by Deep Green Resistance News Service | Feb 16, 2012 | Repression at Home
By Yana Kunichoff
Each time a new measure that the city of Chicago is preparing for the coming NATO and G8 summits is unveiled, the tension in the city ratchets up a notch. The latest news comes in the form of reports that Chicago has purchased face shields, and may be considering the implementation of airborne surveillance technology.
As part of the expanded powers given to Mayor Rahm Emanuel for the May summits, the city has authority to accept contracts for goods or services without approval of the City Council or the expected competitive bidding process. The face shields and aerial surveillance technology are the first use of this allowance.
Chicago police officers, and any law enforcement the city chooses to deputize under the measures put in place for NATO/G8, will be equipped with 3,000 new face shields that “will fit easily over gas masks,” according to The Chicago Sun-Times.
The nearly $200,000 contract with Super Seer, a Colorado-based company, was made as an “emergency purchase for the G8 summit,” according to Super Seer President Steve Smith.
Chicagoist also reported that Chicago will get the latest in aerial surveillance equipment, according to the press release from a company called Vislink:
The airborne units will transmit to four strategically located ground-based receiver sites providing city-wide coverage and the ability to simultaneously receive real-time images from two aircraft for viewing at the Office of Emergency Management and Communications (OEMC) operations center. An additional three receive systems will be installed in the city’s mobile command vehicles to facilitate field operations.
These measures will be in addition to “snipers that will stand guard from above,” reported ABC. Overarching security jurisdiction for the summits, which have been designated a national security event, has already been handed over to the Secret Service.
From TruthOut:
by Deep Green Resistance News Service | Feb 15, 2012 | Repression at Home
By Amnesty International
The deaths of 500 people following police use of Tasers underscores the need for tighter rules limiting the use of such weapons in law enforcement, Amnesty International said.
According to data collected by Amnesty International, at least 500 people in the USA have died since 2001 after being shocked with Tasers either during their arrest or while in jail.
On 13 February, Johnnie Kamahi Warren was the latest to die after a police officer in Dothan, Alabama deployed a Taser on him at least twice. The 43-year-old, who was unarmed and allegedly intoxicated, reportedly stopped breathing shortly after being shocked and was pronounced dead in hospital less than two hours later.
“Of the hundreds who have died following police use of Tasers in the USA, dozens and possibly scores of deaths can be traced to unnecessary force being used,” said Susan Lee, Americas Programme Director at Amnesty International.
“This is unacceptable, and stricter guidelines for their use are now imperative.”
Strict national guidelines on police use of Tasers and similar stun weapons – also known as Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs) – would effectively replace thousands of individual policies now followed by state and local agencies.
Police forces across the USA currently permit a wide use of the weapons, often in situations that do not warrant such a high level of force.
Law enforcement agencies defend the use of Tasers, saying they save lives and can be used to subdue dangerous or uncooperative suspects.
But Amnesty International believes the weapons should only be used as an alternative in situations where police would otherwise consider using firearms.
In a 2008 report, USA: Stun Weapons in law Enforcement, Amnesty International examined data on hundreds of deaths following Taser use, including autopsy reports in 98 cases and studies on the safety of such devices.
Among the cases reviewed, 90 per cent of those who died were unarmed. Many of the victims were subjected to multiple shocks.
Most of the deaths have been attributed to other causes. However, medical examiners have listed Tasers as a cause or contributing factor in more than 60 deaths, and in a number of other cases the exact cause of death is unknown.
Some studies and medical experts have found that the risk of adverse effects from Taser shocks is higher in people who suffer from a heart condition or whose systems are compromised due to drug intoxication or after a struggle.
“Even if deaths directly from Taser shocks are relatively rare, adverse effects can happen very quickly, without warning, and be impossible to reverse,” said Susan Lee.
“Given this risk, such weapons should always be used with great caution, in situations where lesser alternatives are unavailable.”
There are continuing reports of police officers using multiple or prolonged shocks, despite warnings that such usage may increase the risk of adverse effects on the heart or respiratory system.
Deaths in the past year include Allen Kephart, 43, who died in May 2011 after he was stopped by police for an alleged traffic violation in San Bernardino County, California. He died after three officers shocked him up to 16 times. The officers were later cleared of wrongdoing.
In November 2011, Roger Anthony fell off his bicycle and died after a police officer in North Carolina shot him with a stun gun. The officer reportedly shocked Anthony – who had a disability and hearing problems – because he did not respond to an order to pull over.
Neither man was armed when police shocked them.
“What is most disturbing about the police use of Tasers is that the majority of those who later died were not a serious threat when they were shocked by police,” said Susan Lee.
From Amnesty International:
by Deep Green Resistance News Service | Feb 14, 2012 | Colonialism & Conquest
By Spencer Ackerman / Wired
Thought the Iraq war was over? The Obama administration certainly wants you to think so, the better for its re-election campaign. Inconvenient fact, though: The Pentagon is asking for nearly $3 billion for a war it isn’t actually fighting.
To be specific, the Pentagon’s brand-new budget request asks for $2.9 billion for what it calls “Post-Operation NEW DAWN (OND)/Iraq Activities.” That’s almost as much money as the Pentagon spends on Darpa, its mad-science arm. And there are practically no U.S. troops in Iraq.
The Pentagon’s briefing materials provide little explanation for the expense. “Finalizing transition” is the ostensible mission the Pentagon wants funded. Its remaining office in Baghdad, the Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq, will get cash to “continue security assistance and security cooperation” with the Iraqi military “and amounts for the reset of equipment redeploying from Iraq and the theater of operations.”
And that won’t be all the cash going to Iraq. Contained within the classified “black” budget is sure to be money for special operations forces to hunt Iraq’s remaining terrorists on a case-by-case basis. And chances are, the CIA is spending money in Iraq, too.
Aside from that, the U.S. military has turned over operations in Iraq to the State Department, which in turn has hired an army of private security contractors the size of a heavy combat brigade. State has blocked congressional oversight into how its contractors will operate in the wake of the U.S. withdrawal. But it’s clear that the diplomats are also buying themselves an air force — since Dec. 17, 2011 marked the first day in 20 years that the U.S. Air Force received no orders for operations in or over Iraq.
The New York Times noted over the weekend that in Afghanistan, “even dying is being outsourced” to civilian contractors. During the coming years in Iraq, that trend is likely to accelerate.
By and large, though, the point of the military’s residual operations in Iraq will be to sell the Iraqis weapons. It’s already brokered a sale of 18 F-16s to Iraq’s fledgling Air Force, worth $835 million. The Iraqis are already talking about doubling that purchase in the future. They can discuss future weapons sales with a U.S. military office that’s flush with cash.
From Wired:
by Deep Green Resistance News Service | Feb 14, 2012 | Rape Culture
By Eric W. Dolan
Fox News contributor Liz Trotta on Monday suggested women serving alongside male service members should expect to be raped and complained about the money spent on women who are “now being raped too much.”
Trotta appeared on Fox to discuss new Department of Defense rules allowing women to serve in more than 14,000 jobs that had been off-limits to female soldiers. They still cannot join infantry, armor or special forces units, however.
“But we have women once more, the feminist, going, wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time,” she said.
“Defense Secretary Leon Panetta commented on a new Pentagon report on sexual abuse in the military,” Trotta added. “I think they have actually discovered there is a difference between men and women. And the sexual abuse report says that there has been, since 2006, a 64% increase in violent sexual assaults. Now, what did they expect? These people are in close contact, the whole airing of this issue has never been done by Congress, it’s strictly been a question of pressure from the feminist.”
She then noted that the budget of the Defense Department’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office increased from $5 million in 2005 to more than $23 million in 2010.
“So, you have this whole bureaucracy upon bureaucracy being built up with all kinds of levels of people to support women in the military who are now being raped too much,” Trotta remarked.
“Well, many would say that they need to be protected, and there are these sexual programs, abuse programs, are necessary,” co-anchor Eric Shawn interjected, but to no avail.
“That’s funny, I thought the mission of the Army, and the Navy, and four services was to defend and protect us, not the people who were fighting the war,” Trotta responded.
From The Raw Story: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/13/fox-contributor-on-women-raped-in-the-military-what-did-they-expect/
by Deep Green Resistance News Service | Feb 12, 2012 | Colonialism & Conquest
By John Tirman / Alternet
The plea bargain in the last Haditha massacre case handed down in January is a fitting end to the Iraq war. In the most notorious case of U.S. culpability in Iraqi civilian deaths, no one will pay a price. And that is emblematic of the entire war and its hundreds of thousands of dead and millions displaced.
Sergeant Frank Wuterich, the squad leader who encouraged and led his marines to kill 24 civilians in the Iraqi town of Haditha in November 2005, was the last of eight originally charged in the massacre. The others were let off on technicalities, or to help the prosecution. One officer, not involved in the killing but the coverup, was acquitted in a military trial.
The responsibility for these killings came down to Wuterich’s role, but he never actually went through a full trial. The military prosecutor opted for the slap-on-the-wrist of demotion to private for the 24 civilian deaths. Wuterich, who admitted to much more in a “60 Minutes” interview in 2007—including rolling grenades into a house filled with civilians without attempting to make an identification—copped only to “dereliction of duty.”
The episode was often compared with the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, in which some 400 civilians were executed by Lieutenant William Calley and some of his army unit in 1967. While the scale and circumstances are quite different, they do bear one striking similarity, and that is the reaction of officials and the American public alike.
The My Lai massacre was uncovered by an enterprising journalist, Seymour Hersh, who had to overcome official disavowals to get the story. When Hersh managed to publish via a small wire service, the story exploded, with many Americans expressing horror and outrage that something like that could be done by American troops.
But as the months passed, another reaction set in. A rally-round-the-troops surge began to take over the news cycle. Conservatives in particular insisted that the soldiers were only following orders. Calley became a kind of folk hero, and eventually he was found guilty but only served three years under house arrest. No one else was convicted for these 400 murders.
The public, which is broadly indifferent to the deaths of civilians in U.S. wars like those in Vietnam and Iraq, simply does not want to come to terms with the horror of these atrocities. “The memories that endure within American public culture,” wrote British scholar Kendrick Oliver in a cultural study of the My Lai massacre, “tend to be more compatible with the interests of power than those of events, like My Lai, which disrupt the identification of the nation with perpetual historical virtue.”
As Oliver points out, a pattern was established during the My Lai episode: public exposure by a journalist, official denials that, when no longer sufficient, give way to an official investigation and perhaps a trial. Vocal segments of the public cry out on behalf of the accused soldiers, pointing to the fog of war, the rules of engagement, and the much greater evils perpetrated by the enemy. In the end, few if any American soldiers are held accountable.
The pattern held not only for My Lai, but for the belated discovery of a large-scale massacre in 1950 at No Gun Ri during the Korean War. Uncovered in 1999 by Charles Hanley and his colleagues at the Associated Press, this massacre—perhaps as many as 300 or 400 South Korean civilians gunned down by a U.S. army unit—also led to an investigation and an acknowledgement that some Korean civilians had been killed, but not an apology. The discoveries also met with a fierce backlash.
The Haditha massacre fits this pattern. There was a coverup by the U.S. Marine Corps, which insisted that 15 Iraqis had been killed by an IED. When reporter Tim McKirk of Time magazine was alerted to the massacre by an Iraqi human-rights group, his reporting sparked a firestorm of attention. Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat and Vietnam veteran who was a reliable supporter of the military, called the massacre “cold blooded murder” and decried the pressure being put on our troops, pressure that could result in tragedies of this kind.
Read more from AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/world/154087/why_was_no_one_punished_for_america%27s_%22my_lai%22_in_iraq/
