Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/31/2013 10:29:13 AM

Russian anti-gay laws impact Olympics, vodka sales

An empty space on a liquor shelf where Russian vodka used to be located at The Sidetrack, a gay bar on the north side of Chicago, Monday, July 29, 2013. Many gay bars across North America have joined a campaign to stop selling Russian vodka due to anti-gay laws in Russia. The chief cause of the anger is a law signed by President Vladimir Putin last month that bans the "propaganda of nontraditional sexual" and imposes hefty fines for providing information about the gay community to minors or holding gay pride rallies. (AP Photo/Scott Eisen)
Associated Press

View Gallery

NEW YORK (AP) -- Russian vodka and the Winter Olympics in Sochi. For now, those are the prime targets as gays in the United States and elsewhere propose boycotts and other tactics to convey their outrage over Russia's intensifying campaign against gay-rights activism.

At many gay bars across North America, owners have joined a campaign to stop selling Russian vodka — notably the popular brand Stolichnaya. Activists also are pressing the International Olympic Committee and NBC, which holds U.S. broadcasting rights for Sochi, to be more aggressive in criticizing new Russian laws.

So far, there have been only scattered calls for a full-fledged boycott of the Sochi Games, but there is active discussion of how to convey gay-rights messages once the competition begins — including gestures by individual athletes and perhaps a gay-pride parade.

The chief flashpoint is a law signed by President Vladimir Putin last month that bans the "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations" and imposes hefty fines for providing information about the gay community to minors or holding gay pride rallies. Foreign citizens arrested under the law can be jailed for 15 days and then deported.

There also is concern about a long-running problem of violence against gays in Russia, as well as a new law restricting adoptions of Russian children by people in countries allowing same-sex marriage.

The new laws were approved by parliament with overwhelming support, reflecting animosity toward gay activism that is widely shared across the political spectrum in Russia.

Responding to the furor, the IOC said it has received assurances "from the highest level of government in Russia that the legislation will not affect those attending or taking part in the Games." It pledged to ensure there would be no discrimination against athletes, officials, spectators and the media in Sochi.

However, the Human Rights Campaign, a leading U.S. gay-rights group, said the IOC should take a stronger stand.

"They should be advocating for the safety of all LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) people in Russia, not simply those visiting for the Olympics," said HRC President Chad Griffin. "Rescinding this heinous law must be our collective goal."

The New York Times, in an editorial Sunday, said the U.S. government "needs to be more forceful" in denouncing the new laws.

"So does the International Olympic Committee, which too often fails to defend the Olympic ideals and should be leading a full-throated international campaign to insist that Russia repeal these laws," the editorial said.

NBC also is coming under pressure, including an open letter from the Human Rights Campaign saying it would be wrong to televise Sochi's opening ceremonies without reporting on the anti-gay legislation.

Mark Lazarus, chairman of NBC Sports Group, was asked about the matter during a weekend meeting with television critics.

"We will address it if it becomes an issue," he said. "If it is still their law and it is impacting any part of the Olympics Games, we will make sure that we acknowledge it and recognize it."

There seems to be little momentum at this stage for organizing a boycott of the Games.

"History has proven that the only people that are negatively affected by boycotts are the athletes who have trained their whole lives to compete," said Patrick Sandusky of the U.S. Olympic Committee. "Past boycotts have not worked, and the USOC is not planning on boycotting these Games."

Patrick Burke of the You Can Play Project, which seeks to combat anti-gay prejudice in major sports, is urging outspoken participation at Sochi by gay athletes as well as straight athletes who support them.

"Maybe some of the individuals who go will feel compelled to take a stand — for themselves, for their family, for their friends, for the Russian people," Burke wrote in a column. "Maybe they'll remind us of the power of pure, unadulterated sport to compel change. We'll know only if we show up."

Gay U.S. figure skater Johnny Weir, who hasn't ruled out a comeback attempt for Sochi, has depicted the repression in Russia as "heartbreaking" but says he opposes a boycott.

"There isn't a police officer or a government that, should I qualify, could keep me from competing," he wrote in an op-ed last week in the Falls Church (Va.) News-Press.

Another gay athlete, New Zealand speed skater Blake Skjellerup, says he will be wearing a rainbow pin at the Olympics, and "If that gets me in trouble, then so be it."

"I have no interest in going back into the closet in Sochi," he told the Daily Xtra, an online news outlet in Canada, where he was training. "This is not about defiance. This is me standing up for what I believe in."

Charley Sullivan, associate men's rowing coach at the University of Michigan and one of the first openly gay coaches of a major-college sports team, suggested that other athletes could adopt similar tactics, wearing gay pride pins and carrying rainbow flags to the closing ceremonies.

The athletes, Sullivan said, have "a moral imperative not to let their efforts, their body, the images of what they do, their names, to be hooked to legitimizing of the host country without their consent."

Nikolai Alexeyev, a prominent Russian gay-rights activist, suggested staging a gay pride parade in Sochi as the Olympics begin "to attract the maximum attention to the rights violations."

Alexeyev was not among a group of more than 20 other Russian activists who issued an open letter endorsing efforts to boycott Russian goods and companies, as well the Sochi Games.

Russian journalist Masha Gessen, who helped organize the letter, also suggested that activists around the world should confront Russian officials when they travel abroad.

"Our goal is that any foreign trip made by Russian officials or representatives of big Russian companies becomes hell," she said.

Another signer of the letter, photographer Mitya Aleshkovsky, welcomed the boycott of Stolichnaya.

"If more Russian brands face rebuke and boycott in the West, it would help influence the Russian government," he said. "Of course, a boycott of Russian oil and gas would be the most efficient step, but, regrettably, none of Western oil and gas importers are willing to do that."

The vodka boycott took shape last week, fueled by appeals from popular gay columnist Dan Savage and various other activists and organizations. Gay bars in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Seattle, Toronto, Vancouver and elsewhere joined the effort.

In New York City, the activist group Queer Nation is planning to organize a "vodka dump" Wednesday at the Russian consulate.

Hoping to defuse the boycott, the CEO of the company that produces Stolichnaya, Val Mendeleev, issued a statement criticizing the Russian anti-gay laws as "dreadful actions." He depicted his company as a longtime supporter of the global gay community, as evidenced by Stolichnaya's role as a sponsor of various gay pride events.

"We are upset and angry," Mendeleev wrote. "We fully support and endorse your objectives to fight against prejudice in Russia."

Mendeleev said his company, SPI Group, has no ties to the Russian government. The vodka is made from Russian wheat, rye and raw alcohol at a distillery in Latvia.

Some U.S. activists proposed that the boycott be extended to Russian caviar, and also suggested that American companies doing business in Russia be pressured to speak out against the laws.

Two gay-rights groups, All Out and Athlete Ally, on Monday announced the launch of a "speak out, not sit out" campaign that would oppose a boycott of Sochi while encouraging gay-rights activism before and during the Games.

"Staging the Games in Russia with these laws in place is like holding the Olympics in Johannesburg (South Africa) at the height of apartheid," said Andre Banks, executive director of All Out. "President Putin will risk his country's international reputation if these Games go ahead with laws in place that are in fundamental opposition to Olympic values."

Yelena Goltsman, the founder of a New York-based gay-rights group for immigrants from the former Soviet Union, had called for moving the Games from Sochi to another country, but now says it's too late for that.

Goltsman's group, RUSA LGBT, is encouraging international corporations to withdraw their sponsorship of the Olympics or to flout the Russian law by including statements supporting gay rights in their commercials.

___

Associated Press writers Vladimir Isachenkov and Jim Heintz in Moscow and Stephen Wilson in London contributed to this report. Leff reported from San Francisco.

___

Follow David Crary on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/craryap


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/31/2013 10:34:37 AM

Why Veterans Become Criminals

The Daily Beast

View Gallery

Ian Forsyth/Getty

During the last year of his service contract with the Marine Reserves, Christopher Lee Boyd was sent to Iraq. Boyd was a driver in the Fourth Combat Engineer Battalion, Charlie Company, out of Lynchburg, Virginia. In Iraq, Boyd’s unit escorted convoys and swept for land mines. When Boyd drove, he watched the road for IEDs. The bombs could be disguised as almost anything; his team found them stashed in potholes, trash bags, and, once, in a dead sheep. In November 2004, Charlie Company was transferred to a base near Haditha. At the same time, 100 miles to the southeast, coalition forces were attacking Fallujah, an insurgent stronghold. As the insurgents fled the city, they flocked north.

In late January, Charlie Company received word that insurgent leaders were hiding in a house in a nearby town. A raid team, composed of 11 vehicles carrying 77 Marines, set off just after 3 a.m. on January 26, 2005. Boyd steered a Humvee carrying nine members of his unit. When the soldiers arrived at the house, they found its front door open and no one home. Except for a few pieces of furniture, the building was empty. As the convoy began rolling back to base, Marines dropped flyers reminding Iraqis to vote in the upcoming elections.

Boyd hadn’t moved 100 yards before he heard the explosion. Two bombs had detonated beside the convoy’s lead vehicle. Suddenly, the darkness came alive with muzzle flashes and tracer rounds. The convoy halted and, for the next 20 minutes, the Marines traded fire with their unseen attackers. Finally, the convoy started up again. The gunfire had stopped and the Marines were just clear of town when Boyd felt his vehicle shudder violently. It was later learned that an insurgent had fired off a long-shot RPG from the roof of a mosque, scoring a direct hit on the vehicle’s right rear flank. Miraculously, the Humvee was still running, and Boyd was able to coax it back to base.

Four of the Marines in the Humvee—Sgt. Jesse Strong, 24; Cpl. Jonathan Bowling, 23; Lance Cpl. Karl Linn, 20; and Cpl. Chris Weaver, 24—were killed. Five others were injured. Of the 10 men in his vehicle, only Boyd escaped without injury.

A few months later, Boyd was back in Virginia, working a third shift at a Frito-Lay plant. He had trouble sleeping. When he did sleep, he had nightmares about the raid. Boyd soon discovered that if he drank until he passed out, he didn't dream.

Boyd's twin sister, Crystal, remembers the change in her brother happening gradually. She knew Chris as a cheerful, easygoing family man. Slowly, he grew anxious, irritable, and sullen. He began to distance himself from his girlfriend and their two sons. Before long, he started carrying a gun, a .380 pistol. He explained that he wanted to be able to protect his family.

One Saturday morning in 2008, Boyd finished his shift and began to drink. In the evening, a friend drove him to a party. The last thing Boyd says he remembers is sitting in the front seat of the car outside the party, drinking liquor. When he woke up, he was in a police car, on his way to jail. The police officer told Boyd that he had shot his friend in the chest. The bullet made a clean exit, and the friend lived. Corporal Boyd was sentenced to five years in prison.

Last year Boyd was transferred to Haynesville Correctional Center, a medium-security prison deep in the Virginia boondocks. He lives in Building 5, a white structure whose exterior suggests an airplane hangar. Everyone in Boyd’s dorm is a military veteran. In 2012 Virginia began a pilot program to house vets separately from other inmates. The state believes that re-creating some of the trappings of military life in a prison setting might reduce recidivism.

Boyd is tall and thickly muscled and speaks softly in a Piedmont drawl. He took me on a tour of his dorm, which consists of a single cavernous space where bunk beds are arranged in three long rows. At the head of each bunk is a small plastic sign embossed with the name of the inmate and an insignia indicating his branch of service. The walls are painted with patriotically themed murals. A sign announced that the word of the day was “latent.” (“Definition: present, but not visible or active.”) It was after lunch, and the 80 or so veterans were milling around, chatting, and watching TV.

“Without the barbed-wire fences, it’s like you’re back in bivouac,” Boyd said.

When soldiers come back from war, part of the war comes back with them. For many veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, the return home is not a postscript to the war so much as another chapter. In these conflicts, mental wounds have outnumbered physical ones. Posttraumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury have been called the wars' signature injuries. In 2008 the RAND Corporation surveyed a group of veterans six months after their return. It found that almost one in five had either PTSD or major depression. In recent years rates of substance abuse and suicide among veterans have also ticked steadily upward.

A certain number of veterans suffering from mental-health issues will, invariably, end up in jail or prison. After Vietnam, the number of inmates with prior military service rose steadily until reaching a peak in 1985, when more than one in five was a veteran. By 1988, more than half of all Vietnam veterans diagnosed with PTSD reported that they had been arrested; more than one third reported they had been arrested multiple times. Today veterans advocates fear that, unless they receive proper support, a similar epidemic may befall soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

No one knows how many veterans are incarcerated, but the most recent survey, compiled by the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2004, found that nearly one in 10 inmates in U.S. jails had prior military service. Extrapolated to the total prison population, this means that approximately 200,000 veterans were behind bars. Margaret Noonan, a statistician who co-authored the study, told me that it would likely take years for these numbers to reflect the toll on veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Generally, veterans don’t get in trouble immediately,” she said. “There’s usually a big gap between leaving the service and entering the criminal-justice system.”

Since the recession, a mercurial job market has made it difficult for many vets to find steady employment. While prospects for soldiers has improved recently, the employment rate for veterans remains stubbornly lower than the rate for nonveterans.

"Even if they can find a job, the kinds of employment available now don't capture the skills our soldiers have developed," said Dr. Judith Broder, the founder and director of the Soldiers Project, a nonprofit organization based in North Hollywood, California, that provides free psychological services to returning veterans and their families. “They've gone from a situation where they're at the top of their form to where it's hard to find a place that honors them for what they've done."

Many soldiers, unable or unwilling to get treatment for psychological problems, self-medicate with alcohol and drugs. Meanwhile, the VA’s doctors have become increasingly liberal in prescribing powerful drugs. According the National Institute on Drug Abuse, pain-reliever prescriptions issued to members of the military quadrupled between 2001 and 2009. As more drugs are prescribed, more soldiers are developing dependencies. According to a study by the Institute of Medicine, rates of prescription drug abuse among veterans saw a fivefold increase between 2002 and 2008.

"It's just more cost effective and takes fewer man-hours to write a prescription than to sit and talk to a veteran about what they need,” said Broder.

The combination of unemployment, substance abuse, mental-health issues, and a shortage of adequate counseling creates, Broder said, a "perfect storm" for sending vets into the criminal-justice system.

Bryan Gressly grew up in Butler and enlisted in the Army when he was 19, a few months after 9/11. He served with the First Infantry Division in Kosovo and Iraq, making sergeant inside three years. In 2007 he had just started training for the Green Berets at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, when he informed his staff sergeant that he was addicted to crack cocaine. Drummed out of the service, Gressly moved back to Butler, where he soon became homeless. His addiction gradually worsened until, in 2012, he was arrested with a bag of heroin.

Nine months later, I watched Sergeant Gressly present himself in the courtroom of Judge Timothy McCune. Gressly looked slim and spruce. He wore pressed slacks and a collared shirt, and his hair was cut in a smart fade. When the court came to order, he approached a lectern and stood at attention.

“Veteran Gressly reporting, sir.”

“Hey Bryan,” said the judge. “Another new hairdo?”

“It’s springtime, your honor,” said Gressly, deadpan.

McCune chuckled. For the next several minutes, Gressly brought the judge up to date on his life. The defendant announced, with a blush, that he had just finished up his first semester of college and was awaiting his grades. He wasn't quite sure how he'd be spending his summer, but he was thinking of volunteering for a softball league.

“You’ll have so much time you won’t know what to do with it,” said McCune, nodding in approval. “Good work, Bryan.”

“Thanks, your honor.”

Gressly retook his seat and another young man approached the bench. One by one, nine men, all military veterans, updated the judge on the vicissitudes of their week. One recounted a recent trip to New Jersey to get a mechanic’s certificate. Another talked about a custody issue with his ex-wife. A third vented about a friend who had badmouthed Alcoholics Anonymous. (“It didn’t make me act out,” he said, “but it kind of affected my serenity.”) Occasionally McCune asked questions or offered advice, but mostly he just listened.

Last year Butler County opened a veterans court. Veterans courts are criminal courts for military veterans. Modeled on drug courts and mental-health courts, the courts try to help defendants by mandating treatment and close supervision rather than jail time. The first veterans court opened in 2008 in Buffalo, New York, but as more troops return home, they've been founded in hundreds of jurisdictions across the country. In the last five years, cities in 28 states have opened 166 courts, with over 100 opening in the last year alone. The courts represent the most far-reaching attempt by the civilian world to stem the tide of incarcerated vets.

Among the people in the courtroom watching the proceedings was Brad Schaffer. A social worker for the VA, Schaffer visits local jails and helps arrested vets sign up for benefits. Several years ago Schaffer, himself a retired Marine, started noticing an influx of younger veterans fresh from Iraq and Afghanistan, many with substance-abuse problems. He and Judge McCune began talking about setting up a veterans court for Butler, one focused on veterans with combat-related mental-health issues.

Last October the two men approached Sgt. Gressly about being the court's first defendant. In lieu of jail, Gressly agreed to at least a year of close supervision. The level of accountability demanded of a defendant in veterans' court far exceeds that of a normal probationer. In addition to appearing in front of a judge three Thursdays a month, Gressly must see his probation officer at least once a week, attend NA and AA, and meet with the other defendants every Sunday. The court also assigned Gressly two mentors—a professor of criminal justice and a retired state trooper, both of them veterans—who act as big brothers.

Gressly knows his release is provisional. If any of the defendants fail to meet the court's conditions, they can be sent back to regular court and potentially face jail time. The stipulations of their release are sufficiently strict that some veterans eligible for the court prefer to simply serve out their sentences.

To supplement its carrot-and-stick approach, the Butler court tries to create a new support network for defendants, something many soldiers lose when they leave the service. One of the philosophies behind veterans' courts is the people best equipped to help a veteran work out his problems is another veteran. Gressly lives in a transitional home with several of the other defendants. If he needs help, he's encouraged to call his mentors, Judge McCune, or Schaeffer or another one of the veterans in the program.

Gressly told me he appreciated both the camaraderie and the program's rigid structure, both of which were reminiscent of his days in the military.

“The courts puts some dignity back in your life,” Gressly said. “It reminds you you’re a soldier, with values.”

After almost a year, Butler has yet to see any of the veterans in its freshman class fail out. While veterans courts are still new enough that there are few studies available to measure their success, most courts are reporting low rates of recidivism. This is due in part to individual attention given the defendants, but also the selectivity of the courts. Many veterans courts, like Butler's, admit only veterans with good service records who have been arrested for nonviolent crimes.

However, many soldiers begin to suffer adjustment difficulties before even leaving the service. If these veterans do break the law while still enlisted, their case will likely in an administrative separation or a court martial. This can lead to an other-than-honorable discharge, a bad-conduct discharge, or a dishonorable discharge. Veterans receiving these discharges face a tough road: they are eligible for few, if any VA benefits and have more limited access to mental-health counseling and additional challenges in finding a job. Some critics have charged the military with being too hasty to discharge vets who engage in criminal conduct linked to adjustment difficulties.

“There’s this idea that when a soldier engages in misconduct, it’s expedient to get him out and let someone else pick up the pieces,” Maj. Evan Seamone, the former chief of military justice at Fort Benning, told me. “It’s the unspoken assumption that civilian programs and the VA will be there to work out all the details of adjustment."

Identifying veterans as a special category of criminal defendant raises its own questions. Some critics of veterans courts, including the ACLU, have objected to enacting a two-track system of justice, in which those with military service receive opportunities not given to others. In addition, some prosecutors worry that defendants will begin to use their military service as a catch-all excuse for crimes.

“On the one hand, we want to be responsive to veterans' needs," said Thomas Hafemeister, a law professor at the University of Virginia who has written about the use of posttraumatic stress disorder in criminal defenses. "On the other hand, we don’t want to absolve them of responsibility for their crimes.”

Butler County's Judge McCune, who spent a decade as a prosecutor, admits that veterans do receive treatment that, in a perfect world, would be available to all defendants. But he sees rehabilitating soldiers afflicted with combat trauma as a special moral imperative.

"If you’re willing to give your life to protect your country, we as a society have an obligation to help you deal with some of the problems attached to that service," he said. "We're trying not to make the same mistakes we made after Vietnam."

In Haynesville, each veteran is assigned a position in the dorm. Recently the other inmates voted Corporal Boyd senior coordinator, making him the dorm's unofficial leader. In previous facilities, Boyd tried to kept his veteran status under wraps—a challenge, as his right shoulder bears a massive tattoo reading “USMC.”

“A lot of guys don’t take kindly to you being in the military,” Boyd said. “A guy might be like, ‘What? You think you’re better than me?’ It's better to keep quiet.”

In the veterans dorm, though, fights are almost nonexistent. If a conflict between inmates arises, there’s an intervention where everyone sits down and hash it out internally. The mood is calm and the dorm orderly. In the morning, racks are made, shoes squared away. Boyd and another group of vets meet for PTSD group on Thursday. The unit holds veterans from five different wars, and the average age of the dorm is a decade or two older than the inmates in gen pop. Boyd told me the level of trust was such that no one bothered to lock their footlockers.

“Everyone’s on the same page,” Boyd said. “We just want to do our time and go home.”

Related from The Daily Beast

Like us on Facebook - Follow us on Twitter - Sign up for The Cheat Sheet Newsletter


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/31/2013 10:42:22 AM

Student left in DEA cell to get $4 million from US

UCSD Student held in DEA raid gets $4.1 million (Photo: K.C. Alfred/AP via U-T San Diego)
Associated Press

SAN DIEGO (AP) — A 25-year old college student has reached a $4.1 million settlement with the federal government after he was abandoned in a windowless Drug Enforcement Administration cell for more than four days without food or water, his attorneys said Tuesday.

The DEA introduced national detention standards as a result of the ordeal involving Daniel Chong, including daily inspections and a requirement for cameras in cells, said Julia Yoo, one of his lawyers.

Chong said he drank his own urine to stay alive, hallucinated that agents were trying to poison him with gases through the vents, and tried to carve a farewell message to his mother in his arm.

It remained unclear how the situation occurred, and no one has been disciplined, said Eugene Iredale, another attorney for Chong. The Justice Department's inspector general is investigating.

"It sounded like it was an accident — a really, really bad, horrible accident," Chong said.

Chong was taken into custody during a drug raid and placed in the cell in April 2012 by a San Diego police officer authorized to perform DEA work on a task force. The officer told Chong he would not be charged and said, "Hang tight, we'll come get you in a minute," Iredale said.

The door to the 5-by-10-foot cell did not reopen for 4 1/2 days.

Justice Department spokeswoman Allison Price confirmed the settlement was reached for $4.1 million but declined to answer other questions. The DEA didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Detective Gary Hassen, a San Diego police spokesman, referred questions to the DEA.

Since attorney fees are capped at 20 percent of damages and the settlement payment is tax-free, Chong will collect at least $3.2 million, Iredale said. Chong, now an economics student at the University of California, San Diego, said he planned to buy his parents a house.

Chong was a 23-year-old engineering student when he was at a friend's house where the DEA found 18,000 ecstasy pills, other drugs and weapons. Iredale acknowledged Chong was there to consume marijuana.

Chong and eight other people were taken into custody, but authorities decided against pursing charges against him after questioning.

Chong said he began to hallucinate on the third day in the cell. He urinated on a metal bench so he could have something to drink. He also stacked a blanket, his pants and shoes on a bench and tried to reach an overhead fire sprinkler, futilely swatting at it with his cuffed hands to set it off.

Chong said he accepted the possibility of death. He bit into his eyeglasses to break them and used a shard of glass to try to carve "Sorry Mom" onto his arm so he could leave something for her. He only managed to finish an "S."

Chong said he slid a shoelace under the door and screamed to get attention before five or six people found him covered in his feces in the cell at the DEA's San Diego headquarters.

"All I wanted was my sanity," Chong said. "I wasn't making any sense."

Chong was hospitalized for five days for dehydration, kidney failure, cramps and a perforated esophagus. He lost 15 pounds.

The DEA issued a rare public apology at the time.

U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley, the Judiciary Committee's ranking Republican, on Tuesday renewed his call for the DEA to explain the incident.

"How did this incident happen? Has there been any disciplinary action against the responsible employees? And has the agency taken major steps to prevent an incident like this from happening again?" he said.

___

Caldwell reported from Washington.


Daniel Chong, Student Left In DEA Cell, To Get $4 Million from US In Settlement

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/31/2013 10:58:11 AM

Spain investigators: Train conductor was on phone

This image taken from security camera video shows a train derailing in Santiago de Compostela, Spain, on Wedmesday July 24, 2013. Spanish investigators tried to determine Thursday why a passenger train jumped the tracks and sent eight cars crashing into each other just before arriving in this northwestern shrine city on the eve of a major Christian religious festival, killing at least 77 people and injuring more than 140. (AP Photo)
Associated Press

View Gallery

MADRID (AP) — A Spanish court says "black box" data recorders show that a train conductor was on the phone and traveling at 95 mph (153 kph), almost twice the speed limit, when the vehicle derailed, killing 79 people.

Investigators say the train had been going as fast as 119 mph (192 kph) shortly before the derailment and that the conductor activated the brakes "seconds before the crash."

In a statement, the court said Tuesday that the conductor was talking on the phone to an official of national rail company Renfe when the crash happened and apparently was consulting a paper document at the time.

The conductor, Francisco Jose Garzon Amo, has been provisionally charged with multiple counts of negligent homicide.


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/31/2013 11:02:40 AM

Is Bradley Manning a hero, traitor or something more complex? Military veterans react to verdict


Army Pfc. Bradley Manning is escorted out of a courthouse in Fort Meade, Md., Tuesday, July 30, 2013, after receiving a verdict in his court martial. Manning was acquitted of aiding the enemy, the most serious charge he faced, but was convicted of espionage, theft and other charges, more than three years after he spilled secrets to WikiLeaks. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

After a military court on Tuesday acquitted former U.S. Army Pfc. Bradley Manning of aiding the enemy when he released classified documents to the website Wikileaks, Yahoo News asked military service members and veterans for their reactions. Below are excerpts from some we received.

***

Hero or traitor a complex question: The heart of the matter in the Bradley Manning case, to many, seems to be this question: At what point do the people of the United States, be they low-ranking enlisted men like Manning, or private citizens — like Edward Snowden, the recent whistleblower and U.S. government-labeled traitor — have the right to stand up and speak out about government abuses that are affecting not just America and Americans, but the people of the world?

Did Pfc. Manning put troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan at greater risk by leaking the information that he gathered over a period of time in 2009 and 2010? As a veteran of the Iraq War myself, I would say yes. Did he send a message to an overreaching behemoth U.S. government that it will be held to account for misleading the American people and trying to cover up wrong-doings? As a U.S. citizen, I would say yes.

Manning still faces more than 130 years in prison for his convictions of 19 of 20 lesser charges. But one message has been sent loud and clear: A U.S. government that seems to feel it can start wars based upon rumors and half-truths, and by misleading the American people, should be reminded of the adage that you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

Manning may spend some time in a prison cell, but on his way down the corridor, he has revealed a little more of the man behind the curtain to a not-so-ignorant public.

— Kevin E. Lake served as a machine gunner for a convoy security team in Mosul, Iraq, as a member of the Washington Army National Guard.

***

Stiff sentence would dissuade others: Manning willingly broke his word and the law. I know this because I've signed that same paperwork countless times over the years.

With this in mind, I cannot sympathize with him. Manning was put in a position of trust and responsibility, and he lacked the correct attributes for the job. He broke his word and hurt America in an incalculable way.

Is Manning a traitor or whistleblower? Downloading more than 700,000 documents to WikiLeaks isn't the action of a man who discovered a couple of ugly secrets and wanted to expose them. He downloaded a massive amount of classified on a wide range of subjects. This suggests he grabbed anything that had an interesting title. He may have started out wanting to expose an ugly secret, but he got foolishly wild and sloppy. He also showed a horrible lack of judgment. I have to think he is a petty young man who naively committed terribly traitorous acts. A whistleblower brings wrong-doings to the proper authorities; he doesn't pass them along to the open market.

Between Pfc. Bradley Manning's weak principles, his co-workers' lack of interest, and his supervisor's complacency, this was bound to happen eventually. A strong and harsh sentence will hopefully dissuade others from doing similarly foolish things.

— A 23-year military veteran, Mark Murphy's career has included satellite communications, housing hundreds of junior enlisted personnel, helping train F-22 pilots, developing and monitoring government contracts and even performing courier duties with the Air Force and U.S. State Department.

***

Manning a disgrace, traitor: I'm disappointed he wasn't found guilty of aiding the enemy. How could he not be with the breadth and scope of the classified documents he released? What might have taken many years for the enemies of the United States to gather, he provided in one massive discharge of intel. For that reason alone, I have no empathy or sympathy for him.

This is not the 1800s. We are in the digital age and release of this intel is transmitted and received by the bad guys at the speed of light. ClassifiedInformation is just that: It's classified and further categorized by its sensitivity to military and diplomatic operations and the access should not be broadened to a wider segment of the military population.

Robert Douglas served in the U.S. Air Force from 1965 until 2000, including tours in Vietnam and at the Pentagon.

***

Manning faced an impossible choice: Manning is a patriot of the highest order. The great 20th century philosopher, Albert Camus, once said that loving one's country means holding it to the highest standard. If that is the case, then any time someone reveals the wrong-doings of this country to the public, the whistleblower has exercised the highest form of patriotism.

Could Manning have gone about this in a different way? Perhaps. But he knew that every one of his superiors, straight to the very top of the chain, were willing to say nothing about these violations of human decency. Is it any wonder that he did not trust military justice to do the right thing? Would anyone know about any of this information had he not leaked it?

Manning may have broken the law, but the court verdict was right: Manning is not a traitor.

Jack Camwell served in the U.S. Navy from 2002 to 2006 as a cryptologist on board the USS San Jacinto. He has direct experience and working knowledge of military intelligence.

***

Manning took wrong path in reporting wrongdoing: If Manning did witness something he considered a war crime, he should have followed the proper channels of reporting it to his superiors. By leaking the information, he violated the greatest vow taken by anyone who joins the military. Because Manning admitted to leaking the information, regardless of his motives, I believe he should be punished. The verdict could have had the potential to set off a domino effect of service members sharing classified information, had Manning not been found guilty of anything. I believe with the guilty verdict on less serious charges, the message was sent to both sides.

The Manning situation is troublesome at best. With the rise in technology, and our ability to instantly access and share information, the government must ask itself: What we must do to stop other incidents from happening?

John E. Moore Jr. served in the U.S. Army and Army reserves from 1987 to 1995 -- 25th ID, 1/27th Infantry Wolfhounds, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii.

***

Don't second-guess judge: Although Bradley Manning's conduct is reprehensible and traitorous, I support the decision of the court-martial in finding him not guilty of aiding and abetting, yet guilty of a number of lesser charges.

In the Marine Corps, I was a legal serviceman and later served in the Air Force as a First Sergeant. This 28-year career frequently had me involved in courts-martial proceedings and enforcement of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Each UCMJ article has elements that must be proven to successfully prosecute someone.

In Manning's case, he posted classified information to a website that is accessible throughout the world by many entities. In order to prove "aiding and abetting the enemy," it would have to proven he directly or indirectly provided the classified information specifically to Al-Qaida rather than a larger global audience. He certainly made it accessible to them. But was the evidence strong enough to meet the element? The court didn't think it met that threshold. We shouldn't second-guess the decision of a military law expert charged with making the decision.

SMSgt (ret) Tony Barnes spent three years in the Marines and 25 years in the Air Force. His time as a Marine Corps legal serviceman and an Air Force first sergeant gave him vast experience regarding the UCMJ.

***

Manning lucky I wasn't his judge: Manning had access to top-secret communications that he should have known, by releasing to others, could have landed in enemy hands. He, like I did, took an oath, which states: "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

This young man, only 25, should have known better, and, although he may serve some time in prison on the other charges, is lucky I was not his judge because instead of life in prison, I believe that violation of Article 104 deserves the stiffest penalty: death.

— Gene Bannister served in the U.S. Army from 1989 1991 in Operation Desert Storm.

***

Heart in right place, but he still erred: I understand Pfc. Manning's desire to make Americans aware of faulty ethics in the country's foreign policy. I am not saying I would have reacted in the manner he did had I disagreed with information I was privy to. Was his illegal publishing of material to Wikileaks the correct way to blow that whistle? Probably not.

But action needs to be taken and not swept under the rug. Sooner or later, the government is going to have to realize it cannot get away with everything. This nation's citizens deserve the right to know how its government is conducting its business.

We will continue to see more like Manning and Snowden, as they are witness to absurdities in this government. And, when they unveil the truth, the government will have no choice but to attempt to throw them to the dogs and scream, "Spy!" Both sides should realize there are consequences to what they do.

— Michael Hedges enlisted in the U.S. Army in 2002. He served in the infantry from 2002 to 2010, when he was medically re-classed to Army Finance due to combat-related injuries. He served two tours of duty in Iraq in infantry and one tour in Afghanistan in Army Finance.

***

Bradley Manning verdict is a shame: One of the main lessons I took from my time in combat operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan is that the local population's opinions of how we conduct ourselves as a unit deployed to their country and as a nation back home have a direct effect on the average soldier on the ground.

What Bradley Manning did was irresponsible and done from the point of view of someone who has never had to engage the enemy, someone who has never had to walk a patrol where the average citizen can turn against you in an instant and attempt to take your life.

Manning presents himself as a "whistleblower" and as someone who stands for the free flow of information. While the free flow of information is a good thing, it has to be moderated in certain cases and when there are lives on the line is a perfect time to exercise that restraint.

— Tim Smith served five years of active duty in the U.S. Army's 82nd and 173rd Airborne units as an infantry soldier, reaching the rank of staff sergeant. He served three additional years in the reserves after leaving active duty.

***

Manning knows what he did was wrong: While in the Navy, I worked in a "secure" facility where it was necessary to have a security clearance. Security clearances are not given out freely. The government does complete background checks that often include interviewing the candidate's teachers, religious leaders and even neighbors, in person.

Therefore, I cannot see any way Bradley Manning was not aware he was releasing sensitive information. He had no authority to declassify information, and he was aware of consequences of releasing the information.

— Paul Smith enlisted in the U.S. Navy before graduating from high school, attended boot camp one week after graduation and served four years, 1967-71


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1