Author Topic: Adm. Mike Mullen threatens Jeremy Scahill to SHUT UP ABOUT BLACKWATER CRIMES!  (Read 15557 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Claim: Pentagon tried to ‘intimidate’ journo covering Blackwater
By Daniel Tencer
Thursday, November 26th, 2009 -- 9:22 pm

The office of Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the highest-ranking soldier in the US, tried to intimidate a reporter working on a story about security contractor Blackwater's operations in Pakistan, the reporter claims.

Jeremy Scahill -- whose story alleging secret assassination and bombing campaigns inside Pakistan run by Xe Services, formerly Blackwater, appeared in The Nation on Monday -- said he received a phone call from Adm. Mullen's office the day before the story appeared, informing him that his story "didn't match up with reality."

Speaking to Laura Flanders' GRITtv, Scahill described how he got little cooperation from the government in his investigation -- until he received a phone call from Adm. Mullen's office the day before the article was to be published.

"I didn't call them," Scahill said. "They called me. They wouldn't tell me how they got my number. They wouldn't tell me how they heard about the story. And they told me that my story didn't match up with reality."

Scahill said he interpreted the move as an attempt at intimidation.

"How would any journalist perceive a call from the top US military chain of command, when you haven't called them [and] they won't tell you how they heard about the story? I did take it as an act of intimidation on the part of Adm. Mullen's office."

The following video was posted to the Web by GRITtv, November 25, 2009. Scahill's comments about Adm. Mullen start around the 8:00 mark.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Surprise: Admiral Mike Mullen Loves Communism:

USA File: Kremlin's top general, who labels Americans "evil," received with full military honors for unannounced talks in DC; secret memorandum signed
Wednesday, December 05, 2007

Have America's political and military leaders secretly hoisted the white flag of surrender to neo-Soviet Russia?

In a previous blog we referred to the clique of cabinet-level advisors from the Soviet-infiltrated Council on Foreign Relations, which has controlled the White House since at least FDR's administration, grovelling before America's enemies. We have also documented the formation of the highly secretive Kissinger-Primakov Strategic Working Group, also known as the "strategic vision group," on US-Russian bilateral relations. This cabal of Soviet Leninists and globalist diplomats, politicians, and businessmen from the USA is scheduled to meet again in January 2008.

Yesterday's unannounced meeting in Washington DC between Yuri Baluyevsky, Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, who referred to Americans as "evil" last month, and Admiral Michael Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff since October, points strongly toward the incorporation of America into the Red World Order. Baluyevsky, whose finger is poised over Russia's nuclear button, was received with full military honors. The story below relates, unbelievably, that "Pentagon spokesmen said they had no information on the agenda for the sessions." However, "US plans to install a radar and interceptor missiles in eastern Europe have been a growing source of contention between the two countries [USA and Russia]." No doubt the bellicose Gen. Baluyevsky intended to reiterate the Kremlin's position on NMD with the utmost clarity.

At the same time communist mouthpiece Pravda reveals that Mullen and Baluyevsky signed a secret memorandum on defense cooperation. Following the meeting, US Navy Captain John Kirby, spokesman for Adm. Mullen, said: "The memorandum specifies the plan of defense cooperation and the compatibility of the armed forces of the two countries in 2008. It was a very fruitful, productive discussion that both parties benefited from, and the chairman desires to keep the content of those discussions between him and his counterpart." Intriguingly, in quoting Kirby, the story below deletes reference to the secret memorandum. Washington and Moscow are already engaged in defense cooperation activities, including the second stage of the Torgau 2007 joint military exercise, underway in Germany.

Pictured above: The Moscow-Beijing Axis personified: General Liang Guanglie (right), Chief of the General Staff of the People's Liberation Army, and Gen. Baluyevsky shake hands in Vladivostok, Russia, August 18, 2005, on the occasion of the first-ever Sino-Soviet war game, Peace Mission 2005.

Russian military chief at Pentagon for talks
Agence France-Presse Dec 5, 2007

WASHINGTON: Russia's armed forces chief met Tuesday at the Pentagon with his US counterpart for previously unannounced talks that come amid strains over US missile plans in eastern Europe. General Yury Baluyevsky was received with full military honors by Admiral Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at the start of the talks.

Pentagon spokesmen said they had no information on the agenda for the sessions, but US plans to install a radar and interceptor missiles in eastern Europe have been a growing source of contention between the two countries.

"It was a very fruitful, productive discussion that both parties benefited from, and the chairman desires to keep the content of those discussions between him and his counterpart," said Navy Captain John Kirby, a spokesman for Mullen.

Russia President Vladimir Putin last week signed a law suspending Russia's participation in the 1990 Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, which limits the deployment of tanks and other military hardware in eastern Europe.

The suspension enters into force on December 12 but Russian military officials have said they have no immediate plans to move forces into Eastern Europe.

Nevertheless, a Russian general said last month that Moscow could counter US missile defense deployments in eastern Europe by stationing missiles in Belarus.

Russian officials also have responded dismissively to US proposals to cooperate on missile defense and to hold off on the activation of a European site until Iran flight tests a missile capable of reaching Europe.

Baluyevsky's visit coincided with the release of a new US intelligence estimate that concludes that Iran halted a secret nuclear weapons program in 2003.

US intelligence officials say a uranium enrichment program that Iran says is for civilian purposes and its efforts to develop longer range missiles keeps Tehran's nuclear options open.

Washington insists its plans for missile defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic are aimed at countering a looming Iranian ballistic missile threat, not Russia's vast nuclear arsenal.

But the Russians have argued that the Iranian threat is not imminent, and that missile defense systems in eastern Europe could be turned against Russia's nuclear deterrent.


While Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, among others, are CFR members, we could not confirm Admiral Mullen's membership in that pro-communist/pro-world government body. However, the admiral's foreign policy advisor during his stint as Chief of Naval Operations (2005-2007) was former US ambassador Carey Cavanaugh, who is CFR.

Cavanaugh's Cold War-era career is instructive and reveals his associations with Communist Bloc officials: US Mission to Berlin (West), consular affairs; Office of Soviet Affairs in Washington, bilateral relations and arms control, including implementation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty; and US embassy in Moscow, political officer, Soviet relations towards Europe and arms control issues. In the "post"-Cold War period Cavanaugh was posted as chargé d’affaires to Tblisi where Georgia's Communist Party boss Eduard Shevardnadze had seized power from the democratically elected President Zviad Gamsakhurdia in January 1992.

Russian oligarch and Alfa Group founder Mikhail Fridman serves on the CFR's International Advisory Board, as well as the state-run Public Chamber of Russia, proposed by President Vladimir Putin in 2004 to analyze draft legislation. Fridman is "ex"-Komsomol. Like Alger Hiss, who was an advisor to FDR and secretary general of the United Nations Conference on International Organization, he is an example of current Soviet infiltration of the august CFR.

Interestingly, US political economist Francis Fukuyama, whose 1991 book The End of History and the Last Man argued in favor of the post-Cold War demise of ideology--playing nicely into the hands of the Soviet strategists who asserted that communism was "dead"--belongs to the CFR too.

In summary, the CFR's subversive influence extends into those corridors of power that formulate and execute the US government's military policy.

Incidentally, Putin and his top general, citing "NATO aggression," have already formally imposed a moratorium on Russian compliance to the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, effective December 12, and have threatened to pull out of the INF Treaty as well. The Kremlin is currently building a legal case for withdrawing from the latter too. Today Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated at a Moscow news conference:

We regret that some of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe's member-states, in particular, the United States, have declined to support at the OSCE's meeting in Madrid, the Russian- American initiative to turn the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) into a universal accord. We urged our American partners to submit a draft resolution so it would be supported by the ministers all OSCE member-states. Unfortunately, for reasons unknown to us, the American colleagues gave up this proposal. Given the partners' position, the OSCE's decisions in favor of this crucial initiative have not been made.

What Lavrov was implying: The Americans refuse to turn the INF into a universal accord so let's scrap it altogether.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Surprise again, Mullen is directly rresponsible for the pussification of tthe Navy and demoralizing chain of command honor systems...

The Pretenders: A Failure of Admiralship
Gerald L. Atkinson
15 June 2007

       Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, USN (Ret.) predicted it a decade ago. In a prescient commentary [1] in The Washington Times entitled, "On a diversity roll that serves to erode" (9/01/96), he identified two factors which would, if continued, imperil our national security. The first and foremost difference he saw between our nation's post-WWII situation and [that in 1996, just before the presidential election] is that the commander-in-chief then was Harry Truman, and the second factor, that flows from the first, is that the radical feminist diversity policies of the current commander-in-chief (Wm. J. Clinton) [and continued by George W. Bush] have undermined the morale and integrity of the combat forces. He argued that if the current policies are continued, "many traditional American institutions, in particular the Navy, will be irreparably damaged ů due in large measure to the policies of placing women aboard ships and in combat roles."

       This warning came after the disastrous witch hunt in the aftermath of the Tailhook '91 bacchanal in which over 300 naval aviator 'warriors' were summarily and wrongly purged from service. CDR Bob Stumpf USN (Ret.), who had not participated in such activities, was the prime example of such wrongful prosecution for simply having attended the event. Other innocents, such as LT John Cooney who was not even present - documented by flight logs -- during the 'gauntlet' activities, were nearly swept away in the political hysteria of the times. Many junior officers who would not assent to the devious interrogation methods of the radical feminist investigators were placed on 'do not promote' lists, ensuring the end of promising careers. Not a single Navy or Marine aviator who had the courage to take his case to courts-martial was convicted on the evidence available. And yet, the witch hunt continued. The Looming American Matriarchy in our politics, education, and military was accelerated on its way to power. Raw, naked power!

       RADM Marsha J. Evans USN, a foremost Navy 'pretender' [2] at the time boasted that "Tailhook has turned the tide and made a positive difference for Navy women...It was the watershed event Navy women have needed to advance their cause." Indeed, the Navy, under ADM Boorda's direction as Chief of Naval Operations, accelerated the training of the first two females to attempt fighter pilot training in the F-14 Tomcat - under drastically reduced qualification standards. This resulted in the death of LT Kara Hultgreen who made a 'rookie' mistake while attempting a daylight, clear weather landing aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, killing herself and nearly killing her backseater. Her companion 'first female' fighter pilot, LT Carrie Dunai Lohrenz, was subsequently washed out of carrier aviation by a Field Evaluation Naval Aviation Board (FENAB) due to unsafe flying practices during carrier landings.

       ADM Moorer's warning also came shortly after ADM Jeremy Boorda had committed suicide - the only Chief of Naval Operations in history to do so. Indeed 'diversity' was showing its ugly face, this time in naval history. Boorda was a pretender, a naval officer who was not up to the challenge of leading a 'warrior' Navy, and when he finally realized this truth, took the coward's way out. He had lost the trust of the junior officer aviators in the Navy when he pushed for the purge of those who had simply attended Tailhook '91. At the time, scores of junior officers were telling this author that they "cannot trust anyone above the rank of Commander" in the U.S. Navy. He lost the trust of retired senior officers when he failed to keep his promise to them at a conference [3] in Pensacola, Florida that he would support CDR Stumpf's promotion to Captain, as the selection board had recommended twice before. With nothing left of his honor and integrity, ADM Jeremy Boorda committed suicide. Diversity had produced the ultimate failure.

       The rot of the Navy's emphasis on 'diversity' continued to 'erode,' as predicted by ADM Moorer. Beginning in the early 1990s and entrenched by the early 2000s, it had invaded a group of naval aviator 'pretenders' who were not pilots, but backseater Naval Flight Officers (NFOs). They became pretenders, not by direct, deliberate obfuscation, but by a gradual process of following a slippery slope misuse of history and language (e.g. they don't 'fly' fighter aircraft as many such pretenders contend  -- the pilot 'flies' it, they are airborne in it - an important passenger so to speak) to imply a status that is not deserved. For example, I engaged a group of NFOs in a Hollow Force Debate, as a result of the injustice the Navy had carried out against LT Patrick J. 'Pipper' Burns by refusing to promote him to the next higher rank. His 'crime.' He had released the training records of LTs Hultgreen and Lohrenz to the public, showing in precise detail the lowered standards, which allowed them to join the fleet as the 'first female fighter pilots.' To the Navy's shame, his truth-telling was his undoing.

       This group of worthy backseaters were led by a former training squadron commander (called 'Stewie' here) who, for some reason that only he can know, bragged via Email to me that [4] "My Navy is full of heroes but I won't bore you with a long list of names ů to try to impress you. We have served in more conflicts and operations than you have night traps. We won the Cold War, one that you did not. We survived Tail Hook and all the political correctness that followed.  Moreover, we continue to do more with less.  My generation has been shot at, won Distinguished Flying Crosses, gone to TPS, flown in air shows and done it allů"

     My reply, with an emphasis on the role of generations, reveals the depth to which this group of naval aviators have stooped to garner a place in the sun which they had not earned [5]. "You wrote that my generation 'lost the Vietnam War' and that your generation 'won the Cold War.' That has to be the most preposterous statement we have ever heard.  With regard to who 'lost' the Vietnam War, let me remind you that the U.S. never lost a battle in that war -- not one.  You denigrate the memory of over 58,000 dead whose names appear on the Vietnam War Memorial Wall with such a statement. You besmirch the record of over 3,000,000 soldiers, sailors, and Marines who served and fought in that war -- two thirds of whom were volunteers and 75 percent of those who died were volunteers (in a time in which the draft was active).  It seems that you are reverting to the same mind-set as the 'power elites' of your generation (the 'bad guys') -- history began when they reached young adulthood, in their early 20s. All before that is just myth."

       I continued, "It is clear that you have not read extensively about the Vietnam War. Let me suggest several excellent books which may just change your mind. Start with ADM Ulysses S. Grant Sharp's seminal book on the strategy carried out by the Johnson/McNamara team for that war, "Strategy for Defeat: Vietnam in Retrospect."  Then read what LTGen Harold G. Moore, USA (Ret.) and Joseph L. Galloway have to say about our fighting men in "We Were Soldiers Once --- and Young."  Then please read H.R. McMaster's ground breaking book on the relationship among President Johnson, Robert McNamara, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies that Led to Vietnam." No, Stewie-baby, our generation's military did NOT 'lose the Vietnam war.' That is the history that Boomer generation 'elites' wrote from their perspective of an 'unjust war. A war that they dodged."

      I then added, "Had you attended a major university during the mid-to-late 60s, like I did at the University of Michigan, you would know from first-hand personal experience who had a major hand in 'losing' the political war to Ho Chi Minh for the minds of the American people.  You see, Stewie-baby, it was the 'elites' of your generation, those who are now what we call the 'power elites' of the Boomer generation who fomented the unrest, demonstrated against the war (some of whom even demonstrated in communist countries -- need I say who), dodged the draft, fled to Canada and otherwise carried out a counter-culture war against America during those years.  If many of you who were born in the late fifties and early 1960s (historically, but not all culturally a part of the Boomer generation) want to support those 'power elites,' so be it.  But you better know whom you support and why."

       Finally, I concluded the discussion with Stewie. "For some reason, your knowledge of history seems to leave out the Korean War. If I am not mistaken, since Harry Truman decided to resist Soviet aggression in Greece in 1947 (the Truman Doctrine), we entered a so-called Cold War against socialist Soviet expansion. The first large-scale 'battle' of the Cold War was the Korean War (the second being the Vietnam War). For a clear and insightful description of the former war, let me recommend T. R. Fehrenbach's "This Kind of War: The Classic Korean War History."  I have two high school friends who fought their way from Pusan to the Yalu. They would be quite surprised to hear that you, born years after that war was over, claim that your generation won the Cold WarůJust being a naval aviator and alive during the later 'peacetime' era of the Cold War does not automatically confer 'status' as having won the Cold War. Those who claim such status are 'pretenders' of the first order." Indeed, Stewie and those who believe in his braggadacio are such pretenders. And many of them are in high-level leadership positons in today's Navy.

       The situation in today's Navy is even worse than that criticized by active duty Army Lt. Col. Paul Yingling. In an incisive critique [6] of today's U. S. Army 'generalship,' he presents damning evidence of its failure. Although aimed at the current war in Iraq and the underlying position of the U.S. Army there, it has far greater implications of guilt.

       Thomas E. Ricks, a former Marine, highly regarded military analyst, and syndicated columnist for The Washington Post, reviews Lt. Col. Yingling's critique in an article entitled [7], "Army Officer Accuses Generals of 'Intellectual and Moral Failure." He reveals that "The young officersůnote that the Army's elaborate 'lessons learned' process does not criticize generals and that no generals in Iraq have replaced for poor battlefield performance, in contrast to other U.S. wars."

      To reinforce Yingling's critique, Ricks notes that "Top Army officials are also worried by the number of captains and majors choosing to leave the service. 'We do have attrition in those grade slots above our average,' acting Army Secretary Pete Geren noted in congressional testimony this week. In order to curtail the number of captains leaving,' he said, 'the Army is planning a $20,000 bonus for those who agree to stay in, plus choices of where to be posted and other incentives."

       Shades of the post-Tailhook '91 disaster in naval aviator retention. And the same situation exists in today's Navy resorting to huge bonuses to retain skilled sailors, including naval aviators. Aviation officer incentives are proposed [8] of "ůup to $850 a month and an aviation continuation bonus of up to $25,000 a year would be authorized. Incentive pay would include those training to be aviators, or aviators who are involved in "frequent or regular" flying duties or agree to continue serving for a specific period." Even today, disillusioned young naval aviators are leaving the service. In this case, it has nothing to do with Iraq or the war against radical Muslim fundamentalists. It has everything to do with a 'failure of admiralship.'

       Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, USA (Ret.), a former commander of the Army War College and a major TV network military analyst, backs up Lt. Col. Yingling. Scales writes [9], "Today, anecdotal evidence of collapse is all around. Past history makes some of us sensitive to anecdotes and distrustful of Pentagon statistics. The Army's collapse after Vietnam was presaged by a desertion of mid-grade officers (captains) and non-commissioned officers. Most left because they and their families were tired and didn't want to serve in units unprepared for war. If we lose our sergeants and captains, the Army breaks again. It's just that simple. That's why these soldiers are still the canaries in the readiness coal-mine. And, if you look closely, you will see that these canaries are fleeing their cages in frightening numbers."

       Ricks also points out that "Until now, charges of incompetent leadership have not been made as publicly by an Army officer as Yingling does in his article. He quotes Yingling, "After going into Iraq with too few troops and no coherent plan for postwar stabilization, America's general officer corps did not accurately portray the intensity of the insurgency to the American public. For reasons that are not yet clear, America's general officer corps underestimated the strength of the enemy, overestimated the capabilities of Iraq's government and security forces and failed to provide Congress with an accurate assessment of security conditions in IraqůOur generals are not worthy of their soldiers."

       Ricks, in an interview with Lt. Col. Yingling reports that "At the level of lieutenant colonel and below, [Yingling's article] received almost universal approval." Ricks' interview with retired Marine Col. Jerry Durant, now working in Iraq as a civilian contractor, confirms that discontent in the young officer ranks is widespread. "Talk to the junior leaders in the services and ask what they think of their leadership, and many will tell you how unhappy they are,' Durant said."

       Ricks says that "Yingling advocates overhauling the way generals are picked and calls for more involvement by Congress. To replace today's 'mild-mannered team players,' he writes, Congress should create incentives in the promotion system to 'reward adaptation and intellectual achievementůHe also recommends that Congress review the performance of senior generals as they retire and exercise its power to retire them at a lower rank if it deems their performance inferior. The threat of such high-profile demotions would restore accountability among top officers,' Lt. Col. Yingling says, 'As matters stand now, a private who loses a rifle suffers far greater consequences than a general who loses a war.'"

       A similar failure of high-level leadership is apparent in the U.S. Navy - from the top to the bottom, to the Naval Academy and from there to the recently appointed commander of the U.S. Central Command, responsible for our overall military engagement in the Middle East. While this failure has very little to do with the war in Iraq, the Middle East, or the overall war against terror (or whatever anyone else wishes to call it) - because the Navy has such a miniscule role in such a war - it is, nevertheless, every bit as important. And maybe even more so. And that is because of the Navy's current capture by the admiralship of the Boomer generation with an enduring infatuation with the concept of 'diversity.' This admiralship is of the same generation whose 'elites' carried out the 'counter-culture' revolution in the mid-1960s and infected every institution in the land with it as they came to executive, congressional, judicial, religious, educational, and military power during the 1990s.

       This admiralship has been mercilessly 'sensitivity trained,' flooded with a tsunami of 'white guilt,' 'male guilt,' and subjected to other psychological conditioning over the past two decades to the point where they are completely mentally and intellectually dominated by those same 'counter-culture' revolutionaries - now several decades aged since their young adulthood upheaval - who are still dedicated to carrying their revolution to completion. And a powerful component of that revolutionary force is our Looming American Matriarchy.

       The 'diversity' camel stuck its nose under the Navy's tent in 1976 when President Ford opened the service academies to women. And from there it became a 'forced march' to the cadence of a drummer completely out of step with the traditions, values, and common sense of America's past. A drummer whose agenda has perilously weakened our armed forces. A drummer whose radical feminist cohorts, such as former U.S. Representative Patricia Schroeder, D (Colorado) - who famously publicly proclaimed the power of her 'vagina' - have invented the concept of Eve Ensler's (author of the 'Vagina Monologues') 'Vagina Warriors.'

       We have just recently observed the raw, naked POWER of this 'diversity' machine in action at the U.S. Naval Academy. This exercise of ruthless, vindictive power by the then-superintendent, VADM Rodney P. Rempt, as the convening authority of a courts-martial procedure which was corrupt from the beginning to the end. I entered the controversy over the rape and other charges against Midshipman Lamar Owens via a commentary in The Washington Times [10], entitled "Wronged and Nifonged."

       In that commentary I pointed out that "We now know of the gross abuse of prosecutorial power in the Duke rape case. Durham District Attorney Michael B. Nifong indicted three Duke University lacrosse players last April without any corroborative evidence. The only 'evidence' was the conflicted testimony of the accuser, an escort service 'stripper' who performed at a team party. Her testimony has been challenged by the other black female stripper performing that night. DNA from five men was found on specimens from the accuser's underpants, vagina, and rectum - but none of it belonged to the three defendantsůAfter it had become clear Mr. Nifong's case was falling apart, the parents of the accused appeared on national television to tell their sons' side of the story - their absolute and complete innocence. Since Mr. Nifong faces a hearing before the North Carolina bar association that could result in his disbarment, he ceded the case to the State District Attorneys Office."

     I also pointed out that "There is a close parallel with the Duke case in the false rape allegation by a character-challenged female midshipman on Midshipman Lamar Owens, a star quarterback on the 2005 football team who was not graduated with his class in May 2006. The latter case is even more egregious because it reveals a pervasive, systemic application of absolute power by Superintendents at the U.S. Naval Academy in carrying out the agenda of the nation's radical feminist movement."

       The commentary compared the fraudulent accusations of rape by character-challenged females on absolutely and completely innocent males. It also questions why the superintendent at the Naval Academy, VADM Rodney P. Rempt, is not being subjected to the same public scrutiny that has been visited on Durham District Attorney Michael B. Nifong, who is facing disbarment proceedings on the basis of his biased prosecution of the Duke Rape Case. And it answers that question.

       My research shows that the answer rests at the 'political' source of power in each case. In North Carolina, it is at a very low level of governance, i.e. local. At the Naval Academy, it has its origin in the nearby Congress and executive branch of the U.S. Government. And the latter are driven solely by politicians doing the bidding of the Looming American Matriarchy, the radical feminists and their supporters - one of the most powerful arms of the 'counter-culture' leadership of the Boomer generation. This includes such military 'pretenders' as VADM Rodney P. Rempt!

     Why was there no outcry for the public censure of Vice Adm. Rempt for his Rempt-rape of Midshipman Owens? Why was there no official move to hold him accountable for his false prosecution of Midshipman Owens - as Lt.Col. Yingling called for in his critique of the U.S. Army. VADM Rempt should not have been retired at the rank of Vice Admiral, but at a minimum forced to retire in disgrace several ranks below. And if retired at the rank of VADM, Rodney Rempt should be recalled to active duty and stand trial for flagrant abuse of power as the convening authority in a false rape accusation and the perversion of justice that ensued in the Midshipman Owens affair.

       But as his vendetta played out, VADM Rempt furtively fought for his reputation by delaying the decision on Midshipman Owens until just prior to his imminent retirement. While Midshipman Owens languished for thirteen-plus months at the Naval Shipyard, awaiting punishment, hanging in the wind by VADM Rempt and the final authority, Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter. The final decision stunned those of us, by the thousand across the country, who believed there might still be a modicum of justice, a taste of honor, a fresh breath of courage left in the U.S. Navy. Not only did SecNav Winter dismiss Midshipman Owens from the Navy sans the diploma he had earned and the commission he had sought (the same commission that his false accuser of rape received in May 2007), but he ruled that Owens repay over $90,000 of his tuition at the Academy - a punishment that even VADM Rempt had not called for.

The Details of the Harm that VADM Rempt Visited on the Naval Academy

       On 1 January 2007, I wrote on this Web Site of Rempt-Rape at the Naval Academy.  A summary is included here. The story is one of 'ticket punching careerism' taking precedence over justice. It has, however, happened before at the Academy and we all just looked away. The leadership is cancerous at the top of the U.S. Naval Academy. And if it is not corrected soon, that venerable institution will be seen as unworthy of support and funding by an America that sees its, decay and lack of focus on its primary mission - training the core combat leadership of the U.S. Navy. Take a look at the evidence.

       VADM Rodney P. Rempt, at the behest of radical feminist organizations across the country, court-martialed Midshipman Owens on a rape charge while concurrently publicly announcing Owens' guilt in four Emails [11] to more than 200 commissioned officers who serve as faculty and staff members at the Academy, all of whom could have served on the jury panel - as well as students and alumni [12]. The Emails at times dropped the word, 'alleged,' when referring to the 'victim of sexual assault,' and spoke of 'teamwork' needed to stamp out sexual harassment.

       The military judge at the pretrial hearing reprimanded VADM Rempt for attempting to bias the proceeding against the defendant and give the blood-thirsty feminists another victory. The judge concluded that there was an 'appearance of unlawful command influence' in the case. In fact, the judge declared that 'This is almost trial by public policy, trial by press release.'

       VADM Rempt immediately gave the alleged victim and supporting female witnesses complete immunity [13] for any and all violations of Academy rules, including underage drinking, in return for their testimony against Midshipman Owens. Charles Gittins, a renowned defense attorney for previous such cases but not active in defense of Owens, explained publicly that [14] "ADM Rempt is running scared. He has been under pressure from the board [of Directors of the Academy] and [other] feminist organizations [nationwide]." As in the Duke Rape Case, only the male(s) would have his (their) name(s) publicly associated with a rape charge, Midshipman Owens' name was made public, but the alleged victim's name was not. This patently unfair practice by the media is universally supported by the radical feminists and their supporters across the land.

     Meanwhile, alumni [15] of the Naval Academy conducted a battle with VADM Rempt on the matter of his bias in this case. In letters written to Navy officials, heated comments posted on message boards and affidavits submitted to Midshipman Owens' defense attorneys, alumni alleged that the superintendent remained convinced that Owens raped a female midshipman, despite a jury's decision to the contrary. The Washington Post details this contest (McCaffrey, Raymond and Vogel, Steve, "Case Stirs Criticism of Naval Academy Chief: Alumni Question Leadership," 12/17/06). Details of this battle reside at the hyperlink above.

       There is much to commend in this summary. The author's common sense rendition of the similarities and differences between the Duke and Naval Academy rape cases is a direct and reasonable indictment of the New Age 'Harvard on the Severn' that the Academy has become. I have chronicled this in numerous articles in the FORUM commentary section of The Washington Times.

       So the perpetration of injustice is in full view, both at Duke University and at the U.S. Naval Academy. Michael B. Nifong may be a tin-horn local prosecutor who carried out his disgraceful work in Durham, NC and of little consequence outside the lives of the accused and their immediate families. And for what? The notoriety which won him an election at a local level and would have secured him his pension which would vest in three years. His perfidy might buy him only a tiny gain in the grand scheme of things.

       But what of VADM Rodney P. Rempt, the superintendent at the Naval Academy? His conduct in the Owens case reveals a disintegration on a much larger scale of importance. His disgrace reveals a systemic disorder at the Academy. It is a symptom of the corruption of not only a venerable institution, the U.S. Naval Academy, held in high regard by the American people, but also of a Navy whose leadership has lost its way. I have written a dozen or so articles for The Washington Times during the 1998-2000 years of the source of this degradation. What once produced leaders who believed with their hearts and souls in a motto equivalent to General Macarthur's, Duty, Honor, Country has degenerated to a set of trite New Age 'core values:' Honor, Courage, Commitment. And here, Commitment has become synonymous with a leadership defined by one's commitment to diversity and above all, a leader in advancing the role of women in the military. VADM Rempt's over-zealousness in prosecuting high-profile sexual assault cases is part of his effort to advance an agenda designed to appease women's groups demanding a crackdown on sexual assault and harassment at military academies. And above Rempt is ADM Mike Mullen, the Chief of Naval Operations who just recently (Navy Times, "CNO: Diversity 'critical' to Navy's future," 7/17/06) declared that "diversity within the Navy work force persists as a 'very critical issue,' a top priority and a 'strategic imperative' for the future. He said he wants to see more women and minorities as flag officers and among flag staffs - and his admirals know it." There is more on this matter later, involving ADM Mullen.

       In the penultimate hearing on Midshipman Owens' disposition by VADM Rempt at the Navy Yard in Washington D.C., the superintendent, after supposedly reviewing the record and report of the court-martial proceeds, met with his adversary. Owens' defense team reported that [16] "After a 30-minute 'hearing' on Friday (2/09/07) at the Navy Yard, convened by VADM Rempt and his coterie of Jag lawyers and other adminstrative staff, in which Owens stood alone (his attorney and local civilian 'Sponsor' were excluded), Rempt issued an official 'letter of disenrollment' to Owens. That means: no graduation, no commission."

     "At the 30-minute hearing, VADM Rempt could not/would not look Midshipman Owens in the eye and appeared very nervous and uncomfortable. Owens was asked 26 questions, nearly all of which were answered by the official report on the courts-martial minutes. It was obvious that Rempt, who had possession of said report for the past seven months, had not even read the report. His mind was made up from the beginning. In pre-trial negotiations with Owens' defense attorneys, VADM Rempt demanded 'prison time' for Owens. After the hellabaloo raised by USNA Alumni, both privately and in the Washington Post, Rempt recused himself. VADM Paul Sullivan Commander Naval Sea Systems Command, a reviewing authority, reviewed the charges and the evidence and ruled 'not guilty' and 'no punishment -- as had the jury in the rape case -- including the 'ancilliary charges' of conduct unbecoming and disobeying a restraining order."

       VADM Rempt's version was quite different. He definitely knew he was the man in charge. He would carry out his vendetta against Owens. He had almost dictatorial power of a true CONFESSOR, as the one with convening authority in the Owens' affair. "VADM Rodney P. Rempt, Superintendent at the Naval Academy, after a half-hour hearing last Friday, issued a recommendation that Midshipman Lamar Owens not be graduated and not be commissioned, but excused him from repaying $130K-plus in tuition. Owens' defense has five days to reply to this memo as the case goes to the Secretary of the Navy for final decision."

     The battle to FREE LAMAR OWENS, however, had gained momentum. His supporters noted that "For the first time since the beginning of this case over 13 months ago, the Superintendent has lost the total control over the media that he has exercised as the Administrative Authority over it. In an article on The Washington Post ("Memo Urges Ex-Quarterback Not Be Commissioned," 2/14/07), Raymond McCaffrey writes, "The [USNA] alumni argue that Rempt's zeal in prosecuting high-profile sexual assault cases is designed to appease Congress and women's groups demanding a crackdown on sexual assault and harassment at military academies. They say that in unjustly targeting a prominent black midshipman who was a leader not only on the gridiron but also in church, Rempt has unintentionally set back the advancement of African Americans in the Navy."

       During that ensuing battle, the Academy and/or its supporters 'leaked' information to the press regarding Midshipman Owens' class standing in his midshipman company. His standing (after the rape charges were first made by the female midshipman) was reportedly at the bottom of the list. In response to this devious attempt to demean Owens' character in the eyes of the public, the supporters of Midshipman Owens - after consulting with WWII Navy veterans who had won the Battle of the Pacific in their young adulthood days - published on the Internet the following recorded history [17].

       "Much has been discussed regarding the 'meaningfulness' of the class standing of midshipmen at the U.S. Naval Academy. This discussion results from the Academy's continued vendetta against Midshipman Lamar Owens by releasing to the local press (The Capital Gazette) a list of 'piddly' infractions that Owens has accumulated during his time there. And they stress that Midshipman Owens would have graduated near the bottom of his class -- 27 out of 27 in his Company and 770 (the bottom 77th percentile) out of 996 in his 2006 graduating class. What does this mean?

       RADM C. A. 'Mark' Hill, Jr. USN (Ret.), a member of the class of 1944 (which graduated in 1943 so as to engage the enemy a year earlier than normal), and a proud member of ADM Thomas H. Moorer's 'Boys,' is as knowledgable as anyone I know on this measure of attainment in the real world of the men who won the 'Battle of the Pacific' in WWII.

     RADM Hill served on the submarine USS Ray (SS-271) in the Battle of the Pacific during World War II.  His ship suffered every battle experience that was recorded on film for the German U-boat in the documentary film, Das Boot, including a sinking to the bottom of Lingayen Gulf with a recovery due only to the courage, bravery, and skill of its crew  except that Hills ship was not destroyed in the end. Mark entered flight training after the war and rose to command an A-4 Skyhawk squadron as well as the aircraft carrier USS Independence. He was a manpower expert from the grade of LCDR to RADM and served as the Assistant Chief of Naval Operations for Manpower. He has been a strong supporter of naval aviation and has championed the concept of the Navys large aircraft carriers for decades.

RADM Hill has a 'corner' on my web site at:

and gave one of the eulogies at ADM Moorer's funeral. With the permission of ADM Moorer's widow, that eulogy is posted at:

       RADM Hill told me recently that a large share of the leaders and the fighters who won the Battle of the Pacific were from the middle of their graduating classes in military and academic standing. And a surprising number of those who were outstanding wartime leaders were near the bottom of their Naval Academy classes.

       For example, ADM Mark Mitscher earned a reputation for excellence (see his biography by Theodore Taylor published by the Naval Institute Press) as being such a great leader in the Battle of the Pacific that "if he hadn't been there, the Navy would have had to 'invent' him." That is the force of his contribution to the Navy's Victory at Sea. But Midshipman Mitscher was not high in his class standing. His record was not only below average -- it was awful.

       He did not have a strong desire to attend the Naval Academy, but did so at the urging of his father. He entered in 1904 and was soon thrown out because of his unsatisfactory military (many demerits) and academic standing. At his father's urging and proselytizing, he re-entered the Academy in 1906. He continued his lackluster performance, graduating with the class of 1910, near the bottom -- 107th out of a class of 130.

       Examples abound. VADM John S. McCain, Sr., who was posthumously promoted to Admiral, after serving in rotation with ADM Mark Mitscher during the War in the Pacific was 115th in a class of 151 -- 36th from the bottom of his 1906 graduating class.
       ADM John S. McCain, Jr. who was Commander Pacific during the Vietnam War, was very near the bottom of his 1931 class -- 424th out of 441 in the class.

       Senator John S. McCain III, who returned from the Vietnam War a hero for his leadership as a POW in the infamous Hanoi Hilton, graduated 895th out of 900 -- 5th from the bottom of the class of 1958.

       ADM Wm. F. 'Bull' Halsey, who commanded the Third Fleet during WWII, was always a discipline problem at the Academy. He graduated with the class of 1904, 43rd out of 63 -- 20th from the bottom of his class.

       ADM Charles A. Lockwood Jr., Commander of the Submarine Force Pacific Fleet during WWII, held in highest esteem by those submariners who served under him, graduated 35th out of 55 in his 1912 class -- 20th from the bottom.

       More recently, ADM Edward C. 'Eddie' Outlaw, who was a ne'rdowell at the Academy, became an outstanding fighter pilot during WWII. In fact, that war molded Outlaw into the leader he became. Those under his command as C.O. of the Intrepid during the late 1950s revered 'Eddie' Outlaw for his 'atta boys' for difficult tasks well done. Midshipman Outlaw graduated 436th out of 442 in his 1935 Naval Academy class -- 6th from the bottom. His is another shining example that neither class standing, nor the Naval Academy for that matter, make that much of a difference in whether one becomes a 'warrior' and a leader in wartime or not -- it is the real world caldron of combat experience that defines and molds the leader -- the kind the Navy needs now more than ever in the age of Political Correctness.

       ADM John S. Thach, who as a Lieutenant invented the 'Thach Weave' tactic by which WWII Navy fighters were able to gain superiority over the Japanese Zeros, graduated 495th out of 579 graduates in his 1927 Naval Academy class.

       Some critics might look at this record of achievement by America's past top Navy leaders and say, "Yeah, but I knew [fill in the blank] and Midshipman Lamar Owens is no [fill in the same blank]." Owens' supporters submitted that Midshipman Owens has already passed the test of quality leadership, both on the football field and during his humble and loyal conduct during the travesty of the vendetta against him by VADM Rodney P. Rempt over an extended period (over 13 months) sequestered at the Navy yard. He would make a fine junior officer in the U.S. Navy. And time would tell whether or not he may even become as prominent as the Navy leaders noted above. It is time to FREE LAMAR OWENS!"

All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
       Midshipman Owens' supporters were joined by black naval officers who condemned VADM Rempt's apparently racist vendetta against him [18].  "Midshipman Lamar Owens has been served a letter of disenrollment by the Superintendent of the Naval Academy. If not reversed at a higher level, Midshipman Owens will not be graduated or commissioned but will not be required to repay $130K-plus in past tuition. At a formal meeting Friday (2/09/08) at the Navy Yard Midshipman Owens was confronted by VADM Rodney P. Rempt, his Judge Advocate lawyer, and other Academy administrative staff. Owens was asked 26 or so questions nearly all of which were answered decisively in the Record of the Proceedings of the courts-martial. It was clear that RADM Rempt had not even read the official Record. Owens was allowed neither legal nor personal representation at the meeting his attorney and local Sponsor were available, but were kept outside the closed doors."

       "This ruling, coming 13 months after the initial accusation and 7 months in quarantine at the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., has many Naval Academy midshipmen and alumni not only puzzled and perplexed, but angry. VADM Rempt has ruled in direct opposition to two independent deciders in the Owens case. The military jury ruled not guilty of rape but guilty of two peripheral charges that would not have existed absent the rape allegation. And the jury recommended no punishment for the peripheral charges. After an uproar by USNA alumni in the face of hints that VADM Rempt was dead-set on prison time for Midshipman Owens, the Superintendent recused himself and transferred administrative authority to VADM Paul Sullivan, Commander Naval Sea Systems Command, for an independent formal review of the case."

       "VADM Sullivan, after exhaustive and careful review, ruled, as did the jury, not guilty and no punishment for all charges against Midshipman Owens. In spite of these independent rulings, and the fact that VADM Rempt could not impose prison time under his renewed convening authority of the case, the superintendent is still attempting to destroy this fine young mans reputation, character, honor, and future. Academy alumni are wondering why VADM Rempt should be so vindictive."

       "They reason that there can only be three possibilities. Either VADM Rempt is going to extremes in carrying out the radical feminist agenda, or he has a deep-seated, personal resentment of athletes (he distinguished himself only by being in the choir in his 66 Academy Class), or he is a closet racist. Midshipman Owens' Sponsor, a family which officially provides a home-away-from-home on weekends for midshipmen to help relieve the stress of their daily lives, who in the beginning believed that VADM Rempts behavior was motivated by gender-angst or athlete-angst, now believes that it can only be a deep-seated, arrogant racism."

       "There is logical evidence for this belief. VADM Rempt made it known to Midshipman Owens defense team from the beginning that he would not enter into any plea bargain, but demanded jail time for Owens. He remained steadfast in this demand through the end, including his final administrative authority decision. But VADM Rempt cleverly and deviously planted two charges in the buildup to Owens courts martial that were to be his trump cards in the event that the jury would find him not guilty of the rape charge. These peripheral charges were conduct unbecoming an officer because he had sex in the academy dormitory with the alleged victim, and violating a protective order of a 100 foot distance from the alleged victim (he walked down the hallway 53 feet from her room). The jury had found Owens guilty of these two charges, but recommended that no punishment be awarded."

      " The devious part of this ruling and VADM Rempts regaining administrative authority over the case occurred when he originally convened a general courts-martial instead of other less harsh forms of judicial action and then cleverly added two peripheral charges. This guaranteed that any peripheral offenses committed under it, if found guilty by a military jury, would be ruled as felonies. His ace in the hole for achieving jail time for Owens would be the felony verdicts under a General Courts-Martial proceeding. Thus, no matter how it came out for VADM Rempt, he would get his original goal to destroy Midshipman Owens future even if he immediately returned to civilian life without punishment. And the felony verdicts will remain part of his civilian record. Given the hysteria of our times, this might even result in placing Owens on a sex abuser watch list for the rest of his life. All to satisfy the angst of a superintendent of the Naval Academy who has abused his powers."

       "This reminds a careful observer of history to recall that the U.S. Government, in carrying out prosecutions of Mafia gangsters in the mid-1900s for felony crimes for which there was little or no evidence, would convict them on lesser charges such as tax evasion which could be proven. The criminals were then sent to prison for long terms. They got the prison time that everyone agreed was their just desserts for the more serious crimes they had committed."

      "VADM Rempt has treated Midshipman Owens from the beginning as if he were a common criminal. He obviously believed, and still believes, that Midshipman Owens is guilty of sexual assault on the alleged female victim. If his recommendation to the Secretary of the Navy is upheld, his treatment of Owens as a criminal will, indeed, have worked its magic. A disgraceful miscarriage of justice for a fine young man and disastrous message to those who would consider sending their sons to the U.S. Naval Academy."

       The Anne Arundel County chapter of the NAACP chimed in with support for Midshipman Owens. They reveal some heretofore unpublicized facts, obtained by independent observers at the courts-martial proceedings, which devastate the Superintendent's attempt to ruin this young man's life.

       For example, they reveal that [19] "[Owens'] proposed punishment stands in sharp contrast to the treatment of the accusing midshipman who, although her story was completely discredited at the Court Martial, is on track to graduate in May 2007."

       And furthermore, "The Commandant's legal advisor testified the Academy has never before brought criminal charges against a midshipman for having consensual sexual relations at the Yard. CMDR Roper also testified that untold numbers of midshipmen have graduated and been commissioned despite nonjudicial punishment for the same offense. Finally, we point out that no less than four witnesses in MIDN Owens' Court Martial were given immunity for engaging in consensual sexual activity at Bancroft Hall. Under these circumstances, VADM Rempt's refusal to vacate the felony conviction as well as his pursuit of MIDN Owens' disenrollment, raises serious questions about the equality and evenhandedness of justice at the Naval Academy."

       They conclude with a damning opinion regarding Midshipman Owens' situation. "...we are also greatly concerned about the detrimental impact the Naval Academy's treatment of MIDN Owens will have on other black youth considering a career as a Naval Officer. The Superintendent's handling of this case has not presented the Academy in a favorable light to the black community. Academy news releases focused negative attention on the unproved allegation and exposed MIDN Owens to public scrutiny in a way that is unheard of in other cases. The long delay in resolving MIDN Owens' fate after he was cleared of the rape allegation and the punishment now proposed despite his exoneration do not give young blacks confidence that they will receive fair treatment at the Naval Academy. It is not difficult to understand why a young man or woman would be hesitant to pursue an appointment to an institution where telling the truth results in expulsion and making false allegation affords unlimited protection."

       The ensuing battle over the fate of Midshipman Owens produced a great deal of heat, frustration, and anger but also a considerable measure of reason and 'light.' CAPT Neil Black USN (Ret.), USNA Class 1961, wrote a piece that strikes directly at the heart of what has occurred in the case of Midshipman Lamar Owens and his situation with regard to the Superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy. He sent the following message to the Secretary of the Navy in support of Midshipman Owens that is, graduate and commission him. It has to do with the destruction of the Honor Code at the U.S. Naval Academy [20].

       "Has something fundamental and significant been overlooked in all the rhetoric, heat, light and emotion of this matter? Has not the line between a CONDUCT OFFENSE and an HONOR OFFENSE (MORAL TURPITUDE) been obscured? Did not Midshipman Lamar Owens commit a CONDUCT OFFENSE along with the participating accuser, but did not the accuser commit an HONOR OFFENSE by first alleging rape, then recanting and then suggesting maybe the sex of the CONDUCT OFFENSE might very well have been consensual? (Apparently only after being confronted with evidence and verification of the accusers participatory culpability in the event did the accuser agree that the conduct was consensual). Isn't that  LYING?

       "Doesn't a conduct offense warrant punishment according to the offense? But then doesn't an HONOR OFFENSE warrant the  poison pill being reserved solely and exclusively for Owens but not for the accuser?

       "Back in my Naval Academy [days], IMMUNITY was not required to provide information regarding a personal involvement in a conduct issue. One was required to bilge oneself if required to do so by the question being put?  Mr., did you talk in ranks today? Whatever the answer to that question was, was what the punishment outcome would be. We did not have the privilege, nor should we have, to demur in our complete and total, un-sea lawyer response to potentially bilging ourselves. That is the crux of HONOR as was inculcated in this former midshipman.

       "So, how in the world did we come to the circumstance where the accuser would provide total and complete information only in the circumstance of garnering immunity for herself?

       "Has our HONOR and CONDUCT code been so corrupted that  sea lawyering is now an accepted reality? I ask that rhetorically, for I am afraid the answer to that question is a resounding YES. My personal, recent experience in wading in this pond is that the midshipmen themselves (men and women, and particularly upperclassmen who have lived with the reality for some years) do not have FAITH or TRUST in the system. I have been told that clearly.

       "The improper and biased and hidden initiative motivations behind this farce and injustice to Lamar Owens have damaged beyond near-term repair what it took 150 years to build at my alma mater regarding the underpinnings of HONOR. I am saddened. I am angry. I am appalled.

       "Owens was a dumb cowboy with raging hormones led on by an equally dumb cowgirl, apparently with equally raging hormones. Both deserve severe punishment for their consensual infractions and colossal stupidity. Owens does not need to be, nor should he be, the whipping boy for this mutual conduct aberration. But, the accuser should not get by scot-free for the HONOR code violation in her moral turpitude by dint of the moronic offer of immunity bestowed upon her."

       Thousands of USNA alumni awakened to the sickening injustice being visited on Midshipman Lamar Owens by the Naval Academy administration. And they took action by writing to the Secretary of the Navy to FREE LAMAR OWENS. They had slumbered through a long period of peacetime, content with the pronouncements of a long line of Academy Superintendents who have prided themselves with raising funds for grand structures physical and intellectual. The latter includes a far-reaching New Age Leadership and Ethics program which introduces Aristotle, Stoicism, Immanuel Kant, Peter Singer, and a host of other Franco-German philosophers (but not including Christian Chaplains). But it also has evolved into something much, much more sinister the entrenchment of a radical feminist activism within the Academy administration structure called a SAVI (Sexual Assault Victim Intervention) counselor.

       This victims advocate structure, while not implemented by law within the Pentagon, has grown at the grass roots level via the sensationalism of radical feminist organizations attack on the U.S. Air Force Academy and high-visibility allegations of rape in our military organizations, particularly our most revered service academies.

       SAVI was implemented in 2004 by then-Vice Chief of Naval Operations, ADM Michael G. Mullen, who directed that Commanders are required todesignate Command Representatives who serve as the liaison with an individual victim. The representative prevents re-victimization by limiting the number of command officials with whom the victim is required to interact and provides a direct line of communication to the Commanding Officer. All Navy commands, ashore and float, provide 24/7 advocacy for sexual assault victims, either through use of trained military volunteers or community sexual assault advocates. You may read this directive at the hyperlink:

       Thus, little known to Naval Academy alumni, the chain of command within all naval units, including the Naval Academy, has been broken by directive from the Chief of Naval Operations. And the direct link between the Superintendent and the SAVI counselor has completely destroyed the Honor Concept at the Naval Academy. Why? Because that post has quietly been filled by a radical feminist from the outside, a Ms. Karen Gentile.

       Ms. Gentile is a professional victims advocate from the school of thought which the pioneering date rape researcher, Eugene Kanin, a professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Purdue University, who virtually deny the existence of false rape accusations and believe the concept itself constitutes discriminatory harassment toward women. She is of the same school of feminism as Catharine A. MacKinnon, a law school professor at the University of Michigan, who claims that all sex within marriage is rape.

       Ms. Gentiles position at the Naval Academy is reported at the hyperlink:

       She is identified there as the sexual assault prevention and interventions specialist at the Naval Academy. She organized and conducted a SAAVI Conference at the Academy for representatives of the Air Force Academy, Military Academy, Coast Guard Academy, Merchant Marine Academy, Virginia Military Institute, the Citadel, and service academy preparatory schools. To quote, Gentile believes the academy is on the cutting edge of being able to respond with its training program for SAVI guides and advocates.

       It is now clear how Midshipman Lamar Owens was railroaded by the radical feminists through Ms. Gentile, her direct link to the Superintendent, VADM Rodney P. Rempt, and the radical feminist destruction of the military chain of command. It is the radical feminists and their supporters at the Academy who have destroyed the chain of command at the Naval Academy and thereby destroyed the Honor Code that has served it so well through over 150 years.

       So, who is this Karen Gentile the inside SAVI counselor with a direct path to the Superintendent at the Naval Academy? She is actually an outside community activist who advocates for victims of sexual assault and in the Midshipman Owens case, if the alleged victim says she has been raped, by gosh she has been raped. Just go ask the SAVI counselor.
     You can view evidence for this view of Ms. Gentile by reading the Adobe Acrobat pdf file account at the hyperlink:

       Here MCASA stands for the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault. Read through its radical feminist agenda and scroll down to page 5 and you will find that Karen Gentile, United States Naval Academy, is on the Board of Directors of MCASA. So the inside Naval Academy victims advocate SAVI counselor with a direct command link to the Superintendent is actually an outside radical feminist victims advocate for the MCASA.

       Very few Naval Academy alumni and virtually no other American citizens know this. And it came as a great shock to those of us who supported Midshipman Lamar Owens against the vendetta carried out by the Superintendent of the Naval Academy. It is no wonder they the radical feminists been so effective in destroying the traditional Honor Code at the U.S. Naval Academy. And it is no wonder why VADM Rodney P. Rempt was so hell-bent on destroying Midshipman Lamar Owens' life. VADM Rempt is simply the agent, the useful idiot, through whom Ms. Gentile and her comrades are carrying out their savage agenda.

For those of you who do not have a copy, a Fact Sheet summarizing the injustices carried out by VADM Rempt on Midshipman Owens is available at the hyperlink:

       One of the last official acts by VADM Rempt, as superintendent of the Naval Academy was to appoint CAPT 'Peg Klein' as Commandant of the Midshipmen. The March/April 2007 issue of the Eternal Vigilance journal [20a] describes this appointment. Under the heading, 'High Level Corruption is Complete at the Naval Academy,' the journal states "His conduct in the Owens case reveals a disintegration on a much larger scale of importance. His disgrace reveals a systemic disorder at the Academy. It is a symptom of the corruption of not only a venerable institution, the United States Naval Academy, held in high regard by the American people, but also of a Navy whose leadership has lost its way. I have written a dozen or so articles for The Washington Times during the 1998-2000 years of the source of this degradation. What once produced leaders who believed with their hearts and souls in a motto equivalent to General Macarthur's, Duty, Honor, Country has degenerated to a set of trite New Age 'core values:' Honor, Courage, Commitment. And here, Commitment has become synonymous with a leadership defined by one's commitment to diversity and above all, a leader in advancing the role of women in the military. Rempt's over-zealousness in prosecuting high-profile sexual assault cases is part of his effort to advance an agenda designed to appease women's groups demanding a crackdown on sexual assault and harassment at military academies. And above Rempt is ADM Mike Mullen, the Chief of Naval Operations who just recently (Navy Times, "CNO: Diversity 'critical' to Navy's future," 7/17/06) declared that "diversity within the Navy work force persists as a 'very critical issue,' a top priority and a 'strategic imperative' for the future. He said he wants to see more women and minorities as flag officers and among flag staffs - and his admirals know it."

     Accordingly, VADM Rempt announced in December 2006 the appointment of Navy Captain Margaret D. 'Peg' Klein, a 1981 graduate of the Naval Academy to be the first female commandant of midshipmen. This post has formerly been filled by Navy or Marine Corps officers with combat experience in fighting units. In short, warriors. They have traditionally served to provide the leadership and military training for the brigade. Klein, an apparently nice and capable woman is not in the mold of the traditional 'warrior.' She is a Naval Flight Officer who has not served in a 'fighting' combat unit but has punched all of the right 'tickets' in joint service billets to reach this point in her career.
       She met her husband Frank Klein, a retired Navy commander, a day before he graduated from the academy and the couple married on campus in 1982. They have two children. "Her experience in making family life work with joint assignments with her husband, neither serving at sea duty at the same time, might be a valuable model [20b] for midshipmen," Klein said.
       A Naval Academy alumnus, John Howland - USNA Class '64 - who hosts the USNA-at-Large online news service comments, "But, the hard facts are that the American citizen/taxpayer really didn't bargain for our service academies becoming high priced dating services. If the social goal is to pair up young American men and women, there are lots less expensive ways to accomplish that social goal. Middle Americans are willing to pay to provide the core combat leadership for the United States Naval Sea Services. Sooner or later they are going to catch on that they are paying for lots of other things these days and when they do, they are going to cut off the funds.
        In announcing her appointment, the Washington Post reported that "Klein was appointed by the academy's superintendent, VADM Rodney P. Rempt, who came to the academy with a reputation as a leader in advancing the role of women in the military." In the same article, Klein was quoted as saying "As far as her working relationship with Rempt, 'Certainly his priorities are my priorities.'" Indeed, the complete feminization of the U.S. Naval Academy has nearly been accomplished. It is in its final stages.
       Malcolm Schantz USNA Class '63, wrote [20c], in a commentary entitled "'Political' Preferences at Work: Commandant a Female," " I note that just about every official reference to Captain Peg Klein '81 includes a reminder that she was a CarGru Chief of Staff, and commanded an operational squadron. The two are joined at the hip, reminiscent of references to candidate John Kerry as a Viet Nam vet! Both smack of a desire to immunize the chosen one against charges that he or she is short of requisite qualifications."
       "As such, they tell us far more about the boosters than they do about the candidate. I don't mean to disparage Captain Klein's professional achievements; she is certainly above average. But just as clearly, there are many navy captains whose records are equal to or better than hers, and involve a lot more sea air and salt spray. As to what she was "advising" Senator Snowe about I can't imagine."
       "What unique perspectives had she to offer? May I speak plainly? This officer was chosen for a coveted and prestigious assignment because she is female. Period. Assurances about what a hot shot warrior and aviator she is notwithstanding."
       "There isn't an officer on active duty who doesn't understand what's going on here. The universal reaction will be a cynical shrug. The navy has become accustomed to half-truths and lawyerly evasions served up in aid of the latest political fad."
       "Klein is obviously marked for exalted office in today's navy. We can draw consolation from the fact that as soon as she gets her "commandant" ticket punched she will probably be on her way. Of greater and longer lasting effect is the corrosive influence that such institutional mendacity has had on the morale and professional standards of our service." Schantz has it exactly right.
       So, what has the Midshipman Lamar Owens Affair taught us about the Naval Academy, and the U.S. Navy in general for that matter? It has taught us that the concept of LEADERSHIP has been stood on its head in the U.S. Navy.  It means that the 'pretenders,' the 'ticket punching careerists' who are now entrenched throughout the Navy's admiralship are steering it on a course of disintegration from within as servants of the 'diversity' agenda of the Boomer generation's counter-culture elites. They know nothing of real live COMBAT, never having tasted it, lived it, nor even aspired to its 'siren song.' They are the ultimate 'pretenders.' So, just who are the Navy's real leaders?
       Midshipman Lamar Owens has demonstrated more leadership potential than any one of the Navy 'actors' in this sorry saga. A true leader takes personal and professional risks in support of his 'people,' his comrades-in-arms. When shots are fired in anger, the true leader runs 'toward' the fire, not away from it. Unlike the VADM Rempts of the U.S. Navy, who after punching the required 'tickets,' scramble into the darkness to save their precious rank and retirement goodies, the Lamar Owens of the Navy stand up for their 'people,' their teammates, their buddies, their fellow bearer of arms in the fox holes and against insurgent refuges in foreign lands. Leaders unite us in times of peril while the 'pretenders' follow agendas which favor one group over others. Lamar Owens was and is just the kind of leader the U.S. Navy needs now and in the future.
      Let me give you two examples of Midshipman Lamar Owens' leadership during this saga. First, by standing firm against the injustices visited upon him by VADM Rempt and his weak-kneed supporters, with moral courage (see Lt. Col. Yingling's critique) and fortitude while conducting himself with patience, faith, and honor toward the Naval Establishment which was persecuting him, Owens won the admiration and support of thousands of Naval Academy alumni. This disparate alumni group had no formal organization and, as individuals, would probably disagree on many, if not all, of the 'political' issues facing America today. But Midshipman Owens' continuous display of moral courage in the face of the vendetta carried out against him and his (and his middle-class family's) deep faith in America and its institutions was inspiring to all of us who believe in the cause of justice before the law, brought us all together. Our other differences were put aside. Here is an American who was being sacrificed to the false gods of the counter-culture revolutionaries who would destroy America. Here is a young man who could be counted on to face the harsh winds of death and destruction that our enemies will attempt to visit on us in the future. Here is a young man we could trust to do his duty to protect us and our Constitution. Here is a young man, whom his weekend 'Sponsor' at the Academy, Deborah Clark and her family, says is an exemplar of those who attend 'America's University,' the U.S. Naval Academy. And that 'University' let him down. The final decision by SecNav Winter - no graduation, no commission, and payback of $90,000 in tuition - was a stunning blow to those close to Lamar Owens. Yet, he did not give up his faith - nor his leadership.
       And that second example of leadership displayed by Midshipman Lamar Owens occurred during the first of the same week in which SecNav Winter's negative decision was dispensed. It is possible that Owens' action during that week sealed his fate. He had the audacity, and the moral courage to personally attend the sentencing phase of Midshipman Kenny Ray Morrison at the Navy Yard. Morrison had been found 'not guilty' of a rape charge (as had Midshipman Owens) but was still facing disciplinary action for lesser sexual assault charges stemming from his court-martial. Morrison was sentenced to prison time at that hearing.
       Midshipman Owens attended Midshipman Morrison's hearing and sat with Morrison's family. He did so against the express wishes of his defense counsel, Reid Weinstein. At a break in the proceedings, Owens was seen - bible in hand - reading to Kenny Ray Morrison. So here we see an exacting, explicit example of leadership as it has been defined over the ages. Owens, without regard to his own personal situation, came to the aid of a fellow member of their outstanding 2005 football team, consoled him, and showed his allegiance to their cause - both having been prosecuted on fraudulent rape charges by members of VADM Rempt's New Age 'Vagina Warriors.' And Morrison was not even a 'starting' member of the 2005 football team which Owens led to a victory over Army and a post-season Bowl victory over Colorado State. Morrison was a 'backup' linebacker on that team. Owens was the star quarterback on that team. No matter to our young leader, Lamar Owens. He saw his duty to support his teammate. He acted on this bond in spite of the impact it may have had on his own situation.
       And at the end of the week of Morrison's hearing, SecNav Winter handed down his negative decision on Midshipman Lamar Owens. Deborah Clark is right. America's 'University,' the U.S. Naval Academy and the U.S. Navy which it serves had let down Midshipman Lamar Owens. As Lt. Gen. Charles G. Cooper, USMC (Ret.), USNA class 1950 said in his letter to SecNav Winter in support of Midshipman Owens [20d] , "ůAs a concerned alumni, experienced leader, and supporter of our school and its traditions, I say to you that some intelligent mercy and reinstatement would make the entire Alumni Association cheer your good judgment and compassion. He has already paid a heavy price. I ask of you, don't take his life, his future away from him. Give him the diploma he has earned, and give him the chance to serve his country as an officer in the U.S. Navy."
       Lt. Gen. Cooper continued, "If you do not see fit to honor my request and the many others you've received, I'm going to feel that the system has failed all of us and I will never again feel the love and enthusiasm I have always had for my Alma Mater. Conversely, you can show the courage and compassion to correct this wrong and let Lamar Owens move on. You will become a hero to those of us awaiting your decision. I pray you will also ask God's guidance and give this fine lad his life and future back." Of course, SecNav Winter's decision failed Midshipman Owens, Lt. Gen. Cooper, the U.S. Navy, and thousands of others of us who supported this valiant and loyal young American leader.
       In the aftermath of SecNav Winter's decisions regarding Midshipmen Lamar Owens and Kenny Morrison, I found a source on the Internet which has a common-sense, reasoned explanation. It is provided by a law firm dedicated solely to representing military members worldwide facing courts-martial on allegations of rape and/or sexual assault. It is accessible at the hyperlink:

'Counter-revolutionary' makes the common sense observation on his "Duke on the Severn -- Kenny Morrison, Lamar Owens, Webster Smith, etc." ( that "The current round of US Naval Academy (USNA) sexual assault cases appear to be over. With Duke lacrosse as a background one might wonder why the difference in outcomes? There really was very little difference in the quality of the evidence. So why did the Navy and Coast Guard convict its accused and North Carolina drop all charges?"

       "The answer may lie in the revelations found at the hyperlink above, run by a law firm specializing in military justice. In explaining the military legal process regarding rape, this point is made:"


       At each step in the process, independent judgments are supposed to be made based on the ultimate interests of justice. There is a lot of 'discretion' at each step, or, at least, there is supposed to be. This is called the military 'chain of command.'

But, after the many cases resulting in BAD PRESS, the landscape has dramatically changed:

       Because of this bad press, the Academy, the Air Force, and the military at large have reacted with new initiatives to try to prevent these allegations and appear to be advocates for alleged rape victims who make false claims. For all intents and purposes, the discretion is now gone. If a woman alleges rape, no matter how much she, or the allegation, lacks credibility, that allegation will end up at trial.

      The law firm goes further explaining the mechanisms being used/causing the current round of rape claims and cases: poor training, misstating the actual rape law during that 'sensitivity' training, resulting in command influence, jury members influenced by these same issues, many sex assault/harassment claims, many lives ruined.

       I cannot predict at this juncture, but it is my impression that if this situation does not change for the better, a class action rights/due process suit will ensue. Why? Because unlike for the Duke Lacrosse players which have the possibilities for civil actions, there is no recourse for military members caught up in these injustices. Moreover, the entire chain of command is involved, since they are behind the training programs.

       At the link above you will also find an insightful, but very disturbing conclusion by the law firm:

       In part I of this series [of law articles], I asked whether the defendants in the Duke case would have fared as well under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and would the military justice system have handled the Duke case better or worse than it was handled in the civilian world? Based on what I have seen in representing members of all service branches, unless the alleged victim recanted, it is unlikely that the charges would have been dropped in the military. That's because of the fear that the woman would end up on the talk show circuit bad mouthing the military and causing public scandal. In the military, even if a woman (herself serving in the military) does not want to go forward with her allegations, if she has already discussed them with a third party she can be compelled to testify against the accused. The actions taken by Attorney General Roy Cooper in North Carolina were an exercise of discretion -- something that has been largely surrendered in handling these
cases in the military. Again, this is a 'broad brush' treatment that may not apply to all military cases, but it applies in a disturbingly high number of them.
       Please read the entire essay on this issue by a firm with expertise in the area. It is available at the hyperlink above.

       The final straw that should have broken the camel's back in the VADM Rempt record as superintendent of the Naval Academy is his responsibility in creating an environment at the Naval Academy wherein a female instructor there was sufficiently emboldened to carry the feminist 'empowerment' mantra to such a degrading depth as to participate as an 'independent contractor' to Ms. Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the now (in)famous D.C. Madam who is being prosecuted under federal statute for running a 'high-end' prostitution ring.
       On 4 May 2007, Brian Ross of ABC News 20/20 TV program interviewed Deborah Jeane Palfrey -- known as the D.C. Madam -- who gave details of her side of the story of the prostitution charges (running a prostitution service) on which she was indicted by a federal grand jury. During this interview she identified an anonymous female U.S. Navy lieutenant commander as one of her 'private contractor' escorts who provided 'services' to her 'customers.' Ms. Palfrey did not reveal the identity of this female officer, either on the program or in answer to inquiries by media reporters in its aftermath. It was established, however, that the escort was on the faculty at the U.S. Naval Academy.
       Local media reporters [21] began hearing 'inside' rumors around the 'Yard' that VADM Rodney Rempt, the Academy superintendent, and/or his staff has knowledge of the identity of this USNA 'escort.' But the rumor has it that it would not be 'fair' to implicitly identify her by dismissing her immediately from teaching a class which was in session or transferring her out of the Academy to another Navy billet at this time. That would wait until after the media 'buzz' subsided later in the summer -- as well as after VADM Rempt's then-planned retirement. The matter would be covered up in the vague shadows of certain normal, routine transfers and other procedural matters. The American public would never know the identity of the Naval Academy 'call girl.' Of course, the Academy would not suffer another blow to its lately, badly-tarnished reputation.
       Of course, this is the same VADM Rempt whose Rempt-Rape of Midshipmen Lamar Owens and Kenny Ray Morrison was carried out under the guise of false rape accusations by female midshipmen at the Academy. These two potential 'warrior' leaders were victims of gross prosecutorial misconduct on the part of VADM Rempt the convening authority in each case -- while the false rape accusers are on a path to being graduated, commissioned and sent to the fleet as officers to continue their radical agenda of sexual high-jinks. The Admiral nearly Rempt-Raped LT Bryan Black, an instructor at the Academy who was accused of using inappropriate language in the presence of a female midshipman. But for the grace of God and the brilliant work of his defense lawyer, Charles Gittins, LT Black was exonerated and received a non-punitive letter in his record. His Navy career continues without blemish -- as it should.
       Soon after the 20/20 program revelations, rumors spread that the USNA 'call girl' was none other than the female officer at the Academy who had, without authority from above, enticed the female midshipman to whom LT Black made inappropriate remarks (regarding his own estranged wife) to report the incident to higher authority. This female officer, LCDR Whisenhant, told the female Midshipman that she should report it so as to 'make it a part of LT Black's service record' -- thereby damaging his naval career. Wouldn't this be 'sweet justice' if LCDR Whisenhant were the USNA 'call girl?' Wouldn't LT Black's supporters be cheered by such a damning revelation? But the truth is, this would not stand scrutiny of the evidence. LCDR Whisenhant is NOT the USNA 'call girl.'
       So, just who is this female Naval Academy instructor -- Ms. Palfrey's escort service D.C. 'call girl?' It is clear that VADM Rempt and close staff know her identity. But so can we. Or at least we can view the evidence and build a strong case as to her identity. It takes some digging, but the evidence is preponderant. This evidence leads directly to a young female lieutenant commander instructor in the Mechanical Engineering Department at the Academy, our 'mystery USNA call girl'.
       Anyone who has the time and access to the Internet via computer can easily follow the evidence to this most likely candidate as the 'mystery USNA call girl.' Here is the evidentiary trail. A reporter who has closely followed the current atmosphere at the Naval Academy called Ms. Palfrey and established that the Naval Academy 'mystery USNA call girl' in question was not (by direct inquiry) LCDR Whisenhant, but that it was a female Naval Academy graduate who had attended a civilian university for an advanced degree and then returned to the Academy as an instructor. That is step one.

       Step two is to access the publicly available web page:

on which the Academic Dean makes a complete list available of the Academy's faculty and staff for the 2006 school year. There are hundreds of names on this official list. But a careful perusal of this list reveals that there are only six female lieutenant commanders at the Academy. One of these is a member of the Japanese Defense Force, so she can reasonably be excluded from the list of possible candidates as Ms. Palfreys 'USNA mystery call girl.'
       This leaves five candidates, and only five for our USNA 'USNA mystery call girl.' Step three is to access a list of all graduates of the naval academy. This list is available. If you access the publication (any recent edition) "The U.S. Naval Academy, Inc. Register of Alumni, Book 2, Classes of 1918-1996 (or any later date)," you will find a complete list of names as well as detailed data on their class year and brief biographical history.
       Fortunately, for those who seek the truth, of the five possible named female 'candidates' for our 'USNA mystery call girl,' only one is a Naval Academy graduate. All of the remaining four did not graduate from the Naval Academy. That is, LCDRs Clifford, Whisenhant, Wingeart, and Alfieri did NOT graduate from the Naval Academy -- but graduated from civilian institutions.
       That leaves only one remaining female LCDR as the most likely candidate for Ms. Palfreys  Naval Academy 'independent contractor'' by the preponderance of evidence. Of course, Ms. Palfrey will not provide reporters with this name. It is not in her interest to do so. She is fighting a serious charge of running a prostitution ring. Consequently, she will not reveal this name. But, of course, VADM Rempt obviously knows the candidate's identity. One does not have to even guess why he will not reveal what he knows. What a blot on his sterling record as a 'warrior' for women at the academy! What a disgrace for the integrator of Eve Ensler's 'Vagina Warriors' at the U.S. Naval Academy!
       So what must we believe to reach this damning conclusion? First we must believe that Ms. Palfrey's revelation on Brian Ross's 20/20 program regarding the 'Navy lieutenant commander' as an example given as one of Ms. Palfrey's 'escorts.' Second, we must take at face value the national reporter's phone query of Ms. Palfrey in which the latter denied that LCDR Whisenhant was the person, but that the person was a 'Naval Academy graduate who had attended a civilian university for an advanced degree and then returned to the Academy as an instructor.'  The USNA faculty and staff identification document lists our 'USNA mystery call girl's' advanced degree as "M.S. Vanderbilt University, P.E." This fits precisely the naval career path given above by Ms. Palfrey in a phone conversation with the reporter. The alumni association document lists our 'USNA mystery call girl' as a class 1993 graduate of the Academy. At this juncture, she is the most likely candidate, based on the evidence, as Ms. Palfreys USNA prostitute, one of her female prostitution ring's military 'independent contractors.'
       Ms. Palfrey's claims that [22] "ůthe women in her employ had at least two years college experience, and many worked white-collar professional jobsůWant to attract an elite clientele? You've got to offer an elite array of women - drawn, in this case, from the upper reaches of academia, government agencies and even the militaryůOf the 132 escorts, only a few lacked college-level education, [her lawyer said], She made a handful of exceptions for women who didn't have a degree but had the poise. Those women tended to be in the military and had been polished in the ranks there - they knew how to stand straight, among other things."
       Although Ms. Palfrey claims that her 'escorts' were contractually prohibited from engaging in sex acts, her frequent newsletters to her stable of 'escorts' proclaimed, "Adult service or fantasy escorts command a substantially greater fee, usually $200 an hour; this, of course, because of the risky and sexual nature of these appointmentsůObviously, the more liberal the booking or act, the more $ one makes. Therefore, if (any)ony thinks that fantasy prices can ever be changed for purely social servicesůall this writer can say, is that the person(s) is a damned fool! This past weekend, this new escort (no longer amongst us) thought she could go 'there,' collect the $200 and 'just talk'ůher mere presence being justification enough here for the big bucks!!! WRONG!!!" So now we know what was expected of our 'USNA mystery call girl.'
       VADM Rodney Rempt was a disaster as the superintendent of the Naval Academy. He encouraged 1st class midshipmen to drink alcohol at formal Academy functions, including those at his own residence presumably to teach them how to responsibly handle such drinking. Then, when the underclassmen (including many female midshipmen) left the Yard and visited local Annapolis bars to engage in binge drinking, he was shocked. Yes, shocked! And his remedy was to invoke childish rules on the number and types of drinks that were allowed while on liberty by ALL midshipmen. And he had to implement a Midshipman Shore Patrol in an attempt to enforce these stringent drinking rules. How naive! How foolish!
       In addition, VADM Rempt implemented a Sexual Assault Victim Intervention (SAVI) counselor program at the Academy which completely destroys the traditional Honor Code system there. A friend of mine, a President of a regional USNA alumni organization relates that, at a recent conference at the Academy, a female midshipman described the new honor code which includes the possibility that several honor code violations could be excused without prejudice as long as the violator expressed regret and promised to do better in the future (for each one in sequential order). That is probably applicable only to female midshipmen.
       But the most egregious failure of VADM Rempts superintendency has been his gross prosecutorial misconduct in bringing unfounded charges of rape against male midshipmen who were fraudulently charged with rape and/or sexual assault by female midshipmen. He has misused his nearly dictatorial power as convening authority for courts-martial in this regard. Unlike the prosecutorial misconduct by Michael Wifong in the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case wherein the prosecutor is undergoing trial by a reviewing authority, the State Attorneys Office, and could be disbarred, VADM Rempt has sailed off into the sunset of retirement without having to answer for his prosecutorial misconduct. His disgraceful performance at the Academy is sufficiently venal that he should have been reduced in rank and retired, if not prosecuted for perversion of justice. Just for the hell of it.
       Given his disgraceful performance as superintendent, we challenge VADM Rempt to come straight with the American people and reveal the name of the female Naval Academy instructor who was anonymously identified by Ms. Jeane Palfrey, the D.C. Madam, in her interview on ABC News 20/20 program. Anything less will brand him the pretender that he has become. He has continuously falsely pronounced in his numerous Shipmate Magazine messages that the Naval Academy, under his reign, has the prime objective of educating Americas future COMBAT leaders. The objective, if he had been honest, should have revealed his efforts to facilitate the U.S. Navy's version of Eve Ensler's  'Vagina Warriors' in the Looming American Matriarchy's 'War Against Men.'
       Christina Hoff Sommers, the author of several books critical of the feminist movement in America (e.g. Who Stole Feminism? and The War Against Boys) recently informed us [22a] that Ms. Ensler's followers have coined the phrase 'Vagina Warriors' for those young women on our nations college campuses who idolize Eve Ensler's episodic play and stage production, The Vagina Monologues. Sommers says that this potty-mouth degradation has become the favorite of up to 25 percent of Americas female college students. This may have set the precedent for the real world 'Vagina Warriors,' those trained at the U.S. Naval Academy under the tutelage of the superintendent, VADM Rodney P. Rempt.
       John Leo described this blight on our New Age popular culture [23]. "Nowadays feminists detect dangerous pro-rape attitudes in joke, complimentary remarks and even glances [by men], but the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl in a popular feminist show has passed almost without comment. The show is 'The Vagina Monologues,' and the reason for the absence of criticism is that the show's fictional perpetrator was a lesbian, aged 24. So the all-female rape is described by the victim as 'a good rape.' No word yet from feminist theorists on this new distinction between good rapes and bad."

All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
       It is clear that VADM Rodney Rempt has been the enabler at the Naval Academy of the Armed Forces version of Americas 'Vagina Warriors.' There is no diversity or radical feminist cause that he did not support while superintendent there. Now it appears that in addition to Mishipman Kim Koss, the fraudulent rape accuser of Midshipman Lamar Owens, legions of other 'Vagina Warriors' at the Academy are enjoying free reins to have sex on and off campus, in classrooms and in Bancroft Hall. A USNA graduate of the class of 1964 wrote [24], I am grateful that we were mids in the pre-women days. Let me tell you that I have knowledge from the lips of participants in the class of 1996 who told me there was a lot of sex going on in [Bancroft Hall]. After learning that, I wondered how a couple of firsties who had had sex in one of Bancrofts rooms could later expect to discipline lower class mids who were listening in the adjacent room. I wondered how reputations earned in such events would affect discipline in the fleet between two officers with this special knowledge about each other. Personally, I was shocked and upset.
       If this isn't sufficient proof that something is rotten in Denmark at the Naval Academy, under VADM Rempt's supervision, a commentary in the Opinion section of the 21 May 2007 issue of Navy Times, by Charles Gittins, LT Ryan Blacks defense attorney states [25], "ůif it is truly conduct unbecoming to engage in sexual relations in Bancroft Hall, the Navy has a real problem. Sex in Bancroft is neither a new phenomenon, nor does it occur in isolated instances. It is pervasive and regular."
       Obviously, under VADM Rempts supervision, the Naval Academy has become not only a haven for a female instructor to perform prostitution in the civilian market place, but it has become a breeding ground for prostitution for free in its venerable dormitory, Bancroft Hall. Could the establishment of the Whore House on the Severn, Bancroft Hall, be VADM Rempt's legacy? Naval Academy alumni should be enraged by this fact. A large fraction, however, have been numbed into passivity by all of this turmoil and may not be likely to support the necessary corrective action. American citizens, however, should be informed and take action commensurate with the huge waste in taxpayer money for an institution that has become corrupted by its high-level military leaders. The diversity crowd in Congress, the White House, and the Secretariat of the Navy has corrupted beyond repair the admiralship of the U.S. Navy. They are failing America across the board. They must also be held accountable.
     The current disaster of Americas military generalship has recently been disclosed by a courageous young active duty Army officer, Lt. Col. Paul Yingling, in an article in the Armed Forces Journal. A parallel example of Lt. Col. Yingling's description of a failure in generalship has been provided by the above expose of the Naval Academy pretender, VADM Rodney Rempt and his superiors in the chain of command up through the Chief of Naval Operations.

The Navy Problem is Not New
       A recent article in the Baltimore Sun [26] revealed that the 'pipeline' of naval officers awaiting an opening in naval aviation has been clogged. The headline read "Flight trainees' assignment: Wait for orders." It told the story of two student pilots, a man and wife - both recent graduates of the Naval Academy - who were drawing almost $4,000/month apiece whiling away their time sunning at the beach, taking online education courses, or just plain lounging around waiting to enter the naval aviation pipeline.
       This article wakened old, old memories. And we are probably missing the BIG story in all of this. But first, the memories. First of all, it's hard for me to wake up and realize how much times have changed. For goodness sake, $4800/month each. Back in my Ensign days I made $5,200 per year. And by God, we would have paid them to let us fly jets aboard carriers. But I digress.
       Second, times change but the problems do not. It is quite easy to see the dilemma for naval aviation leadership in the mismatch between current plans and changing missions. Plans are long-range in time, but missions and circumstances change within weeks, months and a few years. Let me give you an example.
       As a freshly 'winged' ensign out of flight training, I was assigned to a fighter squadron (VF-84) which was being equipped with the new (and radically designed) F7U-3M 'Cutlass,' a fighter far ahead of its time but which quickly earned its reputation as the 'Ensign killer.' Being tail-less (no horizontal stabilizer), it had flying qualities which would result in a post-stall gyration from which it was impossible to recover (ejection was the only non-lethal route to staying alive). But worst of all, it was seriously underpowered.
       Consequently, the aircraft was so difficult to bring aboard ship that it was never successfully deployed. We shook down the USS Forrestal but shortly thereafter (we lost our squadron C.O. and one of the better junior officers, climbing out of Oceana, VA in a thunderstorm), the aircraft was decommissioned and we sat around waiting for replacement aircraft. The A4 Skyhawk was then in its latter stages of development, but not yet ready for the fleet.
       After a few months of this, I (obviously a brand new ensign without a clue as to the proper procedure) wrote a letter to the Commander Naval Air Forces, Atlantic Fleet and demanded that they either give us some jet aircraft to fly or I (for one) was going to resign my damn commission and leave the Navy. Amid amused chuckles from our new squadron commander, we soon received several F9F-8 Cougars and were able to keep reasonably proficient until the A4s arrived. So, I know how the young ensigns, whom you write about feel. Many of them are as gung-ho as we were. But I am afraid the good ones -- I mean the 'real' good ones, the potential 'warriors' will leave.
       So, here comes the BIG story that we will obviously miss if we don't dig deeper into what has happened in naval aviation over the past two decades or so. I authored and published a book about this situation which gives a real live account of a particular case which occurred in 1996 in the advanced naval air training command. Its title is "From Trust to Terror: Radical Feminism is Destroying the U.S. Navy."
       I wrote and published this book after Vivienne Heinnes, a reporter for a Corpus Christi, Texas newspaper (she now occasionally writes for Navy Times) and her publisher were threatened with a $250,000 law suite by the WANDAS feminist organization (Susan Barnes) if they reported the story. I had flight instructors talking to me from pay phones because they feared retribution from the Wing Commander. They were threatened with OIG investigations by him if they cooperated with reporters. So I published the book, leaving out the names of the 'actors,' but preserved the testimony of these courageous flight instructors in the book in their anonymity. I have not and will not reveal their names, but the central flight instructor happened to be the same one who was identified (independently) as 'Pilot A' by Stephanie Gutmann in her book, "The Kinder, Gentler Military." A hyperlink to a four-page summary of that book is at:

       It is of interest to note, over a decade after the events in the above story, that the decadence of the antagonist 'actors' in the story have mirrored the worst that we now have in the U.S. Navy. The Student pilot, here identified as at-the-time Ltjg. Debra Ann Draheim (USNA class 1993), was finally 'washed out' of the advanced naval aviation training program and served aboard the USS Tarawa, a converted WWII aircraft carrier converted to carrying a Marine Expeditionary Force unit in the Pacific Theatre. She served as the Supply Officer aboard that ship. A Marine major, who served aboard that ship at the time, contacted me via Email with information that her presence on the ship had caused great discord among the crew. She took up 'sleeping' with a ranking Navy officer on the ship and spent much time with him behind closed doors. They were well known to be a 'couple.' That behavior could have easily been predicted, based on her behavior in the 'Wrong Stuff' story at the link above.
       It is not known whether or not Ms. Draheim is still in the Navy. But a 'Switchboard' search on her name lists her current living address as Fallbrook, California - a suburb just outside the gate of Camp Pendleton, the Marine Base on the West coast.
       The Wing Commander in my 'From Trust to Terror' book, who bragged openly that he was 'bullet proof' [as now VADM Rempt is 'bullet proof'], as he performed his duties as the 'diversity' commissar in his wing. He would do everything he could to 'wing' Ltjg. Draheim - even suggesting that the Navy just 'give' her the coveted Wings of Gold without completing the flight syllabus and send her to a cargo aircraft billet. The Wing Commander was CAPT Charles Nesby, who upon retirement, served as an aide to Congressman Randy Cunningham. That's right, the same U.S. Representative who now serves time in federal prison for taking bribes while in office. The corruption in the U.S. Navy's 'diversity' machine has come full circle.
       The point is, the very same thing is currently going on in naval aviation as we speak. But no one knows about it but those who are very closely involved. It is the darnedest story and I am collecting materials to write about it. It has some of the same elements that I uncovered in my book above, but even more deadly. It deals with the issue of 'evil prevails when good men do nothing.' It goes even further into the discourse of the current political environment -- that is, the '24' TV program's concept of the value of torture versus the political ambition of Senator John McCain. Every man has his price, and Jack Bauer quickly finds it in his simple but direct way. It is in this story, but in real life. It is being lived today. In the U.S. Navy. The antagonist in this story is a graduate of the Naval Academy, class of 2005.
incorporates that of Dr. James J. Duderstadt, former provost and then President of the University of Michigan. Jim, a brilliant young nuclear engineer from Cal Tech was a member of my PhD dissertation committee at the U of M. A conservative, very capable man, who built the first $1B endowment for the university by proselytizing corporate America for funds, Jim was and is a genius in his technical, professional skill, but he was asleep at the switch as his campus was infiltrated by the radical feminists who quickly introduced all of the diversity-oriented studies programs, including Catharine MacKinnon's Law School (she of the 'all sex within marriage is rape, school of thought). The Chairman of my Doctoral Committee laments that "Jim has three daughters but no sons." I have described the break in our close friendship in my essay at the hyperlink:
       The story I am going to write someday incorporates my attempt to 'explain' all of this via a grounding in Chaos Theory. I stumbled on this 'explanation' pathway quite by  accident. And it relates to all of the above. A good friend of mine, ADM Donald V. Boecker, was in my Test Pilot School class in 1967 and became the Commander of the Naval Air Test Center at the time that LT Paula Coughlin was involved in the Tailhook '91 bacchanal. As a result of his testifying on her behalf in the $5M lawsuit against the hotel chain that hosted that convention and other 'correspondence concerning leadership' matters related to that affair, Don and I have become similarly 'estranged' as above with Dr. Duderstadt.
       But, when Don was Commander NATC, he asked me to teach the Artificial Intelligence (AI) track for young Navy and Marine officers and engineers at the Florida Tech center there at Patuxent River. I did so, and developed the curricula there for the AI program. During this time, I developed an interest in the work of the Santa Fe Institute on Chaos Theory and developed a course on my own and taught Chaos Theory there. It was there that I saw the relationship between the books written by William Strauss and Neil Howe on "Generations: The History of America's Future" and the technical Chaos Theory stuff that I was teaching. You will see my attempt to make the connection between these two fields in essays on my web site at:

Corruption in the U.S. Navy Starts at the Top
       Repeating statistics from a speech by President William J. Clinton in 1997 on the topic of 'diversity,' the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), ADM Mike Mullen stated in 2006 at the Patuxent River Naval Air Station in southern Maryland that [27] "At the strategic level, building a diverse force means keeping with a shifting demographic that will put white Americans in the minority by 2050ůsailors need to see themselves reflected in the senior leadership, though the upper pay grades of the Navy are still heavy with white men. And diversity means varied ethnic representationů"
       The Navy Times story continues. "[Mullen] wants to see more women and minorities as flag officers and among flag staffs - and his admirals know it. Those are paths to success, and we are underrepresented in that regard on the officer side with minorities and women. And it's going to change."
       The Navy Times article adds that "As the demographics shift in the future, the Navy will need new sailors and officers to join the force to prevent the service from isolating itself from society." This, of course, is right out of the mouth of Bill Clinton who stated during his presidency that our armed forces need to reflect the ethnic and race makeup of the American people. And now we hear the very same mantra from the underlings of George W. Bush, our supposedly 'compassionate conservative' president.
       "'We've got to get this right, or I believe this jeopardizes our institution', Mullen said. The seeds for diversity in the upper ranks have been planted at the Naval Academy, which has just inducted its most diverse class ever. The class of 2010ůhas 273 women - 22.4 percent of the 1218-member class. Likewise, 285 ethnic minorities make up 23.4 percent of the 2010 class - a new high. The class of 2010 has the highest total number of women and minorities combined in Naval Academy history."
       "In addition to forming a diverse officer corps trained at the academy, there's a Navy-wide campaign underway to recruit, retain and promote a force - military and civilian - that reflects the general populationůIt's called the Navy Diversity StrategyůRADM Moira Flanders is the director for strategic plans and analysis for the Chief of Naval Personnelů said 'Sailors and civilian employees will start to see changes in recruitment, retention, and promotion 'right away' as the strategy moves from an assessment phase into execution this fall.'" This, of course, makes explicit the 'preferences' for certain groups in the Navy that the American people are now rejecting overwhelmingly in Proposition 209-like initiatives in ballots all over the nation. Indeed, the counter-culture revolutionaries have captured the U.S. Navy as the rest of America slept.
       And to enforce this strategy, the Navy will use the cultural-Marxist techniques of 'sensitivity training' that then-President Bill Clinton introduced in all American institutions, including the military, during the 1990s. "[Ms. Flanders] said, "ůdiversity training will be folded into training for all uniformed personnel, from seaman recruits to new admirals-select. According to the strategy, personnel diversity will be tracked and evaluated in recruiting, retention, and promotion. For example, 'diversity and skills and awareness scenarios' are to be included in all leadership and development courses."
       In a stunning statement in the Navy Times article, RADM Flanders states "Diversity needs to be an underlying priority in what the Navy does in the way safety has been a priority for years." Wow! This means that the Navy will lift 'diversity' as a priority over safety in the future. No wonder the Navy is now experiencing safety 'stand downs' in naval aviation (as it did in the 1990s) and the submarine fleet (show-boating rapid-rise popups for visiting dignitaries such as that which struck a Japanese trawler and killed some of its crew members, and crew members washed overboard in another recent incident), and even in the surface fleet commanding officers are being relieved of command (e.g. USS Arleigh Burke run aground - a so-called 'soft' grounding - by a female commanding officer).
       In his remarks at Patuxent River, Mullen "ůeven though minorities make up 40 percent of the Navy's enlisted ranks - twice the percentage of minorities in the general population - certain technical skill sets are thin on women and minorities. We've got to fix that." Of course that means quotas will be observed even within certain technical skill sets, not just overall. This sad state of affairs was predicted by a prominent Navy hero, one of those who won the Battle of the Pacific in WWII.
     Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, the legendary former Chief of Naval Operations and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff wrote a commentary [28] ("On a diversity roll that serves to erode," 09/01/96) that was prescient of the status of his beloved Navy today. In a precautionary commentary on the looming re-election of President Clinton, ADM Moorer perceived that For the [Clintons] and their coterie 'diversity' is the catch phrase to justify racial and gender quotas, and is reflected in their selection of Cabinet secretaries and senior aides.
       In a full 50 column-inches of print ADM Moorer made his case by quoting from newspapers, polls, military history, and the Bible. In addition he referred to my book [The New Totalitarians]. Unlike most of the widely read recent books about the Clintons, full of personal details, a book that focuses on the effects and future implications of his diversity policies is a cautionary tale. A third of the 266-page book details the demoralization of the Navy by special treatment and the establishment of quotas for females and minorities.
       ADM Moorer highlights the salient point. In the section on the Bosnian intervention, [Atkinson] poses the simple question: Can a multiethnic people who accentuate their differences ever live in peace? ADM Moorer opines "I believe the answer is clear in the case of Bosnia, but the eerie parallel to our own situation should alarm thinking Americans."
       ADM Moorer concludes Although Gerald Atkinson in The New Totalitarians stops short of saying the Republic will be in jeopardy if Mr. Clinton is re-elected, he does make the case that many traditional American institutions, in particular the Navy, will be irreparably damaged by a second Clinton term due in large measure to his policies of placing women aboard ships and in combat roles.
       Now fast-forward a decade and ADM Moorer's prediction has come to pass.  It is not only the damage done by the Clintons but six years as well of the compassionate conservative Bush Administration. The radical feminist claws are so deeply entrenched into the heart and soul of the Navy that it would take something like that which occurred during the successful WWII Battle of the Pacific to dislodge it. What is the evidence?
       The Chief of Naval Operations, ADM Michael G. Mullen, states (CNO: Diversity critical to Navy's future, Navy Times, 07/17/06) At the strategic level, building a diverse force means keeping up with a shifting demographic that will put white Americans in the minority by 2050 Right out of the mouth of Bill Clinton. [Mullen] wants to see more women and minorities as flag officers and among flag staffs and his admirals know it.
       ADM Mullen, in the Navy Times article also states The seeds for diversity in the upper ranks have been planted at the Naval Academy which has just inducted its most diverse class ever. The class of 2010 has the highest total number of women and minorities combined in Naval Academy history.
       ADM Mullen set the stage for this feminization of the Navy when, as Vice Chief of Naval Operations he implemented a program of radical feminist activism in all active duty naval commands. It is called SAVI (Sexual Assault Victim Intervention). This victims advocate structure, while not implemented by law within the Pentagon, has grown at the grass roots level via the sensationalism of radical feminist organizations attack on the U.S. Air Force Academy and high-visibility allegations of rape in our military services, particularly our most revered service academies. This program places a SAVI counselor in a line directly between an alleged victim and the Commanding Officer, thus completely bypassing the traditional chain of command. The SAVI program and VADM Rodney P. Rempt's giving complete immunity to the alleged victim and other female witnesses in the court-martial of Midshipman Lamar Owens has destroyed the Honor Code that has served the Navy so well in the past at the U.S. Naval Academy. This SAVI program is firmly entrenched at the Naval Academy with a civilian feminist activist, Karen Gentile, serving as the sexual assault victims advocate. She was appointed by VADM Rodney P. Rempt, the Academy's superintendent.
       In one of his final acts before his coming retirement this summer, VADM Rempt appointed Navy Captain Margaret D. Peg Klein, a 1981 graduate of the Naval Academy to be the first female commandant of midshipmen. This post has formerly been filled by Navy or Marine Corps officers with combat experience in fighting units. In short, warriors. They have traditionally served to provide the leadership and military training for the brigade. Klein, an apparently nice and capable woman is not in the mold of the traditional warrior. She is a Naval Flight Officer who has not served in a fighting combat unit but has punched all of the right tickets in joint service billets to reach this point in her career. She is not, however, a warrior.
       In announcing her appointment, the Washington Post reported that Klein was appointed by the academys superintendent, VADM Rodney P. Rempt, who came to the academy with a reputation as a leader in advancing the role of women in the military. In the same article, Klein was quoted as saying As far as her working relationship with Rempt, Certainly his priorities are my priorities. Indeed, the complete feminization of the U.S. Naval Academy has nearly been accomplished. It is in its final stages.
       VADM Rempt has come under severe and massive criticism for his mishandling of the fraudulent rape allegations against Midshipman Lamar Owens, who is still being held out to dry at the Navy Yard awaiting disposition of his case by the Secretary of the Navy. Meanwhile, President Bush has nominated RADM Jeffrey L. Fowler, a submarine officer, to relieve VADM Rempt as Superintendent of the Naval Academy from which VADM Rempt is to retire in a normal rotation of that position. Thus, in spite of VADM Rempts outrageous over the top vendetta against Midshipman Owens and the shadow it has cast on the Academy and the Navy, Rempt will go unpunished. He should be punished for the misuse of his authority just the same as the venal prosecutor, Michael A. Nifong, is being punished for his baseless prosecution of three lacrosse team members in the Duke Rape Case.
       While RADM Fowler may become a successful superintendent, no one knows until he proves himself. The evidence is that he will be as committed to the radical feminist agenda as VADM Rempt. The Baltimore Sun (Brad Olson, Academy Leader Nominated: Veteran submarine commander known for advocating diversity, 18 Mar. 2007) reports Fowler is said to care deeply about diversity in the NavyFriends and classmates said that [he] would be well-suited to follow Rempt, praising his commitment to diversity in the Navy and his handling of difficult sexual assault problems while leading the Navys recruiting command in Millington, TN.
       As things go wrong, as they sometimes do in the Navy family, the human side of him comes right out, said Master Chief Petty Officer Evelyn Banks, a senior enlisted adviser to Fowler in Tennessee He made [everyone in his command] know that every woman in the Navy is someone's mother, sister or daughter, and he stood up in training and openly talked about the things that were on peoples mind, things that people didn't want to talk about.
       It does not look like the situation at the Naval Academy will change until the Navy wakes up and finds a warrior, that is someone who has actually been shot at in anger by a resourceful enemy and shot back, to shake things up at the Academy.
       Now fast-forward a decade and ADM Moorer's prediction has come to pass.  It is not only the damage done by the Clintons but six-plus years as well of the compassionate conservative Bush Administration. The radical feminist claws are so deeply entrenched into the heart and soul of the Navy that it would take something like that which occurred during the successful WWII Battle of the Pacific to dislodge them. We can see the evidence. For example, ADM Mullen has recently been appointed to be the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff!
       ADM Mullen was VADM Rempt's enabler, one who provided the new  'strategic vision for the Navy by carrying out the agenda of the radical feminists, the political arm of the Looming American Matriarchy. Such enablement attests to the vast power of this matriarchy in the Congress, Bush Administration, the military, and in nearly every institution in the land. The cultural Marxist revolutionaries are riding the high tide of their movement on the back of this matriarchy.
       And now we learn that SecDef Robert M. Gates has appointed ADM Mullen to be the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Primarily on the basis of Mullen's strategic vision and integrity to lead Americas armed forces [29], [30], [31]. Americas military 'Jena' looms in our future, as predicted by Lt. Col. Yingling, if ADM Mullen's strategic diversity strategy comes to fruition in our Armed Forces.
       And then there is the Fox in the trifecta of The Fox, the Mullens, and the Supes in our feminized Navy. And that is Admiral William J. Fallon, who currently heads the U.S. Pacific Command and who has been named to take over U.S. Central Command (Wm. Cole, Fox to head CentCom, Navy Times, 15 Jan. 2007) and (Gordon Lubold, Sailor to the rescue, Navy Times, 12 Feb. 2007). ADM Fallon's major bona fides include his willingness to apologize to the Japanese Government and the families of fisherman for their tragic deaths due to a collision with a U.S. submarine. He is said to have negotiating skills which some believe are necessary in the Middle East. Others read his appointment as a signal to Iran that the U.S. means business with its gunboat diplomacy in the region.
       But the truth is, ADM Fallon is just another one of the 'purple suiters' who have punched the right tickets in joint service billets to be there at the right time. And that time is when those senior officers who please the radical feminists in the Navy, the Pentagon, the Congress, and the Bush administration have arrived. I have experienced, first hand, some of ADM Fallon's professed diversity and feminist credentials.
       ADM Fallon was a backseater in the RA5C Vigilante, the supersonic tactical reconnaissance aircraft that many of us piloted that is flew over North Vietnam in that war. The backseater, though a valuable part of the twin-cockpit crew, did not fly the aircraft. He operated the radios, radar and inertial navigation equipment, as well as cameras and radar imaging equipment in the aircraft. He did not participate in any way in the takeoff or landing (called a trap in carrier aviation) of the aircraft aboard ship (day or night).
       ADM Fallon was the guest speaker at the dedication ceremony for the Vigilante display aircraft and Museum at the Sanford International Airport in Sanford, FL during an RA5C Reunion event in 2003. At least 150 of the 500 assembled guests at the banquet dinner were Vigi Pilots. Most flew over the North during the Vietnam War. Many were former POWs. During his opening remarks, the then-Vice CNO bragged to those present that he had the week before climbed into a Navy jet and got another 'trap' aboard ship. He boasted that he would go anywhere and do anything to get another 'trap.' Amid the silent smiles and muffled, amused laughter about 150 pairs of eyeballs were staring at each other in disbelief at the false bravado they were hearing this from a senior officer, who in Washington D.C. could get away with such blasphemy, but not in the real world of carrier naval aviation. Not in front of us! My former RA5C Commanding Officer, sitting with his wife next to me blurted out, "The son-of-a-bitch hasn't made a trap in his life. He was just a damn passenger." As were and are all backseaters in all naval carrier aircraft.
       A less trivial point made by the Admiral during his speech was obviously one he had repeated over and over during his Washington, D.C. tours. It was made to convince listeners of his diversity credentials. He said that, when he reported for duty at Sanford Naval Air Station, he was a young bachelor Lieutenant junior grade. who roomed in the BOQ. He befriended the stewards there, all Filipinos or Blacks at the time. His tall frame and athletic ability led him to volunteer to play on their basketball team for the upcoming Base Championship. He played up the diminutive size of his Filipino teammates and his contribution, both physical, and mental to their team winning the championship. He was their hero. And presumably ours during the polite applause for his momentous display of promoting diversity. The champion of the little guy. The all-American hero!
       But the most preposterous story that he told included a dash of real-life heroism, which touched the audience deeply. This was at the height of Americas patriotic spirit as our forces were carrying the fight to the enemy in Afghanistan. He told the story of the Navy Seal, Petty Officer 1st Class Neil C. Roberts, who fell out of a Chinook helicopter as it was hit by enemy fire in the Tora Bora Mountains during Operation Anaconda, his fight to the last and final capture and execution by the al Qaeda enemy. The ensuing firefight during a rescue operation involved Army, Navy, and Air Force special forces operators and Army Rangers. Six, in addition to Roberts were killed.

       ADM Fallon told the story of Air Force medic Senior Airman Jason Cunningham, who while treating a wounded man, was shot and later died. Despite effective enemy fire, and at great risk to his own life, Airman Cunningham remained in the burning fuselage of the helicopter in order to treat the wounded. As he moved his patients to a more secure location, mortar rounds began to impact within 50 feet of his position. Disregarding extreme danger, he continued the movement and exposed himself to enemy fire on seven separate occasions. When the second casualty collection point was also compromised, in a display of uncommon valor and gallantry, Airman Cunningham braved an intense small arms and rocket-propelled grenade attack while repositioning the critically wounded to a third collection point. Even after he was mortally wounded and quickly deteriorating, he continued to direct patient movement and transferred care to another medic. In the end, his distinct efforts led to the successful delivery of 10 gravely wounded Americans to life-saving medical treatment. Cunningham was posthumously awarded the Air Force Cross, the service's second highest award after the Medal of Honor.

       After recounting this heroic story to a hushed and prideful audience, ADM Fallon played his final feminist card. He announced to the audience that he was going to see to it that a special scholarship fund be created for Airman Cunninghams young widow so she could attend an ROTC program and follow in her heroic husbands footsteps. The crowd rose in unison to a thunderous standing ovation for ADM Fallon and his story of American heroism. And, in his own mind, for his chivalrous act in aiding the young widow.

       Of course, only those realists in the audience glumly recognized the cravenness of suggesting that Airman Cunninghams wife would ever wish to or even be able to qualify for the Special Forces footsteps that she would have to take in this idealized utopia where young women, some as diminutive as Airman Cunninghams widow, have no place. Ever!

       But such is the cravenness of today's senior military officers who play the trumpet for feminist dreams. ADM Fallon and his ilk are simply going along with the feminist crusade to advance their own careers. And it will catch up with America when the chips are down and the reality sets in. They don't belong in combat roles, and never will! And all of us will then pay the price!

1)  Moorer, Thomas H. ADM, USN (Ret.), "On a diversity roll that serves to erode," The Washington Times, 1 September 1996.
2)  Atkinson, Gerald L., "The Case of RADM Marsha J. Evans," Eternal Vigilance journal, pp.2, May/June 2007, Atkinson Associates Press.
3)  Ibid, Atkinson, Gerald L., pp.6.
4)  Atkinson, Gerald L., at
5)  Atkinson, Gerald L., at
6)  Paul Yingling, Lt. Col. U.S. Army, "A failure of generalship,"
7)  Ricks, Thomas E., "Army Officer Accuses Generals of 'Intellectual and Moral Failures," The Washington Post, pp. 04, 27 April 2007.
8 )  Maze, Rick, "Cleaning up special pay: House endorses consolidation plan; more retention cash pitched for '09," Navy Times, 28 May 2007.
9)  Scales, Robert H., "Is the Army headed for collapse?" The Washington Times, 30 March 2007.
10) Atkinson, Gerald L., "Wronged and Nifonged," The Washington Times, 4 February 2007.

11) Kelly, Earl, "Judge chides superintendent for rape case e-mails," The Capital, 7 July 2006.
12) Vogel, Steve, "Superintendent Faulted Over Rape Case E-Mails," The Washington Post, 7 July 2006.
13) Vogel, Steve, "Accuser Testifies Against Navy Quarterback," The Washington Post, 12 July 2006.
14) Manning, Stephen, "Courts-martial set for three at Naval Academy," The Washington Times, 10 July 2006.
15) Manning, Stephen, "Courts-martial set for three at Naval Academy," The Washington Times, 10 July 2006.
16) Gerald L. Atkinson, Email to Christoph Wilkening, FORUM Editor, "Is Race a Factor at the Naval Academy," Submission to Washington Times, 13 February 2004.

17) Gerald L. Atkinson, Email to Concerned Alumni, "Midshipman Lamar Owens' Class Standing," 21 February 2007.
18 ) Gerald L. Atkinson, Email to Christoph Wilkening, FORUM Editor, "Revised Submission, "Is Race a Factor at the Naval Academy, 26 February 2007.
19) Gerald L. Atkinson, Email to Fellow Americans, "Black Americans Speak Out to FREE Midshipman Lamar Owens," 27 February 2007.
20) Gerald L. Atkinson, Email to Concerned Alumni, "Who Destroyed the Honor Code at the U.S. Naval Academy?" 14 March 2007.
20a) Atkinson, Gerald L., "High Level Corruption is Complete at the Naval Academy," The American Matriarchy - Part IV, March/April 2007 issue of the Eternal Vigilance Journal, pp.16, 1 March 2007.
20b) Ibid.
20c) Schantz, Malcolm, "'Political' Preference at Work," March/April 2007 issue Eternal Vigilance Journal, pp. 9, 1 March 2007.
20d) Cooper, Charles G., Letter to the Secretary of the Navy, Honorable Donald C. Winter, 18 Febraury 2007.
21) Gerald L. Atkinson, Email to Concerned Alumni, "Rempt-Rot and the D.C. Madam's 'independent contractor' 'escort' at the Naval Academy on Ms. Palfrey and the 'mystery USNA call girl,' 16 May 2007.
22) Hosenball, Mark and Conant, Eve, "An Elite Escort Service," Newsweek, 3 May 2007, available on the Internet at:
22a) Sommers, Christina, "The Irrelevance of American Feminism to Oppressed Women in the Muslim World," Lecture Hosted by A. Graham Down, Washington, D.C. Chapter of the National Association of Scholars, 4 April 2007.
23) Leo, John, "Expanding the file of double standards," The Washington Times, 24 June 2000.
24) A USNA classmate of Gen. Charles Krulak, USMC (Ret.) on the subject of the Midshipman Lamar Owens, "What About the Marines," in the May/June 2007 issue of the Eternal Vigilance journal, pp. 10, 1 May 2007. Quote from the original Email from USNA-at-Large, John Howland, USNA Class 1964, Editor.
25) Gittins, Charles W., "Women Deserve Equality," Navy Times, Opinion, 21 May 2007.
26) Olson, Bradley, "Flight trainees' assignment: Wait for orders." The Baltimore Sun, 17 March 2007.
27) Scutro, Andrew, "CNO: Diversity 'critical' to Navy's future," Navy Times, 17 July 2006.
28 ) Moorer, Thomas H. ADM, USN (Ret.), "On a diversity roll that serves to erode," The Washington Times, 1 September 1996.
29) Baldor, Lolita, "Pace won't return to top military post," Associated Press, The Washington Times, 9 June 2007.
30) McCaffrey, Raymond, "Naval Academy Gets New Leader: Superintendent Leaves Legacy of Tough Policies," The Washington Post, 9 June 2007.
31) Witte, Brian, "Academy 'culture change' touted: Retiring superintendent praised," Associated Press, The Washington Times, 9 June 2007.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Mullen Sees Operational Structure in Guard's Future: VIDEO
Elites TV - 6 days ago
1 votes
Mullen Sees Operational Structure in Guard's Future By Army Sgt. 1st Class Jon Soucy Special to American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, Nov. 20, 2009 – The National Guard's transformation from a strategic reserve to an operational force since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, should continue beyond the current conflicts, the nation's top Military officer told Guard leaders yesterday. As operations in Iraq and Afghanistan change over the next few years
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Blackwater's Secret War in Pakistan Revealed
24 Nov, 2009    Jeremy Scahill


An elite division of Blackwater plans targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives in Pakistan. And everyone's denying it.
At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, "snatch and grabs" of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, an investigation by The Nation has found. The Blackwater operatives also assist in gathering intelligence and help run a secret US military drone bombing campaign that runs parallel to the well-documented CIA predator strikes, according to a well-placed source within the US military intelligence apparatus.
The source, who has worked on covert US military programs for years, including in Afghanistan and Pakistan, has direct knowledge of Blackwater's involvement. He spoke to The Nation on condition of anonymity because the program is classified. The source said that the program is so "compartmentalized" that senior figures within the Obama administration and the US military chain of command may not be aware of its existence.
The White House did not return calls or email messages seeking comment for this story. Capt. John Kirby, the spokesperson for Adm. Michael Mullen, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told The Nation, "We do not discuss current operations one way or the other, regardless of their nature." A defense official, on background, specifically denied that Blackwater performs work on drone strikes or intelligence for JSOC in Pakistan. "We don't have any contracts to do that work for us. We don't contract that kind of work out, period," the official said. "There has not been, and is not now, contracts between JSOC and that organization for these types of services." The previously unreported program, the military intelligence source said, is distinct from the CIA assassination program that the agency's director, Leon Panetta, announced he had canceled in June 2009. "This is a parallel operation to the CIA," said the source. "They are two separate beasts." The program puts Blackwater at the epicenter of a US military operation within the borders of a nation against which the United States has not declared war--knowledge that could further strain the already tense relations between the United States and Pakistan. In 2006, the United States and Pakistan struck a deal that authorized JSOC to enter Pakistan to hunt Osama bin Laden with the understanding that Pakistan would deny it had given permission. Officially, the United States is not supposed to have any active military operations in the country. Blackwater, which recently changed its name to Xe Services and US Training Center, denies the company is operating in Pakistan. "Xe Services has only one employee in Pakistan performing construction oversight for the U.S. Government," Blackwater spokesperson Mark Corallo said in a statement to The Nation, adding that the company has "no other operations of any kind in Pakistan."
A former senior executive at Blackwater confirmed the military intelligence source's claim that the company is working in Pakistan for the CIA and JSOC, the premier counterterrorism and covert operations force within the military. He said that Blackwater is also working for the Pakistani government on a subcontract with an Islamabad-based security firm that puts US Blackwater operatives on the ground with Pakistani forces in counter-terrorism operations, including house raids and border interdictions, in the North-West Frontier Province and elsewhere in Pakistan. This arrangement, the former executive said, allows the Pakistani government to utilize former US Special Operations forces who now work for Blackwater while denying an official US military presence in the country. He also confirmed that Blackwater has a facility in Karachi and has personnel deployed elsewhere in Pakistan. The former executive spoke on condition of anonymity.
His account and that of the military intelligence source were borne out by a US military source who has knowledge of Special Forces actions in Pakistan and Afghanistan. When asked about Blackwater's covert work for JSOC in Pakistan, this source, who also asked for anonymity, told The Nation, "From my information that I have, that is absolutely correct," adding, "There's no question that's occurring."
"It wouldn't surprise me because we've outsourced nearly everything," said Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff from 2002 to 2005, when told of Blackwater's role in Pakistan. Wilkerson said that during his time in the Bush administration, he saw the beginnings of Blackwater's involvement with the sensitive operations of the military and CIA. "Part of this, of course, is an attempt to get around the constraints the Congress has placed on DoD. If you don't have sufficient soldiers to do it, you hire civilians to do it. I mean, it's that simple. It would not surprise me."
The Counterterrorism Tag Team in Karachi
The covert JSOC program with Blackwater in Pakistan dates back to at least 2007, according to the military intelligence source. The current head of JSOC is Vice Adm. William McRaven, who took over the post from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who headed JSOC from 2003 to 2008 before being named the top US commander in Afghanistan. Blackwater's presence in Pakistan is "not really visible, and that's why nobody has cracked down on it," said the source. Blackwater's operations in Pakistan, he said, are not done through State Department contracts or publicly identified Defense contracts. "It's Blackwater via JSOC, and it's a classified no-bid [contract] approved on a rolling basis." The main JSOC/Blackwater facility in Karachi, according to the source, is nondescript: three trailers with various generators, satellite phones and computer systems are used as a makeshift operations center. "It's a very rudimentary operation," says the source. "I would compare it to [CIA] outposts in Kurdistan or any of the Special Forces outposts. It's very bare bones, and that's the point."
Blackwater's work for JSOC in Karachi is coordinated out of a Task Force based at Bagram Air Base in neighboring Afghanistan, according to the military intelligence source. While JSOC technically runs the operations in Karachi, he said, it is largely staffed by former US special operations soldiers working for a division of Blackwater, once known as Blackwater SELECT, and intelligence analysts working for a Blackwater affiliate, Total Intelligence Solutions (TIS), which is owned by Blackwater's founder, Erik Prince. The military source said that the name Blackwater SELECT may have been changed recently. Total Intelligence, which is run out of an office on the ninth floor of a building in the Ballston area of Arlington, Virginia, is staffed by former analysts and operatives from the CIA, DIA, FBI and other agencies. It is modeled after the CIA's counterterrorism center. In Karachi, TIS runs a "media-scouring/open-source network," according to the source. Until recently, Total Intelligence was run by two former top CIA officials, Cofer Black and Robert Richer, both of whom have left the company. In Pakistan, Blackwater is not using either its original name or its new moniker, Xe Services, according to the former Blackwater executive. "They are running most of their work through TIS because the other two [names] have such a stain on them," he said. Corallo, the Blackwater spokesperson, denied that TIS or any other division or affiliate of Blackwater has any personnel in Pakistan.
The US military intelligence source said that Blackwater's classified contracts keep getting renewed at the request of JSOC. Blackwater, he said, is already so deeply entrenched that it has become a staple of the US military operations in Pakistan. According to the former Blackwater executive, "The politics that go with the brand of BW is somewhat set aside because what you're doing is really one military guy to another." Blackwater's first known contract with the CIA for operations in Afghanistan was awarded in 2002 and was for work along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
One of the concerns raised by the military intelligence source is that some Blackwater personnel are being given rolling security clearances above their approved clearances. Using Alternative Compartmentalized Control Measures (ACCMs), he said, the Blackwater personnel are granted clearance to a Special Access Program, the bureaucratic term used to describe highly classified "black" operations. "With an ACCM, the security manager can grant access to you to be exposed to and operate within compartmentalized programs far above 'secret'--even though you have no business doing so," said the source. It allows Blackwater personnel that "do not have the requisite security clearance or do not hold a security clearance whatsoever to participate in classified operations by virtue of trust," he added. "Think of it as an ultra-exclusive level above top secret. That's exactly what it is: a circle of love." Blackwater, therefore, has access to "all source" reports that are culled in part from JSOC units in the field. "That's how a lot of things over the years have been conducted with contractors," said the source. "We have contractors that regularly see things that top policy-makers don't unless they ask."
According to the source, Blackwater has effectively marketed itself as a company whose operatives have "conducted lethal direct action missions and now, for a price, you can have your own planning cell. JSOC just ate that up," he said, adding, "They have a sizable force in Pakistan--not for any nefarious purpose if you really want to look at it that way--but to support a legitimate contract that's classified for JSOC." Blackwater's Pakistan JSOC contracts are secret and are therefore shielded from public oversight, he said. The source is not sure when the arrangement with JSOC began, but he says that a spin-off of Blackwater SELECT "was issued a no-bid contract for support to shooters for a JSOC Task Force and they kept extending it." Some of the Blackwater personnel, he said, work undercover as aid workers. "Nobody even gives them a second thought."
The military intelligence source said that the Blackwater/JSOC Karachi operation is referred to as "Qatar cubed," in reference to the US forward operating base in Qatar that served as the hub for the planning and implementation of the US invasion of Iraq. "This is supposed to be the brave new world," he says. "This is the Jamestown of the new millennium and it's meant to be a lily pad. You can jump off to Uzbekistan, you can jump back over the border, you can jump sideways, you can jump northwest. It's strategically located so that they can get their people wherever they have to without having to wrangle with the military chain of command in Afghanistan, which is convoluted. They don't have to deal with that because they're operating under a classified mandate."
In addition to planning drone strikes and operations against suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Pakistan for both JSOC and the CIA, the Blackwater team in Karachi also helps plan missions for JSOC inside Uzbekistan against the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, according to the military intelligence source. Blackwater does not actually carry out the operations, he said, which are executed on the ground by JSOC forces. "That piqued my curiosity and really worries me because I don't know if you noticed but I was never told we are at war with Uzbekistan," he said. "So, did I miss something, did Rumsfeld come back into power?"
Pakistan's Military Contracting Maze
Blackwater, according to the military intelligence source, is not doing the actual killing as part of its work in Pakistan. "The SELECT personnel are not going into places with private aircraft and going after targets," he said. "It's not like Blackwater SELECT people are running around assassinating people." Instead, US Special Forces teams carry out the plans developed in part by Blackwater. The military intelligence source drew a distinction between the Blackwater operatives who work for the State Department, which he calls "Blackwater Vanilla," and the seasoned Special Forces veterans who work on the JSOC program. "Good or bad, there's a small number of people who know how to pull off an operation like that. That's probably a good thing," said the source. "It's the Blackwater SELECT people that have and continue to plan these types of operations because they're the only people that know how and they went where the money was. It's not trigger-happy f**ks, like some of the PSD [Personal Security Detail] guys. These are not people that believe that Barack Obama is a socialist, these are not people that kill innocent civilians. They're very good at what they do."
The former Blackwater executive, when asked for confirmation that Blackwater forces were not actively killing people in Pakistan, said, "that's not entirely accurate." While he concurred with the military intelligence source's description of the JSOC and CIA programs, he pointed to another role Blackwater is allegedly playing in Pakistan, not for the US government but for Islamabad. According to the executive, Blackwater works on a subcontract for Kestral Logistics, a powerful Pakistani firm, which specializes in military logistical support, private security and intelligence consulting. It is staffed with former high-ranking Pakistani army and government officials. While Kestral's main offices are in Pakistan, it also has branches in several other countries.
A spokesperson for the US State Department's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), which is responsible for issuing licenses to US corporations to provide defense-related services to foreign governments or entities, would neither confirm nor deny for The Nation that Blackwater has a license to work in Pakistan or to work with Kestral. "We cannot help you," said department spokesperson David McKeeby after checking with the relevant DDTC officials. "You'll have to contact the companies directly." Blackwater's Corallo said the company has "no operations of any kind" in Pakistan other than the one employee working for the DoD. Kestral did not respond to inquiries from The Nation.
According to federal lobbying records, Kestral recently hired former Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roger Noriega, who served in that post from 2003 to 2005, to lobby the US government, including the State Department, USAID and Congress, on foreign affairs issues "regarding [Kestral's] capabilities to carry out activities of interest to the United States." Noriega was hired through his firm, Vision Americas, which he runs with Christina Rocca, a former CIA operations official who served as assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs from 2001 to 2006 and was deeply involved in shaping US policy toward Pakistan. In October 2009, Kestral paid Vision Americas $15,000 and paid a Vision Americas-affiliated firm, Firecreek Ltd., an equal amount to lobby on defense and foreign policy issues.
For years, Kestral has done a robust business in defense logistics with the Pakistani government and other nations, as well as top US defense companies. Blackwater owner Erik Prince is close with Kestral CEO Liaquat Ali Baig, according to the former Blackwater executive. "Ali and Erik have a pretty close relationship," he said. "They've met many times and struck a deal, and they [offer] mutual support for one another." Working with Kestral, he said, Blackwater has provided convoy security for Defense Department shipments destined for Afghanistan that would arrive in the port at Karachi. Blackwater, according to the former executive, would guard the supplies as they were transported overland from Karachi to Peshawar and then west through the Torkham border crossing, the most important supply route for the US military in Afghanistan.
According to the former executive, Blackwater operatives also integrate with Kestral's forces in sensitive counterterrorism operations in the North-West Frontier Province, where they work in conjunction with the Pakistani Interior Ministry's paramilitary force, known as the Frontier Corps (alternately referred to as "frontier scouts"). The Blackwater personnel are technically advisers, but the former executive said that the line often gets blurred in the field. Blackwater "is providing the actual guidance on how to do [counterterrorism operations] and Kestral's folks are carrying a lot of them out, but they're having the guidance and the overwatch from some BW guys that will actually go out with the teams when they're executing the job," he said. "You can see how that can lead to other things in the border areas." He said that when Blackwater personnel are out with the Pakistani teams, sometimes its men engage in operations against suspected terrorists. "You've got BW guys that are assisting... and they're all going to want to go on the jobs--so they're going to go with them," he said. "So, the things that you're seeing in the news about how this Pakistani military group came in and raided this house or did this or did that--in some of those cases, you're going to have Western folks that are right there at the house, if not in the house." Blackwater, he said, is paid by the Pakistani government through Kestral for consulting services. "That gives the Pakistani government the cover to say, 'Hey, no, we don't have any Westerners doing this. It's all local and our people are doing it.' But it gets them the expertise that Westerners provide for [counterterrorism]-related work."
The military intelligence source confirmed Blackwater works with the Frontier Corps, saying, "There's no real oversight. It's not really on people's radar screen."
In October, in response to Pakistani news reports that a Kestral warehouse in Islamabad was being used to store heavy weapons for Blackwater, the US Embassy in Pakistan released a statement denying the weapons were being used by "a private American security contractor." The statement said, "Kestral Logistics is a private logistics company that handles the importation of equipment and supplies provided by the United States to the Government of Pakistan. All of the equipment and supplies were imported at the request of the Government of Pakistan, which also certified the shipments."
Who is Behind the Drone Attacks?
Since President Barack Obama was inaugurated, the United States has expanded drone bombing raids in Pakistan. Obama first ordered a drone strike against targets in North and South Waziristan on January 23, and the strikes have been conducted consistently ever since. The Obama administration has now surpassed the number of Bush-era strikes in Pakistan and has faced fierce criticism from Pakistan and some US lawmakers over civilian deaths. A drone attack in June killed as many as sixty people attending a Taliban funeral.
In August, the New York Times reported that Blackwater works for the CIA at "hidden bases in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where the company's contractors assemble and load Hellfire missiles and 500-pound laser-guided bombs on remotely piloted Predator aircraft." In February, The Times of London obtained a satellite image of a secret CIA airbase in Shamsi, in Pakistan's southwestern province of Baluchistan, showing three drone aircraft. The New York Times also reported that the agency uses a secret base in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, to strike in Pakistan.
The military intelligence source says that the drone strike that reportedly killed Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, his wife and his bodyguards in Waziristan in August was a CIA strike, but that many others attributed in media reports to the CIA are actually JSOC strikes. "Some of these strikes are attributed to OGA [Other Government Agency, intelligence parlance for the CIA], but in reality it's JSOC and their parallel program of UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] because they also have access to UAVs. So when you see some of these hits, especially the ones with high civilian casualties, those are almost always JSOC strikes." The Pentagon has stated bluntly, "There are no US military strike operations being conducted in Pakistan."
The military intelligence source also confirmed that Blackwater continues to work for the CIA on its drone bombing program in Pakistan, as previously reported in the New York Times, but added that Blackwater is working on JSOC's drone bombings as well. "It's Blackwater running the program for both CIA and JSOC," said the source. When civilians are killed, "people go, 'Oh, it's the CIA doing crazy shit again unchecked.' Well, at least 50 percent of the time, that's JSOC [hitting] somebody they've identified through HUMINT [human intelligence] or they've culled the intelligence themselves or it's been shared with them and they take that person out and that's how it works."
The military intelligence source says that the CIA operations are subject to Congressional oversight, unlike the parallel JSOC bombings. "Targeted killings are not the most popular thing in town right now and the CIA knows that," he says. "Contractors and especially JSOC personnel working under a classified mandate are not [overseen by Congress], so they just don't care. If there's one person they're going after and there's thirty-four people in the building, thirty-five people are going to die. That's the mentality." He added, "They're not accountable to anybody and they know that. It's an open secret, but what are you going to do, shut down JSOC?"
In addition to working on covert action planning and drone strikes, Blackwater SELECT also provides private guards to perform the sensitive task of security for secret US drone bases, JSOC camps and Defense Intelligence Agency camps inside Pakistan, according to the military intelligence source.
Mosharraf Zaidi, a well-known Pakistani journalist who has served as a consultant for the UN and European Union in Pakistan and Afghanistan, says that the Blackwater/JSOC program raises serious questions about the norms of international relations. "The immediate question is, How do you define the active pursuit of military objectives in a country with which not only have you not declared war but that is supposedly a front-line non-NATO ally in the US struggle to contain extremist violence coming out of Afghanistan and the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan?" asks Zaidi, who is currently a columnist for The News, the biggest English-language daily in Pakistan. "Let's forget Blackwater for a second. What this is confirming is that there are US military operations in Pakistan that aren't about logistics or getting food to Bagram; that are actually about the exercise of physical violence, physical force inside of Pakistani territory."
JSOC: Rumsfeld and Cheney's Extra Special Force
Colonel Wilkerson said that he is concerned that with General McChrystal's elevation as the military commander of the Afghan war--which is increasingly seeping into Pakistan--there is a concomitant rise in JSOC's power and influence within the military structure. "I don't see how you can escape that; it's just a matter of the way the authority flows and the power flows, and it's inevitable, I think," Wilkerson told the scribe. He added, "I'm alarmed when I see execute orders and combat orders that go out saying that the supporting force is Central Command and the supported force is Special Operations Command," under which JSOC operates. "That's backward. But that's essentially what we have today."
From 2003 to 2008 McChrystal headed JSOC, which is headquartered at Pope Air Force Base and Fort Bragg in North Carolina, where Blackwater's 7,000-acre operating base is also situated. JSOC controls the Army's Delta Force, the Navy's SEAL Team 6, as well as the Army's 75th Ranger Regiment and 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, and the Air Force's 24th Special Tactics Squadron. JSOC performs strike operations, reconnaissance in denied areas and special intelligence missions. Blackwater, which was founded by former Navy SEALs, employs scores of veteran Special Forces operators--which several former military officials pointed to as the basis for Blackwater's alleged contracts with JSOC.
Since 9/11, many top-level Special Forces veterans have taken up employment with private firms, where they can make more money doing the highly specialized work they did in uniform. "The Blackwater individuals have the experience. A lot of these individuals are retired military, and they've been around twenty to thirty years and have experience that the younger Green Beret guys don't," said retired Army Lieut. Col. Jeffrey Addicott, a well-connected military lawyer who served as senior legal counsel for US Army Special Forces. "They're known entities. Everybody knows who they are, what their capabilities are, and they've got the experience. They're very valuable."
"They make much more money being the smarts of these operations, planning hits in various countries and basing it off their experience in Chechnya, Bosnia, Somalia, Ethiopia," said the military intelligence source. "They were there for all of these things, they know what the hell they're talking about. And JSOC has unfortunately lost the institutional capability to plan within, so they hire back people that used to work for them and had already planned and executed these [types of] operations. They hired back people that jumped over to Blackwater SELECT and then pay them exorbitant amounts of money to plan future operations. It's a ridiculous revolving door."
While JSOC has long played a central role in US counterterrorism and covert operations, military and civilian officials who worked at the Defense and State Departments during the Bush administration described in interviews with The Nation an extremely cozy relationship that developed between the executive branch (primarily through Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld) and JSOC. During the Bush era, Special Forces turned into a virtual stand-alone operation that acted outside the military chain of command and in direct coordination with the White House. Throughout the Bush years, it was largely General McChrystal who ran JSOC. "What I was seeing was the development of what I would later see in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Special Operations forces would operate in both theaters without the conventional commander even knowing what they were doing," said Colonel Wilkerson. "That's dangerous, that's very dangerous. You have all kinds of mess when you don't tell the theater commander what you're doing."
Wilkerson said that almost immediately after assuming his role at the State Department under Colin Powell, he saw JSOC being politicized and developing a close relationship with the executive branch. He saw this begin, he said, after his first Delta Force briefing at Fort Bragg. "I think Cheney and Rumsfeld went directly into JSOC. I think they went into JSOC at times, perhaps most frequently, without the SOCOM [Special Operations] commander at the time even knowing it. The receptivity in JSOC was quite good," says Wilkerson. "I think Cheney was actually giving McChrystal instructions, and McChrystal was asking him for instructions." He said the relationship between JSOC and Cheney and Rumsfeld "built up initially because Rumsfeld didn't get the responsiveness. He didn't get the can-do kind of attitude out of the SOCOM commander, and so as Rumsfeld was wont to do, he cut him out and went straight to the horse's mouth. At that point you had JSOC operating as an extension of the [administration] doing things the executive branch--read: Cheney and Rumsfeld--wanted it to do. This would be more or less carte blanche. You need to do it, do it. It was very alarming for me as a conventional soldier."
Wilkerson said the JSOC teams caused diplomatic problems for the United States across the globe. "When these teams started hitting capital cities and other places all around the world, [Rumsfeld] didn't tell the State Department either. The only way we found out about it is our ambassadors started to call us and say, 'Who the hell are these six-foot-four white males with eighteen-inch biceps walking around our capital cities?' So we discovered this, we discovered one in South America, for example, because he actually murdered a taxi driver, and we had to get him out of there real quick. We rendered him--we rendered him home."
As part of their strategy, Rumsfeld and Cheney also created the Strategic Support Branch (SSB), which pulled intelligence resources from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the CIA for use in sensitive JSOC operations. The SSB was created using "reprogrammed" funds "without explicit congressional authority or appropriation," according to the Washington Post. The SSB operated outside the military chain of command and circumvented the CIA's authority on clandestine operations. Rumsfeld created it as part of his war to end "near total dependence on CIA." Under US law, the Defense Department is required to report all deployment orders to Congress. But guidelines issued in January 2005 by former Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone stated that Special Operations forces may "conduct clandestine HUMINT operations...before publication" of a deployment order. This effectively gave Rumsfeld unilateral control over clandestine operations.
The military intelligence source said that when Rumsfeld was defense secretary, JSOC was deployed to commit some of the "darkest acts" in part to keep them concealed from Congress. "Everything can be justified as a military operation versus a clandestine intelligence performed by the CIA, which has to be informed to Congress," said the source. "They were aware of that and they knew that, and they would exploit it at every turn and they took full advantage of it. They knew they could act extra-legally and nothing would happen because A, it was sanctioned by DoD at the highest levels, and B, who was going to stop them? They were preparing the battlefield, which was on all of the PowerPoints: 'Preparing the Battlefield.'"
The significance of the flexibility of JSOC's operations inside Pakistan versus the CIA's is best summed up by Senator Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. "Every single intelligence operation and covert action must be briefed to the Congress," she said. "If they are not, that is a violation of the law."
Blackwater: Company Non Grata in Pakistan
For months, the Pakistani media has been flooded with stories about Blackwater's alleged growing presence in the country. For the most part, these stories have been ignored by the US press and denounced as lies or propaganda by US officials in Pakistan. But the reality is that, although many of the stories appear to be wildly exaggerated, Pakistanis have good reason to be concerned about Blackwater's operations in their country. It is no secret in Washington or Islamabad that Blackwater has been a central part of the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan and that the company has been involved--almost from the beginning of the "war on terror"--with clandestine US operations. Indeed, Blackwater is accepting applications for contractors fluent in Urdu and Punjabi. The US Ambassador to Pakistan, Anne Patterson, has denied Blackwater's presence in the country, stating bluntly in September, "Blackwater is not operating in Pakistan." In her trip to Pakistan in October, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dodged questions from the Pakistani press about Blackwater's rumored Pakistani operations. Pakistan's interior minister, Rehman Malik, said on November 21 he will resign if Blackwater is found operating anywhere in Pakistan.
The Christian Science Monitor recently reported that Blackwater "provides security for a US-backed aid project" in Peshawar, suggesting the company may be based out of the Pearl Continental, a luxury hotel the United States reportedly is considering purchasing to use as a consulate in the city. "We have no contracts in Pakistan," Blackwater spokesperson Stacey DeLuke said recently. "We've been blamed for all that has gone wrong in Peshawar, none of which is true, since we have absolutely no presence there."
Reports of Blackwater's alleged presence in Karachi and elsewhere in the country have been floating around the Pakistani press for months. Hamid Mir, a prominent Pakistani journalist who rose to fame after his 1997 interview with Osama bin Laden, claimed in a recent interview that Blackwater is in Karachi. "The US [intelligence] agencies think that a number of Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders are hiding in Karachi and Peshawar," he said. "That is why [Blackwater] agents are operating in these two cities." Ambassador Patterson has said that the claims of Mir and other Pakistani journalists are "wildly incorrect," saying they had compromised the security of US personnel in Pakistan. On November 20 the Washington Times, citing three current and former US intelligence officials, reported that Mullah Mohammed Omar, the leader of the Afghan Taliban, has "found refuge from potential U.S. attacks" in Karachi "with the assistance of Pakistan's intelligence service."
In September, the Pakistani press covered a report on Blackwater allegedly submitted by Pakistan's intelligence agencies to the federal interior ministry. In the report, the intelligence agencies reportedly allege that Blackwater was provided houses by a federal minister who is also helping them clear shipments of weapons and vehicles through Karachi's Port Qasim on the coast of the Arabian Sea. The military intelligence source did not confirm this but did say, "The port jives because they have a lot of [former] SEALs and they would revert to what they know: the ocean, instead of flying stuff in."
The Author cannot independently confirm these allegations and has not seen the Pakistani intelligence report. But according to Pakistani press coverage, the intelligence report also said Blackwater has acquired "bungalows" in the Defense Housing Authority in the city. According to the DHA website, it is a large gated community established "for the welfare of the serving and retired officers of the Armed Forces of Pakistan." Its motto is: "Home for Defenders." The report alleges Blackwater is receiving help from local government officials in Karachi and is using vehicles with license plates traditionally assigned to members of the national and provincial assemblies, meaning local law enforcement will not stop them.
The use of private companies like Blackwater for sensitive operations such as drone strikes or other covert work undoubtedly comes with the benefit of plausible deniability that places an additional barrier in an already deeply flawed system of accountability. When things go wrong, it's the contractors' fault, not the government's. But the widespread use of contractors also raises serious legal questions, particularly when they are a part of lethal, covert actions. "We are using contractors for things that in the past might have been considered to be a violation of the Geneva Convention," said Lt. Col. Addicott, who now runs the Center for Terrorism Law at St. Mary's University School of Law in San Antonio, Texas. "In my opinion, we have pressed the envelope to the breaking limit, and it's almost a fiction that these guys are not in offensive military operations." Addicott added, "If we were subjected to the International Criminal Court, some of these guys could easily be picked up, charged with war crimes and put on trial. That's one of the reasons we're not members of the International Criminal Court."
If there is one quality that has defined Blackwater over the past decade, it is the ability to survive against the odds while simultaneously reinventing and rebranding itself. That is most evident in Afghanistan, where the company continues to work for the US military, the CIA and the State Department despite intense criticism and almost weekly scandals. Blackwater's alleged Pakistan operations, said the military intelligence source, are indicative of its new frontier. "Having learned its lessons after the private security contracting fiasco in Iraq, Blackwater has shifted its operational focus to two venues: protecting things that are in danger and anticipating other places we're going to go as a nation that are dangerous," he said. "It's as simple as that."

Jeremy Scahill, an independent journalist who reports frequently for the national radio and TV program Democracy Now!, has spent extensive time reporting from Iraq and Yugoslavia. He is currently a Puffin Writing Fellow at The Nation Institute. Scahill is the author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. His writing and reporting is available at
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Mike Mullen: More Troops Needed For Afghan War
ANNE GEARAN | 09/15/09 09:47 PM | 

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's top military adviser endorsed an increase in U.S. forces for the worsening war in Afghanistan on Tuesday, setting up a split with leading Democrats in Congress and complicating an already-tough decision for the president himself.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the war is growing more complicated and the enemy gaining in sophistication. Winning will require more resources from outside Afghanistan, including more troops, Mullen told Congress.

"A properly resourced counterinsurgency probably means more forces, and without question, more time" and dedication, Mullen said.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in charge of both American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, delivered a grim assessment of the war to Washington last month and is expected to follow up soon with a request for thousands of additional troops and more equipment.

That will leave Obama to decide whether to expand a war that polls say is rapidly losing public support in the U.S. and drawing pointed criticism in Congress. He has already roughly doubled the size of the American military force in Afghanistan since taking office, with only limited gains to show. Obama has an ambitious strategy to turn around a war that will soon enter its ninth year, and his aides say the plan needs time to work.

Mullen said he does not know how many additional troops McChrystal will request, but he left no doubt that the commander has concluded that the 21,000 U.S. troops Obama has already approved are not enough.

Sitting opposite Mullen, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Armed Service Committee was unswayed. Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan warned the White House last week that he does not want to see a request for more troops until the United States takes bolder action to expand Afghanistan's own armed forces.

"Providing the resources needed for the Afghan Army and Afghan police to become self-sufficient would demonstrate our commitment to the success of a mission that is in our national security interest, while avoiding the risks associated with a further increase in U.S. ground combat troops," Levin declared at Tuesday's hearing.
Story continues below 

Several other Democrats have said they want a clearer timeline and measures of progress from the administration before approving large expansions of the troop commitment or mission. Congress has approved most of the money Obama requested for the war so far, but a large troop increase would probably require a separate add-on spending bill.

The head of the House's defense spending panel, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., this week questioned the logic of adding troops.

"In Vietnam it took 500,000 troops and that didn't solve the problem," the Vietnam veteran told the foreign policy blog The Cable. "We have to take a different approach."

Recent national polls indicate slipping support for the war and growing doubt that it can be won. The latest AP-GfK survey found that less than half – 46 percent – now approve of Obama's handling of Afghanistan, a 9 percentage point drop since July.

A CNN poll conducted this month said 39 percent supported the war and 58 percent opposed it. That compared with 53 percent supporting and 46 percent opposing in early April, days after Obama announced a new war strategy and vowed to provide resources in ways his predecessor had not.

Fifty-one U.S. troops died in Afghanistan in August, more than in any other month since the U.S.-led invasion in October 2001.

Mullen spoke at a hearing on his nomination for a second term as the nation's highest-ranking military officer. He is expected to win easy confirmation.

Mullen's remarks, cautious as they were, are the first clear marker in an internal debate over Obama's next steps. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has not made up his mind whether to support a troop increase beyond the current level of 68,000, his spokesman said. Gates has long worried publicly that too large a force in Afghanistan would be self-defeating because Afghans would see the troops as occupiers, but he has recently sounded resigned to at least a small expansion.

At the State Department, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told reporters Tuesday that the administration would deliberate "for some time," suggesting no decision was imminent.

"Everyone is providing their best ideas and making their contributions about the way forward in Afghanistan," Clinton said.

The Senate committee's ranking Republican, John McCain of Arizona, said committing too few forces to the war would invite a rerun of mistakes the U.S. made in Iraq. "I've seen that movie before," said McCain, the 2008 GOP presidential nominee.

Although Mullen and other senior military leaders say the Afghan armed forces are the key to a successful U.S. exit from the war, Mullen suggested Tuesday that reliance on more Afghan training at the expense of full-on combat is a false choice.

"Sending more trainers more quickly will give us a jump-start, but only that," Mullen said. "Quality training takes time and patience."

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., took the point further. When Mullen told him it would take two to three years to train enough Afghan troops to do the job, Graham asked what would happen in Afghanistan in the meantime.

"I think the security environment will continue to deteriorate," Mullen replied.

Then Graham made a larger point about public support in the U.S., one that hung over all the specifics of troop levels and trainers and the abilities of the Afghan government.

"Do you understand you've got one more shot back home?" Graham asked, mentioning the poll results. "Do you understand that?"

"Yes, sir. Yes, sir."
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Commentary: The United States Must Withdraw from Afghanistan
By Kenneth J. Theisen
Thursday October 01, 2009

On Oct. 7, 2001 the United States. launched a war of terror against Afghanistan. U.S. leaders are still debating how best to achieve U.S. goals there. Military leaders, including Joint Chiefs Chair Admiral Mike Mullen, Central Command leader General David Petraeus, and General Stanley McChrystal, commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, support the further escalation of the war by sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan to prosecute the “new” counterinsurgency troop-intensive strategy they wish to pursue. It is reported that some of Obama’s civilian aides are arguing for a greater emphasis on attacking al Qaeda leaders with increased special operations missions and missile strikes, including more missile strikes launched against targets within Pakistan. Commander-in-Chief Obama will have to decide on which course to follow. But regardless of which of various strategies is implemented, it is clear that no one in the top rungs of the U.S. government is arguing for the end of the Afghan war.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Blackwater lawyers accuse Justice Dept. of ‘disturbing’ misconduct
By Daniel Tencer
Friday, November 27th, 2009 -- 11:55 am

The prosecution of five Blackwater employees over the notorious 2007 Nisoor Square massacre hit a snag Wednesday, when lawyers for one of the five accused federal prosecutors of "misconduct" in the case.

In a court filing Wednesday, lawyers for Nicholas Slatten, a Tennessee native who served two tours of duty in Iraq before joining Blackwater, alleged "a disturbing case of prosecutorial misconduct, undermining the integrity of the judicial process," the Associated Press reports.

The defense team said prosecutors had little evidence against Slatten and kept vital information from the grand jury that evaluated the basis for the criminal charges against him.

All five defendants had been charged with manslaughter. They had also been charged under an anti-machine-gun statute that would see them receive 30-year sentences under federal law.

The Justice Department last week asked the court to drop the charges against Slatten, but asked to reserve the right to file new charges against him at a later date. Slatten's lawyers argued Wednesday against that right, and also asked for a public hearing into the matter. The case has so far been heard behind closed doors, and the Justice Department's reasons for dropping the charges against Slatten have not been made public.
Story continues below...

The defense allegations complicate a case that many human-rights activists have been watching closely. The September, 2007, massacre in Nisoor Square left 17 people dead and is widely considered to have been a turning point in the Iraq war, as public sentiment in the US and Iraq began to tilt away from the use of for-profit security firms in war zones.

Earlier this month, the New York Times reported that Blackwater "authorized payments of about $1 million" to Iraqi officials, in an attempt to bribe them into allowing the security contractor to continue operating in Iraq.

Blackwater has since renamed itself Xe Services. An investigative report in The Nation, published Monday, alleges that Xe is operating in Pakistan, where it is running targeted assassinations of militants and may be involved in a covert bombing campaign of Taliban and Al Qaeda positions in the country.

The US government adamantly denies the allegations, which would suggest deep US involvement in Pakistan's war against terrorist insurgents. The article's author, Jeremy Scahill, alleged earlier this week that the Pentagon attempted to "intimidate" him into not running the story.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately


  • Guest
Mullen: Most of surge troops will arrive by August
6 hours ago

Mullen: Most of surge troops will arrive by August
U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen speaks during a press conference in Kabul, Afghanistan on Monday, Dec. 14, 2009. America's top military officer is expressing concern about the "growing level of collusion" between Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan and al-Qaida and other militants across the border in Pakistan.(AP Photo/Musadeq Sadeq)

KABUL — The top U.S. military officer said Tuesday that he's confident that most of the 30,000 additional troops that are being sent to Afghanistan will be there by August.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters traveling with him in Afghanistan that the first 16,000 troops who already have orders will be in on schedule.

On Monday, Lt. Gen. David Rodriguez, the second-highest ranking U.S. general in Afghanistan, said the rapid escalation of American troops would take longer than expected, possibly as long as 11 months. Rodriguez blamed the delay on the logistical challenges the military faces in bringing in so many forces so quickly.

But Mullen said that he's "reasonably confident" the logistics can be made to work, although "I want a plan B because life doesn't always work out."

He said the vast majority of troops in the surge ordered by President Barack Obama should be in Afghanistan by August.

In Washington, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway said all his troops will be in place by spring for their mission in the South of Afghanistan with the exception of one headquarters unit.

"The combat units will be in early, and we'll start expanding those zones of influence where we already were, primarily up and down the Helmand River Valley and the Helmand province," he told a Pentagon press conference Tuesday. The force of 5,000 Marines in Afghanistan will grow to some 20,000 as part of Obama's buildup.

Mullen on Tuesday toured U.S. bases in eastern Afghanistan, as well as a small village, where he met an Afghan village elder and the local governor. He said such visits "make me continue to be aware of the gap" between strategic plans and ground-level reality.

Later, Mullen flew to Islamabad for meetings with Pakistan's military leaders, including military chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. He was also scheduled to speak to students at Pakistan's National Defense University.

Sen. John McCain said that while he objects to Obama's decision to set a July 2011 date for beginning a U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, he supports the overall war strategy and believes it will succeed.

Speaking at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, a conservative-leaning think tank, the Arizona Republican also urged Obama to take the lead in building support for the war, both in the Congress and among the public.

"I will be an ally in this effort," McCain said. "I will work to get this policy the votes, the resources and the time it needs to work."

Earlier, Mullen said the Taliban-led insurgency in Afghanistan is harder to defeat now than it was a year ago, and said he will take up concerns about strengthening ties to al-Qaida with government leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

He said he was headed to Islamabad and will have another meeting, his 14th, with Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani as well as other top Pakistani officials.

Mullen's reference to militants based in Pakistan appeared aimed at U.S. efforts to press the Pakistani government to step up its crackdown on extremists who have long used their country as a refuge. The U.S. believes most of al-Qaida's top leadership has moved from Afghanistan to the lawless border area just inside Pakistan.

Mullen said he believed, however, that Pakistan was addressing the threat.

"I have seen Pakistan increase its commitment fairly dramatically over the past 12 to 18 months," he said, adding: "I am completely convinced that the government of Pakistan and the Pakistani military are very focused on this. They are going after this threat, as they have very clearly over the last year."


Associated Press writers Deb Riechmann in Kabul, and Pauline Jelinek and Robert Burns in Washington contributed to this report.