“She committed suicide”: Schofield soldier died of ‘self-inflicted’ gunshot wound

Yesterday, I wrote a short post about a Schofield Barracks soldier who was barricaded in a car with a gun and later went to the hospital from a gunshot wound.  The soldier died shortly after being taken to the hospital.

The Honolulu Star Advertiser and Associated Press carried stories about the apparent suicide.  The identity of the victim has not been released pending notification of the family, but a commenter on this blog wrote:

She commited suicide. She was pronounced dead in Wahiawa last night around 2000.

Other details or circumstances of the incident have not yet been made public.

 

Attempted suicide by Schofield soldier?

According to KHON News, yesterday Army MPs responded to a soldier barricaded in a vehicle with a gun. The soldier suffered a gunshot wound and was taken to the hospital.  Was this an attempted suicide?

>><<

Source: http://www.khon2.com/news/local/story/Army-police-respond-to-barricade-situation/taoTFAYZo0e02IajAhfTWQ.cspx

Army police respond to barricade situation

SCHOFIELD BARRACKS, Hawaii –

At approximately 5:30 p.m., Army law enforcement responded to an emergency call regarding a Soldier brandishing a weapon on post.

Military police cordoned off the area, while the individual was barricaded in a vehicle.

Federal Fire and EMS personnel also reported to the scene.

The individual suffered a gunshot wound was taken to Wahiawa General Hospital for treatment.

The incident is under investigation, and the condition of the individual is unknown at this time.

The Army’s persistent Depleted Uranium problem in Hawai’i

Joan Conrow has written an excellent synopsis of the military’s depleted uranium (DU) contamination issue in Hawai’i on the Civil Beat website.   Here’s an excerpt of her article:

The Army prohibited all training with DU in 1996; however, munitions containing DU remain in wide use.

Although the Army for years denied that it had ever used DU munitions in Hawaii, contractors found 15 tail assemblies from the M101 spotting rounds while clearing a firing range at Schofield Barracks in 2005. Even then the Army did not publicly disclose the presence of DU in Hawaii. The issue came to light inadvertently in 2006, when Earthjustice discovered communication about DU in Army e-mails subpoenaed as part of the ongoing litigation over the use of Makua as a live fire training facility.

The Army subsequently acknowledged that it trained soldiers on the Davy Crockett weapon in Hawaii and at least seven other states during the 1960s.

As a result, some residents have developed a deep distrust of the Army’s statements regarding DU, even though the Army maintains it is committed to transparency on the issue.

Impacts

It’s unclear how much DU is located in the Islands, or exactly where. Some 29,318 M101 spotting rounds containing 12,232 pounds of DU remain unaccounted for on American installations, according to the Army’s permit application. In Hawaii, the Army’s initial surveys were conducted at just three installations — Schofield, PTA and Makua — and the effort was severely limited by dense vegetation, rugged terrain and what the military characterized as “safety considerations” due to unexploded ordnance.

It’s also unclear just how DU may be affecting human health and the environment in Hawaii, as well as other parts of the world where it was used in combat. Its potentially severe and long-lasting impacts are the core of a growing controversy over its use on the battlefield and its presence in the Islands.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Here’s a related article from August 2010 on the Army’s application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an after-the-fact license to “possess” DU at ranges in Hawai’i.

Pearl Harbor has become the X-Band radar’s informal home

The Sea-Based X-band Radar (SBX) pulled into Pearl Harbor again on December 22, 2010.  When the military originally proposed the expansion of its missile defense test range to include most of the north Pacific,  many opposed the project, especially the homeporting of the $1 billion Sea-Based X-band Radar monstrosity in Hawai’i.

We were relieved when Hawai’i was not selected as the site, but soon we saw the terrible eye looming on the horizon as it pulled into Ke Awalau O Pu’uloa for repairs and maintenance, or so we were told.  However, as this Honolulu Star Advertiser article explains, the SBX radar never spent a day in its Adak, Alaska homeport.

When it does head in, Hawaii has become the SBX’s home port by default. Ironically, in 2003, military officials considered but rejected permanently basing the SBX here. A spot three miles south of Kalaeloa was examined along with five other locations before Adak was selected.

Adak got the nod because it is between the “threat ballistic missiles” — presumably in North Korea — and the interceptor missiles in California and Alaska, Lt. Gen. Henry Obering III, then-head of the missile agency, said in a 2006 memo.

Instead it has been a kolea, wintering annually in the islands. The newspaper reports “The 280-foot-tall SBX, as it is called, has “loitered” in the vicinity of Adak several times, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said, but it has returned to Pearl Harbor 11 times and spent a combined total of more than a year and a half in port in Hawaii.”

DAYS SPENT IN ISLES

» 2006: 170 days

» 2007: 63 days

» 2008: 63 days

» 2009: 177 days

» 2010: 51 days

» Dec. 22 to present

Source: Missile Defense Agency

The Honolulu Star Advertiser writes:

Like a loyal tourist, the massive $1 billion Sea-Based X-Band Radar platform keeps returning to Hawaii, becoming an instant focus of public interest every time it moors at Pearl Harbor.

» Size: 240 feet wide and 390 feet long

» Height: 280 feet from keel to top of radar dome

» Displacement: Nearly 50,000 tons

The Missile Defense Agency is tight-lipped about the reasons for never mooring the SBX in Adak as planned in 2006, but the Coast Guard raised concern over operating a 280-foot-tall oil rig ship in the unforgiving Bering Sea, where waves routinely exceed 30 feet and winds top 130 mph.

The SBX radar is part of the massive expansion of the U.S. missile defense system in the Pacific.  On the one hand, the system is anything but defensive.  Russia and China both feel threatened by the ring of missile defense sites encircling them, as these missiles could neutralize retaliatory capabilities in the event of a first strike by the U.S.  So they view the missile defenses as an escalation to be met by expanded offensive capabilities.   The expansion of missile defense systems is causing great political and social unrest in the places where the U.S. wants to station the facilities including Poland, the Czech Republic, Guam and Jeju-do, Korea.   Kwajalein in the Marshall Islands has already been taken over by the U.S. missile defense system, its native islanders crammed into one small squalid slum on Ebeye island.

On the other hand, the missile defense is a massive boondoggle for missile defense aerospace contractors.   As one former engineer from the Pacific Missile Range Facility told me in disgust, the system is not designed to work. It is only supposed to be improved incrementally, thereby keeping the federal dollars flowing. So perhaps the decision to homeport the SBX radar in Adak was only to ensure that Alaska got its fair share of the military pork through construction projects.   The program was initiated during the double reign of Senators Stevens and Inouye on the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.

Meanwhile, the terrible eye is watching…

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Hawaii fights release of details on drone contracts

Jim Dooley wrote an interesting article on watchdog.org about the proposed use of aerial drones to monitor harbors in Hawai’i as part of no-bid contracts awarded to Hawaiya Technologies.  Hawaiya is a military technology company owned by Paul Schultz. Schultz, formerly a Rear Admiral and commander of a fleet stationed in Okinawa, was demoted to captain when he retired from the Navy. He had come under investigation for allegations of adultery and fraud tied to a Navy research contracts scandal at the University of Hawai’i and the Pacific Missile Range Facility.

While in the Navy, the married Schultz allegedly had an affair with an Office of Naval Research program manager Mun Won Chang Fenton who helped to steer research funds and technology to Schultz’s ships outside of normal procurement channels.  Fenton later awarded several grants to University of Hawai’i professors for research related to missile defense systems.  She directed the UH researchers to hire technical personnel under the grant. These “directed hires” took their orders from Chang Fenton. Chang Fenton directed these personnel to write a large net-centric warfare technology contract proposal under the auspices of the Research Corporation of the University of Hawai’i (RCUH) and submit the proposal to Navy research programs that Chang Fenton helped to manage.  The Navy awarded RCUH a contract for its proposal named “Project Kai e’e”, to establish a military Pacific Research Center to serve as a conduit for federal military high technology funding.

Naval Criminal Investigation Service (NCIS) documents and other sources allege that the Schultz and Chang Fenton tried to use government funds to create jobs for themselves in the new Pacific Research Center.   The job announcement for Executive Director of the Pacific Research Center was posted on the bulletin board in the RCUH office for a few minutes.  After Schultz submitted his application the job announcement was taken down.  RCUH staff were directed by Chang Fenton to rate the applicant favorably.  Schultz was offered the job, but he never formally accepted it.  RCUH Executive Director Harold Masumoto suddenly sent a letter to the Office of Naval Research canceling the contract award.

Naval investigators were closing in. My theory is that someone may have tipped off Schultz and his co-conspirators, sending them scurrying for cover.

The Project Kai e’e scandal morphed into the proposed University Affiliated Research Center (UARC), a military classified research lab that met fierce protest by students, faculty and community groups in 2004 – 2006.  The really interesting part of the this sordid tale is that the various projects were earmarks from Senator Inouye.  Sources familiar with the scandal told me that the investigation went nowhere because it could have implicated four admirals and a senator.

As Dooley’s article suggests, Schultz seems to have found a new niche in the homeland security gold-rush.  But the proposed use of unmanned aerial drones to monitor harbors raises many issues of civil liberties, safety and propriety.   The contracts were awarded without any bidding.  The plans for aerial drones are proceeding without approval from the Federal Aviation Administration.  And details about the project are being kept from the public.

Could the no-bid contract have been awarded via Aina Kai, a Native Hawaiian Organization (NHO) established by Schultz and Chang Fenton (who are now married) in partnership with former Hawai’i governor John Waihe’e?  NHOs are given special preferences for federal contracting to receive contract awards without competition and without a limit on the size of the award.

High stakes government funding, exotic and dangerous military technologies and secrecy are a recipe for corruption.   The tsunami of military spending that was unleashed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks have brought with it a flood of corruption. Such is life in the military-industrial-political complex.

>><<

http://watchdog.org/8124/hawaii-fights-release-of-details-on-drone-contracts/

Hawaii fights release of details on drone contracts

Posted on January 28, 2011

BY JIM DOOLEY — The state and a private contractor are installing extensive new security and surveillance measures at harbors and shorelines that include planned use of unmanned aerial drones, according to public records.

Neither the contractor nor state officials have applied to the Federal Aviation Administration for necessary permission to deploy the unmanned aerial vehicles in civilian air space here.

Repeated requests for details about the plans and their status made to the state and its contractor have not been answered for more than a month.

Paul Schultz, chief executive of Hawaiya Technologies, the company installing the new security measures, refused to discuss his company’s shoreline security plans in general or the use of UAV’s in particular.

“You can go find out your story on your own,” Schultz said.

“This is not a friendly story,” Schultz continued. ”You’re coming after me. You can come after me by yourself. But don’t call me looking for information.”

State Department of Transportation and harbors division personnel did not respond to repeated requests for comment submitted by email, telephone and in-person since late last year.

Glenn Okimoto, nominated by Gov. Neil Abercrombie as director of the Transportation Department, and his harbors division deputy director, Randy Grune, have said a department response was being prepared.

Okimoto was head of the harbors division in 2007 and personally recommended award of the original $1.46 million non-bid Honolulu harbor security contract to Hawaiya Technologies, according to state purchasing records.

Some $1 million of the contract is paid with federal grant money and the remainder comes from the state.

Grune said three weeks ago the department was still researching “technical issues” about non-bid security contracts awarded to Hawaiya.

The UAV’s are described as an anti-terrorism tool in documents describing new security measures at Honolulu and Kalaeloa Harbors on Oahu under a 2009 contract awarded to Hawaiya Technologies.

Another non-bid contract award worth nearly $1 million to Hawaiya is planned for Kahului harbor on Maui and the contractor has proposed installing the same system on Kauai and the Big Island.

The jobs would include use of UAV’s to conduct surveillance flights in the congested skies above state harbors, which abut two international airports, a general aviation airfield and Hickam Air Force Base.

The drones can’t fly without an FAA “certificate of authorization” and the state has not applied for one, said Ian Gregor, FAA spokesman.

The drones cost $75,000 each, according to purchasing records posted at the state procurement office website.

The type of drones – there are many different designs being marketed now – and the number to be purchased are details that the state has redacted from contracting files.

Only two civilian government agencies in the country – one in Texas and one in Kansas – have applied for and received necessary certifications for use of the drones, which must be operated by licensed pilots from ground control stations, said Gregor.

The Texas aircraft would be used to patrol remote sections of the Mexican border and the Kansas drones would be flown at a UAV testing and training facility 30 miles outside of Wichita.

The FAA requires that civilian-operated airborne drones must also be tracked by either a ground spotter vehicle or a manned chase plane.

The American Civil Liberties Union has expressed concern about invasion of privacy issues raised by use of surveillance drones in other states and is monitoring the Hawaii plans.

“Use of ‘Unmanned Aerial Vehicles’ or ‘drones’ by law enforcement has a vast potential for abuse,” sad Daniel Gluck, senior staff attorney for ACLU Hawaii.

READ FULL ARTICLE

More on military expansion on Pohakuloa

The full extent of military expansion at Pohakuloa is only becoming more evident.

The Army website for the Pohakuloa Training Areas Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement can be accessed here. Written comments on the proposed action and alternatives will be accepted via e-mail (ptapeis@bah.com) and U.S. mail until February 7, 2011 to:  PTA PEIS, P.O. Box 514, Honolulu, HI 96809. Materials from the scoping meetings will be made available on the “Project Documents” page.

Yesterday, I learned that people witnessed construction activity up on the slopes of Mauna Loa.  The activity was so high on the mountain that the observer thought it surely must be outside the boundary of the Pohakuloa Training Area.    Later, they saw explosions near the site from aircraft and land based artillery fire.

We have confirmed that the construction companies were building ‘targets’.  Julie Taomia, an archaeologist at Pohakuloa said that the activity is most likely related to Marine Corps projects. She said that the Pohakuloa Training Area extends pretty far up Mauna Loa, beyond the old Hilo-Kona Road.   She said that the Marines did an Environmental Assessment (EA) for this range construction work. However, since this was done as an EA, as opposed to a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), it slipped past the notice of most people.  Furthermore, since this is a Marine Corps project, she said that cultural monitors, which are required under the Army Stryker Brigade programmatic agreement, are not required to oversee ground disturbing activity, which is just a way for the Army to avoid responsibility for the impacts on an Army range.  This loophole must be closed.   The Marine Corps expansion contributes tot he cumulative impacts of military activity.  There should be way to conduct cultural and environmental monitoring  for all activity related to the installation regardless of which service branch is doing the project.

In addition to this current Marine Corps expansion activity, the Marines are expanding training in Pohakuloa to accommodate the new aircraft scheduled to be stationed at Mokapu (a.k.a. the Marine Corps Base Kane’ohe).  I missed the following article in the Big Island Weekly when it came out in September.

>><<

http://www.bigislandweekly.com/articles/2010/09/01/read/news/news02.txt

The Marines are landing on the island

New squadrons may be using Pohakuloa for future training and gunnery exercises
By Alan D. Mcnarie
Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:50 AM HST

The United States military is planning yet another expansion entailing increased use of Pohakuloa Training Area. The Marine Corps wants to move up to three additional squadrons of aircraft to the islands, including 9 UH-1Y Huey and 18 AH-1Z Cobra helicopters and 24 of its controversial MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft.

The Marines held “scoping meetings” for an Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed expansion last week in Hilo and Kona. The meetings followed an “open house” format: instead of allowing public testimony before an open mic, the meeting’s organizers set up various visual displays manned by experts to answer questions, and allowed members of the public to present written testimony or dictate their input to a court reporter. But a group of protestors led by Malu Aina’s Jim Albertini brought their own microphone system to the Hilo meeting to voice their objections to the plan, including concerns that increased use of PTA’s firing range could stir up depleted uranium dust there and that the Ospreys, which have a less-than-perfect safety record, could present dangers to servicemen and to the community.

The move would essentially allow an entire Marine Air-Ground Task Force to operate out of Kaneohe Marine Air Base. Most of the components of such a task force, including command and ground elements and CH-53D “Sea Stallion” heavy-lift helicopters, are already in place here. The proposed move would allow medium-lift and assault helicopters needed by the MAGTF to train alongside the other elements of the force.

Although the new aircraft would be based on O’ahu, their presence would be felt across the island chain. The plan calls for training, including gunnery exercises, at Pohakuloa; for refueling facilities and night exercises at Molokai Training Support Facility and Kalaupapa Airfield, respectively; for additional activities at the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, and possibly for target practice on an islet called Kau’ula Rock, near Ni’ihau.

Perhaps the plan’s most controversial element is the Osprey, a hybrid aircraft with stubby wings that end in two giant propellers that can lift the craft like a helicopter, then rotate to pull the machine forward like an airplane. The Marines want Ospreys to replace their aging C-46 “Sea Knight” medium-lift choppers, which have only about half the Ospreys’ range and speed.

“It’s much more capable (than the C-46) and it’s faster – and faster, for the Marines, is safer,” said a Marine spokesperson at the scoping meeting.

But the Osprey has a troubled history. Based on an experimental craft that gained Bell Helicopter and Boeing a joint government contract in 1983, first flown in 1989, Ospreys remained in development for the next 15 years; along the way, it compiled a long record of cost overruns, mechanical failures and crashes, killing 30 people before the first operational Marine squadron began training in 2005.

“The mishaps that we had in the 90s and in 2000 [when two Ospreys crashed, killing 23 people] were tragic,” said Jason Holder, one of the Marines’ authorities at the scoping meeting in Hilo. But he said that since those incidents, the Marines had brought in “outside experts” to fix the problems that no crashes had occurred in over 80,000 flight hours since 2002.

That statement wasn’t entirely accurate. An Osprey went down under combat conditions in Afghanistan in April of 2010. But that accident occurred during a dust storm and may have been influenced by weather, pilot error or even enemy action. Due to an electronic malfunction, another Osprey took off without a pilot and made a rather unsuccessful landing.

The Ospreys have had enough other problems that the U.S. General Accounting Office recommended last year the Secretary of Defense require a new analysis of alternatives to the aircraft, and that the Marines develop “a prioritized strategy to improve system suitability, reduce operational costs, and align future budget requests.”

“Although recently deployed in Iraq and regarded favorably, it has not performed the full range of missions anticipated, and how well it can do so is in question,” the GAO Web site (http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-692T) summarized.

At the Hilo meeting, the Sierra Club’s Cory Harden provided a long list of media references about various problems with the Ospreys, including the aircraft’s inability to glide to an unpowered landing, as helicopters can, and a downwash from its rotors that can be so powerful that during a demonstration at Staten Island, New York, it knocked down tree branches and injured 10 spectators.

In light of such problems, Harden asked that the EIS “evaluate the risks of Ospreys harming military personnel and civilians” in Hawai’i.

Another major concern voiced at the meeting was the continued presence of depleted uranium at Pohakuloa and the risk that increased use of the facility’s target range might have of stirring up radioactive dust. The military has maintained that the number of DU shells fired there, and the risk of the dust leaving the area, were both minimal, while critics claim that thousands of uranium spotter rounds may have been fired, that the dust could spread for miles, and that even a few molecules in the lungs could cause cancer. Albertini pointed out that a County Council resolution had called for a moratorium on any live fire exercises at PTA until an independent assessment and cleanup of the DU there had taken place.

The deployment of the new Marine Aircraft would almost certainly mean more use of PTA’s firing range. The Osprey’s notorious downwash could certainly stir up dust. But while it can mount an optional belly or ramp gun, it is primarily a transport, not a gun platform. A much bigger user of the firing range would likely be the Marines’ venerable Cobras, which have been blasting enemy targets with gunfire and Hellfire missiles since the Vietnam era. Jim Isaacs, another Marine expert running one of the information stations at the Hilo meeting, noted that with the Cobras, “sixty percent of events are ordnance related.” He noted, however, that the Marines’ Cobras did not fire any ordnance containing DU.

The new aircraft probably would create some jobs in the islands – especially construction jobs. Ironically, despite the choppers’ and Ospreys’ go-anywhere mission, one big ticket item involved in moving them here could be the construction of new landing pads at Schofield and elsewhere. Marine spokesperson James Sibley told the Weekly that while there were “no plans” currently for new helipads at Pohakuloa, “Right now PTA can barely support the operators of the helicopters that we have here”: that downwash could potentially lift the existing runway’s steel mesh material, causing damage.

Despite their obvious differences, the Marines joined the protestors in an opening pule, or Hawaiian prayer. A court reporter typed continuously during the protestor’s testimony, apparently taking it down.

Members of the public who missed the meetings are encouraged to visit the project’s website, http://www.mcbh.usmc.mil/22h1eis to submit online testimony, or to mail comments to Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pacific, Attn: EV21, MV 22/H-1 EIS Manager, Makalapa Drive, Suite 100, Pearl Harbor, HI 96860-3134.

In the wake of the Army’s Makua decision

The Honolulu Star Advertiser did a feature article on David Henkin, an attorney for EarthJustice who represents Malama Makua in its fight with the U.S. Army.  David is a friend and Makahiki brother who has done a great job as the attorney for Malama Makua.   However, I disagree with his suggestion that live fire or other training is more acceptable at Schofield (Lihu’e) or Pohakuloa.  The principles of aloha ‘aina and solidarity that bring thousands of people from around the world to stand with Makua must be reciprocated.  The ‘not-in-my-backyard’ argument leaves unchallenged the very premise that the training is necessary and for some legitimate purpose, which, as the death toll and costs rise in Iraq and Afghanistan, we know to be a lie.  As Jim Albertini writes in his January 12, 2011 leaflet: “The bottom line is this: Hawaii residents don’t want the U.S. military training to do to others what the U.S. has already done to Hawaii: overthrow and occupy its government and nation, and contaminate it’s air, land, water, people, plants, and animals with military toxins.”

Below is the leaflet issued by Malu ‘Aina followed by the interview with David Henkin:

Pohakuloa Military Expansion Opposed Unanimously!

Below is a brief report on the public hearing held Jan. 11th at Hilo Intermediate School cafeteria on plans for military expansion at Pohakuloa. The plans call for new live-fire ranges and training, and construction activities, at Pohakuloa, as well as high altitude helicopter flights and landings on Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa in training for Afghanistan/Pakistan high altitude mountainous warfare.

The first hour and a half was taken up with “open house” science fair type displays by military people who knew very little about the history of militarism in Hawaii and couldn’t answer many questions asked. But the public testimony portion on Pohakuloa was powerful.

The public hearing portion started with Kumu Paul Neves and his Ohana/halau doing chants and then Paul led a Pule.  Lots of young Hawaiians testified both in their native tongue and English.  They spoke eloquently against the military desecration of the sacred mountains and aina.  Other Hawaiians and people of all ages,  testified as well.  The testimony went for 2 hours.  Not one person spoke in support of the military expansion plans. The PTA new commander and the Army Garrison commander from Oahu sat stoned-faced throughout the 2 hours of public testimony

Many citizens noted that no further military activity at the Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA) should go forward.  On July 2, 2008 the Hawaii County Council passed a resolution by a vote of 8-1 calling for a complete halt to all live-fire at PTA and any activities that create dust until there is a comprehensive independent assessment of the depleted uranium (DU) at PTA and a clean up of the DU present.  The council’s resolution also called for 7 additional actions, none of which have been implemented.

Several people emphasized that stopping the bombing and all live-fire, construction, and other activities that create dust at PTA is key.  Du particles are particularly hazardous when inhaled.  People testified that the federal government should pay for the comprehensive independent assessment, testing and monitoring for radiation contamination and that federal funds should be sought through Hawaii’s congressional delegation –senators Inouye and Akaka, and representatives Hirono and Hanabusa.  There has been plenty of money over the years for military build up but very little funding for military clean up.  It’s time to change those priorities.

The bottom line is this: Hawaii residents don’t want the U.S. military training to do to others what the U.S. has already done to Hawaii: overthrow and occupy its government and nation, and contaminate it’s air, land, water, people, plants, and animals with military toxins.

Stop the Bombing!  Stop All the Wars!
Military Clean Up NOT Build Up Now!
End all Occupations! Restore the Hawaii Nation!

1. Mourn all victims of violence. 2. Reject war as a solution. 3. Defend civil liberties. 4. Oppose all discrimination, anti-Islamic, anti-Semitic, etc. 5. Seek peace through justice in Hawai`i and around the world.
Contact: Malu `Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action P.O. Box AB Kurtistown, Hawai`i 96760.
Phone (808) 966-7622.  Email ja@interpac.net   http://www.malu-aina.org
Hilo Peace Vigil leaflet (Jan. 14, 2011 – 487th week) – Friday 3:30-5PM downtown Post Office

Jim Albertini

Malu ‘Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action

P.O.Box AB

Kurtistown, Hawai’i 96760

phone: 808-966-7622

email: JA@interpac.net

Visit us on the web at: www.malu-aina.org

+++

http://www.staradvertiser.com/columnists/20110121_David_Henkin.html

David Henkin

The lawyer for Earthjustice won a long campaign to stop the Army’s live-fire training in Makua Valley

By Dave Koga

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Jan 21, 2011

David Henkin knew early in life that he wanted to protect the environment. As a child in Los Angeles, he would pick up pieces of trash during walks with his mother and wonder aloud how people could be so thoughtless.

“The interest got more sophisticated after that,” he says, “but I think for a lot of people it starts with just looking around and seeing how beautiful the world is and what a gift we’ve been given … and understanding that we all have an obligation to stewardship.”

At Yale Law School, Henkin naturally gravitated toward environmental law, which would give him “the chance to stand up for the Earth.”

“What drew me in was not just the work — the opportunity to make the world cleaner, better, safer — but that the clients are never in it for money or personal gain,” he says. “They’re in it because they have a passion for protecting resources and places for future generations. And so that’s something I’ve always been able to get up in the morning for … to keep my energy up and keep doing it year in and year out.”

Since arriving in Hawaii in 1995 to work for Earthjustice, Henkin has filed numerous cases on issues ranging from protection of the endangered Hawaiian crow to the upgrading of Honolulu’s wastewater treatment facilities.

He is best known for representing the community group Malama Makua, which has pressed the U.S. Army since 1998 to prepare environmental impact statements on its training in Makua Valley, home to more than 100 archaeological sites and 50 endangered plant and animal species.

Two weeks ago, the Army’s commander in the Pacific, Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, announced that “in an effort to balance our relations with the community and the requirements that we have for training,” the Army had abandoned plans to resume live-fire training in Makua Valley and would conduct future exercises at Schofield Barracks and the Pohakuloa Training Area on the Big Island.

Henkin is pleased with the Army’s decision, which he says was too long in coming. But he says the ultimate goal remains the return of the valley to the state — and it may be a while before that issue is resolved.

QUESTION: Now that the Army is saying there will be no more live-fire training in Makua, what’s your sense of what’s going to happen next?

ANSWER: What’s important to understand is that the Army hasn’t done any live-fire training in Makua since 1998 (when Malama Makua filed suit after a series of munitions-sparked brushfires). In the last 12 years, they’ve fired rounds in only 26 exercises during a three-year period. So actually, out of the last 12 years, there have been nine years without a single shot fired. And as you know, during that period of time, particularly from 2001 onward, the Army has been deploying constantly to combat theaters and they’ve been training their soldiers elsewhere. So what Gen. Mixon said is really just an acknowledgment of reality — which is that not only can the Army get by without live-fire training at Makua, it has.

And so the Army and the people of Hawaii have to ask themselves: Is it worth sacrificing the cultural sites and the endangered species? Is it worth training within three miles of heavily populated areas? Is it worth training across the street from areas where people play with their children and gather food from the ocean when there are other options?

The first lawsuit was filed in 1998 … and in 2000 and then again in 2001, the Army came out with a very short document called an environmental assessment where they said there was no potential for training at Makua to cause any significant harm to the environment. This, against a history in which cultural sites have been destroyed and endangered species have been burned, just didn’t pass the smile test. And the judge agreed with us that they needed to do the full-blown environmental impact statement …

To me, this case is a perfect illustration of what Congress intended when it made … the environmental review law. It is, “Let’s get the facts on the table; let’s not do it based on rhetoric and supposition. Let’s get the facts on the table and make a good decision.” And we believe the decision Gen. Mixon announced last week is not only good for us, but good for the Army and good for the people of the state of Hawaii, because for so long the dialogue has been readiness versus the environment. And now we realize that you can have both. You can protect sacred places, special places, and you can also do the training.

Q: What do you think was driving the Army’s reluctance to do any kind of complete study all these years?

A: We’ve heard that the Army had a fear — almost like the old domino theory — that if the Army gave in at Makua, then the activists would be at the gates and they would try to push them out of Schofield and out of Pohakuloa. For Earthjustice and Malama Makua, the issue has always been Makua and whether this is an appropriate place to train. I think there were some concerns about (the Army) saving face. Maybe along the way some of the generals (who commanded Pacific forces) believed their rhetoric.

Q: What are Malama Makua’s thoughts on the Army’s plan to now turn Makua into a roadside-bomb training site?

A: Our clients’ belief, and my personal belief, is that Makua is a very sacred, special place that just is not appropriate for training. I don’t think any rational military trainer in the 21st century would look around the state of Hawaii and say, “I’m going to train at Makua” if they hadn’t been there since World War II. I think it’s a legacy of past decisions made in a different age, with different knowledge and different sensibilities.

So I guess the short answer is there are other places where they can do this kind of training. To do the convoy exercise you basically need a road. There are plenty of roads on Army land at Schofield and Pohakuloa.

Now, the specifics of what’s being proposed are pretty much unknown at this point. My guess is that it is substantially less of an impact on the cultural sites and the endangered species than what they had been doing before, but to get back to my theme, information is vital and there hasn’t really been disclosure. I can just say, based on what I do know, that there are other places they can do it and Makua really ought to be returned to the people of the state of Hawaii for appropriate cultural and civilian use.

Q: Are you confident of that happening?

A: Before (the government’s 65-year lease for Makua expires in) 2029? My approach to the type of work that I do is that you have to be optimistic and idealistic, because that’s what keeps you going. But at the same time, you have to be realistic and keep your expectations low because that’s what keeps you from becoming discouraged. When you’re doing public interest environmental work, it’s always a long-term battle, it’s always an uphill battle, it’s never really over. So I do envision a return of Makua to the people of Hawaii as soon as possible. But I don’t expect it. I hope to be pleasantly surprised.

You have to remember that when Makua was originally taken for training in 1941, the families who lived there, the families who were evicted, were told that their land would be returned six months after the end of hostilities. They’re still waiting. So really, Makua has a history of very profound broken promises to the individual families and in a larger context to the people of Hawaii.

Q: Does Earthjustice have any problem with live-fire training at Pohakuloa?

A: My understanding is that the Army has started an environmental review process, where from the beginning they’ve admitted the need for an environmental impact statement — so there’s been progress over the years — and that they’re doing a review of locations of alternate training facilities to Pohakuloa. It is hard to find a place in the state of Hawaii to do live-fire military training that is not going to cause damage. It is by its very nature a destructive activity. You’re practicing war.

Am I OK with them training at Pohakuloa? That’s not really the lens that I look at it through. I look at it through this lens: If the Army is going to do a certain type of training, where can they do it with the least impact?

Q: As far as returning Makua to Hawaii and having it open to civilians again, do you have a sense of how much unexploded ordnance might still be there and how much clean-up it would take?

A: Well, one of the things we were able to secure through a settlement agreement in 2001, is an obligation for the Army now to be clearing unexploded ordnance from the valley. Normally, the Army has a policy that live training ranges don’t get cleaned up until they’re actually closed. But as part of our settlement we said, “We don’t want you to wait until you’re ready to leave, we want you to start cleaning up now.” So there have been 1,000-pound bombs, 250-pound bombs, a lot of heavy ordnance that has already been pulled out of there. Now they tend to find a mortar round here, a mortar round there.

Compared to Kahoolawe, the entire military reservation’s about 4,100 acres. The flat lands where people would want to carry out cultural activities, maybe start farming again, is a much, much smaller area. So I think it would be manageable.

A partial win for Makua, but struggle far from over

Yesterday, the Army announced that it will end live fire training in Makua valley. This is a win for those who have struggled for many years to save Makua from the destructive and contaminating activities of the U.S. military. The Honolulu Star Advertiser ran a story and so did the Associated Press.

However, it is only a partial victory.

The Army continues to hold Makua hostage and plans to use the valley for other kinds of training. Furthermore, the Army is shifting the bulk of its training to Schofield in Lihu’e, O’ahu and Pohakuloa on Hawai’i island. This is consistent with the recent announcement of a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for expanding or renovating training facilities at Pohakuloa.

This was never a “Not-In-My-Back-Yard” movement. Trading one ‘aina for another is not acceptable. Furthermore, it leaves unchallenged the very premise that the training is needed. Training for what purpose? To invade and occupy other countries? Inflict death and destruction in the name of Pax Americana?

The movement to protect Makua moves into a challenging phase as we now push for the cleanup and return of the land. The Army is hoping that non-live fire training will be less likely to inflame community anger. By removing a major flashpoint, the Army hopes to deflate the momentum of the movement. It is more difficult to sustain high levels of energy around the technical and tedious clean up and restoration of a site. So we must be inspired by our vision of the alternative we hope to grow in Makua.

Every gain we make in Makua owes to the thousands in Hawai’i and around the world who have come forward to malama ‘aina, speak out, protest, pray and grow the peaceful and blessed community we wish to see in the world.  The Makua movement must not forget its kuleana to the many people who have stood in solidarity with us, as we continue to stand and speak out in solidarity with others.

>><<

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20110113_Army_ends_live-fire_training_at_Makua.html

Army ends live-fire training at Makua

After decades of opposition to bombing the valley, real ordnance will be used only at Schofield and Pohakuloa

By William Cole

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Jan 13, 2011

The last company of soldiers may have stormed the hills of Makua Valley with M-4 rifles blazing, artillery whistling overhead, mortars pounding mock enemy positions and helicopters firing from above.

After battling environmentalists and Hawaiian cultural practitioners since at least the late 1980s, the Army said this week it is acceding to community concerns and no longer will use the heavy firepower in Makua that started multiple fires in the 4,190-acre Waianae Coast valley and fueled a number of lawsuits.

In place of the company Combined Arms Live-Fire Exercises, known as CALFEXes, the Army said it is moving ahead with a plan to turn Makua into a “world class” roadside-bomb and counterinsurgency training center with convoys along hillside roads, simulated explosions and multiple “villages” to replicate Afghanistan.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

California study shows low levels of perchlorate affect infants

A new study shows newborns in perchlorate contaminated areas have a 50% chance of having impaired thyroid function. Perchlorate is an oxidizer used in rocket propellant that attacks the thyroid. It has been detected in groundwater in Nohili, Kaua’i near the caves where munitions are stored. I think it was also detected in Schofield (Lihu’e). The levels detected in Hawai’i were below the federal limit (around 25 parts per billion) but above the California limit (5 ppb).   Needless to say, when asked about conducting further investigations and cleaning  up the contamination, the military dismissed the perchlorate contamination as insignificant. The Department of Defense has fought efforts to set tougher standards for perchlorate.  Here’s an excerpt from a Press Enterprise article on the California infant health study:

A new analysis by state scientists found that low levels of a rocket fuel chemical common in Inland drinking water supplies appear to be more harmful to newborn babies than previously believed, prompting calls for a tougher limit for tap water.

Scientists with the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment examined records of blood samples drawn from the heels of 497,458 newborns in 1998 as part of a California disease-screening program.

The researchers found that the babies born in areas where tap water was contaminated with perchlorate — including babies in Riverside and San Bernardino — had a 50 percent chance of having a poorly performing thyroid gland, said Dr. Craig Steinmaus, lead author of the study published in this month’s Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

The Abercrombie administration, Mo’olelo Aloha ‘Aina and other news briefs

Governor Elect Neil Abercrombie announced the appointment of William Aila to the position of Chair of the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), an important post that covers protection of the environment and cultural resources, including Native Hawaiian sacred places and burials.  Aila is the harbormaster of the Wai’anae Boat Harbor, a community activist on Native Hawaiian and environmental issues and a leader in efforts to protect and reclaim Makua Valley from the Army.  This could be a good development for groups seeking stronger state protection of iwi kupuna (ancestral remains) and working to end military destruction of Hawaiian land in Makua and other locations in Hawai’i.  In the past, Abercrombie has urged the Army to find alternatives to training at Makua. So let’s hope that the appointment of Alia to head DLNR signals a commitment to fulfill that promise.  At the same time, we must ensure that other locations such as Pohakuloa, Lihu’e or Kahuku are not sacrificed to further military expansion as the trade off for Makua.  Remember that the Stryker expansion involves the Army seizing an additional 25,000 acres of land, whereas, Makua is about 5000 acres.

However, Abercrombie has also built his reputation in Congress by securing military spending in Hawai’i, much of it related to construction projects to intensify the military presence in Hawai’i.  As Hawai’i Business reports, key elements of Abercrombie’s economic recovery plan include military spending:

• Again, using federal dollars, and particularly spending by the Defense Department, build a “21st-century” infrastructure in areas such as energy, information, irrigation and rail transit.

• Make technology and innovation a backbone of the economy, including a stronger emphasis on dual-use technology businesses, which create technology for the military that can also be used in civilian applications.

We need to ensure that this new administration does not make Hawai’i more dependent on and subservient to the military-industrial complex.

The military presence in Hawai’i also brings dangers to the communities and the troops themselves. The toxic legacy of Agent Orange still destroys the lives of US troops as well as Vietnamese.  The University of Hawai’i has the dubious distinction of helping to develop and test Agent Organge in the 1960s. Several UH workers who worked on the project were exposed to the toxin and allegedly died from health effects of the exposure.  A new project Make Agent Orange History partnered with the Matsunage Institute for Peace to conduct a mock dialogue on Agent Orange.   I am not clear what the outcome of the project will be.   We have current issues with Agent Orange contamination on Kaua’i and Depleted Uranium contamination on O’ahu and Hawai’i island. I hope the Matsunaga Institute will become more active in seeking the clean up and restoration of these sites and prevention of further military contamination of the ‘aina.

Military accidents are another danger.  In 2006 two U.S. soldiers died as a result of a mortar blast at Pohakuloa.  The families of the soldiers sued the manufacturer, General Dynamic, the same company that makes the Stryker combat vehicle. The jury in the civil suit recently found that General Dynamics was not liable for the deaths:

An 81 mm mortar round that misfired in 2006, killing a 27-year-old Schofield Barracks soldier at the Big Island’s Pohakuloa Training Area, was not defective, a jury in a federal civil trial determined yesterday.

A new online educational resource project of the Hawaiian independence group MANA has been launched. Mo’olelo Aloha ‘Aina is now online.  It includes oral histories of activists from key Hawaiian struggles of the past 30-40 years, including the Protect Kaho’olawe ‘Ohana. Here’s the announcement and link:

Aloha,

Check out this new website with stories and mana’o from kanaka aloha aina who have been involved in different land struggles in Hawai’i! The Moolelo Aloha Aina project website is at: http://moolelo.manainfo.com/

Here’s a little bit about the project:

The Moolelo Aloha Aina project gathers oral histories of Aloha Aina activists who have engaged in direct action land struggles in Hawaii.  It is intended to be an educational resource for anyone to use.  As a project of MANA (Movement for Aloha no ka ‘Aina), we hope it will inspire new generations to become active in protecting and caring for the ‘aina.

The project creators started by interviewing some key people from a few struggles from the 1970s–Kahoolawe, Kalama Valley and Waiahole-Waikane. You can catch mana’o from Soli Niheu, Pete Thompson, Emmett Aluli, and Walter, Loretta and Scarlett Ritte, on the site, among others.

Since the website is intended to be a living archive, the creators encourage filmmakers or anyone with a video camera to get involved by contributing to the archive. The project coordinators are also looking to collaborate with educators to help increase the young people’s awareness of the legacy of activism that is such an integral part of Hawaiian history and current reality.

You can check out a digital story (a short video) describing the project at: http://vimeo.com/16689150

Please feel free to spread the word by forwarding this message!