Posted on 01/20/2007 7:46:41 PM PST by RedRover
The Haditha Marine case, with its leaks of false information including, possibly, tidbits of confessions, has a recent parallel.
Remember the case of Petty Officer Daniel M. King? You don’t?
Evidently, neither does the Washington Post, Associated Press, National Public Radio, and the rest of the media that repeats every NCIS rumor as gospel. This is surprising because it wasn't that long ago that the NCIS lied to them all.
It was the Daniel M. King case, a few short years ago, that should make everyone suspicious of every leak, and every media report, in the Haditha Marines case.
Petty Officer King was a Navy cryptanalyst: Cryptologist Technician (Collection) First Class (CTR1). He was arrested in 1999 on suspicion of espionage, and was summarily stripped of all his rights as a citizen of this country.
NCIS agents administered a polygraph test. It is possible that the agents were not properly trained. In any event, Daniel King’s polygraph was ruled “inconclusive”. At the same time, no hard evidence was found to back up the charge. So the NCIS agents needed a confession.
Petty Officer King was detained by and subjected to a torturous interrogation that lasted over 26 days for 19 to 20 hours at a time.
At a Congressional hearing, attorney Jonathan Turley would testify, “The NCIS manufactured a theory of espionage without foundation and then took steps to compel statements to support that theory. The tapes and evidence secured by the defense in this case reveal agents seeking a trophy not the truth.”
At the same hearing, Lieutenant Robert A. Bailey (JAG, US Naval Reserve), stated:
“The conduct of NCIS agents in this case was nothing short of shocking. Independent reviewers have stated that their techniques were barbaric….
That such conduct occurred at the hands of NCIS is not surprising….Indeed, such conduct is predictable based on the training and guidance manual published by the NCIS.
According to the NCIS Manual, Chapter 14 - Interrogations, any person who adamantly denies any wrongdoing and points to his clean record is "subconsciously confessing."
If a confused suspect asks what is going to happen to him, the NCIS believes this is an indication that he "is beginning a confession."
Additionally, agents are to convey the idea that they will "persist as long as required to resolve the issue under investigation" and that they "will not give up the interrogation."….
[Petty Officer] King's only recourse was to confess to a crime he did not commit in the hopes that he would eventually receive a lawyer and the truth would come out.”
Finally, the truth did come out--despite the efforts of the NCIS. Petty Officer King was not a spy.
He was released in March 2001 after a hellish 520 days in confinement. Confinement in "Special Quarters," the equivalent to maximum security lock-down condition in which he spent approximately 20 hours a day in a six-foot by nine-foot cell.
Today, the NCIS is continuing the same criminal behavior of coercing confessions and ignoring rules and ethics in pursuit of its target. You haven't been reminded of this story in the mainstream media. But the truth is there for anyone willing to look. It's all right here at Documents in the Case of US v. Daniel M. King .
Spreading the word can be an act of patriotism. If the truth stays secret, the very worst of men will bring down our nation's very best.
All right, Red. Good to see you getting back to the funnies. These NCIS turkeys should be as open to criticism as old senile Murtha.
I am breaking in on the CIA CID NCIS chat, so excuse my rudeness Girlene. I am so glad that I am not the only 'ticked' with watching Nancy pants blink...but here's my question to you...as the VP was leaning in to her, (I won't say in mixed company what a commoner like moi thought it looked like) what the heck did he pop in his mouth as if he was a kid sneaking gum? They had quite the lil show behind GW's back. Ok..go back and discuss Red's new vegetarian friend, Kelly.
Will Red put earmuffs on her tomorrow? Ya, I saw it.
Regular police are allowed to "lie in order to find out the truth." It's a common and accepted practice in interrogations. It's not illegal. It's taught.
I think it's a first cousin to Code Pink.
Justa, when you get a minute, can you find out if anyone in the DC Chapter is familiar with this 'Peace Division of the APA?
Pendleton 8?
---------
11 Apr 2006 20:15:13 GMT
Last week’s guessing game involved the anonymous sources quoted in Jane Mayer’s New Yorker article about Alberto J. Mora and the stand he took against torture. Earlier today, we shared some guesses with you about two of the three sources mentioned. This item remains outstanding:
Another military official, who worked closely with [David] Brant and who has been denied permission to speak on the record, told me that the news [of how Mohammed al-Qahtani was interrogated] ‘rocked’ Mora. The official added that Mora ‘was visionary about this. He quickly grasped the fact that these techniques in the hands of people with this little training spelled disaster.’
After the jump, some above-average speculation about the identity of this anonymous source.
Here’s what one source — at the Pentagon, as it turns out — had to say:
Two names come to mind. First, Rear Admiral James E. McPherson is the head Navy JAG, and Rear Admiral Bruce E. MacDonald is his top deputy. My guess is it is one of them. Vice Admiral Albert Church is also a possibility: he led the DoD investigation of practices in Gitmo, and would have worked closely with Brant when he did.
Another well-informed source suspects a different individual: Dr. Michael Gelles, chief psychologist of the Navy Criminal Investigative Service. This source directs our attention to this report by Human Rights Watch, which talks about how Sen. Carl Levin “outed” Mora and Brant over a year ago:
According to the classified sections of the Church report as described by U.S. Senator Carl Levin, Dr. Michael Gelles, the chief psychologist of the Navy Criminal Investigative Service, completed a study of Guant namo interrogations in December 2002 (when the harsh Rumsfeld-approved techniques were in effect) that included extracts of interrogation logs. Gelles reported to the service director, David Brant, that interrogators were using ”abusive techniques and coercive psychological procedures. According to Levin, Gelles report prompted Brant to argue that if those aggressive practices continued, the Navy would have to ”consider whether to remain” at Guant namo.
Our tipster theorizes: “Mayer’s source is probably Gelles. As the HRW report explains, he’s the NCIS psychologist who discovered the abuse while reading Gitmo interrogation logs and took his concerns to Brant, who then went to Mora. One giveaway: Meyer mentions Gelles by name a few paragraphs earlier in her piece as the source of Brant’s information about the abuse, but never says whether or not she tried to talk with him.”
In addition, our correspondent points out that “In March 2005, Gelles gave an on-the-record interview about his opposition to coercive interrogation techniques like the ones used at Gitmo. After that, Gelles’s superiors apparently gagged him, because he’s not been heard from since.”
The Memo [The New Yorker]
Split Seen on Interrogation Techniques [Boston Globe]
Getting Away With Torture? [Human Rights Watch]http://www.wonkette.com/politics/defense-department/guessing-game-results-the-memo-part-2-157732.phphttp://www.wonkette.com/politics/defense-department/guessing-game-results-the-memo-part-2-157732.php
Wed, 01 Mar 2006 21:11:32 GMT
Last week, we asked for your guesses about the identities of the anonymous sources quoted in Jane Mayer’s intriguing New Yorker article about Alberto J. Mora, the former general counsel of the U.S. Navy who took a stand against what he viewed as torture of detainees. We received some interesting speculation — some of which appears after the jump.
First we asked you about this item:
[Alberto Mora] agreed to confirm the authenticity and accuracy of the memo and to be interviewed. A senior Defense Department official, whom the Bush Administration made available as a spokesman, on the condition that his name not be used, did so as well.
A source proffers this analysis:
Mr. Mora was the Navy’s GC, and officials who work for one of the Service Secretaries (e.g. Secretary of the Navy) would be described on background as a “Navy official” — not a “Defense official”. That is reserved for someone who works for SECDEF [Secretary of Defense]. “Senior” means the guy holds a job that requires Senate confirmation. Who would be in a position to confirm the memo? Could be the Department of Defense general counsel or deputy general counsel — but I bet the Department would shy away from having lawyers talk to the press. That is either going to be done by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Gordon England, or the Assistant SECDEF for Public Affairs, Dorrance Smith. Mr. Mora worked for Mr. England for a long time while England was Secretary of the Navy, the two are close, and the quote and article in general are favorable to Mr. Mora. Sounds to me like the quote came from a Mora friend, so I will guess Mr. England is the source.
Then we inquired into this source’s identity:
A former Administration official told me that [Donald] Rumsfeld was unconcerned [about the torture allegations]; he once more joked that he himself stood eight hours a day, and exclaimed, ‘Torture? That s not torture!’ (‘His attitude was What s the big deal? ’ the former official said.)
Hmm, we’re a bit at a loss — as is our source, who punts as follows:
“A former administration official”… This could be anyone who used to work in DoD. I will guess Paul Wolfowitz because I am a dedicated neo-con who likes seeing the blogosphere explode at the mention of his name.
Well, that’s as good a reason as any! We like seeing the blogosphere explode too.
(There’s one outstanding item from the guessing game, which we’ll be getting back to you about a little later. We may have some more solid information about it than the typical random speculation that we serve up around here.)
2. "They killed a retired police officer with 11 children and four grandchildren.
3. Hashim Awad was a very forgiving and gentle man.
1. If one listens closely the rhetoric is identical.
2. Retired police officer...with Saddams force?
I know a few Iraqis that may like to comment on them.
3. Having 11 kids in the ME does not mean you are gentle.
In fact, it could mean quite the opposite. We all know how women are treated there.
Using manipulative, coercive language to effect a desired conclusion is what these people do best.
In a America we have a high opinion of our police force.
In Iraq, the people were terrified of the police.
In America, we generally view someone with many kids and grands as kind, gentle and loving.
They are grandfatherly or motherly types. Not necessarily the same thing in other countries.
Using these types of descriptors is aimed at controlling how we think and feel about a person that we know nothing about.
FRmail
From MSNBC (who only cares the treatment of terrorists), Can ‘20th hijacker’ ever stand trial?
Aggressive interrogation at Guantanamo may prevent his prosecution
PART TWO OF TWO
By Bill Dedman
Investigative reporter
....excerpt...
'Unanswered questions'
Mora, now the vice president and general counsel for international operations for Wal-Mart, found out about Rumsfeld’s reauthorization a year later, watching a congressional hearing on C-SPAN about Abu Ghraib.
"We may have stopped some abuse on the Department of Defense side," Mora said, "but it's clear we had no effect on the national policy, meaning the White House policy, to inflict cruelty on some individuals."
It is unfathomable that this low life poe actually "delivered" this crap just before the President's address to the nation!
Let me conclude by saying historically...foreign occupations do not work, and in fact incite civil unrest.
Our military... but there are limits to its ability to control a population that considers them occupiers.
I have said this before and I continue to say that there are essentially only two plans.
One is to continue an occupation that has not worked and that has shown no progress toward stabilization.
The other, which I advocate, is to end the occupation of Iraq...and turn Iraq over to the Iraqis.
First, we are NOT occupying Iraq. We are there at the request of the Iraqi government. The notion that we are occupiers and civil unrest has been incited by terrorists and members of the US CONgre$$, but I repeat myself.
Iraq was turned over to the Iraqis inJUNE 2204!!!
What that means, dumuss, is that they are a sovereign nation and the Iraqis are in control.
Oh how I wish I had the time right now to tear this crap apart word for word!
PART II -- STRATEGY IN DETAIL
The average weekly attacks have grown from 430 [14/day] July 2005 to well over 1000 today. [32/day]
Congratulations pig! You have done an admirable job.
Iraqi casualties have increased from 63 per day in October 2005 [441/wk] to over 127 per day.[889/wk]
In the past 18 months the demonRATS have accomplished an increase in the death of Iraqis by 900%. These people are beyond reprehensible.
And now we know why he is constantly citing polls (spit) that we did not know existed. He had to measure how their message to the terrorists was working.
The latest polls show...same polling question was asked just 8 months later...February 2006 poll... Just this morning, the BBC released a poll...
This garbage was given in CONGRESSIONAL "testimony" not a Sunday morning talk show.
I have NO idea what you two are talking about.
Or the current threats we face today in the United States CONgre$$
Shouldn't you otta ping a person if you're gonna talk about 'em??? I notice you posted this when you KNEW I was tied up on another thread. ;*)
BTW, I don't need no steenkin Whiteouthouse. I am fully self-contained.
LOL!
Many things have not occurred by happenstance, as some would like us to believe, IMO.
Should have watched on C-spam. They framed only the President and her quiet empty chest.
Got up at 10AM feeling a lot better. Will be going to work.
Check these out:
If this doesnt' freak you out, nothing will.
The Division of Peace Psychology, established within the American Psychological Association (APA) in 1990
Under the leadership of Susie McKay, president during 1995-96, the following Division 48 vision statement was developed:
As peace psychologists, our vision is the development of sustainable societies through the prevention of destructive conflict and violence, the amelioration of its consequences, the empowerment of individuals, and the building of cultures of peace and global community
The Peaceful Solution® Character Education Program
You will love this one. Read the last couple paragraphs if nothing else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.