Author: debraz

We all love story, we’ll love story forever.  It’s the oldest and most powerful form of communication in every culture.  Forget the kids for a moment, wanna get adult attention?  Start with “Let me tell you a story…”  Try it.

Let me tell you a story.

I’m living away far from home for the first time.  My days and my dreams are full of experimentation, full of raw.  So, one night, I find a deep sleep, and I dream.

I find myself up in a tree.  The leaves are gone, the limbs are bare, but I’m not cold. The tree is tall and small –  at the same time.  I’m not alone.  A bird sits next to me. We look down through the branches at the ground below.
On the ground, I can see all of the animal kingdom. Bear and bison, sheep and lion, great wild cats and little baby bunnies. Quiet. Stillness. Peace. Then, all of a sudden, a ferocious chase begins. Growls and shrieks and death screams. The sound alone is unbearable. Predator and prey, the perpetual cycle of life and death. I sob.  

And the bird speaks. “Imagine how I feel.” And in that instant, I know I am in the presence of God. Not the God of my childhood.  The one who sends thunderbolts, floods and famine down on the heads of those who displease him.  A living God, a sorrowful God. Who could be omniscient and not feel pain?

I wake up. I know that never again will I be the same human being.

That’s my true story. A dream I had more than 25 years ago.  Tell me your story.

We’ve been focused on Bush’s SOTU address and the now infamous 16 words. There’s more, so much more. An entire history of lies. Scooter’s lies are indeed Bush league.

In a Sept. 8, 2002, “Meet the Press” appearance, just weeks before the congressional vote on authorizing President Bush to go to war, Dick Cheney said: “We’ve seen in connection with the hijackers, of course, Mohammed Atta, who was the lead hijacker, did apparently travel to Prague on a number of occasions. And on at least one occasion, we have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official a few months before the attack on the World Trade Center.”

Except it wasn’t true, and Big Dick new it wasn’t true.

On March 8, 2003, President Bush spoke to the American people in a radio address, saying, “Saddam Hussein has a long history of reckless aggression and terrible crimes. He possesses weapons of terror. He provides funding and training and safe haven to terrorists who would willingly deliver weapons of mass destruction against America and other peace-loving countries.

The attacks of September the 11, 2001 showed what the enemies of America did with four airplanes. We will not wait to see what terrorists or terror states could do with weapons of mass destruction. We are determined to confront threats wherever they arise. And, as a last resort, we must be willing to use military force. We are doing everything we can to avoid war in Iraq. But if Saddam Hussein does not disarm peacefully, he will be disarmed by force.”

On Monday, March 17, President Bush spoke in a televised address to the nation. He told us, “The danger is clear: Using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country or any other.”
On Tuesday, March 18th, President Bush sent a letter to Congress saying, “Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.”

Whew!  What a load of shit that was.  Even after CIA and FBI officials had already concluded the claims of the meeting were almost certainly false, Cheney was still referring to it in a Sept. 14, 2003 “Meet the Press” appearance. “The Czechs alleged that Mohammed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraq intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.”

Then in 2004, Cheney returned to insisting that evidence of a link was “overwhelming.” He went so far as to push it on the campaign trail.  When confronted during his debate with John Edwards, Cheney insisted, “I have not suggested there’s a connection between Iraq and 9/11.”  Really Dick? Which is it?

On July 9, 2004 The Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts told reporters that intelligence used to support the invasion of Iraq was based on assessments that were “unreasonable and largely unsupported by the available intelligence.”

And just what intelligence would that be?  The CIA?  The FBI? Hardly.

Senate Intelligence Committee member Jay Rockefeller reported, “We in Congress would not have authorized that war with 75 votes if we knew what we know now.  Leading up to September 11, our government didn’t connect the dots. In Iraq, we are even more culpable because the dots themselves never existed.”  Senator Rockefeller said that “no evidence existed of Iraq’s complicity or assistance in al Qaeda’s terrorist attacks, including 9/11.”

At the time of the report’s release, “phase two” of the investigation – how the Bush administration used the information from the intelligence community — was postponed.  When asked, Senator Roberts responded, “It is a priority. I made my commitment and it will get done.”

On March 10, 2005, after a speech he had given at the Woodrow Wilson Center, Senator Roberts said of the failure to complete phase two, how the Bush administration used the information from the intelligence community, “[T]hat is basically on the back burner.”

On April 10, 2005, Senators Roberts appearing on NBC’s Meet The Press, responded to a question about the completion of phase two of the investigation.  Senator Roberts said, “I’m perfectly willing to do it, and that’s what we agreed to do, and that door is still open. And I don’t want to quarrel with Jay, (Senator Rockefeller) because we both agreed that we would get it done. But we do have–we have Ambassador Negroponte next week, we have General Mike Hayden next week. We have other hot-spot hearings or other things going on that are very important.”

Guess Senator Roberts is still too busy to listen to the American people.  He’s still too busy to reconcile the now glaringly obvious lies this administration fed to the American people.  Next time you hear some pundit defending this war based on “what everyone thought”, or quoting the Senate Intelligence Committee report or the Robb-Silberman report or the Butler report, tell them they’re dead wrong.  Again.  

Our history has been built on their lies. No more, enough is enough.

I’m sure you’ve heard the same refrain from a chorus of politicians – “Now is not the time for blame.” I could care less about blame, blame is a children’s game, it’s high time for some adult accountability.  They’ve had four years to get it right, four long years and billions of dollars to prevent exactly this – massive loss of life because our government failed us.  And once again, when our government fails us, our so-called leaders dodge their primary responsibility, offering the lame and tiresome “nobody knew…” excuse.

Bullshit. They justify their use and abuse of our military telling us, “We’re capable of handling more than one mission at a time.” Then damn it, they’re capable of handling the mission of disaster and the mission of accountability at the same time. After four years, we’re still asked patience?  No American should be asked to wait, to sit patiently by while our government sacrifices even one more life.

I want accountability and I want it NOW.
Questions for each and every one of our elected officials:

1. How many American lives are acceptable collateral damage?
2. If our own government is not responsible and accountable for protecting American lives on American soil, then who is?
3. Are you willing to gamble with more American lives, ask for patience, or are you going to demand the accountability that your oath of office demands?

Are you really willing to ask one more mother to be patient as she watches her child die of thirst in the richest nation in the world? We all owe that mother accountability. It is the very least she deserves.

Halliburton was given a license to steal and kill. Cheney’s no bid, no accounting, no rules war profiteers have taken war profiteering to a whole other realm, making our foreign policy in Iraq not security, or democracy, but corruption. Twenty eight Democratic U.S. Senators are calling for a formal Department of Defense investigation into what they described as “alarming” reports of fraudulent, wasteful and abusive practices by Halliburton in providing food to U.S. troops in Iraq.

Not only has Halliburton and their subsidiary KBR defrauded the American taxpayer, they’ve put our troops at risk and continue to jeopardize the stability of Iraq.  The testimony about KBR revealed just how far this administration is willing to go to put profit above everything else, including national security, democracy and human life.

Raw story reports:

“In May, despite concerns by the Army’s own auditors about billing practices, the firm received a $72.2 million performance bonuses for its work in Iraq. The bonus was the largest ever received by the firm.

Halliburton has billed the government more than $10.5 billion to date under a contract to provide aid for the military in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.”

—–

It isn’t just taxpayer money. Lloyd-Owen International has a contract with the Iraq government to deliver fuel to Iraqi civilians. To get the fuel from Kuwait, they must pass through KBR’s “military” checkpoint on the Kuwait/Iraq border.  LOI testified that KBR and the US military have refused them access into Iraq – because they not have a US contract.

On top of that, they say that the fuel station equipment (that KBR was paid to replace) is old, outdated and show no signs of having been serviced, installed or replaced by KBR.  The old equipment not only doesn’t allow fuel delivery, it’s dangerous.  In order to service the contract to safely provide fuel for the Iraqi people, Lloyd-Owen International has had to replace parts on KBR’s “new” equipment.  

Lloyd-Owen International said they have never lost a tanker to insurgents, that they have been called to deliver fuel specifically to quell unrest, that when the population learns that the fuel is for their use, they have actually helped in the fuel delivery.

They testified that while making a delivery on sub-contract to KBR, Lloyd-Owen personnel came under attack.  They made it to the US base, where KBR managers ordered a “stand-down” and refused to help or even offer medical aid to the wounded.  The US military stepped in, but Lloyd-Owen International lost 3 men.  As it turns out, KBR knew of recent attacks along the same route and failed to inform their own sub-contractor.

Consider what KBR is doing and not doing in Iraq.  Consider that they operate under no outside supervision, are not responsible to our troops or under any law in Iraq.  If they won’t even allow a company under contract with the Iraq government into the country, whose really running what there?

Here are the names of the 28 Senators.  With a record like KBR’s, the question should be why only 28?  Contact your senator and urge them to meet their obligation to our troops, the American taxpayer and the Iraqi people.

Senators signing the letter, in addition to Dorgan included: Carl Levin (D-MI), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Daniel Akaka (D-HI), Max Baucus (D-MT), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Jim Jeffords (I-VT), John Corzine (D-NJ), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Jack Reed (D-RI), Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Paul Sarbanes (D-MD), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Mark Dayton (D-MN), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Ken Salazar (D-CO), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and Charles Schumer (D-NY).

Mark Benjamin’s story “Military Injustice” chronicles one soldier’s personal battle with the military he dedicated 16 years of his life to serving. His heartbreaking story shows a web of deceipt and the frightening reality of unchecked power. At a time when our government is espousing the “spread of democracy” and the need for extending the powers of the Patriot Act, Lt. Goodrum’s story chilled me to the core.

Iraq vet Jullian Goodrum blasted his superiors for misdeeds that he says cost a soldier his life. His reward: The Army he once loved refused to treat his psychological wounds, then charged him with desertion.

It has been a year and a half since Goodrum, back from Iraq and haunted by suicidal thoughts and flashbacks related to his time there, checked himself into a civilian psychiatric hospital in Knoxville, Tenn., after being turned away from a military hospital. The Army subsequently accused him of desertion, which can mean six years in the military’s Fort Leavenworth, Kan., prison. Goodrum fought back, but he had no idea then what he was up against.

On April 1, after he’d been fighting the desertion case for 18 months, the Army found Goodrum innocent of being absent without leave, or AWOL. But the ordeal took a toll. Goodrum’s 16-year career in the military is over — he wants out. “Why would I serve a military that betrayed me?” he asks. He is $40,000 in debt from legal fees, and his relationship with his fiancée has suffered under the stress. The cause of his original hospitalization was post-traumatic stress disorder resulting from his war experiences — a diagnosis confirmed four times, three times by military doctors. But instead of improving, some of his symptoms have worsened as a result of his protracted legal battle.

You go to war with the army you have. Apparently, after 16 years in the Army and witnessing in Iraq what Secretary Rumsfeld has not, Lt. Goodrum disagreed.

Goodrum’s troubles with the military justice system started after he became a whistleblower. After he returned from Iraq, Goodrum complained to his superior officers that his unit had been sent to war with an appalling lack of equipment, including broken, unarmored vehicles. When his complaints were ignored, he went to his Congress member and to the press. He also complained about the poor medical care he received when he came back. Now, he is convinced the charge of being absent without leave for getting medical care from a civilian doctor is retribution from the Army, which he claims closed ranks and blackballed him.

“They chose a pattern,” Goodrum says. “They denied me healthcare and told me to leave. You can hear it in their own testimony. I think it was just abuse of authority and being vindictive.”

Bringing in the feds.  After denying Lt. Goodrum medical care, “The Army claimed Goodrum was a deserter because when he was in the civilian psychiatric hospital in Knoxville he was absent from Fort Knox without permission.”  When the AWOL charges were refuted by the Army’s own regulations, they took another tact with the help of federal prosecutors.

On March 3, documents from an FBI database show, Fort Knox officials asked federal prosecutors to troll the FBI’s National Crime Information Center for any criminal history for Goodrum. On March 4, Fort Knox deputy staff judge advocate Brian Corneilson forwarded to Army prosecutors in Washington the results of that FBI search and noted his suspicion that Goodrum might be a drug dealer. “Results of NCIC check received by Fort Knox indicates an individual (with a different name) with the same height, weight, hair color, social security number, but not eye color, as Goodrum was sale and delivery of Schedule IV substance on 9, Feb. 2001 in Clinton TN,” Corneilson wrote. Corneilson added that Clinton is “just outside of Knoxville,” near Goodrum’s home.

But a review of the FBI data pulled by Corneilson shows that the individual in question had not only a different eye color but also a different Social Security number and birth date. And Goodrum’s service records indicate that a conviction for drug dealing in February 2001 was unlikely, since the Army’s intelligence wing at Fort Meade in Maryland had granted Goodrum access to secret information through August 2002.

When told that the background check had identified the wrong man, Fort Knox spokeswoman Shaffery said, “Isn’t that interesting?” She said Corneilson is no longer at Fort Knox and she doesn’t know how to find him.

One more try.  “Goodrum’s superiors did come up with one allegation that stuck — fraternization. This allegation came from Fisher, Goodrum’s superior officer in Iraq. But there are several peculiar things about the fraternization case against Goodrum, including a possibly forged document and testimony that the Army itself admitted was ‘tainted.'”

“Lt. Goodrum needs to explain what he was doing last night, where he was, and with whom,” the statement, dated April 5, 2003, reads. It says that the female sergeant allegedly involved was suspiciously missing from her bunk one night at Camp Atterbury when Goodrum had gone missing too. “It is only suspect [sic] that these two, the platoon leader and sergeant, might be having an affair.”

Both commanders and soldiers are supposed to sign counseling statements to authenticate them. The Army prosecutors’ packet of information against Goodrum includes, behind the counseling statement, a separate authentication page that Goodrum and Fisher were supposed to sign to show that Goodrum had been counseled. But Goodrum’s signature is dated March 18, 2003, three weeks before he would have received the counseling. It looks like an exact copy of a signature from an unrelated document Goodrum signed on March 18, 2003.

[snip]

After months of legal wrangling, on April 1, 2005, Maj. Gen. Galen Jackman at the Army’s Military District of Washington finally released a decision in Goodrum’s case. A few weeks before, the gray-haired Jackman considered the fraternization case while sitting at his desk in a cramped, hot office at tiny Fort McNair in southwest Washington. Goodrum stood for three hours, his perspiration finally soaking through the jacket of his dress uniform.

Jackman, who gained fame when he appeared giving his arm to Nancy Reagan during her husband’s funeral in Washington, found Goodrum innocent of the AWOL charge. He found Goodrum guilty of fraternization with the sergeant, but only of the lesser violation of presenting an inappropriate image, not of having sexual relations with her. In his written decision, Jackman does not explain the basis for finding Goodrum guilty.

If the Army will gladly lie and manufacture evidence against one of their own, if the sole arbiter of justice will base his decision on such evidence without comment, and federal prosecutors will step in to provide criminal records that do not match… if there is no justice for Lt. Goodrum, there is no justice.  As Congress debates the extension and expansion of the Patriot Act, consider the lengths our government when to punish Lt. Goodrum for blowing the whistle on well known and well documented facts.  If Lt. Goodrum is “the enemy” so are all of us.

Please take a few minutes to read the full story at Salon, by membership or free pass and write your Congress critters. Urge them to consider what unchecked power has done to one man who gave 16 years of his life to serve for his country’s freedom and democracy.