ...

And there was much argument, or debate, among those delegates, as to how to “get around” exactly what you are talking about, and their conclusion was that there really is no solution to what is in reality, HUMAN NATURE, or perhaps, human impulses, when people are confronted by POWER, and GREED ....

And in his Meditations, Marcus Aurelius, the Roman Emporer, also discusses this topic of lying among people in positions of power, at length ....

And it still comes back to CHOICE, FREE WILL, and the inner strength of character of the individual ...

Which is why freedom of speech and freedom of the press was deemed to be so important here in the “UNITED STATES” of America ....

This America that we are the inheriters of rose out of flames, death and destruction, and as any rational combat veteran, if that is not an oxymoron, can tell you, there just has to be a better way ....

And what came out of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, as an alternative, was OPPROBRIUM ....

POINT THE FINGER AT THEM, PULL DOWN THEIR PANTS IN PUBLIC, EMBARRASS THE BE-JAYSUS OUT OF THEM ....

And that is about it, which really brings us right into this present moment, and why an OPEN, UNCENSORED BLOG like this is so important to us common citizens out here in the countryside, where, because of isolation, our voices are never heard ....

America was created as an experiment, NOT A GUARANTEE, if one recalls Ben Franklin’s words on the subject, anyway, and that experiment fails when we all don’t give a damn, anymore, because everybody is lying, in the media, in the government, everywhere ...

Yes, indeed, it can be, AND IS, for us older folks, anyway, VERY DEPRESSING ....

But then, it always has been, and our own history right here in this area tells us that it has been worse, much worse, and yet, we still have prevailed to get through those times, which many of us lived through, and still recall, JE ME SOUVIENS, as the Quebecquois might say ....

And so ....

Us older countryfolks out here were taught way back when that OUR Declaration of Independence was really an OPEN LETTER TO THE CANDID WORLD, telling that CANDID WORLD that this is where we are right now, and this is why it is unsatisfactory to a “civilized people”, so this is where we are going, and that was back in 1776 .....

And this is now 2007, and to us, this BLOG, and others, still serve as OPEN LETTERS TO THE CANDID WORLD, in the same spirit that the original Declaration of Independence was .....

And we older folks out here are using that opportunity to tell the CANDID WORLD where it is that we have gotten to, in the intervening period of time, WHICH IS ALWAYS A MATTER OF PERCEPTION AND OPINION, and what is perceived to be good about it, as well as what is perceived to be wrong, or just plain bad ...

And so ....

Does that type of “venting” to the CANDID WORLD really solve anything?

Whoever does really know, topo gigio, but at least back in 1776, it did get a ball rolling, sort of, anyway,and here we still are, today ....

And so .....

As combat veterans, we were taught to attack right into the heart of that which was attacking you, and by God, or god, some of us got to be pretty good at that .......

And the sharpest weapons that there ever will be, sharper than the finest sword, ARE WORDS, topo gigio .....

And we are not at all afraid to use them in that fashion, if need be .....

Nor are you, from what I can see, anyway .....

And in an intelligent manner, which is an example to all of us, out here in the countrysside, anyway, since us older folks are into “intelligence” and “candor” as a more sure way to survive life than lying is, since lying to yourself in the fall that you have enough firewood to last a long, cold winter is not going to get you far, if in fact, all you have is a little pile of kindling wood ....

And so .....

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4164#comments

"Tillman case could bring punishments"

By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press

Last updated: 7:23 p.m., Wednesday, March 28, 2007

SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Two generals singled out for blame in the Pat Tillman case have retired since the Army Ranger was killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan, but they remain within reach of the military justice system.

Because they receive military pensions, Lt. Gen. Philip Kensinger and Brig. Gen. Gary Jones could be recalled to active duty and court-martialed, former and current military lawyers say.

Kensinger, the officer most heavily criticized in a Monday report from the Pentagon, could be charged with making false official statements.

The maximum punishment if convicted is five years in prison, a dishonorable discharge and forfeiture of pay, said John Einwechter, who has been an Army commander and a military prosecutor.

Commanders reviewing the case "might say the harm done to the Army and the Tillman family is so significant it warrants discipline," Einwechter said.

Such a step would be highly unusual, he said.

Other experts said a court-martial was unlikely.

The Pentagon announced Monday that nine Army officers, including four generals, made errors in reporting the friendly fire death to their superiors and to Tillman's family.

Defense officials said one or more of the officers who provided misleading information during the shooting investigation could be charged with a crime.

Gen. William Wallace, who oversees training for the Army, is examining the officers' actions and is to provide a report on possible punishments by late April.

The Tillman family rejected the military's findings, saying they were an extension of the cover-up that began when Tillman was killed April 22, 2004, after his Army Ranger comrades were ambushed in eastern Afghanistan.

His family seeks a congressional inquiry that would have the power to subpoena officers and soldiers involved.

A central issue in the case is why the Army waited about five weeks after it suspected Tillman's death was friendly fire before telling his family.

The Defense Department said Kensinger knew the truth well before telling the Tillmans and provided misleading testimony to investigators.

Kensinger, a three-star general, was in charge of Army special operations.

Jones, also now retired, conducted the third Tillman investigation ending in 2005.

The Pentagon found numerous shortcomings with his report.

Scott Silliman, a former high-ranking Air Force attorney, said hauling retired officers back onto active-duty for disciplinary action is rare.

Silliman doubted that would happen in this case, pointing out that the enlisted soldiers who actually shot Tillman were exonerated by the reports issued Monday.

Silliman said he anticipates the high-ranking officers will face lighter penalties, if any.

"You don't usually use a sledgehammer to do it if you can do it with something of less severity," said Silliman, now executive director of Duke Law School's Center on Law, Ethics and National Security.

He speculated that the officers singled out by the Pentagon would receive administrative sanctions and nothing more.

Jones declined to comment Wednesday through his military lawyer, Army Lt. Col. Michelle Crawford.

Kensinger did not return calls from The Associated Press.

Two other generals singled out in the report are still on active duty.

One was Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, whose forces include the Army's clandestine counterterrorism unit, Delta Force.

He was named "accountable for the inaccurate and misleading assertions" contained in papers recommending that Tillman get a Silver Star award.

Now-Brig. Gen. James C. Nixon was criticized for failing to ensure Tillman's family was told that friendly fire was suspected.

Nixon is now director of operations at the Center for Special Operations at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida.

NY TIMES EMPIRE ZONE

March 28, 2007, 7:29 am

"Bloomberg Defends Police Spying"

By Diane Cardwell

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg defended police spying on potential protesters in advance of the 2004 Republican National Convention, saying yesterday that it was necessary for security during an uneasy time:

We had a fundamental responsibility to learn whether groups might include any potential terrorists or anarchists planning to cause or take advantage of any disruptions… in a few instances, we did keep track of groups or individuals who did plan to come to New York for the R.N.C. convention and who might have been planning violent acts….

We were not keeping track of political activities,” he said.

“We have no interest in doing that."

But according to Jim Dwyer of The Times, the records show that the police did covertly monitor political activity.

Virtually every intelligence report, even those about expressly peaceful groups, described the political viewpoints of the organizations.

Asked for clarification, Stu Loeser, Mr. Bloomberg’s chief spokesman said:

“We weren’t seeking political information."

"We were seeking security information."

"It wasn’t because of the political views expressed."

"The only concern was what security ramifications came from the activities of those groups.”

COMMENTS

March 28th, 2007 6:08 pm

As an older American who is a twice-wounded Viet Nam combat veteran who still remembers the Viet Nam times here in America all too well, including the DNC in Mayor Dailey’s Chicago in 1968 where heads were being busted and blood was flowing in the streets, and where infiltrated government agents provocateurs were alleged to be behind some of the violence, which helped lead to the restrictions on police infiltration and spying that are supposed to be in place today here in America, which would include NYS, I am finding myself back in those times all over again with this police infiltration and spying that Mr. Mike Bloomberg had his NYC police doing in connection with the RNC in NYC ….

Now, as a twice-wounded combat veteran with 2 Purple Hearts and a Silver Star, the RNC was quite memorable to me because of the people going to that convention wearing little purple heart band-aids to mock John Kerry’s Purple Hearts, and in the course of doing so, in my estimation as a permanently disabled combat veteran, mocking all Purple Hearts and their recipients by doing so ….

And Mike Bloomberg’s NYPD was there protecting these people ….

That is what I remember as a disabled American combat veteran ….

What I remember is that Mike Bloomberg’s NYPD was there in a ring around the RNC to make sure that nobody would or could disrupt these Republicans while they made a mockery of John Kerry getting a Purple Heart for being wounded in combat, because the wounds weren’t serious enough, or gaping enough, by Republican standards, anyway, astonomically high as they are, to deserve a Purple Heart ….

And one can then take it that for a year in advance, Mike Bloomberg had his NYPD out there rooting around and scouring around to find and neutralize anyone who might have thought of going to the RNC in NYC to deny these Republican people their inherent constitutional right to mock the Purple Heart which John Kerry received for wounds suffered in combat in Viet Nam ….

We cannot have the Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression of members of George W. Bush’s own Republican Party stifled, after all, because it is the president’s party, and everybody knows, they come first, and if everybody doesn’t know it, well, Mike Bloomberg does, and in NYC, that is all that counts ….

And so …

As for me, whenever I think of the words, New York City and Mayor Mike Bloomberg, the scenes of all of those fat, comfortable Republican people sporting their little purple heart band-aids to mock John Kerry’s Purple Heart, behind the protection of Mike Bloomberg’s NYPD, comes instantly to mind …..

And I find the nausea induced by those images sufficient incentive to never go anywhere near NYC for the rest of my life, as well to advise my fellow veterans to do the same, avoid the place, it is hostile to disabled veterans, and those who love liberty and free speech for other than Republicans, here in our own country ….

Where we are a bit less equal than they ….

And so ….

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...pying/#comments

"Bush apologizes for Walter Reed woes"

By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer

32 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - President Bush apologized Friday for the shoddy conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and promised during a visit to the facility for war veterans that "we're going to fix the problem."

Critics questioned the timing of Bush's visit six weeks after poor conditions and neglect of veterans were exposed there.

Bush toured the main hospital and Abrams Hall, where soldiers were transferred after they were vacated from the facility's Building 18, the site of moldy walls, rodent infestation and other problems that went unchecked until reported by the media.

He said his conversations with those who had been in Building 18 left him "disturbed by their accounts."

"The problems at Walter Reed were caused by bureaucratic and administrative failures," the president told about 100 medical workers and patients at the hospital.

"The system failed you and it failed our troops and we're going to fix it."

Among the areas of the hospital that Bush toured were a typical — but empty — patient room in Abrams Hall that featured a large wide-screen television and a Macintosh computer, and the physical therapy unit of the main hospital.

Along the way, he awarded 10 Purple Hearts to soldiers recovering from serious wounds suffered in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"It is not right to have someone volunteer to wear the uniform and not get the best possible care," the president said at the end of his more than two-hour visit, cut short from its planned length by almost an hour.

"I apologize for what they went through and we're going to fix the problem."

He said important steps, including the replacement of military leadership in charge of the hospital and the establishment of several commissions to study the facility and the broader military health care system, have been taken already.

But, Bush added: "We're not going to be satisfied until everyone gets the kind of care that their folks and families expect."

The president devoted much of his brief statement to praising the medical care that members of the military and veterans receive at Walter Reed.

"The soldiers and Marines stay here only for a few months, but the compassion they receive here stays with them for a lifetime," Bush said.

"Americans must understand that the problems recently uncovered at Walter Reed were not the problems of medical care."

"The quality of care at this fantastic facility is great and it needs to remain that way."

Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, among retired military officers who took part in a conference call before Bush's visit, praised the president for seeing wounded soldiers.

But, he added:

"I'm convinced he would honor them more if he would refrain from using soldiers as props in political theater."

"I would be very happy to see him do the Walter Reed visit more like the commander and secondarily as an inspector general, rather than as a politician," he said.

Bobby Muller, president of Veterans for America, said Bush wasn't seeing areas of the hospital most in need of change.

He cited Ward 54, where soldiers are suffering from acute mental health conditions, and outpatient holding facilities where soldiers see long waits to get processed out of the Army.

"Walter Reed is not a photo-op," Muller said.

"Walter Reed is still broken."

"The DOD health care system is still broken."

"... Our troops need their commander in chief to start working harder for them."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino called it "an unfortunate characterization" to say Bush was using Walter Reed as merely a picture-taking opportunity.

She said it took some time to clear enough room on the president's schedule to spend an afternoon with patients and staff at Walter Reed.

"There is no more personal moment that he has, and it's one of the memories that I cherish the most of working for the president, because you see his gratitude, and they share hugs, and they share laughter, they share tears," she said.

Perino also said that when the situation at Walter Reed first came to light, "the president immediately took action."

Walter Reed is considered one of the Army's premier facilities for treating the wounded.

The revelations in mid-February of poor treatment and neglect of those wounded in war was an embarrassment to Bush, who routinely speaks of the need to support the troops and praises the care they receive back home.

Troops and veterans say many of the issues have been well-known for a while, and have long been in need of greater attention.

In the wake of reports of problems at Walter Reed, three high-level Pentagon officials were forced to step down and lawmakers on Capitol Hill were outraged.

This week, the House voted to create a coterie of case managers, advocates and counselors for injured troops.

The bill also establishes a hot line for medical patients to report problems in their treatment.
___

On the Net:

Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil

"General tried to warn Bush about Tillman"

By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 36 minutes ago

SAN JOSE, Calif. - For weeks after his death, the Pentagon maintained that Pat Tillman was killed in an enemy ambush, even after a top general tried to warn President Bush that the NFL star-turned-soldier likely died by friendly fire, according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press.

In the memo sent to a superior officer seven days after Tillman's death, Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal warned that the evidence strongly pointed to friendly fire and the nation's leaders risked embarrassing themselves if they publicly said otherwise.

"I felt that it was essential that you received this information as soon as we detected it in order to preclude any unknowing statements by our country's leaders which might cause public embarrassment if the circumstances of Cpl. Tillman's death become public," McChrystal wrote.

The April 29, 2004, memo, was addressed to Gen. John Abizaid, head of Central Command, and was intended as a warning to Bush and acting Army Secretary Les Brownlee.

It is not clear whether Bush or Brownlee received the warning, but it raises new questions on how high up the chain of command the misinformation campaign extended.

In speeches following the memo, Bush avoided any reference to the circumstances of Tillman's death.

The family was not told until May 29, 2004, what really happened.

In the intervening weeks, the military continued to say Tillman died under enemy fire, and even awarded him the Silver Star, which is given for heroic battlefield action.

White House spokesman Blain Rethmeier said Friday that a review of records turned up no indication that the president had received McChrystal's warning.

Rethmeier emphasized that the president often pays tribute to fallen soldiers without mentioning the exact circumstances of their deaths.

The Tillman family has charged that the military and the Bush administration deliberately deceived his relatives and the nation to avoid turning public opinion against the war.

Tillman's mother, Mary, had no immediate comment Friday on the newly disclosed memo.

The memo was provided to the AP by a government official who requested anonymity because the document was not released as part of the Pentagon's official report into the way the Army brass withheld the truth.

McChrystal was the highest-ranking officer accused of wrongdoing in the report, issued earlier this week.

In his memo, McChrystal said he had heard Bush and Brownlee "might include comments about Cpl. Tillman's heroism and his approved Silver Star medal in speeches currently being prepared, not knowing the specifics surrounding his death."

McChrystal said he expected an investigation under way "will find that it is highly possible Cpl. Tillman was killed by friendly fire."

At the same time, McChrystal said: "The potential that he might have been killed by friendly fire in no way detracts from his witnessed heroism or the recommended personal decoration for valor in the face of the enemy."

A former spokesman for Abizaid did not immediately return phone and e-mail messages.

As for Brownlee, he told investigators he did not recall learning Tillman was killed by his fellow Rangers until several weeks after the fact.

He did not discuss the matter with the White House, he told investigators.

A spokesman for McChrystal said he had no comment.

McChrystal was, and still is, commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, head of "black ops" forces.

He has since been promoted to lieutenant general.

Abizaid was in charge of American forces in the Middle East and Central Asia.

On Monday, the Pentagon released the findings of an investigation into the circumstances of Tillman's death, and into whether the military covered them up.

The investigators recommended that nine Army officers, including McChrystal, be held accountable for errors in reporting the friendly fire death to their superiors and to Tillman's family.

McChrystal was found "accountable for the inaccurate and misleading assertions" contained in papers recommending Tillman get the Silver Star.

Some of the officers involved said they wanted to wait until the investigations were complete before informing the Tillman family.

Tillman was killed after his Army Ranger comrades were ambushed in eastern Afghanistan.

Rangers in a convoy trailing Tillman's group had just emerged from a canyon where they had been fired upon.

They saw Tillman and mistakenly fired on him.

NY TIMES EMPIRE ZONE

March 30, 2007, 1:00 pm

"Transparency and Accountability"

By Michael Cooper

In the next 36 hours lawmakers in Albany will be asked to approve hundreds of pages of budget bills that they have not yet read, because they have not been printed.

Key details of how some of the most important aspects of the budget work – the division of education aid and the way the property tax rebate will work – are still being worked out.

It all brings to mind a news conference that Gov. Eliot Spitzer held in January with the Legislative leaders, Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, to announce what they called “sweeping” budget reforms.

From the press release:

“The drive to improve accountability in state government begins with the budget,” said Governor Spitzer.

“For decades, the budget process has been characterized by secrecy, gamesmanship and a lack of accountability."

"These common-sense measures are an excellent first step toward opening up the process and helping ensure timely budgets with greater transparency and accountability.”

Speaker Silver said, “With this agreement, we move our state’s budget process into the 21st Century with a strong constitutional emphasis on mutual respect between the executive and legislative branches in forging a fiscal plan for our state."

"We will continue to rely upon the joint conference committees."

"We will have a more transparent, more easily understood budget process."

"We will enact a fair, balanced and on-time state budget this year that addresses the needs of working families in education, health care and job creation.”

Majority Leader Bruno said, “These budget reforms will help bring greater openness, transparency and accountability to the state budget and help ensure that it is passed on time."

"The agreement includes many proposals that the Senate Majority has sought including greater itemization of state spending, budget conference committees, accelerating the budget process and getting an agreement on state revenue projections.’’

Comments

March 31st, 2007 9:14 am

As one of this state’s many disabled combat veterans who took an oath to protect and defend the United States Constitution, and then did some bleeding in Viet Nam as a result of that oath, it is difficult for me to find the words to adequately express my total disgust with not only the NY Legislature, which has no integrity, and this “STEAMROLLER”, who has even less integrity than the state legislature, but also with the citizen body of this state who are totally ignorant about the provisions of OUR state Constitution regarding preparation of the annual state budget, and so allow this absolute crap that is going on in Albany right now to continue year after year, with all of this hidden “negotiating” going on, as usual, “behind closed doors”, when the provisions of Article VII of OUR state Constitution demand and mandate transparency …

ART. VII, Section 1. For the preparation of the budget, the head of each department of state government, except the legislature and judiciary, shall furnish the governor such estimates and information in such form and at such times as the governor may require, copies of which shall forthwith be furnished to the appropriate committees of the legislature.

The governor shall hold hearings thereon at which the governor may require the attendance of heads of departments and their subordinates.

Designated representatives of such committees shall be entitled to attend the hearings thereon and to make inquiry concerning any part thereof.

Itemized estimates of the financial needs of the legislature, certified by the presiding officer of each house, and of the judiciary, approved by the court of appeals and certified by the chief judge of the court of appeals, shall be transmitted to the governor not later than the first day of December in each year for inclusion in the budget without revision but with such recommendations as the governor may deem proper.

ART. VII, Section 3. At the time of submitting the budget to the legislature the governor shall submit a bill or bills containing all the proposed appropriations and reappropriations included in the budget and the proposed legislation, if any, recommended therein.

As an older common NYS citizen with the same H.S. education that all other New Yorkers supposedly have, and likely, less education than these more modern New Yorkers supposedly have by even the third or fourth grade, according to all the propaganda put out by the powerful teachers’ unions to support their calls for more and more state money to be jammed down their pockets each year by alleged ignorant people like me, I find this above constitutional language to be easily understandable and comprehensible …

And one would think that a couple of real hot-shot lawyers like the “STEAMROLLER” and Sheldon Silver would be able to comprehend it, as well ….

BUT ….

Here it is, almost April, and we have no budget bills before the Legislature, despite that easily understandable constitutional language, and notwithstanding that, they are still poised to pass the budget, because the “STEAMROLLER”, Silver, and “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno are telling them, puppets that they all are, that they must do so ….

In a “representative” form of government such as ours is, a cowardly legislature must in fact be “representative” of a cowardly population, elsewise we would not have a pack of cowards sitting there in the legislature in Albany, making a complete and total mockery of rule of law here in NYS …

And as a disabled veteran, it is my thought this morning that fighting and dying to protect cowards is nothing but a waste of good, red blood ….

And so …

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...ility/#comments

NY SUN

"Spitzer is a subverter of our state government"

Reader comment on: Spitzer To Seek Tuition Deduction on the Rebound

Submitted by John Galt, Apr 4, 2007 07:59

As one of this state's many disabled combat veterans, and as one who was born here in NYS, and as one who has studied extensively about our state's history, it's Constitution, and its laws, so as to be a better, more-informed citizen, I find myself taking great exception to this statement in your newspaper that "the Spitzer administration is looking forward to resuming the governor's role as unfettered state executive".

In point of fact, NYS does not have an "unfettered state executive", and any assertions to the contrary by Christine Anderson or the Spitzer administration are simply empty statements that border on the seditious, a bold attempt by this "STEAMROLLER" and his crowd to subvert the processes of OUR state government, from which springs forth OUR democracy here in NYS, and this taking place right before our eyes, as was just the case with this bogus budget process, which was done in open violation of ART. VII of OUR state constitution, to be quite frank about the matter.

According to our own history, NYS has had long experience with "governors", going all the way back in time to the director general, who administered New Netherland under the Dutch from 1624 to 1664; and then the royal governors, including the infamous Lord Cornbury, who administered the colony under the British until 1776, at which time New York severed its ties forever with Great Britain when its representatives signed the Declaration of Independence, and thereby, gave us the blessings of freedom which we are to enjoy in this state to this day, and tomarrow as well, through the body of OUR state constitution.

As to the very limited office of governor in the State of New York, in April 1777, the Convention of Representatives of the State of New York (renamed the Fourth Provincial Congress) adopted the first State constitution, and New York's constitution of 1777 created the office of governor "to take care that the laws are faithfully executed" and right up to the present time, that is essentially all that the governor of the State of NY is given to do by the people of this state, through section 3 of ART. IV of our state constitution, and nowhere have we given him any authority at all to just willy-nilly step outside of the "law" and become "unfettered" with respect to dissolving our towns and villages here in up-state NY.

In point of fact, the forms of our local governments here in NYS are spelled out in great detail in OUR state constitution, and nowhere does OUR state constitution give this "STEAMROLLER" any authority to unilaterally combine or dissolve OUR towns and villages.

To the contrary, ARTICLE IX of OUR state constitution, entitled "Bill of rights for local governments", states in Section 1 as follows: "Effective local self-government and intergovernmental cooperation are purposes of the people of the state", and as "people of the state" outside of NYC, we disabled veterans especially take this constitutional language quite seriously, just as we do every other word that is written in our constitution, and after this budget fiasco, where the "STEAMROLLER" took our constitution and wadded it up into a litle ball and threw it into the trash, right before our eyes, as if it and we did not matter, our name for him has become "PUBLIC ENEMY NO. 1" up here in the countryside, and rapidly, through the miracle of the internet, the word is now getting out that this "STEAMROLLER" Spitzer is the greatest threat to our democracy and constitutional way of life here in up-state NY that there has been since we gained our independence from Great Britain back in 1776.

And if this "STEAMROLLER" intends to persist in this misplaced belief of his that he really is "unfettered" as NYS governor; that he really is "entitled" to be outside of OUR laws, free to do as he pleases with respect to spitting on OUR constitution, as he just did with respect to the state budget, then it seems that we are in for some interesting times ahead, just as was the case back in the early-1700's, when the people of the state got together to have LORD CORNBURY himself removed as colonial governor for transgressing on our rights, and in this case, thanks to our constitution, we can simply start lobbying our state legislature to remove the "STEAMROLLER" from office for gross and abject failure to live up to his constitutional oath to "take care that the laws are faithfully executed", which starts with OUR organic law as it is spelled out in the entire body of the NYS Constitution.

And so ....

http://www.nysun.com/comments/18564

Posted by: John Galt | April 4, 2007 5:38 PM:

I am one of a community of disabled Viet Nam combat veterans in upstate NY who has been following Elizabeth Benjamin's reporting on issues of importance to our small community since way back in 2004, and her story entitled "New Yorkers make do in off-peak slots" from the Thursday, July 29, 2004 Albany, New York Times Union is still one of our personal favorites, for the "signal" to us from the Kerry Campaign that it contained in the following words:

"Why some New Yorkers received coveted speaking roles while others remained on the sidelines was something of a mystery."

"Meanwhile, state Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who built a national reputation fighting Wall Street corruption and flew to Mexico to endorse Kerry when President Bush's campaign attacked Kerry for his ties to 'special interests', wasn't tapped to speak."

"This fact caused a brief uproar when it was reported that Schumer used his clout to block the attorney general from speaking, the political explanation being that the two are considered possible rivals for the 2006 Democratic gubernatorial nomination."

"Schumer has insisted he had nothing to do with Spitzer's absence behind the podium."

Actually, to shed some further light on that mystery, one of the members of our disabled veterans' community up here had posted the following request to keep "STEAMROLLER" Spitzer off the podium at the DNC in the now-defunct John Kerry Forum, where it was acknowledged by the veterans who were working on the Kerry Campaign, and we were intently following EB's reporting on that convention to see what the results would be, and when we read her report, our day was made ...

And because of her work since then, we will follow her over to here:

Dear Mr. Kerry:

I am an honorably-discharged, twice-wounded, fully disabled Viet Nam war veteran who is a life member of the Military Order of the Purple Heart, the D.A.V., the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and the Tri-County Viet Nam Veterans in the Albany, New York area.

In that capacity, as an honorably-discharged, fully disabled Viet Nam combat veteran, I am asking you personally on behalf of all other disabled veterans in this area of the State of New York who must rely upon the integrity of the medical health and public health fields in the State of New York to not allow New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer an opportunity to speak at the podium of the Democratic National Convention on the grounds that he is pandering to partisan political interests in the State of New York by countencing blatant acts of discrimination against a disabled veteran in the State of New York who has been working to expose corruption in county government in the capital district area of State of New York.

Presently, Mr. Kerry, as this appeal is being written to you personally in this community forum, New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer is actively engaged in defending in Federal District Court for the Northern District of New York what can only be termed blatant acts of discrimination and retaliation against this disabled Viet Nam veteran in New York State by Republicans in the State of New York who wish to permanently suppress this individual and his testimony to the Federal Bureau of Investigation concerning Hobbs Act corruption involving Republicans in the Capital District area of the State of New York.

To stifle that testimony and evidence, in August of 2001, in the weeks before 9-11, as the record shows, this disabled veteran was the victim of what has become known in the Albany, New York area of the State of New York, as a "psychiatric takedown".

A "psychiatric takedown" is a defensive political manuver by which the Republicans in the capital district area of New York State have a witness against them removed by the vehicle of having a "pet doctor" sign a psychiatric arrest warrant for the individual which directs the New York State Police to take the individual into custody and transport them to the secure mental health facility of a local hospital, for psychiatric "care and treatment".

In this manner, the witness is removed, their crediblity is destroyed and their effectiveness as professional witnesses on behalf of the public health of the community is robbed forever.

In this case, the victim, in addition to being a disabled veteran, was also the local public health engineer, who had previously been commended in writing for his integrity by the New York State Health Commissioner.

In March of 1989, based upon an investigation conducted by this local public health engineer, the State Health Commissioner, a well-respected medical doctor named David Axelrod, declared that the public health and environment in our county was threatened by an inordinate amount of sewage system failures which were the legacy of ten years worth of negligence in the Environmental Health Division of the State Health Department itself.

A March 1989 Federal Bureau of Investigation report confirmed these findings by Dr. Axelrod, and further noted that the Republicans in charge of the county had no intention of cleaning up the corruption, and that to cover matters over after the Axelrod Report, the Republicans had removed the public health engineer from his position on grounds that his Viet Nam combat service had rendered him a threat to society.

Thus, ten years of corruption in the environmental health programs of the state public health services in the Capital District area of the State of New York was covered over as if it had never existed, and thus, has flourished up until this time.

In August of 2001, to prevent this same individual from coming forth with videotape evidence demonstrating that these corrupt public health practices have flourished to this day in the capital district area of the State of New York, the Republicans attempted a "psychiatric takedown", and the result has been disastrous for this individual personally, and all fully disabled veterans who would rely upon this individual for his integrity and expertise in the public health field to boot.

Presently, New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, by and through his New York State Department of Law, is defending the actions of a New York State Veterans' Service officer who made alleged false statements to the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York in connection with the false arrest of this honorably-discharged, decorated veteran on mental health grounds.

Because of those false statements, which are still being defended by Eliot Spitzer at this time in the State of New York, despite conclusive evidence to the contrary in his possession, including a graphic videotape portrayal of a violent physical assault on this individual intended to deter him from appearing in court in connection with the matter, this disabled veteran has been branded in the State of New York as a dangerous mental patient with no opportunity afforded him whatsoever at due process to either confront or combat this theft of this person's real identity as an honorable professional person of good standing in the community.

In the face of all of this, which is known to the veterans' community in capital district area of the State of New York, to then allow Eliot Spitzer to stand up at your side and speak at the Democratic National Convention would be an abomination, a travesty, as far as the protection of the rights of the disabled to equal protection of law goes, and well as the public health protection of the disabled veteran population of the State of New York.

For the disabled veterans population of this area, from a civil rights and equal protection of law for the disabled perspective, having Eliot Spitzer standing by your side at the Democratic National Convention would be just like having George W. Bush or George Pataki themselves standing there.

It would make a mockery of all of your promises to the disabled veterans of America to help us have dignity in our own communities, despite our combat-related disabilities, equal to that enjoyed by Max Cleland in his own community in the United States.

Help us prove to America that despite our disabilities, which are often disfiguring, or totally disabling as far as being effective in modern society, that disabled combat veterans are citizens of America too, and that despite our disabilities, we deserve the protection of law in America too.

Help us make this point by keeping Eliot Spitzer off the podium at the DNC.

Thank you on behalf of the disabled veterans of the Capital District area of the State of New York in the United States of America for considering this request.

I remain, sincerely and respectfully, a patriotic disabled American veteran.

Livyjr

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...njamin&st=0

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...of_the_futu.php

"U.S. launches its last bid for success in Iraq"

By BARRY R. McCAFFREY

First published: Thursday, April 5, 2007

Iraq is being ripped apart by a low-grade civil war compounded by a dysfunctional, Shiite-dominated government.

As many as 3,000 Iraqis are being killed or kidnapped a month, and American forces have suffered more than 27,000 killed and wounded.

But we have little choice as Americans except to give our new military commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, and our new ambassador, Ryan C. Crocker, the political and military support they need during the next 12 months.

Failure in Iraq at this point could generate a regional war among Iraq's neighbors that would imperil U.S. interests for a decade or more.

I just returned from a week in Iraq and Kuwait, visiting combat units in the field as well as senior U.S., coalition and Iraqi officials.

I was sent by the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, where I'm an adjunct professor, to do a strategic and operational assessment of security operations there.

I know that the problems we face are grim indeed, but Petraeus' strategy is sound, and the situation is not hopeless.

Our troops face thousands of attacks each month from Sunni and Shiite Arabs employing improvised explosive devices (more than 2,900 a month), snipers, rocket and mortar fire, mines and, recently, suicide truck bombings rigged to release noxious chlorine gas.

The "burn rate" on the Iraq war is $9 billion a month.

The Iraqis are in despair.

Three million are refugees or have fled the country.

The ill-equipped Iraqi police and army suffered 49,000 casualties in the last 14 months.

There is no security in most of the country under the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

The threat we face is huge.

More than 100,000 armed militia members and insurgents confront central authorities.

A handful of foreign fighters (about 500) and a couple of thousand al-Qaida- in-Iraq extremists provoke sectarian violence through murderous attacks on the innocent civilian Shiite population and their mosques.

This provokes a response of brutality and ethnic cleansing against the vulnerable Sunni civilian population.

U.S. forces have arrested more than 120,000 suspects and hold more than 27,000 as detainees.

We have killed about 20,000 of these armed fighters.

However, the armed struggle shows few signs of disruption.

Iraq's neighbors, with the exception of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, have intensified the civil war as an extension of their own larger Shiite-Sunni conflict for power -- or as a reaction to the presence of a foreign presence in Iraq.

This war is primarily an internal struggle, with the preponderance of the leadership, fighters, money and armaments generated inside Iraq.

However, there is no question that Iran has provided the Shiites with leadership from the elite Quds Force of its Revolutionary Guard and with highly lethal EFP (explosively formed projectile) bombs, which are a major cause of U.S. casualties.

The Syrians have provided sanctuary to Saddam Hussein Baathists.

The Syrians also have ignored or aided the passage of 40 to 70 jihadists a month into Iraq.

(Many of them are suicide bombers who are dead within two weeks.)

The Turks also have made threatening military and political moves to confront the prosperous Iraqi Kurdish regions at their border.

This is a dangerous neighborhood.

What is the basis for hope?

U.S. troops continue to show determination, discipline and courage.

We will have organized 370,000 members of the Iraqi police and army, in 120 battalions, by the end of the year.

The al-Maliki government finally has gotten its nerve and allowed joint operations by its police and U.S. special operations forces to arrest al-Sadr militia members in Baghdad.

Petraeus has placed more than 50 Iraqi and U.S. police and army strong points throughout the city.

The murder rate has plummeted in response.

The Sunni tribes in al-Anbar province have turned on the foreign fighters.

We will know by the end of the summer if Petraeus' strategy is going to prompt an adequate political response from the Iraqis.

Only through the success of reconciliation talks can the bitter civil strife be moderated.

We are running out of time.

The American people have walked away from support of this war.

The Army is beginning to show signs of great strain.

Many units are now on their third combat tour, and the tours routinely are being extended.

Recruiting standards are being lowered.

Our equipment is shot.

By the beginning of the coming year, we will be forced to downsize our deployment to Iraq or the Army will begin to unravel.

The United States is at a crossroads.

We are in a position of strategic peril.

We need to support the U.S. leadership team in Iraq for this one last effort to succeed.

Barry McCaffrey, a retired Army general, commanded the 24th Infantry Division in the Persian Gulf War in 1991. He now teaches at West Point and serves as a military analyst for NBC News. He wrote this article for the Los Angeles Times.

"Pentagon to alert National Guard troops"

By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 1 minute ago

WASHINGTON - Several National Guard brigades are expected to be notified soon that they could be sent to Iraq around the first of next year, according to a senior Defense Department official.

If their assignment to Iraq is ultimately approved by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, it would be the first time full Guard combat brigades were sent back to Iraq for a second tour.

The units would serve as replacement forces in the regular unit rotation for the war, and would not be connected to the recent military build-up for security operations in Baghdad.

Gates is expected to sign the notices alerting the Guard troops shortly, said the official, who requested anonymity because the information has not yet been released.

"You will start to see reserve component forces coming back into the rotation," said the official, adding that the notices are being done now in order to give the Guard units as much time as possible to prepare.

Guard officials told The Associated Press in February that they had contingency plans to send at least two Guard combat brigades back to Iraq in 2008 for their second yearlong tour of duty.

While it is not clear yet which units would be alerted, they would likely include brigades that were among the first to go to Iraq early in the war.

Some of those include brigades from North Carolina, Florida, Arkansas and Indiana.

Smaller units and individual troops from the Guard have already returned to Iraq for longer periods, and some active duty units have served multiple tours.

A brigade is roughly 3,500 troops.

The troop alerts come as President Bush and Congress wrestle over legislation that would set timelines for troop withdrawals from Iraq.

Nearly two months ago, Bush asked for more than $100 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year.

Congress has approved the money, but the Senate added a provision also calling for most U.S. combat troops to be out of Iraq by March 31, 2008.

The House version demands a September 2008 withdrawal.

Bush has vowed to veto any legislation that includes such deadlines.

According to defense and Guard officials, the first Guard units could go as soon as late December with others following over the next six months.

They would be sent only if commanders in Iraq determined the troops were needed.

About 270,000 of the more than 347,000 Army Guard soldiers have served in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

Gates said Thursday that the Pentagon's goal is to give reserve units five years at home for every year deployed.

Earlier this year he announced that the reserves will now deploy as full units, and they will go for only 12 months at a time.

Guard units currently serve about 18 months for each tour of duty, including six months of training.

But Gates told Pentagon reporters that there will be a "transition period during which those guidelines would be violated and in which we would be unable, because of the troops commitments in Afghanistan and in Iraq, to meet those goals."

That transition period, he said, could last a year or two.
___

On the Net:

Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil

Last Tuesday, as President Bush got off the Helicopter in front of the White House, he was carrying a baby piglet under each arm.

The squared away Marine guard snaps to attention, salutes, and says: "Nice pigs, sir."

The President replies, "These are not pigs, these are authentic Arkansas Razorback Hogs."

"I got one for Vice President Dick Cheney and the other one I got for Condoleeza Rice."

The squared away Marine again snaps to attention, salutes, and says, "Excellent trade, sir."

"Most '08 candidates lack military record"

By ANN SANNER, Associated Press

Last updated: 3:42 a.m., Monday, April 9, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The 2008 presidential campaign is long on war rhetoric and short on warriors.

Despite the high-profile roles of the battle against terrorism and conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan in the presidential campaign, few of the candidates can claim military experience on their resumes.

Of the top tier of 2008 candidates, only Republican John McCain has been to war and served in uniform.

Yet, while the demand for a president with a military background might be expected to run high in the post-Sept. 11 era, few see that as a determining factor in the 2008 race.

"It teaches you certain things, but I don't think it makes you a better candidate for higher office," said Navy veteran Edward Ferrari, 76, of Randolph, N.J.

"It teaches you honor and duty."

"I guess you can get that in other places, too."

Polls indicate that while having a military background can be helpful to presidential candidates, a majority of adults don't see it as essential.

Many people say candidates who've served as a governor, member of Congress or business executive are better prepared for the Oval Office than a general or admiral.

More broadly, an AP-Ipsos poll last month indicates leadership traits or experience are far less important to voters than character attributes such as honesty.

The 2008 lineup of candidates also makes clear that a new generation of political leaders has stepped forward, some too young to have been eligible for the Vietnam-era draft.

Beyond that, fatigue with the Iraq war may have dulled the appetite for a warrior in the White House.

"We're sick and tired of war and I think that feeling is going to last for about a decade," said Stephen J. Wayne, a professor of government at Georgetown University.

To some, like Richard Land, head of public policy for the Southern Baptist Convention, a war record still counts.

"When you're a war hero, you have less to prove on the character front," he said, comparing McCain with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the front-runner in national popularity polls, who did not serve in the military.

And Vietnam veteran Audrey Birgstresser said presidents with military experience understand the sacrifices of deployed soldiers and how to deftly resolve conflicts.

"They know how to make decisions under pressure because that's what their life is all about," said Birgstresser, 59, of Harrisburg, Pa.

Yet Fred Greenstein, a political scientist at Princeton University, doubts that even the few veterans in the race will make much of their service given the situation in Iraq.

"Now that we're in this period of an increasingly virulent insurgency, it would probably be more electorally effective, even for the people who have military experience, to say they are more suited to be peacemakers, not that they were suited to manage violent conflicts," he said.

Since at least the 1992 election, being a war hero hasn't been a ticket to the White House.

Former President Clinton, who was never in the armed forces, defeated two World War II combat veterans -- former President George H.W. Bush in 1992 and former Sen. Bob Dole in 1996.

President George W. Bush's National Guard duty helped keep him out of Vietnam, yet he defeated three veterans of that conflict -- McCain in the 2000 GOP primaries, Democrat Al Gore in the 2000 election and Democrat John Kerry in 2004.

Of the current Democratic front-runners, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, 45, was too young to have been drafted during the Vietnam War.

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, 53, had a draft number that was never called.

And, Sen. Hillary Clinton, 59, like most women her age, would not have been expected to serve.

Women weren't subject to the draft.

Among the other candidates in the Democratic race, Sen. Chris Dodd, 62, of Connecticut, served in the Army Reserve from 1969 to 1975.

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico received student and medical classifications that probably spared him from service in Vietnam, including one for a deviated septum.

Richardson had a draft lottery number of 131 in 1970, a year when men with numbers as high as 195 were called.

Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, 64, and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, 60, also had medical conditions that kept them from serving in Vietnam.

Among the leading Republican candidates, only McCain, 70, has a military record.

The Arizona senator spent more than 20 years in the Navy, almost a quarter of it in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp.

Draft deferments kept Giuliani, 62, of out Vietnam while he attended law school.

In 1968, as the Vietnam War was escalating, he was classified 1-A, or draft eligible.

After going to work for a federal judge, he received an occupational deferment.

He was classified 1-A again in 1970, but had a high lottery number.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, 60, received a draft deferment while serving as a Mormon missionary in France during the war.

He was eligible for the draft later, but was not selected.

Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, 50, and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, 51, came of age after the draft ended in 1973.

Neither has military experience.

Another Republican, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, received student deferments.

He was available for service in 1969, but was reclassified in 1970 because of stress-related anxiety.

On the other hand, longshot GOP hopeful Rep. Duncan Hunter, 58, who describes himself as "the national security candidate," was an Army paratrooper and Ranger in the Vietnam War and has a personal connection to the Iraq war.

His son, a Marine, has completed two tours of duty there.

Congress has also seen a drain in the number of members with military experience.

Only 131 members have had some form of military service, according to a Congressional Research Service report.

During the 93rd Congress from 1973 to 1975, 390 veterans served.

Even if a military background isn't essential to voters, a sense that a candidate can handle the role of commander in chief remains important to most Americans.

"I think that the voters in this post-9/11 era will take into account everything about candidates," said Dayton Duncan, who was an insider on the presidential campaigns of Democrats Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis, "and part of that filter is, 'Are you capable of protecting us?'"

"Insider: Missteps soured Iraqis on U.S."

By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent

Mon Apr 9, 2:08 AM ET

NEW YORK - In a rueful reflection on what might have been, an Iraqi government insider details in 500 pages the U.S. occupation's "shocking" mismanagement of his country — a performance so bad, he writes, that by 2007 Iraqis had "turned their backs on their would-be liberators."

"The corroded and corrupt state of Saddam was replaced by the corroded, inefficient, incompetent and corrupt state of the new order," Ali A. Allawi concludes in "The Occupation of Iraq," newly published by Yale University Press.

Allawi writes with authority as a member of that "new order," having served as Iraq's trade, defense and finance minister at various times since 2003.

As a former academic, at Oxford University before the U.S.-British invasion of Iraq, he also writes with unusual detachment.

The U.S.- and British-educated engineer and financier is the first senior Iraqi official to look back at book length on his country's four-year ordeal.

It's an unsparing look at failures both American and Iraqi, an account in which the word "ignorance" crops up repeatedly.

First came the "monumental ignorance" of those in Washington pushing for war in 2002 without "the faintest idea" of Iraq's realities.

"More perceptive people knew instinctively that the invasion of Iraq would open up the great fissures in Iraqi society," he writes.

What followed was the "rank amateurism and swaggering arrogance" of the occupation, under L. Paul Bremer's Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), which took big steps with little consultation with Iraqis, steps Allawi and many others see as blunders:

• The Americans disbanded Iraq's army, which Allawi said could have helped quell a rising insurgency in 2003.

Instead, hundreds of thousands of demobilized, angry men became a recruiting pool for the resistance.

• Purging tens of thousands of members of toppled President Saddam Hussein's Baath party — from government, school faculties and elsewhere — left Iraq short on experienced hands at a crucial time.

• An order consolidating decentralized bank accounts at the Finance Ministry bogged down operations of Iraq's many state-owned enterprises.

• The CPA's focus on private enterprise allowed the "commercial gangs" of Saddam's day to monopolize business.

• Its free-trade policy allowed looted Iraqi capital equipment to be spirited away across borders.

• The CPA perpetuated Saddam's fuel subsidies, selling gasoline at giveaway prices and draining the budget.

In his 2006 memoir of the occupation, Bremer wrote that senior U.S. generals wanted to recall elements of the old Iraqi army in 2003, but were rebuffed by the Bush administration.

Bremer complained generally that his authority was undermined by Washington's "micromanagement."

Although Allawi, a cousin of Ayad Allawi, Iraq's prime minister in 2004, is a member of a secularist Shiite Muslim political grouping, his well-researched book betrays little partisanship.

On U.S. reconstruction failures — in electricity, health care and other areas documented by Washington's own auditors — Allawi writes that the Americans' "insipid retelling of 'success' stories" merely hid "the huge black hole that lay underneath."

For their part, U.S. officials have often largely blamed Iraq's explosive violence for the failures of reconstruction and poor governance.

The author has been instrumental since 2005 in publicizing extensive corruption within Iraq's "new order," including an $800-million Defense Ministry scandal.

Under Saddam, he writes, the secret police kept would-be plunderers in check better than the U.S. occupiers have done.

As 2007 began, Allawi concludes, "America's only allies in Iraq were those who sought to manipulate the great power to their narrow advantage."

"It might have been otherwise."

"Ohio gov. fears for Guard members safety"

By JULIE CARR SMYTH, Associated Press

Last updated: 3:33 p.m., Tuesday, April 10, 2007

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Ohio's governor said Tuesday he is worried that National Guard troops who have been told to prepare for a possible deployment to Iraq won't have proper training and equipment.

"These men and women are going to be paying the price, I think, for failure to adequately plan, to predict, and it troubles me," Gov. Ted Strickland told National Public Radio's "Morning Edition."

National Guard brigades in Ohio, Arkansas, Indiana and Oklahoma are being prepared to serve as replacement forces in the regular troop rotation for the war.

It will be the second tour for several thousand of their troops.

"There are so many concerns that I have -- the effect on employers, the effect upon families of these men and women -- and I just think this is an example of the government not keeping faith with the men and women who have volunteered to serve in the Ohio National Guard," the Democratic governor said.

The 37th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Columbus is being called up for the second time in two years, though past practice would have dictated they not be called again until 2009, Strickland said.

"This is a significant departure from the commitment made to Ohio soldiers and their families, and I believe it is a breach of faith," he wrote to the president on Tuesday.

Strickland called on the Bush administration to take steps to ensure that the soldiers are properly trained and given the most up-to-date body armor and weapons.

Thomas Hall, assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs, said the brigades would have about nine months to prepare.

"Training plans are being developed and the funding for equipment will begin to flow to prepare these units," he said in an e-mail.

"It also allows the families and employers time to prepare for the absence of these soldiers for this one-year mobilization."

In a March report to Congress, the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves said it found nearly 88 percent of Army National Guard units had insufficient trucks, generators, radios and other gear needed to respond to potential disasters and terrorist attacks.

The Government Accountability Office issued a similar finding in January.

Strickland said the federal government is asking Ohio Guard members to go "above and beyond the call of duty."

The former congressman has spoken out against the war and the Bush administration's handling of it before.

In a February interview with The Associated Press, Strickland initially said he was not inclined to accommodate any Iraqi refugees in Ohio because doing so would help bail out the president.

He later said he meant only to express frustration with the Bush administration and the war, not to turn away people in need.

The administration's plan calls for about 7,000 Iraqi refugees to be settled in the U.S. over the next year.

"Judge in court-martial case asked to determine if U.S. 'at war'"

Associated Press

Last updated: 10:45 p.m., Tuesday, April 17, 2007

FORT BRAGG, N.C. -- Whether or not the United States is at war, according to a military description for courts-martial, could help determine whether a former National Guardsman will face the death penalty in the deaths of two officers.

Staff Sgt. Alberto B. Martinez of Troy, N.Y., a former member of the New York Army National Guard, faces two counts of murder in the deaths of Capt. Phillip T. Esposito of Suffern, N.Y., his company commander, and 1st Lt. Louis E. Allen of Milford, Pa., in Tikrit, Iraq, in June 2005.

He's accused of setting off an explosive in the window of a room occupied by the two men.

Defense attorneys for Martinez raised the question of whether the United States is at war during a pretrial hearing Tuesday.

They also made other requests, including one to postpone an Aug. 13 start of the court-martial.

The military's Manual for Courts-Martial sets two standards for when the U.S. is at war: when Congress declares war, which hasn't happened since 1941, or when the president issues an order that says for the purposes of courts-martial, the country is at war.

"I don't have the luxury of having an emotional, visceral reaction to an incident," the judge, Col. Patrick Parrish, said during the hearing Tuesday.

"... I am restricted to the definition that's in the manual."

He said he would decide the defense requests "in due course."

The issue of whether the nation is officially at war under military law affects the possible punishment for Martinez because when Gen. John R. Vines ordered Martinez's court-martial, he cited four reasons why the case is a capital punishment case, including that the killings happened during a "time of war."

Defense attorney Maj. John Gregory argued that Vines might not have determined the case was a capital punishment one if not for the "time of war" citation.

But a prosecutor, Capt. John Benson, noted that Vines cited three additional reasons for his determination, including that officers were killed, more than one person was killed and the blast put other people in danger.

In addition to two counts of murder, Martinez is charged with wrongfully possessing an Iraqi pistol, unexploded ordnance and alcohol in Iraq, and with selling printers and copiers to an Iraqi national.

------

Information from: The Fayetteville Observer, http://www.fayettevillenc.com

"Analysis: Iraq surge may be extended"

By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer

23 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon is laying the groundwork to extend the U.S. troop buildup in Iraq.

At the same time, the administration is warning Iraqi leaders that the boost in forces could be reversed if political reconciliation is not evident by summer.

This approach underscores the central difficulty facing President Bush.

If political progress is not possible in the relatively short term, then the justification for sending thousands more U.S. troops to Baghdad — and accepting the rising U.S. combat death toll that has resulted — will disappear.

That in turn would put even more pressure on Bush to yield to the Democratic-led push to wind down the war in coming months.

If the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki does manage to achieve the political milestones demanded by Washington, then the U.S. military probably will be told to sustain the troop buildup much longer than originally foreseen — possibly well into 2008.

Thus the early planning for keeping it up beyond late summer.

More than half of the extra 21,500 combat troops designated for Baghdad duty have arrived; the rest are due by June.

Already it is evident that putting them in the most hotly contested parts of the capital is taking a toll.

An average of 22 U.S. troops have died per week in April, the highest rate so far this year.

"This is certainly a price that we're paying for this increased security," Adm. William Fallon, the senior U.S. commander in the Middle East, told a House committee Wednesday.

He also said the United States does not have "a ghost of a chance" of success in Iraq unless it can create "stability and security."

The idea of the troop increase, originally billed by the administration as a temporary "surge," is not to defeat the insurgency.

That is not thought possible in the near term.

The purpose is to contain the violence — in particular, the sect-on-sect killings in Baghdad — long enough to create an environment in which Iraqi political leaders can move toward conciliation and ordinary Iraqis are persuaded of a viable future.

So far the results are mixed, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates said this week during a visit to Iraq that he wants to see faster political progress by the Iraqis.

"The clock is ticking," he said, referring to the limited time the administration can pursue its strategy before the American public demands an end to the war.

Gates also said he told al-Maliki that the United States will not keep fighting indefinitely.

Gates' remarks reflected the administration's effort to strike a balance between reassuring the Iraqis of U.S. support and pressuring their leaders to show they can bring the country together and avert a full-scale civil war.

Anthony Cordesman, an Iraq watcher at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Friday that even if the Iraqis pass the desired legislation, it probably would take months longer to find out if it proves workable.

"The U.S. should definitely keep up the pressure on the Iraqis, but we should have no illusions," Cordesman said.

"Iraqis are driven more by their own politics than outside pressure."

When Bush announced the troop boost in January, administration officials pointedly left unclear how long the extra troops would remain in Iraq.

Some, including Gates, suggested that troop levels could be reduced to the previous standard of about 135,000 as early as September — assuming the addition of 21,500 combat troops and roughly 8,000 support troops this spring proved to be an overwhelming success or a clear-cut failure.

Three months later, with troops still flowing into Baghdad, the Pentagon is beginning to take steps that suggests it expects to maintain higher troop levels into 2008 and beyond, yet officials still won't say whether the increase is intended as a short-term move.

Some believe the lack of clarity is a mistake because it adds to the strain on troops and their families and it may lessen the psychological pressure on the belligerents.

Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute, whose January report on changing the U.S. military strategy in Iraq was largely adopted as part of Bush's new approach to the war, said in an interview Thursday that it appears the administration believes it will have to sustain the troop buildup much longer.

"They seem to be taking the steps that would make it possible to sustain it for longer, which is good," Kagan said.

"But they seem to be reluctant to commit to a willingness to do that, which I think is unfortunate."

Kagan says the troops, the Iraqi government and the insurgents all ought to be convinced that U.S. forces will keep up the pressure, particularly in the most contested neighborhoods in Baghdad, for at least another year.

"If I were running the show I would say, 'Look, everyone should assume that we're going to sustain this through 2008 — the Iraqis should assume that, too — and if we can turn it off sooner, then everyone would be happy," Kagan said.

Gen. James T. Conway, the commandant of the Marine Corps, takes a similar view.

In an interview earlier this month he pondered the thought process of a U.S. commander in Iraq evaluating the way ahead.

"In six months, if it's working, is he going to say, 'OK, it worked, now you guys can go home'?"

Conway thinks there is a reasonable chance for success, and for planning purposes he is preparing to sustain the troop buildup.

The Marines added about 4,000 to their contingent in western Anbar province, the focal point of the Sunni Arab insurgency.

In March the Marines made a little-noticed move that gives them the flexibility to continue at the higher rate in Iraq at least into 2008.

They extended the tours of Marines in Okinawa, Japan, which freed up other Marine units in the United States to deploy to Iraq later this year instead of Okinawa.

Also, the Pentagon announced earlier this month that normal tours of duty in Iraq will be 15 months instead of 12 months.

Gates said that gives the military the capability to maintain the higher troop levels in Iraq until next spring.
___

EDITOR'S NOTE — Robert Burns has covered the military for The Associated Press since 1990.

"After Tillman death, Army clamped down"

By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press
Last updated: 5:12 a.m., Saturday, April 21, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO -- Within hours of Pat Tillman's death, the Army went into information-lockdown mode, cutting off phone and Internet connections at a base in Afghanistan, posting guards on a wounded platoon mate, and ordering a sergeant to burn Tillman's uniform.

New Army investigative documents reviewed by The Associated Press describe how the military sealed off information about Tillman's death from all but a small ring of soldiers.

Officers quietly passed their suspicion of friendly fire up the chain to the highest ranks of the military, but the truth did not reach Tillman's family for five weeks.

The clampdown, and the misinformation issued by the military, lie at the heart of a burgeoning congressional investigation.

"We want to find out how this happened," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chairman of the House oversight committee, which has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday.

"Was it the result of incompetence, miscommunication or a deliberate strategy?"

It is also a central issue as the Army weighs punishments against nine officers, including four generals, faulted in the latest Pentagon report on the case of the NFL star-turned-soldier.

Gen. William Wallace, who oversees training for the Army, is to report on possible punishments.

He told Acting Army Secretary Pete Geren this week that he was working as quickly as possible on recommendations, but could provide no timetable, Army spokesman Paul Boyce said.

In the meantime, promotions and awards have been suspended for the seven officers still in the Army, Boyce said.

It is well known by now that the circumstances of Tillman's April 22, 2004, death were kept from his family and the American public; the Army maintained he was cut down by enemy bullets in an ambush, even though many soldiers knew he was mistakenly killed by his own comrades.

The nearly 1,100 pages of documents released last month at the conclusion of the Army Criminal Investigation Command's probe reveal the mechanics of how the Army contained the information.

For example, the day after Tillman died, Spc. Jade Lane lay in a hospital bed in Afghanistan, recovering from gunshot wounds inflicted by the same fellow Rangers who had shot at Tillman.

Amid his shock and grief, Lane noticed guards were posted on him.

"I thought it was strange," Lane recalled.

Later, he said, he learned the reason for their presence: The news media were sniffing around, and Lane's superiors "did not want anyone talking to us," he said.

Inside Forward Operating Base Salerno, near Khowst, Afghanistan, a soldier heard the dreaded call come across the radio: "KIAs."

There were two killed in action, one allied Afghan fighter and one Army Ranger, identified only by his code name.

The soldier checked a roster and discovered the fallen American was Tillman.

He rounded up four others and broke the news but withheld Tillman's name.

Had this soldier wanted to share the news outside the tactical operations center, it would have been difficult.

"The phones and Internet had been cut off, to prevent anyone from talking about the incident," he told investigators.

Nearby on the same base, a staff sergeant was in his tent when a captain walked in and told him to burn Tillman's bloody clothing.

"He wanted me alone to burn what was in the bag to prevent security violations, leaks and rumors," the staff sergeant testified.

The superior "put a lock on communications" in the tent, he testified.

Other Army officers said this was probably a directive to the staff sergeant to keep the conversation to himself.

Then he left the staff sergeant to his work: placing Tillman's uniform, socks, gloves and body armor into a 55-gallon drum and burning them.

Several soldiers and officers testified that the primary reason they destroyed the equipment was because it was becoming a "biohazard" and emitting a foul odor.

Several Army officers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan said pulling the plug on base phones and e-mail was routine after a soldier died.

The practice was meant to ensure the family was notified through official channels, said Army Maj. Todd Breasseale, chief spokesman for ground forces in Iraq until last August.

But the truth was quickly becoming evident to a small group of soldiers with direct access to the evidence.

Two other sergeants who examined Tillman's vest noticed the bullet holes appeared to be from 5.56-caliber bullets -- signature American ammunition.

An awful realization dawned on the sergeants, whose names, like those of others who testified in the investigation, were deleted from the recently released testimony.

"At this time was when I had realized Tillman may have been killed by friendly fire," one of them said.

The other sergeant, who was higher-ranking, told him to "keep quiet and let the investigators do their job," the subordinate sergeant testified.

He was not to go "informing unit members that Spc. Tillman was killed by friendly fire."

This was the same reason top-ranking officers cited in trying to explain why they waited to tell the Tillman family: They wanted to have the definitive investigation results.

Army regulations, however, dictate that the next of kin be informed of additional information about a service member's death as it becomes available.

Then-Col. James C. Nixon, Tillman's regimental commander, ordered an investigation but directed that the information gathered be shared with as few people as possible until the results were finalized, acting Defense Department Inspector General Thomas Gimble found in a separate probe also completed last month.

Nixon, now a brigadier general and director of operations at the Center for Special Operations at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, said that he was not aware of all regulations governing such a case, and that his missteps were unintentional.

Among the top brass at the Pentagon, Lt. Gen. Philip Kensinger, a now-retired three-star general in charge of special operations, represented the Army at Tillman's memorial service almost two weeks after the soldier's death.

"He decided to withhold notification from family members until all facts concerning the incident could be verified," Gimble found.

Kensinger denied that he knew on the day of the memorial service that friendly fire was suspected.

But investigators dismissed his claim as not credible and Kensinger could be punished under military law for making false official statements.

Congressional investigators will try to determine how high up the chain of command the information lockdown went.

The Army delivered several thousand pages of new documents on Thursday, military officials said.

Gen. John Abizaid, then chief of Central Command, in charge of all American forces in the Middle East and Central Asia, testified that he did not learn of the likelihood of friendly fire until sometime between May 6 and May 13 -- two or three weeks after Tillman died -- because he was traveling in the Middle East.

And a lieutenant colonel testified that he delayed briefing Central Command lawyers until more than a month after Tillman had died, in part because he feared leaks and did not want to be blamed as the source.

But Abizaid visited Afghanistan within a week of Tillman's death and spoke to Tillman's platoon leader, then-Lt. David Uthlaut.

Uthlaut has testified he did not suspect friendly fire until later.

Abizaid's trip to Afghanistan was not examined by Gimble's investigators, according to spokesman Gary Comerford.

Abizaid had no immediate comment.

The new testimony and other documents do not identify who, if anyone, orchestrated the clampdown.

Nor do they address whether there was a concerted effort to conceal the truth about the best-known casualty in the war on terrorism.

Gimble said last month he found no evidence of such a cover-up.

But when asked by a reporter whether he probed why the Army had not told the family in a timely fashion, Gimble said no.

One soldier carried a particularly heavy burden of secrecy.

Ranger Spc. Russell Baer had witnessed Rangers shooting at Rangers.

Afterward, he was directed to travel from Afghanistan to the United States with his friend Kevin Tillman.

But he was ordered not to tell Pat Tillman's brother and fellow Ranger that friendly fire was the likely cause of the former football player's death.

He kept the secret, fearing he did not know the whole story.

But in a personal protest, Baer later went AWOL and was demoted as punishment.

"I lost respect for the people in charge of me," Baer testified in an earlier Tillman investigation.

He had gleaned "part of the puzzle" of Tillman's death, but lamented that "I couldn't tell them about it."

Five investigations and three years later, that information gap is what's driving the congressional probe, which is also looking into misinformation surrounding the capture and rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch in Iraq.

"Soldier: Honor troops like Va. Tech dead"

By ALISA TANG, Associated Press Writer

Mon Apr 23, 11:16 AM ET

KABUL, Afghanistan - An Army sergeant complained in a rare opinion article that the U.S. flag flew at half-staff last week at the largest U.S. base in Afghanistan for those killed at Virginia Tech but the same honor is not given to fallen U.S. troops here and in Iraq.

In the article issued Monday by the public affairs office at Bagram military base north of Kabul, Sgt. Jim Wilt lamented that his comrades' deaths have become a mere blip on the TV screen, lacking the "shock factor" to be honored by the Stars and Stripes as the deaths at Virginia Tech were.

"I find it ironic that the flags were flown at half-staff for the young men and women who were killed at VT, yet it is never lowered for the death of a U.S. service member," Wilt wrote.

He noted that Bagram obeyed President Bush's order last week that all U.S. flags at federal locations be flown at half-staff through April 22 to honor 32 people killed at Virginia Tech by a 23-year-old student gunman who then killed himself.

"I think it is sad that we do not raise the bases' flag to half-staff when a member of our own task force dies," Wilt said.

According to the Defense Department, 315 U.S. service members have died in and around Afghanistan since the U.S.-led offensive that toppled the Taliban regime in late 2001, 198 of them in combat.

NATO's International Security Assistance Force said that the flags of all its troop-contributing nations are flown at half-staff for about 72 hours after the service member's death "as a mark of respect when there is an ISAF fatality."

Sgt. 1st Class Dean Welch, who works with Wilt at the U.S.-led coalition public affairs office, said the essay is a "soldier's commentary, not the view of the coalition and not the view of the U.S. forces."

Welch added that such outspoken opinion pieces are rare.

Wilt suggested that flags should fly at half-staff on the base where the fallen service member was working and in the states where they hail from.

He said some states do this, but not all of them.

He wrote that the death of a U.S. service member is just as violent as those at the university last week, but it lacks the "shock factor of the Virginia massacre."

"It is a daily occurrence these days to see X number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq or Afghanistan scrolling across the ticker at the bottom of the TV screen."

"People have come to expect casualty counts in the nightly news; they don't expect to see 32 students killed," he wrote.

"If the flags on our (operating bases) were lowered for just one day after the death of a service member, it would show the people who knew the person that society cared, the American people care."
___

On the Net:

U.S. military in Afghanistan: http://www.cfc-a.centcom.mil/

"Ranger alleges cover-up in Tillman case"

By SCOTT LINDLAW and ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writers

5 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - An Army Ranger who was with Pat Tillman when he died by friendly fire said Tuesday he was told by a higher-up to conceal that information from Tillman's family.

"I was ordered not to tell them," U.S. Army Specialist Bryan O'Neal told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

He said he was given the order by then-Lt. Col. Jeff Bailey, the battalion commander who oversaw Tillman's platoon.

Pat Tillman's brother Kevin was in a convoy behind his brother when the incident happened, but didn't see it.

O'Neal said Bailey told him specifically not to tell Kevin Tillman that the death was friendly fire rather than heroic engagement with the enemy.

"He basically just said, 'Do not let Kevin know, he's probably in a bad place knowing that his brother's dead,'" O'Neal said.

He added that Bailey made clear he would "get in trouble" if he told.

Kevin Tillman was not in the hearing room when O'Neal spoke.

In earlier testimony, Kevin Tillman accused the military of "intentional falsehoods" and "deliberate and careful misrepresentations" in portraying Pat Tillman's death in Afghanistan as the result of heroic engagement with the enemy instead of friendly fire.

"We believe this narrative was intended to deceive the family but more importantly the American public," Kevin Tillman told a House Government Reform and Oversight Committee hearing.

"Pat's death was clearly the result of fratricide," he said, contending that the military's misstatements amounted to "fraud."

"Revealing that Pat's death was a fratricide would have been yet another political disaster in a month of political disasters ... so the truth needed to be suppressed," Tillman said.

The committee's chairman, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., accused the government of inventing "sensational details and stories" about Pat Tillman's death and the 2003 rescue of Jessica Lynch, perhaps the most famous victims of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

"The government violated its most basic responsibility," said Waxman.

Lynch, then an Army private, was badly injured when her convoy was ambushed in Iraq.

She was subsequently rescued by American troops from an Iraqi hospital but the tale of her ambush was changed into a story of heroism on her part.

Still hampered by her injuries, Lynch walked slowly to the witness table and took a seat alongside Tillman's family members.

"The bottom line is the American people are capable of determining their own ideals of heroes and they don't need to be told elaborate lies," Lynch said.

Kevin Tillman said his family has sought for years to get at the truth, and have now concluded that they were "being actively thwarted by powers that are more interested in protecting a narrative than getting at the truth and seeing justice is served."

Lawmakers questioned how high up the chain of command the information about Tillman's friendly fire death went, and whether anyone in the White House knew before Tillman's family.

"How high up did this go?" asked Waxman.

Pat Tillman's mother, Mary Tillman, said she believed former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld must have known.

"The fact that he would have died by friendly fire and no one told Rumsfeld is ludicrous," she said.

Tillman was killed on April 22, 2004, after his Army Ranger comrades were ambushed in eastern Afghanistan.

Rangers in a convoy trailing Tillman's group had just emerged from a canyon where they had been fired upon.

They saw Tillman and mistakenly fired on him.

Though dozens of soldiers knew quickly that Tillman had been killed by his fellow troops, the Army said initially that he was killed by enemy gunfire when he led his team to help another group of ambushed soldiers.

The family was not told what really happened until May 29, 2004, a delay the Army blamed on procedural mistakes.

In questioning what the White House knew, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., cited a memo written by a top general seven days after Tillman's death warning it was "highly possible" the Army Ranger was killed by friendly fire and making clear his warning should be conveyed to the president.

President Bush made no reference to the way Tillman died in a speech delivered two days after the memo was written.

A White House spokesman has said there's no indication Bush received the warning in the memo written April 29, 2004 by then-Maj. Gen. Stanley McChrystal to Gen. John Abizaid, head of Central Command.

"It's a little disingenuous to think the administration didn't know," Kevin Tillman told the committee.

"That's kind of what we hoped you guys would get involved with and take a look," he said.

Mary Tillman told the committee that family members were "absolutely appalled" upon realizing the extent to which they were misled.

"We've all been betrayed ..."

"We never thought they would use him the way they did," she said.

The Tillman family has made similar accusations against the administration and the military before, but has generally shied away from news media attention.

The family had never previously appeared together and summarized their criticism and questions in such a public, comprehensive way.

"We shouldn't be allowed to have smoke screens thrown in our face," Mary Tillman said.

"You're diminishing their true heroism to write these glorious tales."

"It's really a disservice to the nation."

"Our family will never be satisfied."

"We'll never have Pat back," she said.

"Something really awful happened."

"It's your job to find out what happened to him."

"That's really important."

Last month the military concluded in a pair of reports that nine high-ranking Army officers, including four generals, made critical errors in reporting Tillman's death but that there was no criminal wrongdoing in his shooting.

Tillman's death received worldwide attention because he had walked away from a huge contract with the NFL's Arizona Cardinals to enlist in the Army after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
___

Associated Press writer Scott Lindlaw contributed to this report from San Francisco.

"Tillman-Lynch hearing set to open"

By SCOTT LINDLAW

23 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - As the Army probed Pat Tillman's death, investigators implored the CIA and Pentagon last year to scour their databanks for aerial video of the friendly fire incident, footage they believed might have been captured as a Predator drone flew over the scene.

The trail ran cold in October, but lawmakers plan to press the Pentagon on Tuesday with questions still hovering over the one-time National Football League star's shooting:

Was a drone flying overhead when Tillman was killed?

Did it videotape the incident, and if so, where is the footage?

Some members of Congress hope to elicit the new information Tuesday when the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform holds a hearing as part of an investigation into misleading information from the U.S. military.

The most recent investigation by the Army, released last month, documented a monthslong search for the video.

The undertaking "suggests the distinct possibility that a Predator drone overflew the battle scene, and, if it did, may have captured yet-unrevealed material information," said Daniel Kohns, a spokesman for Rep. Mike Honda, a Democrat who represents the San Jose, Calif., area where Tillman grew up.

"Representative Honda intends to question Pentagon and Army officials on this issue and, at long last, elicit definitive answers to this and other questions that inexcusably continue to linger over this matter," Kohns said.

The hearing will cover both Tillman's death three years ago and the 2003 rescue of Pfc. Jessica Lynch in Iraq — a story embellished by the military after her videotaped rescue by special forces.

For the hearing, the committee issued its first subpoena since Democrats took power and Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., assumed the chairmanship in January.

The target of the subpoena was Dr. Gene Bolles, the neurosurgeon who treated Lynch in Germany after she was rescued in Iraq.

Bolles will be a witness Tuesday, as will Lynch.

Also testifying will be Tillman's mother; his brother Kevin, who was nearby when Pat Tillman was killed; and Spc. Bryan O'Neal, who was next to Tillman when he was killed.

Acting Defense Department Inspector General Thomas Gimble and Gen. Rodney Johnson, the head of the Army's Criminal Investigation Command — who both completed investigations last month on Tillman's death — also will appear.

The drone, equipped with a video camera in its nose, had been flown by the CIA over Afghanistan in search of Osama bin Laden for several years.

After Sept. 11, 2001, the little plane also was outfitted with missiles and used to kill al-Qaida leaders.

An Air Force commando attached to Tillman's Army Ranger platoon testified that as the incident unfolded, he heard the unmanned reconnaissance plane's distinctive propellor buzz overhead.

"I remember hearing an aircraft that I initially suspected was a C-130 but as I listened closer I knew it was a Predator drone," he told Army investigators.

His belief was later confirmed by a comrade at their tactical operations center, he said. "I was told it was over us during the ambush," this airman testified.

His name was blacked out of documents the Army released last month.

The Air Force commando was something of an expert in aircraft sounds.

As an "enlisted terminal attack controller," his job was to call in and then direct "close air support" or aircraft that could fire on the enemy in the kind of ambush that preceded Tillman's death.

Moments after hearing that attack on his fellow Army Rangers, the airman radioed a command center and requested air cover.

No attack aircraft arrived to help.

His recollection of the Predator was enough to spark a search for any video the drone might have gathered.

That search spanned six months, took investigators close to the highest reaches of the Pentagon and touched upon some of the most sensitive technology the United States possesses.

In September, Army security officials directed that investigators' memos seeking Predator footage be classified "SECRET/NOFORN," meaning no foreigners would be permitted to see the memos.

Special agents for the Army Criminal Investigation Command and the Defense Department inspector general's office spent much of last summer trying to track down the video — or determine whether it existed.

Among other agencies, the agents reached out to "Psychological Operations, the Pentagon ... regarding the Predator footage which was taken during the Tillman incident."

A former U.S. commander in Afghanistan told investigators that "the chances of footage being taken at the incident location during that time frame is minimal."

Still, the investigators met with Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, the Pentagon's deputy undersecretary for intelligence, who said "he would coordinate with the Central Intelligence Agency and ensure a review for the requested imagery is conducted."

In October, however, the conclusive results came back from Navy Vice Admiral Eric T. Olson, deputy commander of the Special Operations Command: No video of the friendly fire episode was "known or suspected to exist."

Tillman's death received worldwide attention because he had walked away from a huge contract with the NFL's Arizona Cardinals to enlist in the Army after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

"Ex-VA cancer chief admits role in scandal - Researcher who ran Stratton center program that caused death of a veteran pleads guilty to failing to protect patients"

By BRENDAN J. LYONS Senior writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, April 25, 2007

ALBANY -- An oncologist who headed the cancer research program at Stratton VA Medical Center during a time when veterans were used like guinea pigs pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor federal charge Tuesday, admitting he failed to protect his patients from a rogue researcher who caused at least one patient to die.

Dr. James A. Holland, 49, who has recently worked at a cancer program for a hospital in Georgia, where he now lives, faces up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $100,000.

But under federal sentencing guidelines, Holland could escape any jail time.

He pleaded guilty to one count of wrongfully and unlawfully failing to establish and maintain adequate and accurate cases on patients participating in drug studies.

It's not clear whether the conviction will affect Holland's professional licenses or research credentials.

At least one veteran died and 64 others suffered unduly or were harmed by the forgeries, which involved manipulating their medical backgrounds so they would qualify for drug studies that were lucrative for the hospital and which had furthered the researchers' careers.

The corruption took place over several years and centered largely around the work of Paul H. Kornak, 55, a Stratton research specialist who posed as a doctor even though he never finished medical school.

Kornak was sentenced in November 2005 to six years in prison for his part in the research scandal.

Federal prosecutors did not provide advance notice of Holland's plea proceeding despite the case having generated national attention and congressional action, including a nationwide ramping up of VA hiring practices and mandatory background checks for prospective employees.

While federal authorities claim the research violations took place over about three years, beginning in May 1999, other VA workers have said the cancer program's problems, including the endangering of patients, stretched back years and involved other researchers.

Indeed, Kornak once said he was "used" by Holland, and that others within the hospital knew what was taking place.

Kornak, formerly of Clifton Park, pleaded guilty to one count each of mail fraud and criminally negligent homicide.

He cooperated with investigators and offered to testify before a grand jury.

But it's not clear if prosecutors ever took that step before negotiating their misdemeanor plea bargain with Holland.

Holland and Kornak were fired by the hospital in 2002 after a private drug company investigator noticed problems with the medical records of patients.

Authorities have never offered a clear motive for the forgeries.

At his sentencing nearly two years ago, Kornak laid blame squarely with Holland.

"Every action and decision in this case was ordered and prescribed by the program director (Holland)," Kornak had said.

"It was his decision that all patients should fit into his study; and that without any consequence to those affected."

"I wish to further state that even though I accept all the responsibility, I was used and not even given a full opportunity to express myself to him at that time."

It was not Kornak's first brush with the federal justice system.

In 1992, he pleaded guilty in Pennsylvania to a felony fraud count for forging a medical license application.

Despite his conviction, Stratton's former cancer research director, Dr. William Hrushesky, gave Kornak a job that included processing patients for drug studies.

The federal investigation confirmed only one veteran's death from the scandal, although more deaths were suspected, according to court records filed as part of lawsuits filed by the widows of more than five veterans.

The veteran whose death was proven to be caused by the researchers was James J. DiGeorgio, a 71-year-old Air Force veteran from Brunswick who died at the hospital in June 2001 while being infused with experimental drugs.

Holland, as part of his plea, admitted that he had never reviewed any of DiGeorgio's medical records or checked their accuracy, which is required for the leaders of drug studies.

Stratton officials could not be reached for comment late Tuesday.

They have never placed any blame with Holland, previously saying only that they were victimized by Kornak.

However, under Holland's watch, Kornak openly served in a doctor's role, including treating patients and advising their families about research alternatives.

Several widows of veterans said Kornak was introduced to them as "Dr. Kornak," and that he gave them VA-issued business cards that indicated he had a medical license, which he does not.

A Times Union investigation found that Stratton's cancer research program was the target of internal complaints dating to the mid-1990s.

Hospital staffers said they were harshly retaliated against for warning hospital administrators as early as 1994 that cancer patients were being placed at risk and being enrolled in drug studies without signing consent forms indicating they knew the risks.

Anthony Mariano, Stratton's former pharmacy director, said he and Jeffrey Fudin, another Stratton pharmacist, went to the FBI eight years ago to report allegations of widespread corruption at the embattled hospital.

As early as 1995, they had warned that patients with cancer and other illnesses were being placed at risk -- or had died -- because of the way experimental drugs were being used.

Patients also were enrolled in drug studies without signing consent forms indicating they had been informed about the risk, they said.

Instead of investigating the allegations, hospital administrators allegedly retaliated against the men and ended the pharmacy's role in monitoring research drugs, according to court records.

Mariano said he eventually was forced to leave his job while Fudin was fired, but later had his job reinstated by a federal court.

Both men have said their efforts to get federal authorities and elected leaders to closely examine their situations have been rebuked.

Lyons can be reached at 454-5547 or by e-mail at blyons@timesunion.com.

"Al-Qaida group claims 9 U.S. deaths"

By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer

Wed Apr 25, 1:48 AM ET

BAGHDAD - An al-Qaida-linked group claimed Tuesday that it used "new methods" in staging a double suicide bombing with dump trucks that blasted a paratrooper outpost in volatile Diyala province, killing nine Americans from the 82nd Airborne Division and wounding 20.

The attack underscored the ability of guerrillas of the Sunni Arab-dominated insurgency to wage war in Iraq four years after the U.S.-led invasion, and it came in a region that has seen violence escalate since U.S. and Iraqi troops launched the security crackdown in Baghdad.

The first truck hit outlying concrete barriers surrounding the outpost at Sadah and exploded after soldiers opened fire.

A second truck rammed into the wrecked vehicles, dragging it and other rubble before it exploded 30 yards from the building housing the post's troops, said Lt. Col. Michael Donnelly, U.S. military spokesman in north Iraq.

Neither vehicle penetrated the patrol base's inner perimeter, but the second powerful blast ruptured the wall of the building, collapsing its second floor and causing most of the soldier casualties, a U.S. military statement said Wednesday.

A civilian house was destroyed and several smaller structures collapsed in a nearby neighborhood, the military said.

A civilian hospital and a mosque about 200 yards from the patrol base also were damaged.

All the casualties were in the 5th Squadron, 73rd Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, which has been conducting operations in largely impoverished villages in the area as part of a security push to tame insurgent activity in Diyala.

The deaths made April the deadliest month of the year for the U.S. military.

It was also the single deadliest attack on U.S. ground forces since Dec. 1, 2005, when 10 Marines were killed by a bomb inside an abandoned flour mill near Fallujah.

"We are recovering, supporting the families during this time of loss, praying for them and continuing our mission," Donnelly told The Associated Press in telephone interview.

"The enemy brings nothing to benefit the people — nothing."

The attack at Sadah inflicted the biggest loss on the 82nd Airborne since June 1969, when 12 paratroopers were ambushed and killed in Vietnam, a spokesman, Maj. Tom Earnhardt, said at the division's base at Fort Bragg, N.C.

Donnelly said the patrol base was set up less than a month ago after an operation that sought to drive militants from the area.

Sadah, a rural Sunni town of about 7,000 people near the capital of Diyala province, Baqouba, has been an al-Qaida stronghold.

The Islamic State of Iraq, an umbrella group of Sunni militants that includes al-Qaida in Iraq, said it was behind the suicide attack.

Its account on the Internet was similar to that of the U.S. military, but claimed it used new techniques.

"Almighty God has guided the soldiers of the Islamic State of Iraq to new methods of explosions," the statement said without elaborating, while claiming 30 Americans died.

Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, said the style of the attack fit the pattern of al-Qaida but he said an investigation was under way into who was to blame and exactly what happened.

When asked about the "new methods" claimed by the group, he said the military was on heightened alert for dump trucks as they had been used in several recent high-profile attacks.

"The use of dump trucks seems to be a recurring theme recently in the last few weeks," he said.

He said the military had foiled several attempts to use the large vehicles, mentioning the discovery earlier this month of a dump truck filled with barrels of gasoline that overturned north of Baghdad.

Michael O'Hanlon, a military analyst at the Brookings Institution, said he didn't think the attack demonstrated a particular new technology, adding that securing remote bases in Iraq has always been difficult for U.S. troops.

"Small arms fire followed by two truck bombs is not new, it's just effective use of time-tested tactics," he said in an e-mail message.

American troops are facing increasing danger as they step up their presence in outposts and police stations in Baghdad and areas surrounding the city, as part of the security crackdown to which President Bush has committed an additional 30,000 soldiers and Marines.

"The new counterinsurgency strategy takes U.S. forces out of relatively safe positions and exposes them," said Anthony Cordesman, an Iraq watcher at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

"It simultaneously gives any hostile faction in their area of operation greater incentives to attack them, while making them more dependent on the Iraqi army and police, and local support, to avoid infiltration and spying that can lead to more effective attacks."

Sunni militants are believed to have moved out of the capital to seek haven in nearby areas like Diyala.

The U.S. command deployed an extra 700 soldiers to Diyala last month.

The military, meanwhile, reported a Marine killed Monday in the insurgent stronghold of Anbar province, west of Baghdad.

That was in addition to a U.S. soldier reported killed the same day in a roadside bombing in Diyala, raising to 86 the number of American troops killed this month.

In other violence, 83 Iraqis were killed or found dead around Iraq.
___

Associated Press writer Sarah DiLorenzo in New York contributed to this report.

"Petraeus eyes long commitment in Iraq"

By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 4 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Thursday that conditions in Iraq may get harder before they get easier and will require "an enormous commitment" over time by the United States.

Speaking as the Senate debated veto-threatened legislation to start bringing home U.S. forces in October, Petraeus called the war there "the most complex and challenging I have ever seen."

The four-star general, named by President Bush to oversee the recent buildup of American forces, cited some progress in the two months since the troop increase began.

Still, he said, "there is vastly more work to be done across the board."

"... We are just getting started with the new effort."

He avoided commenting directly on the legislation before the Senate, which passed the House Wednesday night.

"I have tried to stay clear of the political minefields of various legislative proposals," he said.

But his comments made it clear that his war plan did not include a significant reduction of U.S. forces anytime soon.

"This effort may get harder before it gets easier," Petraeus told reporters at a Pentagon briefing, depicting the situation as "exceedingly complex and very tough."

He said that the increasing use of roadside bombs and suicide attacks, plus the greater concentration of U.S. troops among the population, has "led to greater U.S. losses" as well as increased Iraqi military casualties.

Asked how many troops he thought would have to remain in Iraq — and for how long — to finish the job, Petraeus said, "I wouldn't try to truly anticipate what level might be some years down the road."

However, he noted historical precedents to long U.S. peacekeeping missions.

"It is an endeavor that clearly is going to require enormous commitment and commitment over time, but beyond that time I don't want to get into try to postulate how many brigades or when we would start to do something," he said.

Petraeus said matters were made worse by "exceedingly unhelpful activities by Iran and Syria, especially those by Iran."

Asked whether senior officials in the Iranian government were sanctioning sending weapons and technology to insurgents in Iraq, the U.S. general said it was hard to say.

"We do not have a direct link of Iranian involvement," in attacks, he said.

Petraeus also said that, while the fledgling Iraqi government is often billed as a unity government among Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, it actually is not.

"It is not a government of national unity."

"Rather, it is one comprised of political leaders from different parties that often default to narrow agendas and a zero-sum approach to legislation," the general said.

He said that was one reason why progress has been so slow on deciding how to divide up oil revenues and pass budget and emergency powers laws.

Despite the disappointing pace, Petraeus said he believes that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and other leaders "are committed to achieving more in this area in the months ahead."

Petraeus cited slowly improving conditions in turbulent Anbar province in western Iraq, noting it had been "assessed as lost six months ago."

He said the increased U.S. presence in various outposts has enabled Iraqis "to stitch together the fabric of society that was so torn."

But he said improvements, such as the reopening of shops and the return by some residents to their homes, are "often eclipsed by sensational attacks that overshadow our daily accomplishments."

"Iraq is in fact the central front of al-Qaida's global campaign," he said.

"Al-Qaida-Iraq remains a formidable foe with considerable resilience and a capability to produce horrific attacks."

"This group's activities must be significantly disrupted at the least for the new Iraq to succeed," he added.

"The key to success is disrupting their attacks."

FROM THE DESK OF JOHN KERRY:

Dick Cheney's attacks on Harry Reid are as disturbing as they are disingenuous.

No one has been more wrong about Iraq from day one than Vice President Cheney.

The Cheney Doctrine has been a recipe for disaster in Iraq that has put American troops in unforgivable danger and made America less secure.

The Vice President has only been consistent in his miscalculations and misdirection.

I could hardly believe my ears when the Vice President had the nerve to accuse Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of being uninformed.

This is the same man who claimed that we would be greeted as liberators in Iraq and that the Iraqi insurgency was in its last throes, when in fact the civil war was growing.

It is time for the Vice President to return to his secure, undisclosed location to rejoin his neocon friends rather than attack the Majority Leader who is fighting to keep faith with American troops.

THE CHENEY DOCTRINE: UNINFORMED AND MISLEADING

"I think we may well have some kind of presence there over a period of time," Cheney said.

"The level of activity that we see today from a military standpoint, I think, will clearly decline."

"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."

– May 30, 2005, Larry King Live

"We will succeed in Iraq, just like we did in Afghanistan."

"We will stand up a new government under an Iraqi-drafted constitution."

"We will defeat that insurgency, and, in fact, it will be an enormous success story."

– June 25, 2005, CNN Interview

"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators."

– March 16, 2003

"There's overwhelming evidence there was a connection between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government."

"I am very confident that there was an established relationship there."

– January 22, 2004

"We believe Saddam has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."

– March 16, 2003

"Saddam is actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time."

- March 24, 2002

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."

"There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."

– August 26, 2002

"When you think about what we've accomplished in terms of taking Afghanistan—we had a total of 30 killed in action in Afghanistan—taking down the Taliban and destroying the capacity of al-Qaeda to use Afghanistan as a base to attack the United States, launching an attack into Iraq, destroying the Iraqi armed forces, taking down the government of Iraq, getting rid of Saddam Hussein, capturing 42 out of the 55 top leaders, and beginning what I think has been fairly significant success in terms of putting Iraq back together again, the price that we've had to pay is not out of line, and certainly wouldn't lead me to suggest or think that the strategy is flawed or needs to be changed."

– September 14, 2003

http://www.johnkerry.com/standingwithharry/

"Army officer criticizes generals on Iraq"

By THOMAS WAGNER, Associated Press Writer

17 minutes ago

BAGHDAD - An active duty U.S. Army officer has taken the unusual step of openly criticizing the way generals have handled the Iraq war, accusing them of failing to prepare their forces for an insurgency and misleading Congress about the situation here.

"For reasons that are not yet clear, America's general officer corps underestimated the strength of the enemy, overestimated the capabilities of Iraq's government and security forces, and failed to provide Congress with an accurate assessment of security conditions in Iraq," Lt. Col. Paul Yingling wrote in an article published Friday in the Armed Forces Journal.

"In 2007, Iraq's grave and deteriorating condition offers diminishing hope for an American victory and portends an even wider and more destructive regional war," he said.

Several retired U.S. generals have delivered similar criticism, questioning planning for the Iraq conflict as well as the management competence of former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

But public criticism from an active duty officer is rare and may be a sign of growing discontent among military leaders at a critical time in the troubled U.S. military mission here.

An anti-war group, Appeal for Redress, says about 2,000 active duty personnel and veterans have signed a petition calling for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.

One of its founders, Navy Petty Officer Jonathan Hutto, has said 60 percent of the members have served in Iraq.

There are about 1.4 million active-duty personnel in the U.S. military.

In the article, Yingling, deputy commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, wrote that the generals went into Iraq prepared for a high-tech conventional war but with too few soldiers.

They also had no coherent plan for postwar stabilization and failed to tell the American public about the intensity of the insurgency.

"The intellectual and moral failures common to America's general officer corps in Vietnam and Iraq constitute a crisis in American generalship," said Yingling, who has served two tours in Iraq as well as in Bosnia and the 1991 Gulf War.

In February, the U.S. forces launched the Baghdad security operation, which calls for deploying about 28,000 additional American troops as well as thousands of Iraqi soldiers.

Most will try to secure Baghdad.

Yingling welcomed the change, but suggested it is too little too late.

During the past decade, U.S. forces have done little to prepare for the kind of brutal, adaptive insurgencies they are now fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, Yingling said.

"Given the lack of troop strength, not even the most brilliant general could have devised the ways necessary to stabilize post-Saddam Iraq," he wrote.

Yingling said he believes that no single civilian or military leader has caused what he regards as the current failure in Iraq.

Instead, he argued that Congress must reform and better monitor the system for selecting and promoting generals.

The Senate confirms promotions to general officer rank and should use that power to hold officers accountable for their performance, he said.

"We still have time to select as our generals those who possess the intelligence to visualize future conflicts and the moral courage to advise civilian policy makers on the preparations needed for our security," he wrote.

In Baghdad, U.S. spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said Yingling was expressing "his personal opinions in a professional journal" and the U.S. command was focused on "executing the mission at hand."

The Armed Forces Journal and its Web site are published by Army Times Publishing Co., a part of Gannett Company, Inc., and the world's largest publisher of professional military and defense periodicals.

The company's publications serve all branches of the U.S. military, the global defense community and the U.S. federal government.
___

Monika Mathur of AP News Research Center in New York contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

The Armed Forces Journal: http://www.armedforcesjournal.com.

"Army chief wants to speed up troop hike"

By AUDREY McAVOY, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 41 minutes ago

SCHOFIELD BARRACKS, Hawaii - The Army's new chief of staff said Saturday he wants to accelerate by two years a plan to increase the nation's active duty soldiers by 65,000.

The Army has set 2012 as its target date for a force expansion to 547,000 troops, but Gen. George Casey said he told his staff to have the soldiers ready earlier.

"I said that's too long."

"Go back and tell me what it would take to get it done faster," he said in an interview with The Associated Press during a stop in Hawaii.

Casey became the Army chief of staff on April 12 after serving as the top U.S. commander in Iraq for two-and-a-half years.

He visited Hawaii for a few days in a Pacific region tour to talk with soldiers and their families.

He next heads to Japan, South Korea and Alaska.

Casey said his staff has submitted a proposal for the accelerated timeline but that he has yet to approve the plan.

He said the Army was stretched and would remain that way until the additional troops were trained and equipped.

Casey told a group of soldiers' spouses that one of his tasks is to try to limit the impact of the strain on soldiers and their families.

"We live in a difficult period for the Army because the demand for our forces exceeds the supply," he said.

A woman in the group asked Casey if her husband's deployments would stop getting longer.

She said they used to last for six months in the 1990s but then started lasting 9 months and 12 months.

Two weeks ago, she heard the Army's announcement that deployments would be extended as long as 15 months.

"Do you honestly foresee this spiral, in effect, stopping?" she asked.

Casey said the Army wants to keep deployments to 15 months, but "I cannot look at you in the eye and guarantee that it would not go beyond."

Defense Secretary Robert Gates in January said he was recommending to the president that the Army boost its active duty soldiers by 65,000 to 547,000.

Casey said about 35,000 of those additional soldiers are already in place.

Gates also recommended that the Marine Corps increase its active duty force by 27,000 to 202,000.

"Petraeus should heed Tenet's words"

By PETER S. CANELLOS

First published: Thursday, May 3, 2007

The biggest revelation in former CIA director George Tenet's memoir seems to be showing just how far officials like Tenet, who work for the President but are presumed to have independent expertise, will go to please their bosses.

Tenet now says he regrets calling a New York Times reporter to lend the authority of the CIA to the President's case for war.

But his willingness to sacrifice his credibility for the sake of his boss could reflect on other officials who answer to the President but are seemingly above politics -- such as Gen. David Petraeus, the current U.S. commander in Iraq.

The general gave a long press conference last Thursday in Washington, at the exact hour the Senate was debating whether to support a phased withdrawal of troops.

In it, he asserted that sectarian violence is declining but that al-Qaida remains a major force in Iraq.

"I think it is probably public enemy number one," Petraeus said of al-Qaida.

"It is the enemy whose actions sparked the enormous increase in sectarian violence that did so much damage to Iraq in 2006, the bombing of the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra."

"... And it is the organization that continues to try to reignite not just sectarian violence but ethnic violence as well."

This deeply troubling picture conforms to the Bush administration's insistence that Iraq is not in a civil war, but the main front in an international war against terrorism.

The stakes couldn't be higher: Petraeus' comments gave senators a reason to support the war as a means of defending the United States against its prime enemy al-Qaida, rather than engaging in a nation-building exercise.

But there are some reasons to question the general's assertions.

For one, Bush himself has suggested that Osama bin Laden is isolated in the mountains along Pakistan's border with Afghanistan and has only limited ability to communicate with underlings.

If so, it's hard to believe that the al-Qaida leader could be running things in Iraq.

The likely answer is he's not, but that some Islamist fighters who endorse his vendetta against the United States have gone to Iraq from other countries and are fomenting violence on their own.

If so, this "al-Qaida" really isn't the same international organization that is capable of planning massive attacks against the United States.

It's a splinter group acting largely on its own.

At his press conference, Petraeus pegged the number of al-Qaida fighters in Iraq in the "dozens."

If so, does he really mean to suggest that the thousands of Iraqis killed in hundreds of recent attacks are victims of al-Qaida, rather than civil war?

Apparently he does, in the sense that he seems to believe that the people he calls "al-Qaida" tricked Iraqi Sunnis and Shi'a into believing the other was responsible for mass killings that were sparked by outsiders.

There is, of course, another explanation for the violence between Sunni and Shi'a militias -- that they are fighting for control of the country -- but Petraeus seems fixated on "public enemy number one."

So, too, is the President.

But Petraeus, as a military man, speaks with an authority that transcends politics: His comments are taken by most listeners to be independent of White House spin.

Nonetheless, at many points over the last six years the administration has used such seemingly independent assessments to lend an aura of expertise to its war plans.

From the original Iraq/Afghanistan commander Tommy Franks to Gen. Richard Myers, the former Joint Chiefs chairman who routinely seconded former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld's optimistic assertions, generals have provided cover for policies that weren't necessarily theirs.

And later reports have shown that while they were standing by their civilian bosses, others in the military had deep reservations about those policies, but kept quiet.

So too did many in the CIA, who were privately shocked by Tenet's endorsement of Bush's case for war.

"In retrospect I shouldn't have talked to the New York Times reporter."

"... By making public comments in the middle of a contentious political debate, I gave the impression that I was becoming a partisan player," Tenet concedes in his memoir.

Tenet's genuine desire to serve the President, combined with concern for his own career -- and then with the need to justify his earlier actions -- conspired to draw him deeper into a policy he never really meant to endorse.

Petraeus might learn something from Tenet's experience.

Peter S. Canellos writes for The Boston Globe.

"U.S. examines Iraq battlefield ethics"

By PAULINE JELINEK, Associated Press Writer

2 hours, 19 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A new Pentagon survey of troops in Iraq found that only 40 percent of Marines and 55 percent of Army soldiers would report a member of their unit for killing or wounding an innocent civilian.

In the first internal military study of battlefield ethics in Iraq, officials said Friday they also found that only a third of Marines and roughly half of soldiers said they believed that noncombatants should be treated with dignity.

The study also found that long and repeated deployments were increasing troop mental health problems.

And it showed that more than 40 percent of Marines and soldiers said torture should be allowed to save the lives of troops.

The study was the fourth since 2003.

Previous studies were more generally aimed at assessing the mental health and well-being of forces deployed in the war.

In the latest study, a mental health team visited Iraq last fall and surveyed troops, health care providers and chaplains.

"The Marine Corps takes this issue of battlefield ethics very seriously," said Lt. Col. Scott Fazekas, a Corps spokesman.

"We are examining the study and its recommendations and we'll find ways to improve our approach."

"Lawmaker: Stop bonuses for VA officials"

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer

Fri May 4, 11:28 AM ET

WASHINGTON - The chairman of a House panel wants to stop hefty bonus payments to senior Veterans Affairs officials until they reduce a severe backlog of veterans waiting for disability benefits.

Rep. John Hall, D-N.Y., said Friday he was introducing legislation to place a hold on this year's bonuses after The Associated Press reported that senior VA officials involved in a budget foul-up which jeopardized veterans' health care received bonuses ranging up to $33,000.

Under the measure, 2007 bonuses could not be released until the VA pares down its backlog to under 100,000 cases — a feat the VA has said could take many months, if not years.

Currently, the backlog of claims ranges from between 400,000 to more than 600,000, with delays averaging 177 days.

"It is shocking and scandalous even by the VA's own low standards that top officials at the VA would get performance bonuses when there's a backlog of over 600,000 cases," said Hall, chairman of the House Veterans Affairs subcommittee on disability assistance.

A list obtained by the AP of bonuses to senior career officials in 2006 documents a generous package of more than $3.8 million in payments by a financially strapped agency straining to help care for thousands of injured veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The disclosure prompted outrage on Capitol Hill, where Democratic leaders have demanded an explanation from VA Secretary Jim Nicholson and said they would hold hearings to investigate.

The VA says the bonuses were needed to help retain hardworking employees.

Among those receiving top bonuses of $33,000 was the deputy undersecretary for benefits, who helps manage a disability claims system with the backlog that Nicholson now says is unacceptable.

Also receiving top payments were a deputy assistant secretary and several regional directors who crafted the VA's flawed budget for 2005 based on misleading accounting.

They received performance payments up to $33,000 each, a figure equal to about 20 percent of their annual salaries.

Annual bonuses to senior VA officials now average more than $16,000 — the most lucrative in government.

___

On the Net:

Department of Veterans Affairs: http://www.va.gov/

And for those who read this thread, here is an interesting link that you might want to consider, or perhaps pass along to someone you know, especially someone with kids now, if either parent is serving in Iraq or Afghanistan ....

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/shorts/episodes/2006/11/19

And so ....

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

Well!

It's Cinco de Mayo, somewhere in the world, anyway!

The Battle of Puebla, Mexico on May 5, 1862!

A victory of the Mexican people over the occupying French Army.

And it is one of those historic events that we countryfolks up here wish the real "ivory tower" intellectual people in America like George W. Bush and Richard Bruce "Dick" Cheney and "CON-JOB CONNIE" Rice knew just a little more about, from the perspective of human nature, especially after the AFP news article from Mon., Mar 27, 2006 2:13 AM ET, entitled "Bush told Blair determined to invade Iraq without UN resolution or WMD", wherein was stated:

NEW YORK (AFP) - US President George W. Bush made clear to British Prime Minister Tony Blair in January 2003 that he was determined to invade Iraq without a UN resolution and even if UN arms inspectors failed to find weapons of mass destruction in the country, The New York Times reported.

Bush predicted that it was "unlikely there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups."

Blair agreed with that assessment.

end quotes

With respect to the Battle of Puebla on May 5, 1862, at a time when the American war of Northern Aggression was raging here in the United States of America, the occupying French Army in Mexico at the time was led by General Charles Ferdinand Latrille de Lorencez, a man who is said to have had great contempt for the Mexican people, so much so that he believed he could control the whole country like puppets with his army of 6,000 men.

Which certainly does remind us of President George W. Bush and his own Republican fiasco over there in Iraq!

In the Battle of Puebla, the French commander Lorencez had heard that the people of Puebla were friendly to the French, and that the Mexican Republican garrison which kept the people in line would be overrun by the population once he made a show of force.

And again, this reminds us of none other than George W. Bush, and well, okay, Anthony "Tony" Blair, as well, and of course, Richard Bruce "Dick" Cheney, or at least, Cheney's mouth ....

And as was the case in Iraq, where Bush and Cheney especially predicted that we would be met with flowers and celebrations, this would prove to be a serious miscalculation on Lorencez's part.

As history relates, on May 5th, against all advice, Lorencez decided to attack Puebla from the north, and fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on one's perspective, the French commander-in-chief started his attack a little too late in the day, using his artillery just before noon and by noon advancing his infantry, which by the third attack needed the full engagement of all its reserves.

The French artillery had run out of ammunition, so the third attack went unsupported.

The Mexican forces and the Republican Garrison both put up a stout defense and even took to the field to defend the positions between the hilltop forts.

And as might be expected, the political repercussions of this defeat of the French were overwhelming, as the outnumbered Mexicans used what courage and determination they could to repel the ominous French Army.

Which is what brings us back to that "thing" of human nature!

And with respect to our own American history, and what might have been but for, the Battle of Puebla was also of historic importance in that it squashed Napoleon III's hopes of a quick takeover of Mexico, which he was planning to use as a base to aid the Confederates in the American Civil War.

And so ...

Posted by: John Galt | May 5, 2007 9:35 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...5.html#comments

"Deployed troops battle for child custody"

By PAULINE ARRILLAGA, AP National Writer

Sat May 5, 5:22 PM ET

She had raised her daughter for six years following the divorce, handled the shuttling to soccer practice and cheerleading, made sure schoolwork was done.

Hardly a day went by when the two weren't together.

Then Lt. Eva Crouch was mobilized with the Kentucky National Guard, and Sara went to stay with Dad.

A year and a half later, her assignment up, Crouch pulled into her driveway with one thing in mind — bringing home the little girl who shared her smile and blue eyes.

She dialed her ex and said she'd be there the next day to pick Sara up, but his response sent her reeling.

"Not without a court order you won't."

Within a month, a judge would decide that Sara should stay with her dad.

It was, he said, in "the best interests of the child."

What happened?

Crouch was the legal residential caretaker; this was only supposed to be temporary.

What had changed?

She wasn't a drug addict, or an alcoholic, or an abusive mother.

Her only misstep, it seems, was answering the call to serve her country.

Crouch and an unknown number of others among the 140,000-plus single parents in uniform fight a war on two fronts: For the nation they are sworn to defend, and for the children they are losing because of that duty.

A federal law called the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act is meant to protect them by staying civil court actions and administrative proceedings during military activation.

They can't be evicted.

Creditors can't seize their property.

Civilian health benefits, if suspended during deployment, must be reinstated.

And yet service members' children can be — and are being — taken from them after they are deployed.

Some family court judges say that determining what's best for a child in a custody case is simply not comparable to deciding civil property disputes and the like; they have ruled that family law trumps the federal law protecting servicemembers.

And so, in many cases when a soldier deploys, the ex-spouse seeks custody, and temporary changes become lasting.

Even some supporters of the federal law say it should be changed — that soldiers should be assured that they can regain custody of children after they return.

"Now, they've got a great argument when Johnny comes marching home that the child should remain where they are, even though it was a temporary order," says Lt. Col. Steve Elliott, a judge advocate with the Oklahoma National Guard, referring to non-deployed parents.

Military mothers and fathers, meanwhile, speak of birthdays missed.

Bonds, once strong, weakened.

Returning from duty not to joyful reunions but to endless hearings.

They are people like Marine Cpl. Levi Bradley, helping to fight the insurgency in Fallujah, Iraq, at the same time he battles for custody of his son in a Kansas family court.

Like Sgt. Mike Grantham of the Iowa National Guard, whose two kids lived with him until he was mobilized to train troops after 9/11.

Like Army Reserve Capt. Brad Carlson, fighting for custody of his American-born children in a foreign land after his marriage crumbled while he was deployed to the Middle East and his European wife refused to return to the States.

And like Eva Crouch, who spent two years and some $25,000 pushing her case through the Kentucky courts.

"I'd have spent a million," she says.

"My child was my life ... I go serve my country, and I come back and have to go through hell and high water."

In the midst of World War II, back in 1943, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the soldiers' relief law should be "liberally construed to protect those who have been obliged to drop their own affairs to take up the burdens of the nation."

Shielding soldiers, after all, would allow them "to devote their entire energy" to the nation's defense, as the law itself states.

But in child custody cases, the opposite often happens.

"The minute these guys are getting deployed, the other parent is going, `I can do whatever I want now,'" says Jean Ann Uvodich, an attorney who represented Bradley.

"If you have an ex who wants to take advantage, they can and will."

"The obstacle is that the judge needs to respect the law."

Bradley had already joined the Marines, and his young wife, Amber, was a junior in high school when their son Tyler came along in September 2003.

With Bradley in training, Amber and the baby lived with Bradley's mother, Starleen, in Ottawa, Kan.

When the marriage fell apart two years later, Bradley filed for divorce and Amber signed a parenting plan granting him sole custody of Tyler and agreeing that the boy would live with Starleen while Bradley was on duty.

In August 2005, Bradley deployed to Iraq.

A month later, Amber sought to void the agreement and obtain residential custody of Tyler.

She didn't fully understand what she had signed, she said later.

Bradley learned of the petition in Fallujah, after calling his mom's house one night to say hello to his son.

He was infuriated.

He worked during the day as a mechanic with the 8th Communications Battalion, then headed back to the barracks and, because of the time difference, waited until midnight to call his mother to hear the latest from court.

"My mind wasn't where it was supposed to be," he says.

And the distraction cost him.

One day he rolled a Humvee he was test-driving.

Though he wasn't injured, Bradley was reprimanded.

Uvodich sought a stay under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, which provides for a minimum 90-day delay in proceedings upon application by an active duty service member.

She argued that Bradley had a right to be present to testify.

But the judge refused to postpone the case, saying he didn't believe it was subject to the federal law because "this Court has a continuing obligation to consider what's in the best interest of the child," court records show.

After a November 2005 hearing, the judge awarded temporary physical custody to Amber.

Last summer, that order was made permanent.

Bradley, now 22, is stationed at Camp Lejeune, N.C., awaiting his second deployment to Iraq later this year.

He gets to Kansas on leave for about two weeks every six months, and sees Tyler for four days at a time.

"I fought the best I could," he says.

"The act states: Everything will be put on hold until I'm able to get back."

"It doesn't happen."

"I found out the hard way."

Oregon Circuit Court Judge Dale Koch, president of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, said that as state court judges, those deciding custody cases are obligated to follow their family codes — and "in most states there is language that says the primary interest is the best interest of the child."

"We recognize the competing interests," he says.

"You don't want to penalize a parent because they've served their country."

"On the other hand ... you don't want to penalize the child."

But what does "best interest" really mean?

Koch mentions factors such as stability and considering who has been the child's main emotional provider, parameters that conflict directly with military service.

So how do you balance those things against upholding a deployed parent's civil rights?

When, too, should a temporary change mean just that?

Iowa Guardsman Mike Grantham thought he was serving the best interests of his children when he arranged for his son and daughter to stay with his mother before reporting for duty in August 2002.

She lived a few blocks from the kids' school in Clarksville, Iowa, and he figured, "There wouldn't be much disruption."

He had raised Brianna and Jeremy since his 2000 divorce, when ex-wife Tammara turned physical custody over to him.

After mobilizing, Grantham was served with a custody petition from Tammara, delivered to his unit's armory.

His lawyer tried twice to request a stay under the federal law.

His commanding officer even wrote a letter stating that Grantham's battalion was charged with protecting U.S. facilities deemed national security interests and that his case would cause the entire command structure "to refocus away from the military mission."

The trial judge nevertheless held hearings without Grantham and temporarily placed the children with Tammara.

A year later, though Grantham had returned from duty, the judge made Tammara the primary physical custodian.

An appeals court later sided with Grantham, saying: "A soldier, who answered our Nation's call to defend, lost physical care of his children ... offending our intrinsic sense of right and wrong."

But the Iowa Supreme Court disagreed, saying Tammara was "presently the most effective parent."

Now, Grantham says, his visitation rights mirror those that his ex-wife once had: every other weekend, Wednesdays, and certain holidays — Father's Day, for example.

"There ain't nothing you can do," he says.

"Being deployed, you lose your armor."

Military and family law experts don't know how big the problem is, but 5.4 percent of active duty members — more than 74,000 — are single parents, the Department of Defense reports.

More than 68,000 Guard and reserve members are also single parents.

Divorce among military men and women also has risen some in recent years, with more than 23,000 enlisted members and officers divorcing in 2005.

Army reservist Brad Carlson lived in Phoenix with his wife, Bianca, and three kids when he volunteered to deploy to Kuwait in 2003.

His wife and children were spending that summer with her parents in Luxembourg and expected to remain there until he returned from duty.

A year later, after his wife indicated she wanted to end the marriage and remain in Luxembourg, Carlson filed for divorce in an Arizona court, seeking custody of Dirk, Sven and Phoebe, all American citizens.

The Arizona court dismissed the custody case after Bianca's lawyer argued that jurisdiction belonged in Luxembourg because the children had resided there for at least six months.

Again citing the Servicemembers Act, Carlson's attorney argued that the time the kids spent in Luxembourg shouldn't count toward residency because it came during Carlson's deployment.

A Luxembourg court awarded custody to Bianca, and the kids remain there to this day.

They call him "Bradley" now, he says, instead of "Daddy."

They converse in German in stilted long-distance phone calls that provide few precious minutes for a father to absorb missed moments — soccer games, kindergarten, birthdays.

On Dirk's 9th, Carlson stood beneath a rainbow-colored birthday banner and had a friend take a digital photo of him holding a sign: "Happy 9th Birthday Dirk!"

Tears fill his eyes when it hits him: "That's how I celebrate."

"I feel really betrayed," Carlson says.

"To be able to send me into harm's way ... and my own country can't protect my child custody rights."

"Why aren't they looking out for me, when I'm looking out for the country?"

The solution, some say, lies in amending the federal law to specify that it does apply in custody cases, and to spell out that jurisdiction should rest with the state where the child resided before a soldier deployed.

Some states aren't waiting for congressional action.

In 2005, California enacted a law saying a parent's absence due to military activation cannot be used to justify permanent changes in custody or visitation.

Michigan and Kentucky followed suit, requiring that temporary changes made because of deployment revert back to the original agreement once deployment ends.

Similar legislation has been proposed in Arizona, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas and North Carolina.

"These men and women need to know that when we deploy them, they don't have to worry about being ambushed in our family law court system," says Michael Robinson, a lobbyist who helped write the California and Michigan laws.

"The insurgents are doing enough ambushing over there."

"The only difference between what's occurring there and here is ... it's an emotional bomb."

Crouch knows that all too well.

When she was mobilized back in 2003, Crouch considered having her mother come live in her Frankfort, Ky., home to care for 9-year-old Sara.

But her ex-husband, Charles, wanted Sara with him, and Crouch agreed.

"You have to promise me you won't try anything funny," Crouch told him.

He promised.

They drew up a temporary order, moved Sara's belongings 2 1/2 hours east to her dad's place near Ashland, and Crouch headed out — to Iraq, she thought, although she wound up stateside at Fort Knox, providing personnel support to units shipping out.

The fortunate assignment allowed her to visit Sara most weekends, but no one ever brought up the idea of making the temporary situation permanent until Crouch returned.

"Right up until the day I came home there was every indication that I was picking her up," she says.

Charles Crouch says that's true, and acknowledges their agreement was supposed to be temporary.

But when the time came for Sara to return to her mom, Charles says his daughter expressed a desire to stay with him.

She liked her school, had made new friends.

"I had no intention of trying to talk her into staying or anything," he says.

"All I wanted was what was best for my daughter."

Eva Crouch helped fight for the new Kentucky law.

Last year, the state Supreme Court cited it in overturning the trial judge's decision granting custody to Charles.

Last September, she got Sara back.

Crouch knows she's one of the lucky few whose cases have happy endings.

She's remarried now, and expecting another baby this August.

But with 18 years in the military, she knows she could be mobilized again after she gives birth.

One thing is clear to her now: Serving her country isn't worth losing her daughter.

"I can't leave my child again — regardless of whether or not I know when I come home, she comes home.

"Still," she says, "I can't."

And here is a story of where the PUPPET MASTERS, the BUSHCOS, are now berating the puppets that they created over there in IRAQINAM for being unable to accomplish what the PUPPET MASTERS themselves cannot accomplish ....

This is like the Viet Nam war times all over again, but this time, the PUPPET MASTERS are even more incompetent and inept and yes, weird, than they were back then, when the PUPPET government in Viet Nam could not itself accomplish in Viet Nam what the PUPPET MASTERS in Washington, D.C. wanted for that country ...

"Bush Told War Is Harming The GOP - A Warning on Eve Of Vote on New Bill"

By Shailagh Murray and Jonathan Weisman

Washington Post Staff Writers

Thursday, May 10, 2007; Page A01

House Republican moderates, in a remarkably blunt White House meeting, warned President Bush this week that his pursuit of the war in Iraq is risking the future of the Republican Party and that he cannot count on GOP support for many more months.

The meeting, which ran for an hour and a half Tuesday afternoon, was disclosed by participants yesterday as the House prepared to vote this evening on a spending bill that could cut funding for the Iraq war as early as July.

GOP moderates told Bush they would stay united against the latest effort by House Democrats to end U.S. involvement in the war.

Even Senate Democrats called the House measure unrealistic.

But the meeting between 11 House Republicans, Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, White House political adviser Karl Rove and presidential press secretary Tony Snow was perhaps the clearest sign yet that patience in the party is running out.

The meeting, organized by Rep. Charlie Dent (Pa.), one of the co-chairs of the moderate "Tuesday Group," included Reps. Thomas M. Davis III (Va.), Michael N. Castle (Del.), Todd R. Platts (Pa.), Jim Ramstad (Minn.) and Jo Ann Emerson (Mo.).

"It was a very remarkable, candid conversation," Davis said.

"People are always saying President Bush is in a bubble."

"Well, this was our chance, and we took it."

Even with pressure mounting, Congress and the White House are making little progress as they try to find a bipartisan option to fund the war through the summer.

Senate leaders met with White House officials yesterday and produced no agreement, as Gates warned lawmakers that the debate is beginning to delay Pentagon operations.

The one area of agreement seemed to be that U.S. officials want the Iraqi government to better contain violence there.

Vice President Cheney made an unannounced trip to Baghdad yesterday to meet with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and other officials.

He urged them to help end fighting between rival Sunni and Shiite factions, to make progress on revising their constitution, and to better manage their oil revenue.

Cheney also expressed concern about the Iraqi parliament considering a two-month summer vacation.

That has angered members of Congress and other American officials, who say it shows a lack of concern for the commitment of U.S. troops.

Participants in Tuesday's White House meeting said frustration about the Iraqi government's efforts dominated the conversation, with one pleading with the president to stop the Iraqi parliament from going on vacation while "our sons and daughters spill their blood."

The House members pressed Bush and Gates hard for a "Plan B" if the current troop increase fails to quell the violence and push along political reconciliation.

Davis said that administration officials convinced him there are contingency plans, but that the president declined to offer details, saying that if he announced his backup plan, the world would shift its focus to that contingency, leaving the current strategy no time to succeed.

Davis, a former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, also presented Bush dismal polling figures to dramatize just how perilous the party's position is, participants said.

Davis would not disclose details, saying the exchange was private.

Others warned Bush that his personal credibility on the war is all but gone.

Snow, who sat in on the meeting in the president's private quarters, said it should not be overdramatized or seen as another "marching up to Nixon," a reference to the critical moment during Watergate in 1974 when key congressional Republicans went to the White House to tell President Richard M. Nixon that it was time to resign.

"This is not one of those great cresting moments when party discontents are coming in to read the president the riot act," he said.

But Snow acknowledged that the meeting included some blunt, if respectful, discussion.

Davis stressed that Republicans will remain united against the Democratic bill in the House today.

But the search for an exit is almost inevitable.

"The key for everybody is to try to find a way to declare victory and get out of there," he said.

The House bill, which Bush vowed to veto yesterday, would divide war funding into two installments.

The first $43 billion would be released immediately, with new standards for resting, training and equipping troops and a slate of benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet.

Bush would be required to submit to Congress by July 13 three reports measuring Iraqi progress on those benchmarks, which of the goals had been met and how many Iraqi combat units are ready to operate on their own.

About 10 days later, the House would vote again, first on whether to cut off funding for further combat in Iraq and then on releasing the remaining $53 billion.

But Senate Democrats view that two-month time frame as unrealistic.

"It puts the troops on a very short leash in terms of funding, and I don't think we should do that," said Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl M. Levin (Mich.).

After meeting with White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) said:

"They have to do what they have to do."

Reid said he would wait until after the House vote before deciding on Senate language.

One concern is that the conflicting House and Senate approaches could jeopardize Democrats' goal of delivering a final package to Bush before the Memorial Day recess.

Democrats are eager to avoid political pitfalls that could occur if troop funding begins to run out.

Gates told the Senate Appropriations Committee yesterday that the drawn-out debate over the bill is already forcing the Pentagon to curtail contracts and hiring and to stop funding some programs in order to sustain troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In the Senate, Reid -- who has co-sponsored a bill that would end the war within a year -- is seeking to avoid a Republican filibuster by negotiating with McConnell and the White House.

One idea, favored by some senior Senate Democrats, would link benchmarks to a continued U.S. military commitment, requiring Bush to meet strict reporting requirements and to seek waivers for continued U.S. operations, if the Iraqis fall short.

Another proposal, popular with moderate Republicans, would withhold reconstruction aid if the Iraqi government fails to show progress.

A third, announced yesterday by Sens. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) and Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), would reduce U.S. forces to pre-escalation levels if the benchmarks are not met.

Staff writers Ann Scott Tyson and Peter Baker contributed to this report.

"Army tries incentives to keep officers'

By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 5 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Army will offer incentives to keep midlevel officers as it faces another decade or so in combat around the world, its chief of staff said Friday.

Gen. George Casey, who took over as the Army's chief just a month ago, said the United States will "be in a period of conflict for, I believe, another five or ten years."

And the Army, which has been stretched and stressed by five difficult years at war, must be organized and equipped to deal with that challenge, he said.

The general said he is not suggesting that the Iraq or Afghanistan wars will last five more years.

But Casey, who was the top commander in Iraq until February, acknowledged that building a stable, self-governing Iraq is a "long-term proposition."

"We have been attacked and are at war with an insidious group of transnational terrorists who are attacking our way of life, and are going to continue to attack our way of life until we beat them, because I don't see them giving up," he said.

To stem a growing trend of critical future leaders leaving the service, Casey said the Army will unveil a plan next week to give some captains $20,000 to stay on.

He said the Army also will increase opportunities for officers to go to various graduate schools as another incentive to stay in the military.

The captains also would get a choice in duty assignments.

Casey said leadership development is one of his priorities, along with increasing the size of the Army, improving conditions for soldiers and their families and continuing to transform the service so it can better fight future battles.

According to the Army, the attrition rate for officers is higher than it has been in previous years, with graduates of West Point, the Officer Candidate School and ROTC leaving at a faster pace once they've finished their initial tour in the military.

For example, about six in 10 West Point soldiers who graduated in 1997 reenlisted after their sixth year.

But just 53 percent of those who graduated in 2000 — and likely have spent much of the last six years rotating in and out of the war zones — have signed up for another tour.

Casey, who served as the Iraq commander from July 2004 until February 2007, said he doesn't know how long the Army can keep up current troop levels in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But, he said, "it's a question I have foremost in my mind."

He acknowledged that soldiers' families are upset about the Pentagon's recent decision to extend Iraq deployments to 15 months, from what had usually been 12 months.

But he said the move was the only way to avoid sending as many as five Army brigades back to Iraq after just seven or eight months at home, resting and getting the equipment and training needed to return to war.

Under the new system, units are guaranteed 12 months at home.

The Pentagon released a one-page description Friday of the new deployment policy signed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates stating that units are guaranteed the one-year break.

But it noted that a policy for individual soldiers has not yet been completed.

Some soldiers returning from Iraq may change to a new unit or switch jobs which could result in their being sent back to the war zone in less than 12 months.

The Army is working on a policy that would address those instances as much as possible.

In other comments, Casey said he is still considering moving faster to increase the size of the Army but said he would have to shift money from future years in order to buy enough equipment for the expanded Army, as well as set up more recruiting centers.

He said he does not yet know how much money it would take.

Casey also said the Army is near a decision on how many mine-resistant armored vehicles to buy to replace the more vulnerable Humvees.

The number is "somewhere between 2,500 and 17,000."

The Army wants more of the so-called MRAPs (Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected), but acknowledges there are missions for which the vehicle is not suitable or as agile as needed.
___

On the Net:

U.S. Army: http://www.army.mil/

And as Richard Bruce "DICK" Cheney continues to go around the Middle East ....

With his hat in his hand ....

Like a begger ....

Reaping the fruits ....

Of a whole long series of outright lies ....

By him ....

And George W. Bush ....

With respect to this IRAQINAM fiasco of theirs ...

We have ....

"Cheney in Saudi Arabia seeking Iraq help"

By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 57 minutes ago

TABUK, Saudi Arabia - Vice President Dick Cheney worked to overcome Saudi skepticism over the U.S. military strategy to secure Baghdad and the leadership capabilities of Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki.

Cheney met with King Abdullah at a royal palace in this northern city on Saturday.

The king, while considered an important U.S. ally in the Arab world, increasingly has sent signals that he doubts the effectiveness of President Bush's troop buildup in Iraq.

Abdullah also has signaled that he sees al-Maliki as a weak leader with too many ties to pro-Iranian Shiite parties to be effective in reaching out to Iraqi's Sunni minority.

Saudi Arabia has a predominantly Sunni Muslim population.

Cheney was given a red-carpet arrival ceremony at the airport.

At the palace, as he and the king exchanged pleasantries, Abdullah asked about the first President Bush.

The elder Bush assembled a broad international coalition, including Saudi Arabia, to confront Saddam Hussein's Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War.

Cheney, who was Bush's defense secretary, said the former president was doing well.

"He's still willing to jump out of airplanes," Cheney said.

For his 80th birthday, Bush made a 13,000-foot tandem parachute jump over his presidential library in Texas in 2004; the 41st president, now 82, jumped alone on his 75th birthday.

"I did not want to do it when I was 60 and he's done it twice now," the 66-year-old Cheney said.

Cheney is touring Saudi Arabia and the smaller Gulf states in an attempt to win wider support for ethnic reconciliation in Iraq and to counter efforts by Iran to spread its influence in the region.

Earlier Saturday, Cheney urged greater support for U.S. policies in Iraq when he held meetings in Abu Dhabi with leaders of the United Arab Emirates.

A senior Bush administration official traveling with Cheney said afterward that the Emirates' president, Sheik Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, pledged to do as much as possible to support the struggling Iraqi government.

Iran also was a major focus of the meeting, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.

The Emirates' leaders, the official said, were keenly aware of Iran, a large neighbor less than 100 miles away and a $20 billion a year trading partner.

Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was scheduled to visit the Emirates on Sunday, is trying to persuade the Gulf states to drop their military alliances with Washington.

Cheney's mission to Saudi Arabia included an effort to smooth over recent divisions between the oil-rich kingdom and the United States.

The kingdom has taken an aggressive leadership role in efforts to quiet Mideast troubles.

In a possible attempt to gain more credibility in the region, Abdullah recently has openly challenged the U.S. military presence in Iraq, calling U.S. troops in Iraq an "illegal foreign occupation."

The king refused to see al-Maliki when the Iraqi prime minister toured Arab countries late last month.

Cheney went to Saudi Arabia last November for meetings, requested by the king, that are still shrouded in secrecy.

Reports at the time suggested the two discussed what role Saudi Arabia might play in reaching out to Iraq's Sunni minority as conditions in that country deteriorate.

This time, the king did not request the meeting.

Cheney was sent to the region by Bush.

After dinner with the king, Cheney planned to go to Aqaba, Jordan.

He was expected to visit Egypt on a weeklong trip that began in Iraq.

ALBANY, NEW YORK CAPITAL CONNECTION BLOG:

I am a Viet Nam veteran who enlisted in the Army, and then went to Viet Nam, where I was twice-wounded!

I saw as much of that war as anyone could have, since Viet Nam was a country the size of California, with a whole lot of things going on in it, all at once, and I have studied that “war” extensively since I got back to here in 1970, and the sole conclusion that can be made about it, is that it was assinine!

And now we are in an even more assinine debacle over there in the deserts of IRAQINAM, thanks to a witless man who is in there, posing as a commander-in-chief of the American military, as opposed to actually having the capacity to be one ….

And I have studied this IRAQINAM war, extensively, as well, and in fact, I have BLOGGED about it extensively, as well, and continue to do so to this day ….

And my stated opinion as a combat veteran is that this IRAQINAM war is even more assinine than the Viet Nam war was ….

And in an AP article entitled “Cheney in Saudi Arabia seeking Iraq help” by TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer, which I posted on May 12 2007, it was stated:

TABUK, Saudi Arabia - Vice President Dick Cheney worked to overcome Saudi skepticism over the U.S. military strategy to secure Baghdad and the leadership capabilities of Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki.

Cheney met with King Abdullah at a royal palace in this northern city on Saturday.

The king, while considered an important U.S. ally in the Arab world, increasingly has sent signals that he doubts the effectiveness of President Bush’s troop buildup in Iraq.

Abdullah also has signaled that he sees al-Maliki as a weak leader with too many ties to pro-Iranian Shiite parties to be effective in reaching out to Iraqi’s Sunni minority.

In a possible attempt to gain more credibility in the region, Abdullah recently has openly challenged the U.S. military presence in Iraq, calling U.S. troops in Iraq an “illegal foreign occupation.”

end quotes

AN “ILLEGAL FOREIGN OCCUPATION” …..

Hhhhmmmmmmm …

Seems I recall this other dude from history …

Bimmler?

Bitler?

Something like that, anyway …..

And he got himself and his country and his people into a whole lot of trouble for doing the same thing - making BLITZKREIG invasions of other countries and conducting “illegal foreign occupations”, himself ….

And I seem to recall American blood being shed to put an end to those “illegal foreign occupations” by this Bimmler dude, or Bitler, or whatever it was ….

So it is interesting to see MADAM Hillary Clinton doing her politician’s little dance all around the undisputable fact that she voted to authorize and fund this present “illegal foreign occupation” of IRAQINAM by PRESIDENT OF ALL THE WORLD FOR LIFE George W. Bush, the WITLESS ….

And so ….

Comment by John Galt — May 15, 2007 @ 7:47 am

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4622#comments

ALBANY, NEW YORK CAPITAL CONNECTION BLOG:

Comment by devtob — May 14, 2007 @ 7:14 pm: But in referring to where you served, please avoid the Pentagon propaganda titles and just say you served in Afghanistan and near Iraq on the no-fly zones.

That way, everyone will understand what you’re saying, without having to check with Wikipedia.

JOHN GALT REPLIES: gunga dan, here, I have to agree with devtob ….

Your talking about Operation Enduring Freedom is like a Viet Nam vet talking about Operation Junction City, which took place before I got to Viet Nam, or OPERATION DEWEY CANYON, which occurred from JANUARY 22nd — MARCH 18th, 1969, while I was in Viet Nam ….

Both of which were nothing more than PROPAGANDA SLOGANS to connote large-scale military operations in a losing war ….

And today, like this OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM, which is nothing but another GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA SLOGAN, nobody even knows what any of these “operations” were about, or what they were for, and what they accomplished, or what it might have meant for John Doe or Bill Smith or whoever to be a “part” of any of these operations ….

And with respect to these “operations” in Viet Nam, however successful any “operation” might have been in Viet Nam in some context of having killed a lot of people, and destroyed a lot of people’s lives and livelihoods by intentionally destroying their land, and villages, and rice crops and paddies, like Hitler’s “operation” to level the Warsaw Ghetto, they ended up losing the war for us, because the objectives of these operations were the wrong objectives ….

And to re-ask an unanswered question that I asked before: Was there valor and bravery on the part of individuals in connection with these operations, despite their overall failure?

And the answer is that I myself do not know, because I wasn’t there physically, when either took place, where they actually took place …..

I myself was somewhere else in Viet Nam …

And so ….

And again, that is like asking if there was valor and bravery among Custer’s men, as they died to a man, because of the arrogance and just plain stupidity of the man they followed into war …..

It just is one of those things that there is no real way of knowing ….

Do you die with honor and dignity when you die a violent death inside the fiery jaws of a death trap that your fool of a leader blundered you into?

That, I guess, is just one of those lingering existential questions left over from the Viet Nam war that has not yet been adequately addressed, in my estimation, anyway …

And here we are once again, with that same unanswered conundrum from the Viet Nam war now applying to George W. Bush’s Republican War of Aggression over there in IRAQINAM, and MADAM Hillary Clinton’s support for that war, as well ….

And so ….

And as I now understand it, Operation Enduring freedom was an operation in the opening days of the war in what is now called by Viet Nam veterans Afghanist-Nam ….

And thankfully, gunga dan, you were spared maiming or disabling or disfigurement or dismemberment in that operation that you were a part of ….

And for a soldier or Marine who has been in a combat zone, that is not such a bad thing, and it may in fact be that it is about as good as it gets ….

Since fighting for peace today is still like ******* for chastity, just as it was back in the days of the Viet Nam debacle ….

And no, I am not a member of Veteran’s For Peace, nor was I a “scrungy HIPPIE”, and I don’t dislike Christians, although I don’t like having them in my face all the time, telling me how much more superior to everyone else they are, by being Christians, when they would be the very first on their block to nail Jesus back up on that cross if they could ever get their hands on him ….

Since to make themselves so much greater than everyone else, they need him to stay dead for them ….

And so …..

Comment by John Galt — May 15, 2007 @ 8:08 am

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4622

ALBANY, NEW YORK CAPITAL CONNECTION BLOG:

Comment by gunga dan — May 14, 2007 @ 9:40 pm: I have never met a legitimate Vet who did not describe their service to another Vet in non-specific, devtob-understandable pentagon propaganda-speak.

HUH?

“Legitimate Vets?”

What, pray tell, is a “legitimate vet”?

Someone who swills beer at the bar of the local VFW?

An American Legion post commander who is so drunk at the beginning of a meeting, that he cannot even see straight?

Legitimate veterans ….

AH!

The “SWUFTBOAT VETERANS WHO LIE, BUT THEN CALL IT THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH”!

There is a crowd of real “legitimate vets”, alright!

And as to this crap of “legitimate vets”, and how they “describe” their service, I was a “grunt” in Viet Nam, and while the POGUES and high-ranking generals safe in their bunkers down in Saigon might have known what new name was being given to the operation of the day, all I ever knew was that for one more day, we were going back out again, and for one more day, more people were going too die ….

And then ….

They did!

And I have never heard a real Viet Nam combat veteran say to me, “oh, how glorious it was, John Jones or Bill Smith got to die doing what they loved best, out there on OPERATION BUM-**** II” ….

Or OPERATION GIVE IT TO THEM GOOD ….

Or OPERATION KICK THEM HARD IN THE ***** ….

Or any of the other innumerable “operations” that comprised the totality of the American war of aggression in Viet Nam ….

After the failed French war of aggression in Viet Nam, with its own failed OPERATION CAMARGUES, and such ….

Where they taught the Vietnamese how to become a very efficient and effective army, so that the Vietnamese could then use that experience to in turn kill us efficiently, and effectively, as they killed the French before us …

And so …

Legitimate vets, my *** ….

Comment by John Galt — May 15, 2007 @ 8:39 am

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4622

ALBANY, NEW YORK CAPITAL CONNECTION BLOG:

And with respect to these “legitimate vets”, what is the “POGUE-O-CITY” factor in todays “modern” American military?

Twelve-to-one?

Fifteen-to-one?

Which is to say that for each actual “fighting person” on any given operation, there are ten or twelve or more “support” troops who are “on the operation”, as well, but are often far from where any action takes place, such as the POGUES down there in air-conditioned trailers in Florida, who are directing the debacle over there in IRAQINAM by TV ….

Just as the debacle in “THE MOG” was directed by TV from a trailer somewhere in Mogadishu ….

You should really provide us with your service branch and MOS, gunga dan, and not just keep saying about this OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM, as if that somehow defined you or anything at all, for that matter ….

But maybe what we really need in here, with respect to “vetting” veterans, separating the “legitimate” vets from what must be the “illegitimate” vets, is someone to serve as an “arbiter”, like that POGUE who wrote that book “STOLEN VALOR”, that Billy “JUGHEAD” Burkett dude, who knows all about the Viet Nam war out in the field, even though he never got outside the wire, himself ….

Which I guess makes him somehow “unbaised” ….

As opposed to someone who was out there …

Who saw the **** that was going on in the name of the American people …

Of which I am one, then and now ….

And so …

Comment by John Galt — May 15, 2007 @ 8:52 am

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4622

ALBANY, NEW YORK CAPITAL CONNECTION BLOG:

Comment by uncle tupelo — May 15, 2007 @ 9:58 pm: I don’t understand..

John Galt is a purple-hearted veteran of the baby-boomer generation, yet he doesn’t have gunga dan’s institutionalized blinders on.

Why the discrepency?

JOHN GALT REPLIES: It comes from having had my **** scattered by exploding RPG-7 warheads a time too many ….

And from having had the opportunity to see and smell the after-effects of other Americans who had their **** scattered worse and further than mine, in the name of exactly nothing at all, but the sheerest of sheer stupidity ….

And the one thing this IRAQINAM DEBACLE does for us Viet Nam veterans is that it finally makes the VIET NAM fiasco look real well-run by comparison!

A quote from pp.243,244 of War Comes to Long An - Revolutionary Conflict in a Vietnamese Province by Jeffrey Race by Vietnamese Colonel Nguyen Be, Commandant in 1968 of the South Viet Nam National Training Center at Vung Tau and former Vietminh (Resistance to French OCCUPATION of Viet Nam after WWII) Battalion Commander on why the VIOLENCE PROGRAM outlined to the United States Senate Appropriations Committee in early 1968 by Army Chief of Staff Harold K. Johnson was RIFE with INTERNAL INCONSISTENCIES and was therefore doomed to failure, regardless of the numbers of troops that America put into the field in South Viet Nam might be informative here, so I will include it, for posterity’s sake, if nothing else:

Naturally, in the development of military doctrine we must wait several generations for change.

The reason for this is that the military experts - THE GENERALS AND THE ENTIRE OFFICERS CORPS - have studied and developed their understanding according to PRE-ESTABLISHED DOCTRINES WHICH HAVE BROUGHT THEM HONORS AND PRIDE.

HOW CAN THEY ABANDON A SYSTEM OF THOUGHT WHICH THEY HAVE BELIEVED AND DO NOW BELIEVE IS RIGHT AND EFFECTIVE, IN ORDER TO ADOPT A NEW SYSTEM OF THOUGHT?

Moreover, each succeeding generation gropes in the path of the experience of history, studies according to the experience of its predecessors, and is bound within the thought of those who previously gained victories and accomplishments.

HOW, THEREFORE, CAN THEY VISUALIZE THE STRANGE HORIZONS OF NEW SYSTEMS OF MILITARY THOUGHT ..?

When a military expert looks at a limited war, HE IS USUALLY SCORNFUL OF THE RUDIMENTARY WEAPONS AND MILITARY TACTICS OF THE ENEMY, AND THINKS INSTEAD OF SUCH PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS AS TROOP TRAINING, EMPLOYMENT OF MODERN WEAPONS, AND NUMERICAL SUPERIORITY TO DEFEAT THE ENEMY AND TO CRUSH THE LIMITED WAR IMMEDIATELY.

BUT SUCH MILITARY EXPERTS ARE WRONG.

They are wrong first because they do not understand the essential nature of these limited wars.

MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE SUCH LIMITED WARS BEAR THE DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF STRUGGLE RATHER THAN WAR.

THUS, THE MORE THE PEOPLE ARE OPPRESSED, THE MORE IT FEEDS THE FLAME OF THE STRUGGLE SPIRIT, AND THE FLAME RISES EVER HIGHER UNTIL THE COMBINATION OF IMPROVED TECHNIQUES, MORE WEAPONS, AND THE FIRES OF THE STRUGGLE SPIRIT ITSELF ENABLE THE PEOPLE TO MOUNT A GENERAL COUNTEROFFENSIVE.

ONLY THEN IS THE CYCLE BROKEN.

THE SECOND ERROR OF THE MILITARY EXPERTS IS THAT THEY NEVER SEEK TO ASSIMILATE THE ARMY INTO THE PEOPLE, OR IN OTHER WORDS, THE MILITARY EXPERTS HAVE EMPLOYED TECHNIQUES AND LEADERSHIP ACTIVITIES ATTAINABLE ONLY BY THE ARMY, AND THUS HAVE SEPARATED THE ARMY FROM THE PEOPLE.

THE QUESTION IS, HOW TO GAIN VICTORY IN SUCH A LIMITED WAR?

Comment by John Galt — May 16, 2007 @ 9:13 am

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4622

"U.S. Embassy in Iraq to be biggest ever"

By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press

Last updated: 12:42 p.m., Saturday, May 19, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The new U.S. Embassy in Baghdad will be the world's largest and most expensive foreign mission, though it may not be large enough or secure enough to cope with the chaos in Iraq.

The Bush administration designed the 104-acre compound -- set to open in September in what today is a war zone -- to be an ultra-secure enclave.

Yet it also hoped that downtown Baghdad would cease being a battleground when diplomats moved in.

Over the long term, depending on which way the seesaw of sectarian division and grinding warfare teeters, the massive city-within-a-city could prove too enormous for the job of managing diminished U.S. interests in Iraq.

The $592 million embassy occupies a chunk of prime real estate two-thirds the size of Washington's National Mall, with desk space for about 1,000 people behind high, blast-resistant walls.

The compound is a symbol both of how much the United States has invested in Iraq and how the circumstances of its involvement are changing.

The embassy is one of the few major projects the administration has undertaken in Iraq that is on schedule and within budget.

Still, not all has gone according to plan.

The 21-building complex on the Tigris River was envisioned three years ago partly as a headquarters for the democratic expansion in the Middle East that President Bush identified as the organizing principle for foreign policy in his second term.

The complex quickly could become a white elephant if the U.S. scales back its presence and ambitions in Iraq.

Although the U.S. probably will have forces in Iraq for years to come, it is not clear how much of the traditional work of diplomacy can proceed amid the violence and what the future holds for Iraq's government.

"What you have is a situation in which they are building an embassy without really thinking about what its functions are," said Edward Peck, a former top U.S. diplomat in Iraq.

"What kind of embassy is it when everybody lives inside and it's blast-proof, and people are running around with helmets and crouching behind sandbags?"

The compound will have secure apartments for about 615 people.

The comfortable but not opulent one-bedrooms have offered hope for State Department staff now doubled up in tinny trailers.

Morale is at an ebb among the embassy staff, most of whom rarely leave the heavily fortified Green Zone during their one-year tours in Iraq.

The barricaded zone houses both the current, makeshift U.S. Embassy and the new compound about a mile away.

A recent string of mortar attacks has meant further restrictions.

On Saturday, three mortar shells or rockets slammed into a Green Zone compound where British Prime Minister Tony Blair was meeting with Iraqi leaders.

The attack wounded one person.

One round hit the British Embassy compound.

The new U.S. ambassador, Ryan Crocker, is reviewing staffing and housing needs, and fielding complaints about any suggestion employees either double up again or live elsewhere.

"We do believe that the embassy compound was right-sized at the time that it was presented to the Congress," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told a Senate panel this month.

"There have been some additional issues since that time."

Rice's senior adviser on Iraq, David Satterfield, said the embassy is not disproportionately expensive and will serve U.S. interests for years.

The second-most expensive embassy is the smaller $434 million U.S. mission being built in Beijing.

"We assume there will be a significant, enduring U.S. presence in Iraq," Satterfield said.

The Baghdad Embassy will open in September and be fully staffed by the end of the year, Satterfield said.

U.S. diplomats will move from a dogeared Saddam Hussein-era palace they have occupied since shortly after the 2003 invasion, to the growing irritation of many Iraqis.

The International Crisis Group, a nongovernmental organization that seeks to prevent and resolve conflicts, has identified the complex as the world's largest embassy.

The organization notes that the embassy is a sore point with Iraqis who are fed up with war, violence and roadblocks and chafing under the perception the U.S. still calls the shots more than four years after Saddam's ouster.

The embassy also is a prime target.

The area around the construction site was hit with mortar fire this month.

Other areas of the U.S.-controlled Green Zone were hit on consecutive days last week.

The increase in mortar and rocket attacks on the Green Zone has raised concern, especially because they are occurring during a U.S.-led security crackdown in Baghdad.

The embassy has ordered its staff to wear flak jackets and helmets while outdoors or in unprotected buildings.

The order was issued one day after a rocket attack killed four Asian contractors in the Green Zone this month.

It is unclear who is responsible for the recent attacks.

Some barrages came from Shiite-dominated areas in eastern Baghdad.

But the Green Zone also is within range of Sunni militant strongholds to the south.

The State Department and Congress have tussled this year over a $50 million request for additional blast-resistant housing.

The department says it did not anticipate needing so many fortified apartments when the embassy was in the planning stages three years ago and Iraq was a less violent place.

The new Democratic-controlled Congress has grumbled about the approximately $1 billion annual cost of embassy operations in Iraq and told the administration the embassy is overstaffed at roughly 1,000 regular employees.

Add security contractors, locally hired staff and others and the number climbs to more than 4,000.

"This is another case where poor planning, skyrocketing costs and security concerns are colliding in the Bush administration's policies in Iraq, and we need to make adjustments," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate panel that pays for State Department operations.

"They want hundreds of additional embassy staff who they cannot safely house within the new embassy compound."

"It's time for a reality check," said Leahy, D-Vt.

------

Associated Press writer Robert Reid in Baghdad contributed to this report.

------

On the Net:

U.S. Embassy site: http://iraq.usembassy.gov/iraq/

THE NEW YORK TIMES EMPIRE ZONE

May 17, 2007, 11:10 am

"Reactions to R.N.C. Surveillance"

By Sewell Chan

The Web is abuzz with reactions today to the release yesterday of 600 pages of documents detailing Police Department surveillance before and during the 2004 Republican National Convention.

The Times, which has an article today on the release, has prepared an index with PDF images of all the released records.

Comments so far...

May 19th, 2007 4:12 pm

Posted by s c: I’m sure the NYPD claims it was just a coincidence that all the groups cited, save the “God Hates Fags” crowd, were left-leaning.

— Posted by Livyjr: I myself am a life member of one of the groups cited in R.N.C. Intelligence Situation Report: 7 a.m. Aug. 29, 2004; R.N.C. Intelligence Situation Report: 5 p.m. Aug. 29, 2004; and R.N.C. Intelligence Situation Report: 7 a.m. Aug. 30, 2004, that being the Disabled American Veterans, and for the life of me, I cannot figure out why the NYPD would consider that group to be “left-leaning”!

The only thing that I could see the Disabled American Veterans doing down there in NYC during the RNC would be to protest the mockery that the Republicans, God’s Own Party here in America, were making of combat-wounded disabled veterans and the Purple Heart medal that is awarded to combat wounded veterans ….

But the NYPD had made it quite clear to me anyway, through published news reports, that it was protecting those Republicans who were making a mockery of the Purple Heart medal, and those to whom it was awarded, and so, I don’t know of any members of the Disabled American Veterans who went down there to NYC to protest that mockery at the RNC in 2004, at the risk of getting their heads busted open by the NYPD, and as for me, I was actively encouraging people to boycott NYC because of that police protection of this mockery of the Purple heart medal at the RNC in 2004 ….

And so …

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...lance/#comments

"Getting in line at VA to apply - Process can take months with system strained by wars, funding freeze and shortage of staff"

By DENNIS YUSKO, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, May 20, 2007

ALBANY -- Veterans and members of the military who are hurt or disabled must clear several bureaucratic hurdles to be considered for disability benefits.

And, these days, that process can take more than a year, experts say.

Current wars, a federal funding freeze and a staff shortage have created backlogs in claims.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Manhattan processes and judges claims for wounded and injured veterans from the Capital Region.

After filing, candidates and their doctors must fill out questionnaires, be examined by a VA doctor, have the case evaluated by Manhattan staffers and be cleared by a rating board.

The board decides if the disability is service-related and, if it is, to what degree it is debilitating.

A rating of 0 to 100 percent is assigned, which determines the level of compensation the vet receives.

After that, a VA supervisor makes the final decision.

But the backlog of claims in New York has slowed the system to where it takes more than a year to be fully processed, said Matthew Tully, an Iraq war veteran and Colonie attorney who specializes in VA issues.

"To have vets who get injured in the military, and are well-documented by a military doctor, have to go through a second evaluation by another doctor is absolutely ridiculous," he said.

"They could shave six to nine months off this process."

Here are some tips from Gerry Ladouceur, a veterans counselor at the Stratton VA Medical Center in Albany, and from Tully for military members trying to navigate the cumbersome claims cycle:

Talk to a veterans counselor at your local VA.

He is the first point of contact, and can also serve as a social worker, advocate and lawyer.

At the Stratton VA in Albany, counselors have diverse backgrounds and are employed by the state, not the VA.

They can assist vets through the benefits process, appeals claims and more.

The group Disabled American Veterans funds a full-time employee at the Stratton VA to advocate for veterans who are filing claims.

The VA compensation physical is the most important part of the claims process because it plays such a big role in determining benefit ratings, Tully said.

The doctor's exam and questions asked can be found online, and a vet can file a request within a week to see what the doctor that checked him concluded, he said.

"Marine served, waits for help - Injured while on active duty, discharged veteran struggles with red tape"

By DENNIS YUSKO, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, May 20, 2007

MALTA -- Mark Gansky graduated from Watervliet High School in 2003 at 197 pounds with 3 percent body fat.

The clean-cut kid used to jog three miles almost daily while carrying a 75-pound vest.

He joined the Marine Corps that September, fulfilling an uncle's early prediction.

"I was a monster, and I was all in shape," Gansky said.

But four years later, he's immobilized and unemployed, living in a Saratoga County apartment he shares with his fiance, Amanda Stenzel-Stamer, 22, and their 3-year-old daughter, Zoe-Jane Cruz.

Gansky wasn't wounded in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The 21-year-old former wrestler was injured by a different kind of "friendly fire" -- the U.S. military's health care system -- from what he calls a faulty medical operation.

He's finding it hard to get back on his feet.

His ongoing 20-month plight typifies how it's become harder for disabled and wounded vets to find timely care and benefits.

The normal red tape has been stretched because of a backlog of claims, many from veterans of new wars, a federal funding freeze and staff shortages.

Searching for help

The Bethlehem native was sent to Okinawa in March 2004 as an ammunition technician.

He was helping clean up the Marine base there on Sept. 28, 2005, when he felt a twist in his torso that resulted in a big lump -- a hernia.

During an operation that night, a Navy doctor on the Okinawa base struck two nerves in his right groin, Gansky said.

The surgeon made a last-minute decision to remove a lymph node in the groin, and by nicking the nerves, caused a painful condition called neuropathy, he said.

The operation forced Gansky into a medical discharge.

Since then, the former corporal traveled from military medical facilities in Japan to medical specialists across the United States.

No one's been able to repair the damage, he said.

Gansky, who returned to the Capital Region in August 2006, can no longer work, exercise or concentrate.

He can't bowl, or even wear blue jeans.

Gansky, who takes prescribed pain killers, has gained 40 pounds and has lost his confidence.

"I'm not who I was," Gansky said recently, sitting on his couch in a T-shirt, sneakers and sweat pants for comfort.

His medical history is documented in hundreds of records he keeps in his Ballston Lake apartment.

Among the paperwork is Gansky's application for disability benefits he submitted to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs in Manhattan in September to compensate for lost wages.

Veterans' disability claims are handled through VA regional offices, which are separate from VA hospitals that provide health care.

Eight months later, there's been no decision on his claim and he has no reason to think one is coming soon.

As do many veterans, Gansky must wait longer for benefits.

Crunch at the VA

Since 2003, the VA's claims system has become increasingly strained under a large and unexpected increase in disability filings from Afghanistan and Iraq veterans, and flat federal funding for hiring processors, a March study by the U.S. Government Accountability Office says.

Other factors, like expanded eligibility for claims and an aging federal work force, also have led to a backlog of benefit requests.

Pending claims jumped 40 percent between 2000 and 2006, government figures show.

In New York, in general, continuing Iraq casualties have lengthened claims processing, said Gerry Ladouceur, a veterans counselor at the Stratton VA Medical Center in Albany.

Ladouceur agreed to share findings recently disclosed by the VA's claims office in Manhattan, whose representatives did not respond to requests for an interview.

Ladouceur said a veteran's disability claim before 2000 generally took no more than four months to wind its way through the system, and often just weeks.

It now takes an average of 287 days, and longer for those who weren't wounded in Iraq or Afghanistan, he said.

The Manhattan VA office employs more than 100 claims processors, but in the last year, 44 have retired, each with more than 30 years' experience, Ladouceur said.

The VA hired 28 replacements with no experience, who require years of training, he said.

President Bush has requested more than 450 new full-time claims processors for the VA in his fiscal 2008 budget, the GAO says.

But even a well-funded program in New York would need at least a year to get new employees up to speed and get claims moving, Ladouceur said.

"Time is really the biggest thing for these vets, especially the ones living with no income," he said.

"They're panicked."

"These are guys with jobs and families who were productive members of society, but now they can't work because of their service to their country."

Estimates by the GAO and VA on how long it takes to get a disability claim decision are low, said Matthew Tully, a Colonie lawyer who specializes in VA issues and who served in Iraq with the New York Army National Guard.

He said some New York vets are waiting 12 to 18 months.

Wounded veterans must endure a grueling series of interviews, medical checkups and paperwork before finding out if they qualify for benefits, Tully said.

"It goes without saying there's a crisis," Tully said, but he stressed that the VA's main troubles were in its claims bureaus, not in its hospitals.

'Pain is so long'

But that hasn't been Gansky's experience; he blames military doctors for his nerve disorder and the VA for not healing the problem.

Gansky said after the 2005 operation, Navy doctors prescribed six months of Percocet to dull his pain, and his commanding officer placed him in a very limited office job.

But for a kid like Gansky, who never drank alcohol in his life, the medication was overwhelming and, he says, accomplished little.

He was sent to military doctors in California in March 2006.

They tried nerve injections and shot radio frequencies into his groin to deaden the injured nerves.

The procedures failed, and the discomfort returned.

Neither the VA nor the Navy publicly discuss individual medical cases, and both declined comment.

"The pain is so long, just there," Gansky says.

"Nothing I do makes it go away."

"It feels like squeezing, pulsing, cramped."

By the summer of 2006, Gansky returned to Japan a disgusted man.

He agreed to a medical discharge and came back to upstate New York.

But Gansky has yet to find the recuperative surgery he seeks.

In November, doctors at the Stratton VA Medical Center replaced a mesh bandage inside of him, Gansky said.

He and his family are sick of Band-Aid approaches.

They want a solution.

"You just can't fix it with pills and shots," Gansky said.

He last visited Stratton on May 2.

He said doctors told him there is too much scar tissue in his groin to operate again right now, and they prescribed a painkiller called Ultram and sleep medication that he's taking.

Gansky and Stenzel-Stamer are getting married next month.

The wait for his disability benefits has been devastating for the family, which, like most young couples, is facing cost of living increases.

Stenzel-Stamer works overtime, 10 to 20 hours a week, at a center for disabled people.

Gansky tried work as a telemarketer, but sitting in one place and occasionally getting up to signal a supervisor made it impossible for him to continue.

Suing the military is out of the question because he signed waivers prior to his initial surgery on Okinawa.

"I can't believe people are being sent to war all the time, and they love them when they are at war, but when they come home, they don't care about them anymore," Stenzel-Stamer said.

Gansky doesn't regret joining the Marines Corps, but he looks to the future with a heavy dose of uncertainty.

"My plan, my goal, was to get out of the Marines, finish college and start my own gym, be a personal trainer," Gansky said, sitting on his couch.

"As of now, that's done."

Dennis Yusko can be reached at 581-8438 or by e-mail at dyusko@timesunion.com.

"Army says Dragon Skin armor falls short"

By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer

Mon May 21, 7:39 PM ET

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Army, in a rare move Monday, released a barrage of test results showing that a privately-sold flexible body armor that some families have sought for their soldiers failed extensive military testing.

Pieces of the hefty Dragon Skin armor, with ragged holes torn through its yellow inner skin, were propped up on the floor in the Pentagon, as Army officials systematically detailed the battery of ammunition and temperature testing the armor failed.

Although the tests were done nearly a year ago, the Army declined to release details until Monday, after recent NBC News reports suggested that the Dragon Skin may be better than the Army-issued Interceptor armor.

As a result of the reports, some members of Congress have asked for an investigation into the matter, and others have asked the Army for more information.

"We take this personally," said Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, executive officer for the Army's armor testing program.

"One third of the general officers in the United States Army have either a son or daughter either in theater (at war) today or (who) has been to theater."

Holding up an armor-piercing bullet, Brown showed video of the tests, including footage of officials peering into the bullet hole in the Dragon Skin armor.

"At the end of the day, this one disc has to stop this round."

"It didn't."

"Thirteen times," he said.

In response, Murray Neal, president of Pinnacle Armor which produces Dragon Skin, suggested that the Army lied about some of the testing, and he questioned why the Army was counting shots that "were fired into the non-rifle defeating areas."

The body armor debate has raged almost since the Afghanistan and Iraq wars began, as the Army struggled at times to get all of the needed equipment to its soldiers — both active and reserve.

At times, family members around the country were raising money, having bake sales, and spending thousands of dollars of their own cash to buy armor and equipment for their loved ones going to war.

In some of those cases, families were considering buying Dragon Skin armor because they believed it would provide better protection.

The Army Monday said it was releasing the test details to help prevent families from spending money on body armor that is not as good as the protection already issued to the soldiers.

Brown described "catastrophic failures" by the Dragon Skin armor, and said that in 13 of 48 shots, lethal armor-piercing rounds either shattered the discs that make up the armor, or completely penetrated the vest.

"Zero failures is the correct answer," he said.

"One failure is sudden death and you lose the game."

Brown added that the armor failed to endure required temperatures shifts — from minus 20 degrees to 120 above zero — which weakened the adhesive holding the discs together.

And he said that the Dragon Skin's heavy weight was also a problem for soldiers who need to carry a lot of gear.

The Dragon Skin, he said, weighs 47.5 pounds, compared to the Army-issued Interceptor armor, which weighs 28 pounds.

After seeing the latest television reports, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., sent a letter to Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey asking for more information and saying he's concerned that the Army may not be providing better body armor to the soldiers as quickly as possible.

And Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office, a government watchdog agency, seeking an investigation to assess the body armor being used by the military.

Army officials said they would be going to Capitol Hill this week to talk to lawmakers about the armor issue.
___

On the Net:

U.S. Army: http://www.army.mil