Former Army officer sentenced for embezzling $400,000 from government

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20100112/BREAKING01/100112070/Former+Schofield+captain+sentenced+in++400+000+embezzlement

Updated at 5:35 p.m., Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Former Schofield captain sentenced in $400,000 embezzlement

Advertiser Staff

Former Schofield Barracks Army Capt. David S. Gilliam, 39, drew a 50-month federal prison sentence Tuesday for stealing government property while serving in Afghanistan in 2004-2005.

Senior U.S. District Judge Helen Gillmor also ordered Gilliam to repay $450,566 to the government.

Gilliam was convicted of theft of government property, money laundering and tax perjury.

Hawai’i U.S. Attorney Florence Nakakuni said Gilliam admitted to stealing some $400,000 while assigned as a disbursing officer at Kandahar Air Base in Afghanistan.

According to court records, Gilliam smuggled stolen cash back to Hawai’i in a duffle bag, converting some of the funds to a $254,000 cashier’s check.

He later took the stolen money with him when he moved to South Carolina and failed to report receipt of the money on his tax returns, according to Nakakuni’s office.

“Blackwatergate”

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/8/blackwatergate_private_military_firm_in_firestorm

“Blackwatergate”–Private Military Firm in Firestorm of Controversy over Involvements in Iraq, Afghanistan and Germany

Blackwater-graphic2

Blackwater is all over the news. In the last seventy-two hours, a series of breaking developments involving the notorious private military firm have come to light, ranging from their involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, and even Germany, as well as legal cases here at home. We speak with investigative journalist and Democracy Now! correspondent Jeremy Scahill and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), a leading member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, who is launching an investigation into why two Blackwater contractors were among the dead in the

December 30 suicide bombing at the CIA station at Forward Operating Base Chapman in Khost, Afghanistan.

Guests:

Jeremy Scahill, investigative journalist and Democracy Now! correspondent, author of the international bestseller Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army. He is a Puffin Foundation Writing Fellow at the Nation Institute.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D – IL), leading member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

JUAN GONZALEZ: Blackwater is all over the news. In the last seventy-two hours, a series of breaking developments involving the notorious private military firm have come to light, ranging from their involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, and even Germany, as well as legal cases here at home.

In the latest news, two former Blackwater operatives were arrested yesterday on murder charges stemming from their alleged involvement in the shooting deaths of two Afghan civilians in Kabul in May.

The news broke just hours after it was revealed Blackwater had reached a settlement with Iraqi victims of a string of shootings, including the Nisoor Square massacre, who had sued the company for what they called “senseless slaughter.” Blackwater is reportedly paying $100,000 for each of the Iraqis killed by its forces and between $20,000 to $30,000 to each Iraqi wounded. News of the settlement came a week after a federal judge dismissed manslaughter charges against five Blackwater operatives involved in the Nisoor Square massacre that killed seventeen Iraqi civilians.

Then, on Wednesday, prosecutors in Germany announced they had launched a preliminary investigation into a report that the CIA and Blackwater had planned a secret operation in 2004 to assassinate a German citizen in Hamburg with suspected ties to al-Qaeda.

AMY GOODMAN: And last but not least, Blackwater’s continued involvement with the CIA surfaced this week when it was revealed two Blackwater contractors were among the eight dead in the December 30th suicide bombing at the CIA station in Khost, Afghanistan. Last month, the CIA announced the agency had canceled its contract with Blackwater.

Illinois Representative Jan Schakowsky, a leading member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, says she’ll launch an investigation. Congress member Schakowsky joins us now on the phone from Washington, DC.

And we’re joined here in the studio by investigative journalist, Democracy Now! correspondent Jeremy Scahill, author of the international bestseller Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, Puffin Foundation Writing Fellow at the Nation Institute.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Jeremy, let’s begin with you. The piece you have in The Nation magazine says “Blackwater and the Khost Bombing: Is the CIA Deceiving Congress?” Two Blackwater operatives killed there?

JEREMY SCAHILL: My understanding is that there were two Blackwater operatives killed at this bombing—one was a former Navy Seal; the other was an Army master chief sergeant—and that there was a third Blackwater operative that was wounded in the blast, I understand from my sources.

Let’s remember here that this was the worst attack on a CIA base that we know about since the 1980s. And here you have three Blackwater guys in the center of this blast at the time. Now, we’re not sure what the role was of the Blackwater guys there. That’s what Representative Schakowsky is investigating right now. But let’s say for a moment that they were doing security, because Blackwater has, since 2002, had a contract with the CIA to do force protection in Afghanistan for the CIA. They not only guard static outposts of the CIA, but when CIA operatives move around the country, Blackwater guys travel with them as their security.

So if they were doing the security there, and you have, on their watch, this incredibly devastating attack, not just against some random CIA outpost in the middle of Canada or something, but against the epicenter of the forward operating maneuvers that the intelligence community of the US is engaged in to hunt down Ayman al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden, because this asset made it onto that base, we understand, claiming that he had just met with Ayman al-Zawahiri. So how is it that he walks in there with explosives? And then, I think that should be one of the things that’s investigated as Congresswoman Schakowsky takes this on.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, Congresswoman Schakowsky, your concerns about this latest report and what you’re hoping to look into?

REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY: You know, regardless of what the role that the Blackwater operatives were playing in this incident, why is the CIA, why is any unit of the government, the State Department, the Department of Defense—why would anyone hire this company, which is a repeat offender, threatening the mission of the United States, threatening, endangering the lives of American, well, CIA and military, and then—and also known to threaten and kill innocent civilians? It is just amazing to me, astonishing to me, that we still find Blackwater anywhere in the employ of the United States government at any place around the world.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, during the primaries, Hillary Clinton supported a ban on Blackwater. President Obama didn’t. How does that relate to what you’re introducing now, the legislation that you’re introducing?

REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY: Look, I’m introducing legislation called Stop Outsourcing Our Security, and the idea of that is that when we have mission-sensitive activities, inherently governmental functions in battle zones around the world, that we should have only people that bear the stamp of the United States government. And that means that that would include no private military contractors at all in those operations.

Now, look, when we have a situation where you can question whether or not these contractors can get away with murder—after all, this case against those shooters at Nisoor Square has been dismissed—hopefully that there will be another effort by the Justice Department to go after these people, because it was dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct, which is true. I think there were many mistakes made. But right now, these contractors are in a legal limbo. And so, if these individuals can get away with murder, imagine—you don’t have to imagine, you know what it does to our relations with the Iraqi government and with governments around the world. And now you’ve got a situation where Germany is asking, what were Blackwater people doing in Germany?

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, I’d like to ask you about that, in particular, Congresswoman. Here you have a situation not just of being involved in murder, but apparently of being involved in government-sanctioned assassination attempts. And that is being, to some degree, contracted out. Forget about whether the government should be involved in such a kind of assassination attempts, but to contract out that activity? That is really astounding.

REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY: This really is part of an ongoing investigation that I can’t talk about, but even the fact that there is that allegation, I think, gives one a picture of the degree to which Blackwater has been completely enmeshed in these secret operations. And, you know, at least the allegation that they are, I think is disturbing enough. And there is an investigation going on around activities, you know, like that.

AMY GOODMAN: Jeremy Scahill, what do you know about what happened?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Well, Erik Prince gave this interview to Vanity Fair magazine, and he gave the interview to a former CIA lawyer, Adam Ciralsky, who, himself, has had a history of doing what’s called “graymailing,” which is that you believe or you fear that the government is going to come after you in some way, and so you then leak parts of information about what it was that you were involved with, which is what Erik Prince was doing in that Vanity Fair article as a way of sort of saying to the government, “If you come after me, I’ll blow the whistle on all these things.”

One of the things, though, that came out in that article is that Erik Prince, shortly after 9/11, assembled, he claims, a team, a secret clandestine team for the CIA that trained not at any of the official CIA facilities, but at one of Erik Prince’s homes in Virginia. He trains this team, and then they deployed around the world. And they would go into countries, and, in the parlance of the intelligence community, they would go “in dark,” meaning that, in some cases, the CIA chief of station in the countries that they went into wasn’t even notified that they were going in there.

So, what Representative Schakowsky is talking about here, or, Juan, you were asking about, is that one of these operations allegedly took place in Hamburg, Germany, where a Blackwater-led team inserted inside of Germany to hunt down this man who was a Syrian-born naturalized citizen of Germany that had been alleged to have had connections with three of the 9/11 plotters. And they were doing what’s called—they were trying to find him, fix his location, and finish him off, is what they call it. And my understanding is that someone actually in government, not a Blackwater person, called off that operation, so the trigger was never pulled.

Another operation took place, we understand, inside of Dubai. And Erik Prince talks about working on covert operations inside of Syria, as well, where he was helping the Joint Special Operations Command, JSOC, the Special Forces, identify targets inside of Syria.

So all of this needs to be very deeply probed, because you have not only a situation where these hit teams are being contracted out, but the German politicians are now saying, What if the German intelligence outsourced to a private company assassination operations in New Orleans, in the United States? How would your government respond to this? So this could be a substantial diplomatic problem for the Obama administration, because the Merkel government is now starting to ask questions. Not just Green Party politicians, but today one of Angela Merkel’s biggest allies in Germany said that they’re probing it, and they want answers from Washington.

AMY GOODMAN: Congress member Schakowsky, what kind of support do you have from the White House on either of your efforts—the legislation to stop outsourcing or the investigation?

REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY: Well, we have met with various agencies about the issue of just the outsourcing of security issues and security matters in Afghanistan and in Iraq. And I think that the thing that’s really frightening is it seems that the United States military, the United States government, doesn’t have the capacity, at least when we talk about private security contractors, to do the job and seems to think that it is—makes us more agile and nimble to be able to contract out.

My question is, how many times do we have to—does the mission have to be endangered or do people have to be killed before we understand that it is so important for us to have people who are within the standard chain of command, where the accountability mechanisms are built in, who aren’t going to go rogue on us and do things that are improper? And so, so far, what we’re finding is that even in Iraq—and Jeremy was able to turn that up—that contracts that were supposed to be terminated continued because Blackwater had a capacity that even the United States government does not have.

This is a very unwholesome, unhealthy situation. We have to build that capacity, and we have to end this relationship with companies that don’t have the same standard of transparency and accountability as those who work directly for the United States of America.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And Jeremy, what about that Iraq situation, the Nisoor Square killings? There were some settlements that Blackwater has reached with some of the victims, but not all of them. And what’s been the reaction of the Iraqi government to the acquittals of the Blackwater people?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Well, first, on the settlement that was announced yesterday, we’re talking about not just the Nisoor Square massacre, but we’re also talking about six other incidents—the shooting of bodyguards at an Iraqi TV station, the killing of three other individuals shortly before Nisoor Square. And my understanding from sources is that the victims who—the families of people who died were paid somewhere in the ballpark of $100,000, and then injuries were compensated between $20,000 and $30,000. And then there were a couple of people that got more because of the nature of their injuries. But you’re talking about Blackwater getting—they get $1.5 billion in Iraq. Ninety percent of this company’s revenue comes from the US government. For them to pay, you know, five, six million dollars is chump change. In fact, one source that’s been involved with these cases told me that Blackwater got a real bargain here. And indeed, Blackwater released a statement saying that they were pleased with it, and it allows the company to get on with its business.

But one story that people are not really looking at, the way that these guys got off on these manslaughter charges for Nisoor Square is identical to the way that Oliver North got off on the criminal charges stemming from Iran-Contra, because they were granted immunity by the State Department immediately after the shooting. And so, the prosecutors then, from the Justice Department, had to use—could not use any information from the statements that they gave, because the had been promised immunity by the State Department. Why on earth did the State Department give these guys immunity? These were the prime suspects, and you give them an immunity that generally is reserved for people that you’re trying to flip as witnesses, not the actual suspects.

But I spoke to—and this is something no one’s reported yet—I spoke to a source with direct knowledge of the US military’s official investigation of Nisoor Square, and this source told me that military investigators had determined that it was a criminal event, that it was unprovoked fire, and—and this is what the important part is—and that military investigators had determined that those men who did the shooting at Nisoor Square were not entitled to immunity under the Bremer-era Order 17 that granted immunity to contractors, because they shot unprovoked civilians, which violated the terms of their contract, and had disobeyed orders from superiors not to leave a post where they were, meaning that they were not eligible for that immunity.

And the investigators determined that the appropriate legal venue would have been in Iraq, that the Iraqis should have been allowed to go and arrest those individuals, but they were secretly ferried out of Iraq in the dead of night by the State Department and Blackwater, taken to the US, where they then got off on murder—on manslaughter charges, on the same technicality that Oliver North got off on.

AMY GOODMAN: Could they be extradited?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Well, Scott Horton, who is an international and military law expert that you interviewed last week, I talked to him about this, and the United States and Iraq do have an extradition treaty of 1934. The Status of Forces Agreement gives Iraq jurisdiction. And if they were ineligible for Order 17 immunity, then Iraq could say that the appropriate place for their trial, now that you’ve failed to do it for technical reasons, would in fact be in Iraq.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And was that military determination done before they left the country or afterwards?

JEREMY SCAHILL: No, this was—the military started investigation within less than an hour of the last bullets being fired there. They went on the scene. They gathered forensic evidence. But this was an investigation that went on for months. And so, it’s not as though the military, you know, determined it within twenty-four hours and said, “Oh, wait a minute, we have to hand these guys over to Iraqis.” It was investigators looking and carefully and meticulously documenting this incident and then saying this was improper that they were removed from the country.

AMY GOODMAN: In the settlement, which is incredibly low, $100,000 per death, did some of the Iraqi families want to pull out?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Well, first of all, there is another lawsuit. There are other Iraqis that have different legal representation. And there’s a case that’s gotten no attention yet in the state of North Carolina. The man who was perhaps the single most prominent witness to the Nisoor Square shooting, he was driving a vehicle right behind the first vehicle that the Blackwater guys shot. His nine-year-old son was shot in the head. His head exploded on a van, on his cousins and other people in the vehicle. That man has retained counsel in North Carolina and is suing. That could be a very problematic case for Blackwater, because they’re not only suing Erik Prince of Blackwater, they’re suing the individual shooters in state court in North Carolina. So that could be the one that ends up actually going to trial.

There also—you could read it in the papers—there were—some of the plaintiffs in this case were very, very disappointed in the settlement that they got and felt that $100,000 for a death is a complete injustice.

AMY GOODMAN: Finally, the latest news of the two former Blackwater operatives who were arrested on murder charges stemming from the killing of two Afghans?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Remember, these killings took place under the Obama administration. And what’s significant about this is that the men who are alleged to have murdered—these second-degree murder charges with the indictment—two Afghan civilians were there as military trainers. These weren’t security operatives. The Obama administration is dramatically expanding the US training of Afghan forces, meaning that you’re going to have more of these types of guys on the ground. So these individuals were alleged to have opened fire unprovoked on a civilian vehicle, killing two people. They weren’t even—they weren’t guarding any diplomats. They weren’t even in the country to be guarding anyone. They were there as trainers. And yet, they’re involved with this incident that has caused some significant diplomatic problems between the US and the Karzai government.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Congresswoman Schakowsky, I’d like to ask you, finally, in terms of how, in your experience and—how the military is reacting to these continual problems with Blackwater and how it’s affecting its ability to continue its mission, whether it’s in Iraq or in Afghanistan?

REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY: Well, I think there’s a good deal of resentment, in general, toward the contractors. You know, the companies like Blackwater recruit out of the military. We train them. They take the highly skilled people, and they skim them off. They pay them a good deal more. They are indistinguishable often to the people on the ground, to the Iraqis or the Afghans, from people who are actually in the military. And yet, they conduct themselves in a much more reckless way and—often, not always. And so, I think that the military itself—I’m talking now not about necessarily the top brass, but—would appreciate the fact if the jobs were done by the military themselves, as opposed to hiring out these companies who have proven themselves to be so unreliable and dangerous.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to leave it there. Congress member Jan Schakowsky, leading member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, thanks for joining us from Washington, DC. And Jeremy Scahill, thank you so much for your work, investigative journalist, author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, and Democracy Now! correspondent.

Schofield Barracks soldier arrested in Kahala store robbery

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20100107/BREAKING01/100107029/Schofield+Barracks+soldier+arrested+in+Kahala+store+robbery

Updated at 10:38 a.m., Thursday, January 7, 2010

Schofield Barracks soldier arrested in Kahala store robbery

Advertiser Staff

A 22-year-old Schofield Barracks soldier was arrested yesterday in connection with an early-morning robbery of a convenience store in Kahala.

An employee told police the man entered the store at 12:43 a.m., pulled out a knife, demanded cash and left.

At about 9 a.m., a patrol officer spotted a man in the area where the robbery took place. The clothing the man wearing was similar to that worn by the robber, police said.

The store employee later identified the man and he was arrested on suspicion of first-degree robbery.

Another KBR worker raped at base in Iraq

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6762491.html

KBR worker reportedly raped at base in Iraq

Houston-based firm helping Army investigation

By JAMES PINKERTON

HOUSTON CHRONICLE

Dec. 9, 2009, 11:14PM

An American woman working for Houston-based KBR at a U.S. military base in Iraq was reportedly raped and beaten so badly by a base worker she had to be hospitalized, and while KBR officials declined to provide details, they confirmed Wednesday they are cooperating in a military criminal investigation.

U.S. military officials in Iraq confirmed the Nov. 30 attack, but few details were available, including the woman’s hometown, her age or her current medical condition.

“We’ve got initial reports down here. All we know is that an incident did occur” and that it involved the rape of an American woman working for KBR at Joint Base Balad, said Lt. Brian Wierz­bicki, desk officer at the Multi-National Forces press office in Baghdad. A detailed request for information to U.S. military investigators in Iraq had not been returned as of press time.

The report of the incident at the base north of Baghdad is the latest in a series of complaints of sexual harassment and assault by women working for the international construction and services contractor.

A spokeswoman for KBR at company headquarters in Houston would not comment on the incident or provide information about the employee, but said they are cooperating with investigators in the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command.

“Army CID is the lead investigating agency for this alleged incident and as such KBR cannot comment. Any further query should be directed to Army CID. KBR is cooperating with the investigation,” said Heather Browne, KBR’s di

Court says death-row inmate’s military service is relevant for sentencing

The Supreme Court said that the military service of a convicted death-row murderer should have been considered in his sentencing because “Our nation has a long tradition of according leniency to veterans in recognition of their service, especially for those who fought on the front lines as Porter did.”  While I oppose the death penalty, I was struck by the irony that the country trains troops to kill, sends them to combat, neglects them when they return and then ‘honors’ their service by granting leniency when they commit a capital offense.

>><<

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/30/AR2009113003791.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Death-row inmate’s military service is relevant, justices say

Court faults lawyer for not presenting mitigating evidence

By Robert Barnes

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

The Supreme Court gave hope Monday to a Korean War veteran on Florida’s death row, saying courts should take note of his battlefield bravery and likely post-traumatic stress in weighing whether he deserves to be executed for the murders he later committed.

In an unsigned opinion without dissent, the justices were strikingly sympathetic to George Porter, who shot his former girlfriend and her new boyfriend in 1986. The court faulted Porter’s attorney for not detailing his military service to the jury considering whether he should receive the death penalty, and said lower courts should have recognized that such information could have swayed the outcome.

“Our nation has a long tradition of according leniency to veterans in recognition of their service, especially for those who fought on the front lines as Porter did,” the justices wrote.

“Moreover, the relevance of Porter’s extensive combat experience is not only that he served honorably under extreme hardship and gruesome conditions, but also that the jury might find mitigating the intense stress and mental and emotional toll that combat took on Porter.”

The court said Porter, now 77, returned from Korea “a traumatized, changed man.”

Like most death penalty cases that take more than 20 years to reach the Supreme Court, Porter’s legal journey is complicated. He represented himself in the murder trial, and his standby counsel took over at the penalty phase.

But the lawyer said Porter was fatalistic and uncooperative, and he did not present to the jury potentially mitigating evidence about Porter’s abusive childhood, his military service and the trauma it caused, or a serious alcohol problem.

The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Porter’s death sentence. And even though a federal judge agreed with Porter when he took his appeals to that level, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit backed the Florida court.

The justices on Monday said the appeals court was wrong to defer to Florida courts. They said that the decision of Porter’s counsel not to present more evidence to mitigate the crime “did not reflect reasonable professional judgment” and that the Florida Supreme Court’s decision that it would not have made a difference was “unreasonable.”

The court returned the case to the 11th Circuit, presumably for it to order a new sentencing. The court’s order did not cast doubt on Porter’s conviction.

The court was neither briefed nor heard arguments about the case, and it is unclear how far-reaching the opinion might be for others. It is one in a series of a death-penalty cases the justices have dealt with this term in which ineffective counsel has been alleged; in others, it has sided with the state against the accused.

But the court seemed to go out of its way in Porter’s case to move beyond the issue of counsel to express the seriousness with which it views post-traumatic stress disorder.

In a footnote, it cited the testimony of Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric K. Shinseki that nearly a quarter of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans seeking treatment at a VA medical facility had received PTSD diagnoses. In another, it noted that California and Minnesota had set up special sentencing proceedings for those who alleged their crimes were influenced by PTSD.

The case is Porter v. McCollum.

Dandelions: a poem about military rape

Dandelions

Jerrica Escoto

Click this link to hear Jerrica perform Dandelions

David is 19

Doesn’t know anything else besides the hard exterior of his bullet proof vest

And skills that those video games weren’t gangster enough to teach him.

David has a single mother who couldn’t afford his higher education

And a dream that fell into a pipe long before he even had a chance to realize he had it

They turned David’s skin inside out when he enlisted

Told him his insides need to be just as hard as metal bullets piercing young skin

No time for sissy play during war-time, they say.

His mother keeps his kindergarten picture underneath her pillow

And she swears, some nights she can feel him quivering

Sometimes she can feel the scars under her wrists pulsating

Because this isn’t what she wanted for him either.

I built him to be more than this, she says.

Yuko is 16

She doesn’t know anything else besides the fragility of her own reflection

And fear that is heard in her back and forth as she roams through Okinawa, Japan.

Yuko’s mother wishes she married an American

So she took her dreams and turned them into seeds

Implanted it inside of her womb

The night Yuko was conceived

Grew gardens of expectations the day she was born

And blew dandelions into Yuko’s hair

With silent wishes for her to marry a white or black G.I.

Save yourself for a soldier, she’d say.

Yuko remembers David

She remembers walking home from school

Past the bar

That only rumors talked about

And the whiskey on David’s breath that he signed off as his excuse

She can still feel the soreness in between her legs from

When he took his fingers

And inscribed “America, the beautiful” deep inside her thighs

As a reminder for her to know where he came…on

With the “Star Spangled Banner” blaring on his breath

He took her fluid dreams he wished he had

Used it as lubrication

As he forced her legs wide open

telling her maybe the more you spread her legs

The more miles she’ll gain to get out of here

Out of this room

With broken angels

Cutting off their wings to fan the ugly out of this room

With this boy who was never taught to be better

And this girl

Who’s body never had a chance to be more

David makes the mistake of looking into Yuko’s eyes

Just as she was desperately blinking in Morse Code to stop

And suddenly, the skills he learned begins to matter

He suddenly begins to understand her

He starts remembering

Now his kindergarten picture under his mother’s pillow can’t stop shaking

So he took his adhesive tongue and stuck a secret apology letter over the outside of her mouth

With “PS: When I was a kid, I wanted to be a firefighter. Not a monster.”

All the while, Yuko thinks this couldn’t be it

This ain’t the type of soldier that mama meant

Doesn’t give two shits

About the irrelevant letter that was pasted on her face

Doesn’t give two shits about his hidden good intentions

They won’t bring back her innocence

No matter the effort

No matter the sorry he slobbered behind it

He still took his dirty tongue

And cemented dead words over her mouth

To keep her silent.

Copyright 2009 Jerrica Escoto

Source: http://usmvaw.com/media/dandelions/

Schofield (#1) and Kaneohe (#10) make top ten most dangerous military towns in the country

The Daily Finance blog reports that two Hawai’i military towns rank among the ten most dangerous in the country.  Schofield Barracks came out on top with a property crime rate that is 20 times the national average.   Kaneohe Marine Corps Base ranks number ten.

>><<

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/11/16/most-dangerous-military-towns/

High crimes: 10 military towns are among the country’s most dangerous

Bruce Watson
Nov 16th 2009 at 6:00AMMilitary bases and the neighborhoods surrounding them often seem like the ultimate refuge of middle-American values. Run with military efficiency and discipline, the well-trimmed yards, cleanly-paved roads and orderly layouts convey an ideal image of life as it should be: safe, peaceful and friendly.

Topping the list of America’s ten worst military neighborhoods is Hawaii’s Schofield Barracks. The area has an estimated 759 property crimes per 1,000 people — more than 20 times the national average of 34 per 1,000 residents and fifteen times Hawaii’s average. As a result, NeighborhoodScout ranks it as one of the worst neighborhoods in the country. Yet, Schofield Barracks’s crime wave is largely comprised of property crimes, not violent crimes. While its property crime rate is more than twenty times the national average, its violent crime rate is (a comparatively minor) 49% higher than the median. This suggests that the large crime jumps in the area are more likely to involve robbery, theft, and motor vehicle theft.

Similarly, the second-ranked neighborhood, the Patton Road area near Alabama’s Redstone Arsenal, has an estimated property crime rate of 691 per 1,000 residents. The remaining eight military neighborhoods — Indiana’s Grissom AFB, an area near Texas’ Lackland AFB, Mississippi’s Meridian Naval Air Station, a predominantly-military neighborhood located near South Carolina’s defunct Myrtle Beach AFB, California’s Presidio of Monterey, Louisiana’s England AFB, Washington’s Ault Field, and Hawaii’s Kaneohe Station — range between 410 and 155 property crimes per 1,000 residents.

However, as the horrific shootings in Fort Hood demonstrate, this perception of structure and normalcy may be deceptive. According to a study by NeighborhoodScout, which offers neighborhood-by-neighborhood crime analyses, some of America’s military towns have crime levels that place them among the country’s most dangerous neighborhoods. While the danger in these areas is much more heavily skewed toward property crimes like vandalism and theft than violent crimes like murder or rape, the statistics are startling.

So why do these ten neighborhoods have such high crime rates? According to Andrew Schiller, founder and president of NeighborhoodScout, the answer may lie in the demographics of the American military. Military bases tend to have high concentrations of young, single men living together in very close quarters. Schiller has also found similar property crime spikes in other areas — like college student neighborhoods — that have large concentrations of single males living together. One possible explanation for these surges in crime rates could be that young men, separated from their parents, wives, families and communities, may feel more temptation to commit certain types of crimes.

Ironically, NeighborhoodScout reports that military neighborhoods as a whole tend to be considerably safer than most of the country. America has 300 neighborhoods in which at least 20% of the population is in the military. In these areas, the median property crime rate is 32 per 1,000 residents, which is 7% below the national average. The violent crime rate is even more striking: at 1.55 crimes per 1,000 residents, it is an impressive 67% lower than the average.

To find out how NeighborhoodScout came up with these numbers, read its methodology. Also, to see its disclaimer, click here.

Note to our readers: An earlier version of this story suggested that the military neighborhood in the Kings Highway/Howard Parkway area of Myrtle Beach was related to the Myrtle Beach AFB. However, as some commenters pointed out, this base has been closed since 1993. We have clarified in the story that NeighborhoodScout included the Kings Highway/Howard Parkway neighborhood because it is a predominantly-military area, with a population that is more than 20% military. As such, we have chosen to include it in our list of America’s most dangerous military neighborhoods.

NYT article about Okinawan opposition to U.S. bases

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/world/asia/12okinawa.html?_r=1

Okinawans Grow Impatient With Dashed Hopes on U.S. Base

By MARTIN FACKLER

Published: November 11, 2009

GINOWAN, Japan — Okinawans like Zenji Shimada, who have spent most of their lives under the thudding of helicopters from a busy American air base, are accustomed to disappointment. Decades of complaints about the base here and others on the island have gone largely unheeded, and a painstakingly negotiated plan to move the Marines from populated areas remains years from completion.

 

Many Okinawans oppose the American air base now in the city of Ginowan, as well as plans to move it to Henoko, where ribbons expressed their stance.

This summer was no different. Hopes stirred by the election of a new Democratic Party government were quickly dashed after members of the administration of the incoming prime minister, Yukio Hatoyama, backed away from the party’s pre-election promises to move the base off the island.

“We feel like Mr. Hatoyama has been jerking us around,” said Mr. Shimada, 69, a Protestant pastor who joined a lawsuit against the base.

When President Obama visits Tokyo on Friday as part of a weeklong tour of Asia, the base issue is perhaps the most prominent of several he will face as the countries’ long-close relations enter a new period of uncertainty. While Mr. Hatoyama has affirmed that the military alliance with the United States remains the cornerstone of Japanese foreign policy, he has also called for ending Japan’s “overdependence” on Washington and reorienting his nation toward a resurgent Asia.

“Japan-American relations have entered a new stage that people don’t really understand yet,” said Masaaki Gabe, a professor of international relations at Okinawa’s University of the Ryukyus. “Japan feels a lot of uncertainty about the future in Asia, but it also feels like it doesn’t have to follow quite so closely behind the United States.”

As the two nations search for a new balance, the fate of the base, the sprawling United States Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, has taken on heightened significance. Futenma has occupied the center of Ginowan, a city of 92,000, since it was built on land seized in the closing days of World War II.

It was this base, with its busy runway lying adjacent to homes and a university and its flight paths running directly over crowded neighborhoods, that Washington initially agreed to move in 1996 after a public outcry over the rape of a 12-year-old schoolgirl by three American servicemen.

Washington wants to proceed with a 2006 agreement to move the Marines to a less heavily populated part of Okinawa by 2014. But Mr. Hatoyama’s party is now backtracking, saying it may seek to renegotiate the deal. Mr. Hatoyama has postponed making a formal decision until after local Okinawan elections in January.

The airfield still operates in this densely populated city, 13 years after the initial deal, because of bureaucratic foot-dragging and Tokyo’s inability to find another community to take the Marines. Public clamor for the base’s removal surged again after a Marine cargo helicopter crashed in 2004 in a fireball on the neighboring campus of Okinawa International University, injuring three crew members.

Today, the university has turned the crash site into a small shrine by preserving a burned tree trunk and a concrete wall cleaved by the falling helicopter’s propeller.

For many Okinawans, Futenma has become the most visible symbol of an unfair burden placed on the island, home to about two-thirds of the 37,000 shore-based United States military personnel in Japan. On Sunday, 21,000 protesters gathered in Ginowan to demand that Mr. Hatoyama fulfill his party’s earlier promises to move the base off Okinawa.

“Our fight against the injustice of these bases has been going on ever since the Battle of Okinawa” in World War II, said Ginowan’s mayor, Yoichi Iha, one of the protest’s organizers. “The backlash will also be huge if the Democratic government reneges on its promises.”

His sentiments, and those of many here, are written in English across the roof of its city hall, for American aviators to see: “Don’t Fly Over Our City!” Mr. Iha said he was demanding the base’s removal from the island because he did not want to shift his city’s burden onto another Okinawan community.

Indeed, the 2006 deal to move the Marines to a V-shaped airfield to be constructed near the fishing village of Henoko only angered many Okinawans, who see the continued American presence as a symbol of Tokyo’s neglect of the island, which was part of the independent Ryukyu Kingdom before annexation by Japan in the 1870s.

Okinawans said they felt betrayed last month when a Democratic leader, Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada, seemed to reverse his party’s longstanding promise to move the base off Okinawa, saying such a move would be too time-consuming. Mr. Okada said that instead he wanted to consider moving the Marines to a larger United States Air Force base on Okinawa, a plan that both nations had already rejected.

Anger here also runs high at the Obama administration after Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates’s visit to Tokyo in October to press for the existing deal for a move to Henoko. When Mr. Gates warned that any changes might undo a broader agreement with Washington to move about 8,000 Marines to Guam, he was criticized in the Japanese news media as a bully.

Officially, the White House has said it wants to give the new government time to assess its predecessor’s policies. But there have been concerns in Washington and Tokyo, voiced last week in an editorial by the conservative Yomiuri Shimbun, Japan’s largest daily newspaper, that what it called Mr. Hatoyama’s indecision was eroding trust between the allies.

Not all Ginowan residents are against the base. Manami Onaga, 40, who helps manage a 1950s-theme diner selling hamburgers and tacos outside Futenma’s main gate, said the Marines brought Ginowan needed jobs and money. Okinawa had Japan’s lowest per capita annual income in 2006, less than half of Tokyo’s $45,000, according to the Cabinet Office.

But more seem to agree with Mr. Shimada, the pastor.

“Obama promised change, and that’s what we want,” Mr. Shimada said. “We want him to recognize the problems that his country’s military is inflicting on us.”

Did Blackwater try to bribe Iraqi officials after killing 17 Iraqi civilians?

The NY Times reports that top executives of Blackwater, the notorious mercenary corporation now known as Xe, tried to bribe Iraqi officials to mitigate the political fallout for the murder of 17 Iraqi civilians by Blackwater employees.

>><<

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/world/middleeast/11blackwater.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=all

Blackwater Said to Pursue Bribes to Iraq After 17 Died

By MARK MAZZETTI and JAMES RISEN

Published: November 10, 2009

WASHINGTON — Top executives at Blackwater Worldwide authorized secret payments of about $1 million to Iraqi officials that were intended to silence their criticism and buy their support after a September 2007 episode in which Blackwater security guards fatally shot 17 Iraqi civilians in Baghdad, according to former company officials.

Blackwater approved the cash payments in December 2007, the officials said, as protests over the deadly shootings in Nisour Square stoked long-simmering anger inside Iraq about reckless practices by the security company’s employees. American and Iraqi investigators had already concluded that the shootings were unjustified, top Iraqi officials were calling for Blackwater’s ouster from the country, and company officials feared that Blackwater might be refused an operating license it would need to retain its contracts with the State Department and private clients, worth hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

Four former executives said in interviews that Gary Jackson, who was then Blackwater’s president, had approved the bribes and that the money was sent from Amman, Jordan, where the company maintains an operations hub, to a top manager in Iraq. The executives, though, said they did not know whether the cash was delivered to Iraqi officials or the identities of the potential recipients.

Blackwater’s strategy of buying off the government officials, which would have been illegal under American law, created a deep rift inside the company, according to the former executives. They said that Cofer Black, who was then the company’s vice chairman and a former top C.I.A. and State Department official, learned of the plan from another Blackwater manager while he was in Baghdad discussing compensation for families of the shooting victims with United States Embassy officials.

Alarmed about the secret payments, Mr. Black cut short his talks and left Iraq. Soon after returning to the United States, he confronted Erik Prince, the company’s chairman and founder, who did not dispute that there was a bribery plan, according to a former Blackwater executive familiar with the meeting. Mr. Black resigned the following year.

Stacy DeLuke, a spokeswoman for the company, now called Xe Services, dismissed the allegations as “baseless” and said the company would not comment about former employees. Mr. Black did not respond to telephone calls and e-mail messages seeking comment.

Reached by phone, Mr. Jackson, who resigned as president early this year, criticized The New York Times and said, “I don’t care what you write.”

The four former Blackwater executives, who had held high-ranking posts at the company, would speak only on condition of anonymity. Two of them said they took part in talks about the payments; the two others said they had been told by several Blackwater officials about the discussions. In agreeing to describe those conversations, the four officials said that they were troubled by a pattern of questionable conduct by Blackwater, which had led them to leave the company.

A senior State Department official said that American diplomats were not aware of any payoffs to Iraqi officials.

Blackwater continued operating as the prime contractor providing security for the United States Embassy in Baghdad until spring, when the Iraqi government said it would deny the company an operating license. The State Department replaced Blackwater with a rival in May, but the company still does some work for the department in Iraq on a temporary basis.

Five Blackwater guards involved in the shooting are facing federal manslaughter charges, and their trial is scheduled to start in February in Washington. A sixth guard pleaded guilty in December. The company has never faced criminal charges in the case, although the Iraqi victims brought a civil lawsuit in federal court against Blackwater and Mr. Prince.

Separately, a federal grand jury in North Carolina, where the company has its headquarters, has been conducting a lengthy investigation into it. One of the former executives said that he had told federal prosecutors there about the plan to pay Iraqi officials to drop their inquiries into the Nisour Square case. If Blackwater followed through, the company or its officials could face charges of obstruction of justice and violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bans bribes to foreign officials.

Officials at the United States Attorney’s Office in Raleigh declined to comment on their investigation, and it is not clear whether the payment scheme is a focus of the grand jury.

Federal prosecutors in North Carolina have interviewed a number of former Blackwater employees about a variety of issues, including allegations of weapons smuggling, according to several former employees who say they have testified before the grand jury or been interviewed by prosecutors, as well as lawyers familiar with the matter. Two former employees have pleaded guilty to weapons charges and are believed to be cooperating with prosecutors.

Since 2001, Blackwater has undergone explosive growth, not only from security contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also from classified work for the Central Intelligence Agency that included taking part in a now defunct program to assassinate leaders of Al Qaeda and to load missiles on Predator drones.

The Nisour Square shooting was the bloodiest and most controversial episode involving Blackwater in the Iraq war. At midday on Sept. 16, 2007, a Blackwater convoy opened fire on Iraqi civilians in the crowded intersection, spraying automatic weapons fire in ways that investigators later claimed was indiscriminate, and even launching grenades into a nearby school. Seventeen Iraqis were killed and dozens more were wounded.

The matter set off an international outcry and intense debates in Iraq and the United States over the role of private contractors in war zones. Many Iraqis condemned Blackwater, which they had long seen as an arrogant rogue operation, and Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki declared that the Blackwater shooting was a challenge to his nation’s sovereignty. His government opened investigations into the episode and previous fatal shootings by Blackwater guards, and threatened to bar the company from operating in the country.

Those responses deeply worried Blackwater officials. Before the Nisour Square shootings, the company had operated in Iraq without a license largely because the Iraqi government had never enforced the rules. Being blocked from the country would have been costly — the State Department deal was Blackwater’s single biggest contract. From 2004 through today, the company has collected more than $1.5 billion for its work protecting American diplomats and providing air transportation for them inside Iraq.

“It would hurt us,” Mr. Prince, the chairman, said in an interview in January about losing the diplomatic security contract. “It would not be a mortal blow, but it would hurt us.”

The former Blackwater executives said it was not clear who proposed paying off Iraqi officials. But after Mr. Jackson, the former company president, approved the plan, the cash for the payoffs was taken from Amman and given to Rich Garner, then a top manager in Iraq, the former executives said. One of those executives said that officials in Iraq’s Interior Ministry, which is responsible for operating licenses, were the intended recipients.

Mr. Garner, who still works for the company, could not be reached for comment. The former executives said they did not know whether Mr. Garner was involved in decisions about the bribery scheme.

At that time, Mr. Black was in a series of discussions with Patricia A. Butenis, the deputy chief of mission at the American Embassy in Baghdad, about compensation payments to the Nisour Square victims. According to former Blackwater officials, Mr. Black was furious when he learned that the payoff money was being funneled into Iraq, and he swiftly broke off the talks with Ms. Butenis.

“We are out of here,” Mr. Black told a colleague, one former executive said. After returning to the United States, Mr. Black and Robert Richer, who had also joined Blackwater after a C.I.A. career, separately confronted Mr. Prince with their concerns about the plan, one former Blackwater executive said.

Mr. Richer left Blackwater in February 2008, followed by Mr. Black several months later, amid a battle inside Blackwater between former C.I.A. officers working at the company’s office outside Washington and executives at Blackwater’s headquarters in North Carolina.

The former officials said that Mr. Black, Mr. Richer and others believed that Blackwater had cultivated a cowboy culture that was contemptuous of government rules and regulations, and that some of the company’s leaders — former members of the Navy Seals including Mr. Prince and Mr. Jackson — had pushed the boundaries of legality. Contacted by telephone, Mr. Richer would not discuss specifics of why he left the company.

Ms. Butenis, now the United States ambassador to Sri Lanka, declined to comment for this article. But other State Department officials confirmed that embassy officials had met with Blackwater executives to encourage them to compensate the victims of Nisour Square.

The United States military had a well-established program for paying families of civilian victims of American military operations, but at the time of the Nisour Square shooting, the State Department did not have a similar program, officials said.

In interviews, three Iraqis wounded in Nisour Square said that Blackwater had made payments of several thousand dollars to them and other victims. Still, some of them joined the civil lawsuit against Blackwater. Settlement talks collapsed Tuesday, according to Susan Burke, a lawyer for the victims.

Even after the furor that was set off by the shootings, State Department officials made it clear that they did not believe they could operate in Baghdad without Blackwater, and Iraqi officials eventually dropped their public demands for the company’s immediate ouster.

Raed Jarrar, the Iraq consultant to the American Friends Service Committee, said in a recent interview that the Maliki government had gone too easy on Blackwater. “They had two different messages,” he said. “The Iraqi public, and even the Iraqi Parliament, was told that all private contractors would be pulled out of the country, while the contractors and the State Department were told the opposite.”

In late 2008, the Bush administration and the Iraqi government hammered out an agreement governing the role of security contractors in Iraq. Under the new rules, security contractors lost their immunity from Iraqi laws, which had been granted in 2004 by L. Paul Bremer III, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran the country after the start of the American-led war. The Iraqi government also made it mandatory for security contractors to obtain licenses to operate in the country.

In March 2009, the Iraqis said that the company would not be awarded a license. Two months later, the State Department replaced it with a competing security contractor, Triple Canopy.

Barclay Walsh contributed research from Washington, and Mohammed Hussein from Baghdad.

Japan government out of touch with Okinawan concerns about U.S. bases

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/features/news/20091109p2a00m0na021000c.html

Gov’t out of touch with the real problems Okinawans over U.S. military presence

The charred Javanese bishopwood trees are a pitiful sight, a lasting reminder of the U.S. military helicopter crash on the campus of Okinawa International University on Aug. 13, 2004, just south of U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma.

Noriyoshi Miyagi, 67, who runs a confectionary company near Futenma, was reminded of a similarly nightmarish incident that took place 45 years earlier when he saw black smoke billowing from the American helicopter, when in 1959, a U.S. jet fighter slammed into Miyamori Elementary School in Uruma City (then Ishikawa City), killing 17 people, including 11 of the school’s students. Miyagi witnessed the destruction first hand.

“If all our politicians saw something like that, they would immediately understand the danger of military bases,” he said.

The relocation of Futenma — which currently occupies one-fourth of Okinawa’s Ginowan City and is called “the world’s most dangerous military base,” due to its location by the city center — has remained at a standstill since the 1996 Japan-U.S. agreement of its reversion to Japan. But since the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) took over the reins of government in September, it has once again become a top-priority issue.

Like most Okinawa residents, Miyagi thinks that relocation out of Okinawa is the best solution, but more than anything, he is simply tired of living under such risky conditions. Asked what he thinks about relocation of Futenma to an offshore location at Camp Schwab in Nago City, he answered, “I guess it can’t be helped. I worry more that nothing will actually happen.”

Seisuke Tamanaha, 77, who owns land inside Futenma air station that he inherited from his parents, is similarly doubtful. “I had faith … but I really don’t want to talk about politics.” He’s a “military landowner,” whose land was forcibly turned over for use by the U.S. military, for which he receives rent from the Japanese government.

U.S. military troops landed on Okinawa Island in April 1945, and grueling ground fighting ensued between Japanese and U.S. troops. Tamanaha was just 12 years old at the time. Upon returning home from a relocation camp after the war ended, he found that the surrounding area had become an aircraft junkyard, which was eventually absorbed into the air station.

Of the 13 people in his family, only he, along with his mother and grandmother, survived. In protest, he never took one of the well-paid jobs on U.S. military bases, but has mixed feelings about having received rent for the family’s land. He remembers feeling a weight lift from his shoulders 13 years ago when a bilateral agreement was reached stating that Futenma would be returned to Japan.

Still, he has misgivings about the fact that other Okinawans will continue to bear the burden. Naturally, he had had high hopes for the DPJ, which called for the relocation of Futenma out of Okinawa and out of the country during its general election campaign. On Sept. 26, however, Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa stated that relocating Futenma out of Okinawa would be “extremely difficult.” A change of course by the government not even a month after the general election has made Tamanaha increasingly distrustful.

At a study session by Ginowan City military landowners on Oct. 31, the venue was less than half filled. “Maybe people are too dumbfounded to attend,” suggested Tamanaha with a sigh. “They probably think nothing’s going to happen for a while anyway.”

Approximately 40 kilometers northeast of Ginowan City, an emerald green ocean glimmers off the coast of Henoko, Nago City. In a tent set up next to the fishing port, a sit-in by residents protesting Futenma’s relocation has been going on for more than five years. Meanwhile, 72-year-old Shigemori Shimabukuro, who sees parallels between the Futenma relocation and the establishment of Camp Schwab some 50 years ago, is hopeful that relocation of the air station to the area will help his son find good work. Another man, a construction worker in the area, said with a wry grin, “It would help if the base came here, but we no longer live in an age where the construction industry influences politics.”

On the heels of the statement by Defense Minister Kitazawa, on Oct. 23, Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada announced his desire to revive the option of shifting Futenma to Kadena Air Base. “They’re repeating the same discussions that took place over a decade ago,” Shimbakuro muttered. “Considering the number of aircraft at Kadena, even a kid can tell that it’s impossible to incorporate Futenma into Kadena …”

In addition to the various views and interests of local residents, the relocation has given rise to discord within the new government. Ahead of President Barack Obama’s upcoming visit to Japan, on Nov. 5, Foreign Minister Okada notified U.S. officials that the Japanese government was postponing its decision on Futenma.

“I will make the final decision (about the Futenma relocation),” Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama declared last month, to which Tamanaha remarks: “It’s always people who don’t know Okinawa who are making the decisions.” (By Toru Watanabe, Tokyo Regional News Department)