Sunday, October 23, 2011

Rice Tries Hiding In Plain Sight; Attempts To Pre-empt War Crimes Charges

Former Bush secretary of state Rice tries Cheney-Rove method "hide in plain sight," lies to avoid War Crimes trials; attempts to re-write history, fails miserably; offers up salacious affair with lover Ghadafi to distract, deflect prosecution

 "Another rat jumps the ship." - Alberto Gonzales, Former Attorney General under Bush

By Phillip Sherwell

Condoleeza Rice clashed repeatedly with then Vice President Dick Cheney over what to do with captured terrorism suspects and at one point even threatened to resign when she felt circumvented, according to a memoir of her time in Washington, due out next month.

     At one stage, the splits within the Administration became so deep that she threatened to resign. Her book is the latest by former Bush insiders to recount deep rifts at the highest level of the US government over the war on terror.

Rice had long-term affair with AC/DC Ghadafi
In the sharpest confrontation between Dr Rice and Mr Cheney in 2006, the then secretary of state argued that terrorism suspects could not be “disappeared” as happens in authoritarian states.

She urged President Bush to acknowledge that the US was holding Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and other terrorism suspects in secret prisons overseas, the New York Times reported after obtaining a copy of the book.

    Ms Rice and the vice president had a heated argument for several minutes while other senior figures reportedly looked on in uncomfortable silence. Mr Bush sided with her and moved the suspects to the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, according to the memoir.

    She recounts several other splits with hardline hawks in Mr Cheney’s circle. Indeed, just two months after the attacks of Sept 11, 2001, she had threatened to resign as national security adviser after Mr Bush authorized military commissions for terror detainees without informing her. The president apologized, she said.

Pathological liar:  Rice lies to save skin, claims she fought Cheney

But despite their closeness, she also had her disagreements with Mr Bush too, most notably in 2006 too over his plans to increase troop levels in Iraq as the war there was going badly.

“So what’s your plan, Condi?” he responded testily when she questioned his “surge” plans. “We’ll just let them kill each other, and we’ll stand by and try to pick up the pieces?”

    She describes her prickly relationship with Donald Rumsfeld, the defense secretary, and the frustrations of Colin Powell, her predecessor as secretary of state who quit after Mr Bush’s first term.

    After another clash, she said to Mr Rumsfeld “What’s wrong between us?” She took his response as dismissive. “I don’t know,” he said. “We always got along. You’re obviously bright and committed, but it just doesn’t work.”

    The book also includes her memories of world leaders, most notably how deposed Libyan dictator Col Muammar Gaddafi made a video showing photographs of her to the backing of a song called “Black Flower in the White House”. It was an “eerie fascination”, she notes, “but at least it wasn’t raunchy”.

    Although she spells out the tensions of the Bush era, she defends the key decisions, including the invasion of Iraq. And she cites this year’s Arab Spring revolutions as a vindication of his focus on spreading freedom and democracy. 

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

14 yearl old busted for drugs in Bali

Boy transferred by Indonesian Justice Minister to better accommodations in humanitarian move; Kuta retains it's seedy reputation as hangout for scumbag Australian transients, drug dealers, pedophiles

Canberra Times
By Tom Allard and Amilia Rosa

THE 14-year-old boy facing drug charges in Bali spent last night with asylum seekers in an immigration detention centre after being suddenly shifted from his police cell following the intervention of Indonesia’s Justice Minister.

    Shielding his face from the cameras, the teenager wore a half balaclava, sunglasses and hat as he arrived at the facility at Jimbaran Bay, which has recently been rebuilt after asylum seekers burnt much of it down last year.

Boy apparently sold pot by Australian pedophiles
In bizarre scenes, the teenager from Morisset Park on Lake Macquarie was even required to attend a press conference where the move was explained, although he did not say anything and reporters were requested not to ask questions.

Taswem Taribh, the head of the Bali office of the Justice Ministry, said the teenager had been moved in dramatic circumstances.

    ‘‘After a brief, incognito visit from Minister of Justice and Human Rights Amir Syamsuddin earlier today to Kerobokan prison, [he decided] that the situation in Kerobokan was inhumane,’’ Mr Taswem said. 

    ‘‘There’s no more space, it’s inhumane. He’s a juvenile, and here the food is good, and he will also be able to play, like a young person.’’

    The youth will have his own cell and his parents will be able to stay next to him as he awaits his court appearance. His lawyers hope to convince the judge the teenager is an addict and should be freed for rehabilitation in the care of his parents.

   The immigration centre is austere but a vast improvement on crowded Kerobokan prison, where the boy could have gone. There are 36 asylum seekers staying there from Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. Among them are several children.

    His lawyer, Mohammad Rifan, said the boy was upset and stressed while being paraded in front of media, but a much better outcome was achieved.

    ‘‘The detention over here is much better than in the police [cells] and in the Kerobokan,’’ he said after delivering the boy to the new facility. ‘‘I ask him not to worry. He’s quite happy with my explanation because I already check inside. Much, much better.’’

    The schoolboy was arrested on October 4 after allegedly purchasing 3.6 grams of marijuana while on holidays in Bali with his parents. He faces three charges, two of which carry prison terms. He is expected to go to trial within weeks. 

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

What is next for Canadian Armed Forces

Canada has played military second fiddle and imitated U.S. military for far too long, and is now paying for it

Centre for International Policy Studies
By Daryl Copeland

There have in recent years been a growing number of voices expressing serious concern over the militarization of American life. I certainly share that sentiment. Is an F-16 flyover really appropriate for the opening of the Super Bowl?

    The United States is apparently becoming the Praetorian pole in an increasingly heterpolar world order. Still, I think that a debate of this nature is culturally healthy, and have always admired the fact that some of the most trenchant, even withering, criticism of U.S. policy and actions comes from domestic sources – including, not least, that country's many military academies and war colleges.

Number of U.S. dead in Iraq, Afghan wars still unknown
Even in the mainstream media, a decade’s worth of assumptions – used mainly to justify deploying the military to pursue the epically misguided global war on terror – are finally being questioned.

One could only wish that a similar degree of the scrutiny accorded defence issues in the United States might one day be evident in the discourse on international policy in Canada.

    Apart from a few faint echoes in the academy and a handful of specialized publications, that discussion here is practically non-existent. I find that most unfortunate.

U.S. now a military dictatorship under Obama, thanks to Bush
Canadians need to start talking about the kind of military they require in the face of all identifiable threats and challenges. They must then somehow try and square the outcome of that conversation against a thoughtful consideration of whether the defence capability that they need matches the one that they have got.

    I have my doubts.


    Post-Afghanistan, the Canadian forces are fully kitted up: main battle tanks and artillery; light armored vehicles and troop transports; heavy air lift; new fighter aircraft are next. By international standards, they may be small, but they are sharp. After a period of rest, they will again be ready for combat.

    But here’s the rub: Garrisoning our borders will not stop infectious disease. We won’t find alternatives to the carbon economy by sending out an expeditionary force to capture them. Generals and admirals won’t be able to save us from a warming planet or changing climate.

    That said, and to be sure, in the firmament of international policy there is a place for hard power instruments, and I am certainly not a pacifist. Having a capable military gets you a place at the table at NATO headquarters in Brussels, and the ear of some influential people in Washington. And not just hawks and neo-conservatives.

    But is that enough?

    Militaries exist, in the first instance, for capturing or killing enemies, and for compelling your adversary to submit to your will. This is what armed forces were designed to achieve and why they are lethally equipped.

Too late:  Obama destroying America, killing servicemen, women
It seems unlikely, for example, that any kind of diplomatic intercession could have stopped Hitler and the Nazis. The problem is that early in the 21st century, there is no threat out there that looks remotely like the Third Reich, or even Imperial Japan. In the nuclear age, moreover, large-scale conventional war has become inconceivable.

    In fact, the enduring lesson of the Cold War is that militaries work best when they are not used. Take the blade out of its sheath for purposes of doing harm and it tends to make a terrible mess, as can be witnessed today in Iraq and Afghanistan. Libya seems set to become the next case in point.

    The problem with leading with the sword is that you run the very real risk of allowing policy to become an instrument of war, rather than vice versa.


    Today, militaries are being deployed as first responders in complex emergencies, such as natural disasters in fragile or failed states. In such cases, the questions must be put: How, when, and with what should a nation intervene?

Somalia:  Canadian serviceman imitating U.S. GI's at Abu Grahib
Given the elemental purpose of the armed forces, in humanitarian intercessions are they really the most appropriate international policy instrument, or do they just get the tasking because they have the nominal capacity, while the other instruments have been allowed to wither for lack of resources? When resources are scarce, does this represent a misallocation?

     Crucially, could not purpose-built civilian organizations do a better, more cost-effective job?

    A decade ago, recruitment advertisements for the Canadian Forces had the memorable refrain: “There’s no life like it.” Soldiers were shown keeping the peace.

Somali dope for Canadian servicemen:  "It's all good, Bro!"
Today, the slogan is “Fight” and soldiers are shown going to war.

If security is the flip side of development, does this realignment make sense?

None of this came up in the recent federal election campaign, which is unfortunate. It is time to begin an overdue national conversation on where to go with defence policy, international security, and the Canadian military.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

End supposedly in sight, U.S. veterans ponder pain of Iraq war, traitor Obama

Celebrations premature; Obama still has to pull plug against stiff opposition from GOP/Demo scumbag war mongers, delusional parents of dead who can't (won't) except war, dead family members their fault for their support, silent cowardice


WASHINGTON (Reuters) –

They remembered friends who died and brave Iraqis they had met, but news on Friday that the Iraq war was ending couldn’t erase questions among U.S. veterans about whether it has all been worth it.

    Sentiment about whether the nearly nine-year war was right or wrong was as divided among veterans as public opinion in general about a conflict that began with the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 and will end when 40,000 U.S. troops are pulled out by the year-end holidays.

Illustration copyright Imas-Kurniawati-Finnegan 2007
Over its course, about 4,400 U.S. military personnel died and another 32,000 were wounded. Tens of thousands of Iraqis were killed.

While welcome news for families waiting for loved ones to return home, veterans know that it is not an end to foreign deployments, with battles still to fight in Afghanistan.

“For us, it’s a personal connection. For most Americans they probably thought the war in Iraq was already over,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.

    “It’s been a long ride and we’ve lost a lot of friends and we’ve had a lot of friends come home wounded and injured, and I think at times like this we always remember the people that we lost,” said Rieckhoff, an 
Army platoon leader in Iraq in 2003-04.

    President Barack Obama announced the end of the Iraq war on Friday with surprisingly little fanfare — no big event, no big signs, no big crowds.

    “The last American soldier will cross the border out of Iraq with their heads held high, proud of their success, and knowing that the American people stand united in our support for our troops,” he said in the White House press room.

    “That is how America’s military efforts in Iraq will end.”

Obama:  "Gee, how many are dead for nothing?
But U.S. veterans were divided over whether pulling out was the right course of action. Some welcomed it, others felt the job was unfinished.

Daryl Boggs, Jr., a member of the Army Reserve, was injured by an improvised explosive device in Iraq just a month after arriving in March 2003. He suffered shrapnel wounds to his lower body, a fractured leg and a brain injury, and was awarded the Purple Heart for those wounded in action.

“The way I felt from the very beginning was each one of us was there to do a certain job. You feel that what you did was right,” he said.


    Every veteran of the Iraq war will have to decide whether the war was worth the cost, Boggs, who works in Ohio, said. But he would not change the journey he took.

    “What happened, happened. War is hell,” he said. “I was meant to do a job in this world and I felt I did it. If I was meant to get injured, I was meant to get injured.”

    Marc Wolfson, 25, of Tampa, Florida, who served two stints in Iraq during his four years in the Marine Corps, said it sounded “more like a retreat than a withdrawal.”

This Marine has died of his wounds.  You will be avenged, Brother
The U.S. military still needs to mentor young Iraqis and help rebuild the country, he said. Otherwise, Iraqi anger toward Americans will build and U.S. troops will be forced to return in the future.

“If we pull out like this, it’s going to be a total failure,” Wolfson said.

    “I think that people haven’t left with their heads held high for a long time from Iraq,” he said. “I pretty much left feeling as though I didn’t accomplish anything.”

    Republican Congressman Mike Coffman still becomes emotional when he remembers an Iraqi worker at a voting station who was wounded in an attack during a national election but refused to be evacuated. He was determined to stay until the polls closed because it took so much courage for Iraqis to come out in that area to vote.

    “There were times when I just felt that it would never end. That it was just war without end. We had no traction,” said Coffman of Colorado, who served in Iraq with the Marine Corps Reserve in 2005-2006.

    But he agreed with Obama’s decision. “We’re bringing the war to a just conclusion,” Coffman said.
Janette Perry, 47, a nurse from Ohio whose son served in Iraq, was visiting the Vietnam War Veteran’s Memorial in Washington and said she did not agree with the decision to withdraw troops.

    “I understand that there’s a price,” she said. “You don’t withdraw until it’s done and it’s not done.”

    “Somebody helped us when we were fighting for our freedom,” Perry said. “The Iraqis deserve the same.”

(Additional reporting by Ned Barnett and Colleen Jenkins in North Carolina, and Lily Kuo in Washington; editing by Mary Milliken and Todd Eastham)

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

STRATFOR Dispatch: Post-Ghadafi Libya

Murdering scumbag getting royal sendoff by his people; body desecration proves he was reviled by population

October 20, 2011 | 1733 GMT 
Analyst Kamran Bokhari gives an overview of the challenges facing Libya after the death of former Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.

Editor’s Note: Transcripts are generated using speech-recognition technology. Therefore, STRATFOR cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.


Ousted Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi was killed Oct. 20 when rebel forces took his hometown of Sirte. Col. Gadhafi’s death is largely symbolic because it does not change the ground reality that he had ceased to be the ruler of his country when his forces left Tripoli and the capital was taken over by rebel forces. Therefore the ground realities have not changed with Col. Gadhafi’s death because the NTC, the National Transitional Council, and its other rebel allies still need to demonstrate — and now more than ever before — that they can actually effectively run the country.

    The one thing that held all the rebels together was the presence of Moammar Gadhafi, even though the rebels had taken the capital and the focus was to essentially put down any form of pro-Gadhafi resistance wherever it may be, especially in his hometown, Sirte. And now that has been accomplished, and therefore the next question is whether these rebel forces will continue to be able to hold their unity and not descend into a situation of chaos and civil war.

Gadhafi was still alive when captured, then tortured, killed
There are two main forces that are centered in the two major cities of the country. The National Transitional Council, which was effectively a Benghazi-based entity and then relocated to the capital once the capital fell to the rebels. But in the capital there is another entity called the Tripoli Military Council that is also distinguishing itself from the NTC. And then there are ethnic differences between Arabs and Berbers, there are ideological differences between Islamists and non-Islamists.

    So we have a very complex landscape that will somehow need to come together. And therefore the biggest concern right now is how to disarm all the militias that have been active in fighting the Gadhafi regime and turn them into, or integrate them into, a new military force representing the new government, if and when the new republic is formed.

Also dead:  One of Gadhafi's sons
Gadhafi’s death therefore moves the country into the next phase and which is the most difficult stage of this entire conflict, especially now that the country is awash with hundreds of thousands of fighters armed to the teeth and the goal of securing the country and forming a new state remains elusive.

This STRATFOR article is republished with permission and thanks by The 5th Estate.

How the Afghan Mission Failed; Part 2 of 3

Failing to learn from history, NATO finding out that it isn't cool to imitate War Criminals Bush, Obama, Blair, Part 2

Centre for International Governance Innovation
By Mark Sedra

[Series] The spectre of protracted war looms large as the Taliban changes its tactics, looks beyond NATO's departure.


One could say that the Afghan war was already lost by the time NATO had expanded in earnest across the country in 2006. Neglect and missteps early in the intervention, as well as errors of omission and commission, have reverberated throughout the decade-long state-building process and military mission, placing both on a rather precarious and shaky foundation.

    Among those early mistakes was, first and foremost, the UN’s failure to authorize the expansion of a peacekeeping presence across the country in 2001-02, which was largely a result of U.S. objections. At the time, then-defense-secretary Donald Rumsfeld, among others, worried that a countrywide UN peacekeeping mission would interfere with U.S. counterterrorism operations, and potentially sap U.S. resources from the looming war in Iraq.

War Criminal:  Donald Rumsfeld
Second, a combination of grossly flawed assessments of the costs of reconstruction and the fact that some donor states (particularly the U.S.) were averse to nation-building produced a reconstruction effort advanced on the cheap and with a light footprint. By the time the Taliban were driven from power, the U.S. had already shifted its gaze to Iraq, leaving debilitating shortfalls in resources and initiative. Former UN envoy to Afghanistan Lakhdar Brahimi would later refer to the light-footprint approach, which he presided over, as “original sin.”

  Third, the Afghan government and international donor community’s unwillingness to launch a legitimate peace process in order to draw opposition and spoiler groups like the Taliban in from the cold while they were still weakened and on the run was a missed opportunity. They chose, instead, a victor’s peace that disproportionately privileged some groups on the inside and alienated those on the outside.

    A fourth factor was the failure to construct an effective regional strategy that could prevent the blatant interference of states like Pakistan, India, and Iran, while encouraging more constructive and beneficial co-operation.

    Finally, there were the problems with strategy and resource shortfalls in the Afghan National Security Forces’ (ANSF) development process, which was always seen as the international community’s exit strategy and the key to long-term stabilization.

Near useless:  Afghan National Security Forces’ (ANSF)
Combined, these factors seemed to stall Afghanistan’s transition process before it even got out of the starting gate, such that the country essentially lost two to three years in its transition. This is not to say that significant achievements have not been made, with major breakthroughs in health, education, and rural development. But what are schools and clinics without peace?

    The U.S. and its donor partners have drastically increased the flow of aid to Afghanistan over the past three to four years in an attempt to rectify its early neglect and create the minimum conditions for an “honourable” withdrawal. They are seeking, in particular, to boost ANSF development and stimulate a stillborn peace process. However, in their haste to paper over holes in the Afghan security sector and get the ANSF into the fight in advance of NATO’s departure, donors may have funneled too much money into the system, leading to increased graft, leakage, waste, and mismanagement.

    The ship has also probably sailed on Taliban reconciliation. After all, would you make a peace deal when you think you are winning, and when the other side has already announced a departure date? Probably not, and neither will the Taliban unless they are handed full control of most of the southern half of the country, which NATO and the Northern Alliance surely will not allow.

Civilian casualties continue to mount from U.S. drone attacks
The Sept. 21 assassination of Burhanuddin Rabbani, a former Afghan president and leader of the Afghan High Peace Council, which was charged with spearheading Taliban talks, has struck a serious blow to peacemaking efforts. The killing of this leading Northern Alliance figure, which took place under the guise of peace negotiations with Taliban interlocutors, is probably the clearest sign yet of the Taliban’s growing disinterest in a negotiated settlement. Coming only months after the high-profile assassination of Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s half-brother, an influential former governor of Uruzgan Province and the mayor of Kandahar City, it will be difficult to contain impulses to abandon reconciliation and seek revenge.

    The recent shift in the Taliban strategy, from targeting NATO units on the frontlines to assassinating Afghan leaders and launching high-publicity terrorist operations, shows that the Taliban may already be looking beyond NATO. Decapitating the Karzai leadership and support base while shattering public faith in the state is a strategy aimed more at destabilizing the domestic regime than at driving out foreign infidels. 

    It would appear that the stage is being set for a new phase of conflict.

Taliban to U.S., NATO:  "Why negotiate when we are winning?"
Preventing this mutation and escalation of the conflict would take, at minimum, a Taliban power-sharing agreement, a regional non-interference and co-operation treaty, and an ironclad donor commitment to sustain current levels of aid for up to a generation. Although not impossible, under present circumstances this would seem highly improbable. Even in the best-case scenario, it appears that the most Afghans can hope for is a weak central government in Kabul with limited sovereignty outside of the capital, and a few major urban centers where warlords, the Taliban, and other factional actors will hold sway, with low-intensity violence as the norm. This is hardly the “end state” most Afghans and donors envisioned in Bonn, Germany, in December 2001, but it beats a return to all-out war.
    The reality, though, is that over the next decade we may be talking about a different type of legacy for the Afghan mission – one that set in motion a chain of events that eventually triggered a second NATO-Afghan war.

   This is the second part of a three-part series examining the outcomes and legacy of the Afghan war.   Part 1 outlined how the international intervention was lost, and described the grave consequences that that failure is likely to have for a people intimately familiar with war.  Part 2 offers a focused discussion of what factors led to NATOs failure, and highlights why the resurgent Taliban, and the departing western forces, raise the spectre of a return to protracted war and violence in a post-NATO landscape.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Obama, Bush & Company's legacy: Guantanimo Torture Camp; origins

A close look at the torture center run by Obama and created by Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Powell, Feith, and many, many more;  War Crimes Trial are necessary for U.S. to be viable, legitimate Republic again

Global Security

Guantanamo Bay "GITMO"

U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay is the oldest U.S. base overseas and the only one in a Communist country. Located on the southeast corner of Cuba, in the Oriente Province, the base is about 400 air miles from Miami, Florida. The terrain and climate of Guantanamo Bay make it a haven for iguanas and banana rats.

In December 1903, the United States leased the 45 square miles of land and water for use as a coaling station. A treaty reaffirmed the lease in 1934 granting Cuba and her trading partners free access through the bay, payment of $2,000 in gold per year, equating to $4,085 today, and a requirement that both the U.S. and Cuba must mutually consent to terminate the lease.

    U.S. diplomatic relations with Cuba were cut on January 3, 1961 by President Dwight Eisenhower; shortly prior to John F. Kennedy's inauguration on January 20, 1961. At that time, many Cubans sought refuge on the base. U.S. Marines and Cuban militiamen began patrolling opposite sides of the base's 17.4 mile fenceline. Today, U.S. Marines and Cuba's "Frontier Brigade" still man fenceline posts 24 hours a day.

    In October 1962, family members of service people stationed here and many base employees were evacuated to the United States as President John F. Kennedy announced the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba. This was the start of the Cuban Missile Crisis which resulted in a naval quarantine of the island until the Soviet Union removed the missiles. The evacuees were allowed to return to the base by Christmas 1962. 

Another crisis arose just 14 months later on Feb. 6, 1964, when Castro cut off water and supplies to the base in retaliation for several incidents in which Cuban fishermen were fined by the U.S. government for fishing in Florida waters. Since then, Guantanamo Bay has been self-sufficient and the Naval Base desalination plant produces 3.4 million gallons of water and more than 800,000 kilowatt hours of electricity daily.

    The base is divided into two distinct areas by the 2 1/2 mile-wide Guantanamo Bay. The airfield is located on the Leeward side and the main base is on the Windward side. Ferry service provides transportation across the bay. The primary mission of Guantanamo Bay is to serve as a strategic logistics base for the Navy's Atlantic Fleet and to support counter drug operations in the Caribbean.

    In 1991, the naval base's mission expanded as some 34,000 Haitian refugees passed through Guantanamo Bay. The refugees fled Haiti after a violent coup brought on by political and social upheaval in their country. The naval base received the Navy Unit Commendation and Joint Meritorious Unit Award for its effort.

Kennedy wanted to close GITMO, kill CIA
In May 1994, Operation Sea Signal began and the naval base was tasked to support Joint Task Force 160, here providing humanitarian assistance to thousands of Haitian and Cuban migrants. In late August and early September 1994, 2,200 family members and civilian employees were evacuated from the base as the migrant population climbed to more than 45,000 and the Pentagon began preparing to house up to 60,000 migrants on the base. The last Haitian migrants departed here Nov. 1, 1995. The last of the Cuban migrants left the base Jan. 31, 1996. In October 1995, family members were authorized to return, marking an end to family separations. An immediate effort began to restore base facilities for family use, including a child development center, a youth center, two schools and Sunday school. Additionally, the revitalization of Boy and Girl Scout Camps and the Guantanamo Bay Youth Activities (a free sports program for children) was enacted.

Illustration copyright Imas-Kurniawati-Finnegan 2007
During the Haitian migrant operation "Operation Sea Signal" at Guantanamo Bay, a number of migrant camps were set-up at "Radio Range" the site of the Naval Base's radio antennas on the south side of the base, and the future site of the more permanent detainee facility. To identify the camps, a name was designated to each to correspond with the phonetic alphabet used for official military "radio" communication (Camp Alpha, Camp Bravo up to Camp Golf). When additional sites were established on the north side of the base, camp names were designated using the opposite end of the alphabet, to include Camp X-Ray. Camp X-Ray is the only camp site on the northern side of the base and is currently used as a temporary detention facility.

    Since Sea Signal, Guantanamo Bay has retained a migrant operations mission with an ongoing steady state migrant population of approximately 40. The base has also conducted two contingency migrant operations: Operation Marathon in October 1996 and Present Haven in February 1997. Both of these short-fused events involved the interception of Chinese migrants being smuggled into the United States.

    After 52 years of service, Guantanamo's Fleet Training Group relocated to Mayport, Florida, in July 1995. One month later, the naval base lost another major tenant command when the base's Shore Intermediate Maintenance Activity disestablished after 92 years of service.

Operation Sea Signal
On 13 June 2003 Brown & Root Services, a division of Kellogg Brown & Root, Arlington, Va., was awarded a $12,495,601 modification to Task Order 0038 at under a cost-reimbursement, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity construction contract for various facilities, Radio Range, U.S. Naval Base, Guantanamo Bay. The work to be performed included new facilities for traffic control checkpoints (main and secondary checkpoints), troop bed-down facility, troop dining facility and destructive weather improvements to detention facility structures. The project was to also include site work, heating, ventilation and air-conditioning, plumbing and electrical work, as required for the various facilities. Work was to be performed at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and was expected to be completed by June 2004. Contract funds wouldnot expire at the end of the fiscal year. The basic contract was competitively procured with 44 proposals solicited, three offers received and award made on June 29, 2000. The total contract amount was not to exceed $300,000,000, which included the base period and four option years. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic Division, Norfolk, Va., was the contracting activity (N62470-00-D-0005).

Five Star accommodations:  Complimentary spray painted goggles
The Naval Base includes, as separate commands, a Naval Hospital and Branch Dental Clinic, detachments of the Personnel Support Activity, Naval Atlantic Meteorologic and Oceanographic Command, Naval Media Center, Naval Communications Station, Department of Defense Dependent Schools and a Navy Brig. Directly supporting the base as departments of Naval Station are Naval Criminal Investigative Service, Resident Officer in Charge of Construction, Human Resources Office, Family Support and Service Center, Red Cross, Security and Navy Exchange/Commissary.

    Guantanamo Bay, located on the southeast coast of the island of Cuba about 500 statute miles southeast of Miami, Florida, is approached via the Windward Passage from the north or the Caribbean Sea from the south . Guantanamo Bay is the largest bay on the extreme south coast of Cuba, and affords anchorage for deep-draft ships. The bay is a pouch-shaped indentation about 12 miles long in a northeast-southwest direction and about 6 miles across at its greatest width. Guantanamo Valley, a low, hilly district, extends westward from the bay along the Sierra Maestra. The deep bay is sheltered by the nearby Cuzco Hills (elevations to 495 ft) to the south and east and by mountains to the north.

Entrance into the bay, between Leeward Point and Windward Point, is made through a 1 1/4 mile-wide channel with 42 ft least dredged depth up to a point westward of Fisherman Point. From there to a point southwestward of Caravela Point, the least dredged depth is 32 ft.

The bay complex is divided into an Outer Harbor and an Inner Harbor. The Outer Harbor stretches from the entrance to the Naval Reservation Boundary about 5 miles northeastward. The channel narrows to 250 yards here, at Palma Point, then widens into two separate bays whose total width is about 5 miles; the upper half, known as Ensenada de Joa, forms the Inner Harbor in which commercial ports are located. The naval base and the main anchorage area are contained within the Outer Harbor area.

    The naval complex is located on the east side of the harbor between Fisherman Point (1 3/4 miles north of Windward Point) and Granadillo Point, abut 2 3/4 miles northeastward. The area contains many coves and peninsulas and a few islands. Much of the land here is elevated well above water level. The western side of Guantanamo Bay, generally low and mangrove-covered, contains many mud flats.

The more important coves, located between Corinaso Point and Deer Point, contain the pier and wharf facilities of the naval base. The land is lower and flatter here for a few hundred yards inland. Two airfields are located within the naval complex: McCalla Airfield, on the east side of the harbor entrance, is inactive; Leeward Point Field on the west side is an active naval air station.

    Water depths vary from about 60 ft just inside the harbor entrance to approximately 30 ft in Granadillo Bay (on the east side of the Outer Harbor) and at the entrance to Eagle Channel. Many of the coves are only 25 ft deep. The mean tide range is 1.0 ft and the spring tide range is 1.3 ft. Periodic tidal variations as great as 4-5 ft have been observed, but these probably were meteorological versus astronomical phenomena. Harbor tidal currents in Guantanamo Bay are estimated to be about .25 kt on the flood to .50 kt on the ebb. Locally at the river mouth, stronger currents are observed periodically. Swells ranging 3-5 ft are common during the afternoons and nights, extending upbay from the harbor entrance to Fisherman Point. During an extended period of fresh southerly winds from a recent winter storm on the Gulf of Mexico (Apr 83), waves up to 10-12 ft were observed in the outer harbor; these disrupted the lifeline ferry service from Leeward Point for two days.

     At Guantanamo Bay, the Outer Harbor is used by the US Navy and the Inner Harbor serves as a commercial (Cuban) port. This evaluation deals with the facilities of the Outer Harbor only, although the climatology section is appropriate for both harbors. The Outer Harbor includes that portion of Guantanamo Bay from the entrance north to Palma Point (approximately 19° 58' 24"N). The major naval facilities are contained within Corinaso Cove from Corinaso Point to Radio Point. There are five piers available, varying in length from 180-900 ft with depths alongside from 20 to 35 ft. Three wharves provide accommodations up to 1065 ft with depths to 38 ft. Piers and wharves range from 6 to 10 ft in height above MSL. It should be noted that dredge depths decrease along some piers (see Pier B) and also that dredge width may be minimal and maneuvering is consequently difficult. Berths and anchorages in Guantanamo Bay are assigned by the Port Services Officer. The naval anchorage areas for deep-draft vessels are in the Outer Harbor. Pilots are available and required for ships engaged in commercial trade, but are not compulsory for ships of the US Navy. Tugs (normally two available) and other harbor services may be arranged through Port Control. Emergency harbor services are available 24 hours a day.

Guantanamo Turbines
In early 2005, four white wind turbines began operating John Paul Jones Hill, the base's highest point, named after the Revolutionary War naval hero. The turbines, standing at 80 meters (262 feet) high, feature three-blade turbines. The four turbines were estimated to provide as much as a quarter of the base's power generation during the high-wind months of late summer and fall; an appreciable fact given that 

    Guantanamo Bay is completely self-sustaining, generating its own power and water without having to rely on Cuban municipal sources. In addition to generating power, the turbines have significantly cut down on emissions of greenhouse gases created through burning diesel fuel. Black clouds containing carbon dioxide can routinely be seen pouring from the diesel generators supplying power to the base's energy grid. Each turbine is anchored in a giant block of concrete, through which 22 soil anchors are drilled into the mountain to a depth of 30 to 40 feet deep. These are then sealed with grout. The automated turbines are rated to withstand winds of up to 140 miles per hour. 

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

GUANTANAMO – The U.S.’s Very Own Concentration Camp

Another Obama bogus promise: to close Guantanamo; Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, among others need to be charged with War Crimes

Progressive Avenues
By Marti and Luke Hiken

At a time when the U.S. pretends to be a beacon of freedom and liberty to the world, one would expect that Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp – a symbol of blatant repression -- would not exist. It logically would be seen as an anathema the U.S. would want to keep hidden. Instead, the U.S. flaunts it like a teenager showing off his muscles.

    Why did the U.S. leadership decide to build it in Cuba in the first place? What kind of mentality did it take for Cheney, George Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, Ashcroft, and others to sit down and decide to construct a torture chamber out of a former military base?
War Criminals Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Obama's legacy
If the question is approached from a psychological point of view, from a military standpoint, and as a law enforcement question, none of these frameworks explain the continued phenomenon. When Obama ran for office, shutting down Guantanamo was one of the myriad broken promises made by the president. Even before his election, he was disgusted with the obvious failures of this prison camp. As a nation all we could do with Bush’s atrocities was to shake our heads in disbelief; yet, Obama continues on the same path as his predecessor.

  Although Americans have prided themselves in promoting and touting democracy and a justice system based upon constitutional principles, our country remains silent in the face of a prison camp.

    A prison camp just doesn’t emerge out of nowhere on a particular day; nor does it arise from the destruction of buildings by a terrorist group. On the contrary, even though there could be military retaliation for a strike on a country’s home soil, a prison camp requires much more. Indeed, it is necessary for a people, whether they be citizens or not, to be slowly inculcated with a mentality that imprisoning people in order to ensure national security and the ability to gather intelligence is acceptable legal and moral behavior. It also helps to de-humanize them as “enemy combatants” rather than as suspects or human beings.
Obama on Guantanamo illegal imprisonment/torture:  "SO?"
Guantanamo is not authorized by the constitution of this country. The foundation upon which this country is based, its belief in its legal processes, including due process, as well as our very basic moral dignity, have been thrown out the window. The existence of a Guantanamo renders torture and atrocities as so commonplace as to go unnoticed and make it an approved national policy.

    The daily reality of Guantanamo is easy to ignore. It lies off the coast of the U.S. and remains, basically, out of site. We hear no news from or about the camp. It is located inside a closed and secured naval military institution, inside another country. Freedom of the press is non-existent in such a concentration camp. It not only has a justice system of its own, outside the purview of the U.S. legal system, it adheres to a justice system clearly incompatible with U.S. law. The existence of Guantanamo, and its use of violence and torture as legitimate instruments of interrogation, is demonstrated by the fact that the nationally syndicated television show, NCIS [10-18-11], has its fearless hero threaten a potential suspect by suggesting that she would send the man to Guantanamo for questioning if he didn’t confess to the crime.
Fly Friendly CIA Air (complimentary diapers, goggles, drugs)
For a concentration camp to exist the general population must become accustomed gradually to the torture of their own people at home on their own territory. This is accomplished by incarcerating hundreds of thousands of people into ad-seg units, Security Housing and Control Management units throughout the country. Justice becomes a different word with a different meaning to Afro-American and Hispanic families constantly under threat from police forces and a prison system that incarcerates them first and foremost. Law and Order becomes the euphemistic words for racism and injustice.

     A concentration camp allows for this country’s leaders to kill, isolate, and maim at will. In the process they also serve, as all brutal prisons do, to quell angry citizens who might threaten the Pentagon’s privileged status.

    The camp’s existence also demonstrates to the world that the U.S. can intimidate, murder and torture anyone, anywhere, with impunity. It is the essence of arrogance and blatant lawlessness that elevates the hypocrisy of the U.S. government to its highest level.
Gitmo accommodations include complimentary torture package
The ultimate reason for this symbol of violence and lawlessness is that it underscores our military dominance and superiority over the world’s people. It establishes the U.S. as the meanest nation in the world where none dare oppose us because nobody could be as vicious and cruel as we are. There is no pretense at truth or justice involved here; rather, it is the exercise of raw power stripped to its most basic core. Granted murder and slaughter take place all over the world, but Guantanamo says to everyone:  You want bad, we’ll show you bad.
    Is it part of the American psyche? Is it based on a psychotic dominance personality and bureaucracy? Torture, renditions, and murder are not info-gathering techniques; they are a dominance factor whether they reside in a Security Housing Unit or Guantanamo. To the extent this camp exists as a manifestation of a psychotic military mentality, it is time for the American people to regain control over our armed forces.
USA:  Illegal torture centers "R" Us
Is it too late to ask: When will we shut down the concentration camp at Guantanamo? This camp is to the American people what concentration camps were to the German people. How long will we allow this camp to define our national character as so contemptible? For as long as Guantanamo exists, this country will rank with Nazi Germany and pre-apartheid South Africa as one of the most heartless and lawless regimes in the history of mankind.

Marti Hiken is the director of Progressive Avenues. She is the former Associate Director of the Institute for Public Accuracy and former chair of the National Lawyers Guild Military Law Task Force. She can be contacted at, 415-702-9682. 

Luke Hiken is an attorney who has engaged in the practice of criminal, military, immigration, and appellate law.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.



The real truth on 9/11 slowly continues to bleed out

Technical experts are mounting major challenges to official U.S. government accounts of how three World Trade Center skyscrapers collapsed in near-freefall after the 9/11 attacks 15 years ago.

Many researchers are focusing especially on the little-known collapse of



The Geopolitics Of The United States, Part 1: The Inevitable Empire

The Empire and the inevitable fall of the Obama criminal regime

STRATFOR Editor’s Note: This installment on the United States, presented in two parts, is the 16th in a series of STRATFOR monographs on the geopolitics of countries influential in world affairs.

Like nearly all of the peoples of North and South America, most Americans are not originally from the territory that became the United States.



Geopolitics Of The United States Part 2: American Identity And The Threats of Tomorrow

A look back at 2011 predictions for the future in order to put events of today into perspective

 photo capitalism_zpsah78uy5p.jpg
We have already discussed in the first part of this analysis how the American geography dooms whoever controls the territory to being a global power, but there are a number of other outcomes that shape what that power will be like. The first and most critical is the impact of that geography on the American mindset.



By Robert S. Finnegan

This e-mail outlines and confirms the acts of espionage against Indonesia and Indonesians by Akiko Makino and the others involved both in Kobe University and in AI Lab at University of Airlangga, Surabaya; Bahasa Indonesia original follows English translation...



UPDATED 01/07/2015 : New Analysis Challenges Tamiflu Efficacy; Hong Kong Corona Virus Outbreak


 photo TAMIFLU_small_zpssojx6okt.jpg

Obama criminals now resulting to biowarfare in quest to destroy Chinese and ASEAN economy; "novel virus substrain" points directly to a Kawaoka / Fouchier / Ernala-Ginting Kobe lab virus weaponized and genetically altered to specifically target and infect the Asian population: Ribavirin...



 photo WHO02_zpsplmhtlpr.jpg
The 5th Estate has just purchased a library on H5N1 "Novel" virus pandemics, there are dozens of PDF and Exel documents we feel will assist you in saving lives following intentional releases of the H5N1 and now MERS viruses; we will begin by printing those that appear to be extremely relevant here: H5N1 Kobe-Kawaoka-Ernala series continues soon with more "Smoking Gun" e-mails from Teridah Ernala to The 5th Estate . . .



By Robert S. Finnegan

On October 12, 2002 the Indonesian island of Bali experienced a terrorist attack that rocked the world. It was unquestionably well-coordinated and executed, the largest in the country's history.