The New York Times seems to believe themselves obliged to publish everything they stumble across that can/will put America’s interests, war missions, and troops in danger. They also feel that simply reminding us they have more, but are sitting on it, is somehow credit-due for them …

A six-year archive of classified military documents made public on Sunday offers an unvarnished, ground-level picture of the war in Afghanistan that is in many respects more grim than the official portrayal.

The secret documents, released on the Internet by an organization called WikiLeaks, are a daily diary of an American-led force often starved for resources and attention as it struggled against an insurgency that grew larger, better coordinated and more deadly each year.

The New York Times, the British newspaper The Guardian and the German magazine Der Spiegel were given access to the voluminous records several weeks ago on the condition that they not report on the material before Sunday.

The documents — some 92,000 reports spanning parts of two administrations from January 2004 through December 2009 — illustrate in mosaic detail why, after the United States has spent almost $300 billion on the war in Afghanistan, the Taliban are stronger than at any time since 2001.

As the new American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David H. Petraeus, tries to reverse the lagging war effort, the documents sketch a war hamstrung by an Afghan government, police force and army of questionable loyalty and competence, and by a Pakistani military that appears at best uncooperative and at worst to work from the shadows as an unspoken ally of the very insurgent forces the American-led coalition is trying to defeat.

The material comes to light as Congress and the public grow increasingly skeptical of the deepening involvement in Afghanistan and its chances for success as next year’s deadline to begin withdrawing troops looms.

The archive is a vivid reminder that the Afghan conflict until recently was a second-class war, with money, troops and attention lavished on Iraq while soldiers and Marines lamented that the Afghans they were training were not being paid.

The reports — usually spare summaries but sometimes detailed narratives — shed light on some elements of the war that have been largely hidden from the public eye:

• The Taliban have used portable heat-seeking missiles against allied aircraft, a fact that has not been publicly disclosed by the military. This type of weapon helped the Afghan mujahedeen defeat the Soviet occupation in the 1980s.

• Secret commando units like Task Force 373 — a classified group of Army and Navy special operatives — work from a “capture/kill list” of about 70 top insurgent commanders. These missions, which have been stepped up under the Obama administration, claim notable successes, but have sometimes gone wrong, killing civilians and stoking Afghan resentment.

• The military employs more and more drone aircraft to survey the battlefield and strike targets in Afghanistan, although their performance is less impressive than officially portrayed. Some crash or collide, forcing American troops to undertake risky retrieval missions before the Taliban can claim the drone’s weaponry.

• The Central Intelligence Agency has expanded paramilitary operations inside Afghanistan. The units launch ambushes, order airstrikes and conduct night raids. From 2001 to 2008, the C.I.A. paid the budget of Afghanistan’s spy agency and ran it as a virtual subsidiary.

Over all, the documents do not contradict official accounts of the war. But in some cases the documents show that the American military made misleading public statements — attributing the downing of a helicopter to conventional weapons instead of heat-seeking missiles or giving Afghans credit for missions carried out by Special Operations commandos.

White House officials vigorously denied that the Obama administration had presented a misleading portrait of the war in Afghanistan.

“On Dec. 1, 2009, President Obama announced a new strategy with a substantial increase in resources for Afghanistan, and increased focus on Al Qaeda and Taliban safe-havens in Pakistan, precisely because of the grave situation that had developed over several years,” said Gen. James L. Jones, White House national security adviser, in a statement released Sunday.

“We know that serious challenges lie ahead, but if Afghanistan is permitted to slide backwards, we will again face a threat from violent extremist groups like Al Qaeda who will have more space to plot and train,” the statement said.

General Jones also condemned the decision by WikiLeaks to make the documents public, saying that “the disclosure of classified information by individuals and organizations which could put the lives of Americans and our partners at risk, and threaten our national security.”

“WikiLeaks made no effort to contact us about these documents – the United States government learned from news organizations that these documents would be posted,” General Jones said.

The archive is clearly an incomplete record of the war. It is missing many references to seminal events and does not include more highly classified information. The documents also do not cover events in 2010, when the influx of more troops into Afghanistan began and a new counterinsurgency strategy took hold.

They suggest that the military’s internal assessments of the prospects for winning over the Afghan public, especially in the early days, were often optimistic, even naïve.

There are fleeting — even taunting — reminders of how the war began in the occasional references to the elusive Osama bin Laden. In some reports he is said to be attending meetings in Quetta, Pakistan. His money man is said to be flying from Iran to North Korea to buy weapons. Mr. bin Laden has supposedly ordered a suicide attack against the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai. These reports all seem secondhand at best.

The reports portray a resilient, canny insurgency that has bled American forces through a war of small cuts. The insurgents set the war’s pace, usually fighting on ground of their own choosing and then slipping away.

Sabotage and trickery have been weapons every bit as potent as small arms, mortars or suicide bombers. So has Taliban intimidation of Afghan officials and civilians — applied with pinpoint pressure through threats, charm, violence, money, religious fervor and populist appeals.

FEB. 19, 2008 | ZABUL PROVINCE Intelligence Summary: Officer Threatened

An Afghan National Army brigade commander working in southern Afghanistan received a phone call from a Taliban mullah named Ezat, one brief report said. “Mullah Ezat told the ANA CDR to surrender and offered him $100,000(US) to quit working for the Afghan Army,” the report said. “Ezat also stated that he knows where the ANA CDR is from and knows his family.” Read the Document »

MAY 9, 2009 | KUNAR PROVINCE Intelligence Summary: Taliban Recruiter

A Taliban commander, Mullah Juma Khan, delivered a eulogy at the funeral of a slain insurgent. He played on the crowd’s emotions, according to the report: “Juma cried while telling the people an unnamed woman and her baby were killed while the woman was nursing the baby.” Finally he made his pitch: “Juma then told the people they needed to be angry at CF [Coalition Force] and ANSF [Afghan National Security Forces] for causing this tragedy” and “invited everyone who wants to fight to join the fighters who traveled with him.” Read the Document »

The insurgents use a network of spies, double agents, collaborators and informers — anything to undercut coalition forces and the effort to build a credible and effective Afghan government capable of delivering security and services.

The reports repeatedly describe instances when the insurgents have been seen wearing government uniforms, and other times when they have roamed the country or appeared for battle in the very Ford Ranger pickup trucks that the United States had provided the Afghan Army and police force.

NOV. 20, 2006 | KABUL Incident Report: Insurgent Subterfuge

After capturing four pickup trucks from the Afghan National Army, the Taliban took them to Kabul to be used in suicide bombings. “They intend to use the pick-up trucks to target ANA compounds, ISAF and GOA convoys, as well as ranking GOA and ISAF officials,” said a report, referring to coalition forces and the government of Afghanistan. “The four trucks were also accompanied by an unknown quantity of ANA uniforms to facilitate carrying out the attacks.” Read the Document »

The Taliban’s use of heat-seeking missiles has not been publicly disclosed — indeed, the military has issued statements that these internal records contradict.

In the form known as a Stinger, such weapons were provided to a previous generation of Afghan insurgents by the United States, and helped drive out the Soviets. The reports suggest that the Taliban’s use of these missiles has been neither common nor especially effective; usually the missiles missed.

MAY 30, 2007 | HELMAND PROVINCE Incident Report: Downed Helicopter

An American CH-47 transport helicopter was struck by what witnesses described as a portable heat-seeking surface-to-air missile after taking off from a landing zone.

The helicopter, the initial report said, “was engaged and struck with a Missile … shortly after crossing over the Helmand River. The missile struck the aircraft in the left engine. The impact of the missile projected the aft end of the aircraft up as it burst into flames followed immediately by a nose dive into the crash site with no survivors.”

The crash killed seven soldiers: five Americans, a Briton and a Canadian.

Multiple witnesses saw a smoke trail behind the missile as it rushed toward the helicopter. The smoke trail was an important indicator. Rocket-propelled grenades do not leave them. Heat-seeking missiles do. The crew of other helicopters reported the downing as a surface-to-air missile strike. But that was not what a NATO spokesman told Reuters.

“Clearly, there were enemy fighters in the area,” said the spokesman, Maj. John Thomas. “It’s not impossible for small-arms fire to bring down a helicopter.”

The reports paint a disheartening picture of the Afghan police and soldiers at the center of the American exit strategy.

The Pentagon is spending billions to train the Afghan forces to secure the country. But the police have proved to be an especially risky investment and are often described as distrusted, even loathed, by Afghan civilians. The reports recount episodes of police brutality, corruption petty and large, extortion and kidnapping. Some police officers defect to the Taliban. Others are accused of collaborating with insurgents, arms smugglers and highway bandits. Afghan police officers defect with trucks or weapons, items captured during successful ambushes or raids.

MARCH 10, 2008 | PAKTIA PROVINCE Investigation Report: Extortion by the Police

This report captured the circular and frustrating effort by an American investigator to stop Afghan police officers at a checkpoint from extorting payments from motorists. After a line of drivers described how they were pressed to pay bribes, the American investigator and the local police detained the accused checkpoint police officers.

“While waiting,” the investigator wrote, “I asked the seven patrolmen we detained to sit and relax while we sorted through a problem without ever mentioning why they were being detained. Three of the patrolmen responded by saying that they had only taken money from the truck drivers to buy fuel for their generator.”

Two days later when the American followed up, he was told by police officers that the case had been dropped because the witness reports had all been lost. Read the Document »

One report documented the detention of a military base worker trying to leave the base with GPS units hidden under his clothes and taped to his leg. Another described the case of a police chief in Zurmat, in Paktia Province, who was accused of falsely reporting that his officers had been in a firefight so he could receive thousands of rounds of new ammunition, which he sold in a bazaar.

Coalition trainers report that episodes of cruelty by the Afghan police undermine the effort to build a credible security force to take over when the allies leave.

OCT. 11, 2009 | BALKH PROVINCE Incident Report: Brutal Police Chief

This report began with an account of Afghan soldiers and police officers harassing and beating local civilians for refusing to cooperate in a search. It then related the story of a district police commander who forced himself on a 16-year-old girl. When a civilian complained, the report continued, “The district commander ordered his bodyguard to open fire on the AC [Afghan civilian]. The bodyguard refused, at which time the district commander shot [the bodyguard] in front of the AC.”

Rivalries and friction between the largest Afghan security services — the police and the army — are evident in a number of reports. Sometimes the tensions erupted in outright clashes, as was recorded in the following report from last December that was described as an “enemy action.” The “enemy” in this case was the Afghan National Security Force.

DEC. 4, 2009 | ORUZGAN PROVINCE Incident Report: Police and Army Rivalry

A car accident turned deadly when an argument broke out between the police and the Afghan National Army. “The argument escalated and ANA & ANP started to shoot at each other,” a report said.

An Afghan soldier and three Afghan police officers were wounded in the shootout. One civilian was killed and six others were wounded by gunfire. Read the Document »

One sign of the weakness of the police is that in places they have been replaced by tribal warlords who are charged — informally but surely — with providing the security the government cannot. Often the warlords operate above the law.

NOV. 22, 2009 | KANDAHAR PROVINCE Incident Report: Illegal Checkpoint

A private security convoy, ferrying fuel from Kandahar to Oruzgan, was stopped by what was thought to be 100 insurgents armed with assault rifles and PK machine guns, a report said.

It turned out the convoy had been halted by “the local Chief of Police,” who was “demanding $2000-$3000 per truck” as a kind of toll. The chief, said the report, from NATO headquarters in Southern Afghanistan, “states he needs the money to run his operation.”

The chief was not actually a police chief. He was Matiullah Khan, a warlord and an American-backed ally of President Karzai who was arguably Oruzgan’s most powerful man. He had a contract, the Ministry of Interior said, to protect the road so NATO’s supply convoys could drive on it, but he had apparently decided to extort money from the convoys himself.

Late in the day, Mr. Matiullah, after many interventions, changed his mind. The report said that friendly forces “report that the COMPASS convoy is moving again and did not pay the fee required.”

The documents show how the best intentions of Americans to help rebuild Afghanistan through provincial reconstruction teams ran up against a bewildering array of problems — from corruption to cultural misunderstandings — as they tried to win over the public by helping repair dams and bridges, build schools and train local authorities.

A series of reports from 2005 to 2008 chart the frustrations of one of the first such teams, assigned to Gardez, in Paktia Province.

NOV. 28, 2006 | PAKTIA PROVINCE Civil Affairs Report: Orphanage Opens

An American civil affairs officer could barely contain her enthusiasm as she spoke at a ribbon-cutting ceremony for a new orphanage, built with money from the American military.

The officer said a friend had given her a leather jacket to present to “someone special,” the report noted. She chose the orphanage’s director. “The commander stated that she could think of no one more deserving then someone who cared for orphans,” it said.

The civil affairs team handed out blankets, coats, scarves and toys. The governor even gave money from his own pocket. “All speeches were very positive,” the report concluded. Read the Document »

DEC. 20, 2006 | PAKTIA PROVINCE Civil Affairs Report: Not Many Orphans

The team dropped by to check on the orphanage. “We found very few orphans living there and could not find most of the HA [humanitarian assistance] we had given them,” the report noted.

The team raised the issue with the governor of Paktia, who said he was also concerned and suspected that the money he had donated had not reached the children. He visited the orphanage himself. Only 30 children were there; the director had claimed to have 102. Read the Document »

OCT. 16, 2007 | PAKTIA PROVINCE Civil Affairs Report: An Empty Orphanage

Nearly a year after the opening of the orphanage, the Americans returned for a visit. “There are currently no orphans at the facility due to the Holiday. (Note: orphans are defined as having no father, but may still have mother and a family structure that will have them home for holidays.)” Read the Document »

FEB. 25, 2007 | PAKTIA PROVINCE District Report: Lack of Resources

As the Taliban insurgency strengthened, the lack of a government presence in the more remote districts — and the government’s inability to provide security or resources even to its own officials — is evident in the reports.

An official from Dand Wa Patan, a small sliver of a district along the border with Pakistan, so urgently wanted to talk to the members of the American team that he traveled three and a half hours by taxi — he had no car — to meet them.

“He explained that the enemy had changed their tactics in the area and were no longer fighting from the mountains, no longer sending rockets toward his compound and other areas,” the report noted. “He stated that the enemy focus was on direct action and that his family was a primary target.”

Ten days earlier the Taliban crept up to the wall of his family compound and blew up one of the security towers, the report said. His son lost his legs in the explosion.

He pleaded for more police officers, weapons and ammunition. He also wanted a car so he could drive around the district he was supposed to oversee.

But the Americans’ situation was not much better. For months the reports show how a third — or even a half — of the team’s vehicles were out of service, awaiting spare parts.

NOV. 15, 2006 | PAKTIA PROVINCE Civil Affairs Report: Local Corruption

For a while the civil affairs team worked closely with the provincial governor, described as “very charismatic.” Yet both he and the team are hampered by corrupt, negligent and antagonistic officials.

The provincial chief of police is described in one report as “the axel of corruption.”

“He makes every effort to openly and blatantly take money from the ANP troopers and the officers,” one sympathetic officer told the Americans.

Other officers are more clever. One forged rosters, to collect pay for imaginary police officers. A second set up illegal checkpoints to collects tolls around Gardez. Still another stole food and uniforms, leaving his soldiers underfed and ill equipped for the winter.

The governor, meanwhile, was all but trapped. Such animosity developed between him and a senior security official that the governor could not leave his office for weeks at a time, fearing for his life. Finally, the corrupt officials were replaced. But it took months.

SEPT. 24, 2007 | PAKTIA PROVINCE Civil Affairs Report: The Cost of Corruption

Their meetings with Afghan district officials gave the American civil affairs officers unique insights into local opinions. Sometimes, the Afghan officials were brutally honest in their assessments.

In one case, provincial council officials visited the Americans at their base in Gardez to report threats — the Taliban had tossed a grenade into their office compound and were prowling the hills. Then the officials began a tirade.

“The people of Afghanistan keep loosing their trust in the government because of the high amount of corrupted government officials,” the report quoted them as saying. “The general view of the Afghans is that the current government is worst than the Taliban.”

“The corrupted government officials are a new concept brought to Afghanistan by the AMERICANS,” the oldest member of the group told the civil affairs team.

In conclusion, the civil affairs officer who wrote the report warned, “The people will support the Anti-Coalition forces and the security condition will degenerate.” He recommended a public information program to educate Afghans about democracy. Read the Document »

The reports also evoke the rivalries and tensions that swirl within the presidential palace between President Karzai’s circle and the warlords.
(Continue Reading here @ NY Times and here)

W.H. condemns ‘irresponsible’ leaks, dismisses stories

The White House responded swiftly and sharply to publication Sunday evening of more than 91,000 secret documents painting a bleak picture of the Afghanistan war, calling the leak “irresponsible” and saying that the source – the whistleblower website WikiLeaks — “opposes U.S. policy in Afghanistan.”

WikiLeaks said its “Afghan War Diary” consists mostly of reports “written by soldiers and intelligence officers … describing lethal military actions involving the United States military.” WikiLeaks gave three news organizations – The New York Times, The (British) Guardian and Germany’s Der Spiegel – advance access to the “war logs” trove.

White House National Security Adviser James Jones issued a statement that begins: “The United States strongly condemns the disclosure of classified information by individuals and organizations which could put the lives of Americans and our partners at risk, and threaten our national security.

“Wikileaks made no effort to contact us about these documents – the United States government learned from news organizations that these documents would be posted. These irresponsible leaks will not impact our ongoing commitment to deepen our partnerships with Afghanistan and Pakistan; to defeat our common enemies; and to support the aspirations of the Afghan and Pakistani people.

“The documents posted by Wikileaks reportedly cover a period of time from January 2004 to December 2009. On December 1, 2009, President Obama announced a new strategy with a substantial increase in resources for Afghanistan, and increased focus on al Qaeda and Taliban safe-havens in Pakistan, precisely because of the grave situation that had developed over several years.”

An administration official went further in an e-mail to reporters: “I don’t think anyone who follows this issue will find it surprising that there are concerns about ISI and safe havens in Pakistan. In fact, we’ve said as much repeatedly and on the record. …

“The period of time covered in these documents (January 2004-December 2009) is before the President announced his new strategy. Some of the disconcerting things reported are exactly why the President ordered a three month policy review and a change in strategy.”

The official added: “[I]t’s worth noting that WikiLeaks is not an objective news outlet but rather an organization that opposes U.S. policy in Afghanistan.”

The official highlighted this passage in The Guardian’s coverage: “[F]or all their eye-popping details, the intelligence files, which are mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, fail to provide a convincing smoking gun for ISI complicity. Most of the reports are vague, filled with incongruent detail, or crudely fabricated. The same characters – famous Taliban commanders, well-known ISI officials – and scenarios repeatedly pop up. And few of the events predicted in the reports subsequently occurred.

“A retired senior American officer said ground-level reports were considered to be a mixture of ‘rumours, [baloney] and second-hand information’ and were weeded out as they passed up the chain of command. ‘As someone who had to sift through thousands of these reports, I can say that the chances of finding any real information are pretty slim,’ said the officer, who has years of experience in the region.

“If anything, the jumble of allegations highlights the perils of collecting accurate intelligence in a complex arena where all sides have an interest in distorting the truth.” – Politico

For Immediate Release: 6th Annual PFC Geoffrey Morris Memorial Fishing Tournament a huge success.

Winthrop Harbor, IL June, 2010 –

Seventy boats turned out at North Point Marina on June 17-18 to make the sixth annual PFC Geoffrey Morris Memorial Fishing tournament a success, raising funds to help military families.  The Pro division competes both Friday and Saturday with a top prize of $15,000 taken home by 1st timer Silver King out of Milwaukee, WI. The one day amateur event, attracting 40 boats this year, had a top purse of $2500 and was awarded to Alco II out of Winthrop Harbor, IL.

Overall, 500 people participated over the first two days and were present for the banquet at Skipper Buds on Saturday afternoon where prizes were awarded for both divisions, including for largest fish of each species.

Over 4000 pounds of salmon and trout were caught during the two days and volunteers spent six hours each afternoon cleaning the fish, resulting in 2700 pounds of Vacuum packed fresh cleaned fillets donated to the Evanston Food Bank.

The third day is truly special and the highlight of the weekend: The Heroes Of Freedom Fishing Derby.  The captains from the previous days’ events, generously volunteer their boats, time and fishing expertise to take veterans, wounded soldiers, and active duty servicemen out on the lake to experience deep lake fishing. This year, a record 28 boats took out ninety patriots. Attendees include Purple Heart veterans from all wars, patients from at least three Veterans Hospitals as well as active duty, reservists, Gold Star families and other men and women who have honorably served in our military.  They come from as far away as St. Louis, Minnesota, Indianapolis, IN and northern WI.

After a four hour fishing trip on Lake Michigan, the USO and Operation Homefront-IL co-sponsor Sunday’s banquet at The Tropics Restaurant.  Food, cold drinks, prizes for the days catch for everyone in the group, a special way to say thank you for their honorable service to our country.

For more information and pictures and standings see: http://www.GSMTournament.com

Rolling Stone has managed to put a major dent in the trust the US military has given the US media in two wars in the last ten years. It’s pretty bad when career liberal ‘journalist’ Geraldo Rivera is mercilessly attacking Rolling Stone magazine and the reporter involved in taking down a general heading an over eight year war crucial to this nation’s security …

Gen. McChrystal allies, Rolling Stone disagree over article’s ground rules

It was 2:30 Tuesday morning in Kabul, after a busy day of travel to Kandahar and meetings with top Afghan officials, when Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal was awakened by an aide with grim news.

“There’s a Rolling Stone article out,” the aide told McChrystal. “It’s very, very bad.”

Forty hours later, McChrystal had been relieved of his command, his 34-year military career in tatters. Apart from a terse apology, McChrystal has not discussed publicly the disparaging remarks that he and his aides made about administration officials and that appeared in the article.

On Friday, however, officials close to McChrystal began trying to salvage his reputation by asserting that the author, Michael Hastings, quoted the general and his staff in conversations that he was allowed to witness but not report. The officials also challenged a statement by Rolling Stone’s executive editor that the magazine had thoroughly reviewed the story with McChrystal’s staff ahead of publication.

The executive editor, Eric Bates, denied that Hastings violated any ground rules when he wrote about the four weeks he spent, on and off, with McChrystal and his team. “A lot of things were said off the record that we didn’t use,” Bates said in an interview. “We abided by all the ground rules in every instance.”

A senior military official insisted that “many of the sessions were off-the-record and intended to give [Hastings] a sense” of how the team operated. The command’s own review of events, said the official, who was unwilling to speak on the record, found “no evidence to suggest” that any of the “salacious political quotes” in the article were made in situations in which ground rules permitted Hastings to use the material in his story.

‘Clearly off the record’

A member of McChrystal’s team who was present for a celebration of McChrystal’s 33rd wedding anniversary at a Paris bar said it was “clearly off the record.” Aides “made it very clear to Michael: ‘This is private time. These are guys who don’t get to see their wives a lot. This is us together. If you stay, you have to understand this is off the record,’ ” according to this source. In the story, the team members are portrayed as drinking heavily.

Bates said the contention that the night at the bar and other instances in which derisive comments were made about administration officials were off the record was “absolutely untrue.” Hastings was traveling Friday, and an automated response from his e-mail account referred queries to Rolling Stone.

Neither McChrystal nor members of his staff have denied making any of the remarks quoted in the story, including a description of Obama as “uncomfortable and intimidated” in his first meeting with the general and a reference to national security adviser James L. Jones as a “clown.”

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters Thursday that the atmosphere of disrespect for civilian leaders that McChrystal apparently tolerated and participated in was grounds for dismissal regardless of the context in which the offensive comments were made or who made them.

A U.S. military spokesman in Kabul, Air Force Lt. Col. Edward T. Sholtis, acknowledged that Hastings, like other reporters who have interviewed McChrystal over the past year, was not required to sign written ground rules. “We typically manage ground rules on a verbal basis,” Sholtis said. “We trust in the professionalism of the people we’re working with.”

McChrystal’s headquarters first received a copy of the story shortly before midnight Monday from a wire service reporter seeking comment. After McChrystal read it, “he knew instantly, this was going to be very large,” the source said. “But I don’t think any of us realized it was going to be as large as it was.”

Reaching out

The general’s first action was to call his superiors. Then he began reaching out to members of the Obama administration mentioned in the article. He reached Vice President Biden — whom one McChrystal aide referred to in the article as Vice President “Bite me” — on an airplane as Biden was heading home from an official trip.

At the White House, copies of the article were already circulating among key West Wing officials.

“Tuesday was definitely not a normal day” in Kabul, the source said. McChrystal tried to maintain his schedule, assuming that the response to the story would be handled by the White House and the Pentagon. It was late in the day in Afghanistan when Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates called to order McChrystal home immediately for face-to-face meetings.

As events unfolded at the White House, members of McChrystal’s staff in Kabul “were all heartbroken,” the source said. “I’ve seen incredibly brave men cry this week.”

Bates said it was telling that it took four days for those close to McChrystal to begin crying foul. Subjects of critical articles, he said, have many ways “after a story appears to question its veracity, [to complain] that things were taken out of context or off the record. None of those objections were raised during the critical few days in which this became a national issue,” he said. “You’re used to instantaneous responses from sources who feel they were abused in any way.”

Sholtis said that “arguing about the merits of the article would have seemed like we were trying to protect or excuse ourselves rather than acknowledge our mistake. That may have not been the best PR strategy, but it wasn’t the approach consistent with the character of General McChrystal.”

Officials also questioned Rolling Stone’s fact-checking process, as described by Bates in an interview this week with Politico. “We ran everything by them in a fact-checking process as we always do,” Bates said. “They had a sense of what was coming and it was all on the record, and they spent a lot of time with our reporter, so I think they knew that they had said it.”

In an interview Friday, the managing editor, Will Dana, said the reporter’s notes and factual matters were exhaustively reviewed.

But 30 questions that a Rolling Stone fact-checker posed in a memo e-mailed last week to then-McChrystal media adviser Duncan Boothby contained no hint of what became the controversial portions of the story. Boothby resigned Tuesday.

In the e-mail, a copy of which provided to The Washington Post by a military official sympathetic to McChrystal, Boothby is asked to confirm the makeup of McChrystal’s traveling staff on the Paris trip and the communications equipment they brought with them on an earlier visit to London. “They don’t come close to revealing what ended up in the final article,” the official said.

“Does McChrystal’s staff joking refer to themselves as Team America?” the fact-checker asked. “Not really,” Boothby replied. “We joke that we are sometimes perceived that way by many of the NATO forces” under McChrystal’s command.

In the article, Hastings wrote that McChrystal and his aides “jokingly refer to themselves as Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority.” In other passages, Hastings took what appear to be similar minor liberties with the facts as Boothby described them.

In the last question, the fact-checker asked: “Did Gen. McChrystal vote for President Obama? (The reporter tells me that this info originates from McChrystal himself.)”

Boothby replied in all capitals. “IMPORTANT — PLEASE DO NOT INCLUDE THIS — THIS IS PERSONAL AND PRIVATE INFORMATION AND UNRELATED TO HIS JOB. IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE TO SHARE.” He went on to describe the “strict rules” under which military personnel keep their political views to themselves.

In the article, Hastings reported that the general “had voted for Obama.”

Bates said that the remark was “absolutely” not off the record, and he noted that Boothby’s appeal “isn’t on accuracy or even that it was off the record,” but that it was irrelevant. He said the magazine, like other news organizations, had no obligation to warn sources that they had made unwise remarks. – WaPo

Rolling Stone fact checker sent McChrystal aide 30 questions

Military Says Rolling Stone Broke Ground Rules on McChrystal Story

ABC News’ Luis Martinez reports:

A senior military official tells ABC News that Rolling Stone broke journalistic ground rules established for the magazine’s profile of the general by publishing comments that occurred during what McChrystal’s aides thought were off-the-record sessions that would not be reported.

The official said the magazine’s claim that there were no ground rules for the interview and profile was an “absurd statement.”

The official says a review of events has found no ground rules for the article in writing, but the official is confident that many of the attention-grabbing comments made by McChrystal staffers were made in what they thought were off-the-record discussions.

The review found Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings conducted “several one-on-one interviews — some of those were on background and others were on the record.” Hastings also was allowed access to other sessions that “were off-the-record and intended to give him a sense” of how McChrystal’s team worked together.

The official says no evidence has been found to suggest that the most “salacious political quotes were from any of these one-on-one interviews. They all appear to have been in settings that were off the record.”

In an interview conducted this afternoon by the Washington Post, Rolling Stone magazine’s executive editor Eric Bates says no ground rules were broken.

“A lot of things were said off the record that we didn’t use,” Bates says. “We abided by all the ground rules in every instance. In every case in this story, there were multiple times in which there were express requests for off-the-record and background or not-for-attribution and we abided in every instance.”

The senior military official says that Rolling Stone is incorrect in stating that the magazine sent McChrystal’s staff an advance draft of the story, sending instead a list of 30 questions compiled by a researcher who was fact-checking Hastings’ article. Those questions, says the official, did not “come close to revealing what ended up in the final article.”

A copy of that e-mail obtained by ABC News shows the submitted questions requested confirmation of details such as whether McChrystal’s staff had a “full-scale operations center” set up in the Hotel Westminster during their visit to Paris this past April. “Yes” came the reply from McChrystal press aide Duncan Boothby, who had set up the interview and resigned his post in the wake of the controversy surrounding the article. He added. “Not sure, I’d call it full scale, but everywhere we go we have capability for immediate comms.”

A key moment in the Rolling Stone article is when Hastings described how McChrystal and President Obama had failed to connect on a personal level from the outset. Hastings went on to describe a description provided by aides of McChrystal’s first meeting with Obama where he “didn’t seem very engaged.”

Hastings’ description of McChrystal’s relationship with Obama begins with the mention that McChrystal had voted for Obama. According to the researcher’s questions, that information came from McChrystal himself. In his reply, Boothby requests that piece of information not be included in the article because it would present an undue command influence.

The researcher asks, “Did Gen. McChrystal vote for President Obama? [The reporter tells me that this info originates from McChrystal himself.]”

Boothby replies: “Important – Please do not include this. This is personal and private information and unrealtd (sic) to his job. It would be inappropriate to share. My reason for this is it would present an undue command inflluence (sic) on junior officers or soldiers who should make their own political decisions. There are very strict rules in the military on separating church and state on this sort of stuff – Have to keep out of political preference and personal choice.”

- Luis Martinez @ ABC News

HotAir asks:

[...] Exit question one: Given the claim by RS’s managing editor that they omitted plenty of material that really was off the record, what exactly were the ground rules here? Exit question two: Should we expect any grumbling from other journalists that RS has now singlehandedly made the military afraid to talk candidly to reporters on background, or is McChrystal’s ouster a big enough score that they won’t care?

I’m thinking, as bad as this has been for Gen. McChrystal, in the end it won’t be the smell of burning doobies coming from Rolling Stone …

U.S. Supreme Court Grants NRA Motion
For Divided Argument In McDonald v. City of Chicago
National Rifle Association Press Release
January 30, 2010

Patriots, we will keep you updated regarding this case which is now before the Supreme Court.

On Monday, January 25, the U.S. Supreme Court granted NRA’s motion to allow it to participate in the upcoming oral argument in McDonald v. City of Chicago.

“We are pleased with the Court’s decision to grant our motion,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox. “NRA’s solitary goal in McDonald is to ensure that our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms applies to every law-abiding American in every state. We are hopeful that the Court will share our view that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment clearly intended to apply the Second Amendment to the states.”

Last September, the Court agreed to consider the McDonald case, on appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. That court incorrectly claimed that prior Supreme Court precedent prevented it from holding in favor of incorporation of the Second Amendment. NRA believes the Seventh Circuit should have followed the lead of the Seventh Circuit , which found that Supreme Court precedent does not prevent the Second Amendment from applying to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. As a party in McDonald, NRA looks forward to participating in the upcoming oral argument.

NRA Press Release
Supreme Court Update: McDonald v. City of Chicago
January 08, 2010

For several months, we have been reporting on the landmark McDonald v. City of Chicago court case. The McDonald case is one of several that were filed immediately after last year’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Court upheld the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right and invalidated Washington, D.C.’s ban on handgun possession, as well as the capital city’s ban on keeping loaded, operable firearms for self-defense in the home.

On November 16, the NRA filed its brief with the U.S. Supreme Court as Respondent in Support of Petitioner in McDonald v. City of Chicago. The NRA brief asks the Court to hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the 14th Amendment, and makes a clear and strong case in favor of incorporation of the Second Amendment.

The Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the McDonald v. City of Chicago case on Tuesday, March 2, 2010.

There are two provisions in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution through which the Supreme Court should apply the Second Amendment to the states. One is the Due Process Clause, which the Court has used to incorporate a majority of the provisions of the Bill of Rights, and the other is the Privileges or Immunities Clause. The Supreme Court has asked the parties in McDonald v. Chicago to address both issues. Counsel for the petitioner, Otis McDonald, focused overwhelmingly in his brief on the Privileges or Immunities Clause. NRA, as a party to the case, focused its brief largely on the Due Process Clause (although the NRA brief also discusses the Privileges or Immunities Clause).

NRA believes that the Court should reach the same conclusion¾that the Framers of the 14th Amendment clearly intended to apply the Second Amendment to the states¾under either provision of the 14th Amendment. NRA has asked for the opportunity to participate in the oral argument to ensure that all arguments for applying the Second Amendment to the states are fully considered. Gun owners will have the best chance of ultimate victory on this critical issue if all options are fully explained to the Court. As always, NRA’s goal in McDonald is to see that our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms applies to all law-abiding Americans, regardless of the state in which they live.

Rest assured we will continue to update you on the case as it progresses

City Flier ‘Smacks’ Of Lunacy
By BRAD HAMILTON New York Post
January 4, 2010

Here’s the latest smack on taxpayers.

The city spent $32,000 on 70,000 fliers that tell you how to shoot heroin, complete with detailed tips on prepping the dope and injecting it into your arm.

The Health Department handout has outraged New York’s top drug prosecutors and abuse experts.

“It’s basically step-by- step instruction on how to inject a poison,” said John Gilbride, who heads the Drug Enforcement Administration’s New York office.

“It’s sick,” said City Council member Peter Vallone Jr. (D-Queens)

“Foolish,” said Columbia University drug researcher and treatment expert Dr. Herbert Kleber.

The 16-page pamphlet features seven comics-like illustrations and offers dope fiends such useful advice as “Warm your body (jump up and down) to show your veins,” and “Find the vein before you try to inject.”

It even encourages addicts to keep jabbing if their needles miss the mark.

“If you don’t ‘register,’ pull out and try again,” it says.

The brochure sends the wrong message about the dangers of the drug, experts said.

“It concerns me that the city would produce a how-to on using drugs,” Gilbride said. “Heroin is extremely potent. You may only get the chance to use it once. To suggest there is a method of using that alleviates the dangers, that’s very disturbing.”

Vallone, who chairs the council’s public safety committee, vowed to shut down the distribution of the pamphlet.

“This is a tremendous misuse of city funds, and I’m going to see what I can do to stop it. It sends a message to our youth: give it a try,” he fumed.

Gilbride and city drug czar Bridget Brennan noted that the manual does have some sound advice. It stresses the importance of kicking the habit, seeking professional help and not sharing needles.

But it also spells out how junkies should ready their fix and the best ways to shoot it — a bad idea when more New York teens than ever are trying heroin, they said.

“What we do not want to do is suggest that there’s anything safe about shooting up narcotics,” said Brennan, the city’s special narcotics prosecutor. “No matter how many times you wash your hands or how clean the needle is, it’s still poison that you’re putting in your veins.”

The guidebook, called “Take Charge, Take Care,” has sections on overdosing, testing for HIV and hepatitis — and how to “prepare drugs carefully” and “how to take care of your veins.”

Kleber, a psychiatry professor, said the brochure could help save lives but that it was “foolish” for the city to include tips on how to shoot up.

The Health Department defended its brochure, saying it was helpful and necessary, and has been distributed only to addicts or those at risk of becoming abusers.

“Our goal is to promote health and save lives with this information,” said Daliah Heller, assistant commissioner for the Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Use Prevention, Care and Treatment.

Asked why the handout tells people how to shoot up, Heller said, “From a health perspective, there is a less harmful way to inject yourself.”

The flier fails to identify the city agency as its creator and distributor, and mentions only a group called LifeNet and the city’s 311 help line as call-in resources to addicts.

LifeNet is run by the nonprofit Mental Health Association of New York City, which is heavily funded by the city.

“It’s certainly not ours,” said association spokeswoman Beth Garcia.

brad.hamilton@nypost.com
Additional reporting by Melissa Klein

Happy New Year To Our Loyal Followers At ChandlersWatch.com
January 1, 2010

We wish each and every one of you a blessed, healthy and productive 2010. Not much more to say ( well in reality you know we have lots to say) however, we’ll cut this short.
God bless you and keep coming back.

Happy New Year!

The Chandler’s Watch Team

National Rifle Association Press Release

CALIFORNIA: Hunting Threatened on Mojave National Preserve.

The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), in concert with the Sierra Club and other anti-hunting organizations, has filed a petition with the California Fish and Game Commission to ban most hunting in the Mojave National Preserve, including rabbit and varmint hunting. What hunting remains (resident game birds, deer, and bighorn sheep) would be restricted. The “Petition for Rulemaking Regarding Hunting in the Mojave National Preserve” blames hunters for the declining population of the desert tortoise, a threatened species under the state’s Endangered Species Act. CBD filed a similar petition in 2003, but the commission did not act on it. The commission will likely consider the CBD’s petition next week and could schedule a hearing on it early next year.

The petition contains the flimsiest of evidence that hunting in the preserve is the cause or even a contributing factor of the decline in the tortoise population. In fact, statistics confirm that vehicular traffic and increased tourism within the designated critical habitat of the tortoise have increased substantially since 1994 when the preserve was established. Those activities are believed to be the leading causes of tortoise mortality. Further, there is sufficient research to suggest that predation by ravens and coyotes are also taking its toll on this protected species. The objective of the petition is not to protect and enhance the tortoise population. Rather, it is an attempt by this coalition of anti-hunting organizations to permanently end hunting in the Mojave National Preserve. CBD was also behind the ban on the use of lead ammunition for hunting big game within the range of the California condor, and earlier this year, CBD attempted unsuccessfully to extend that ban to all game species.

Iraqi Counter Terrorism Forces cripple suicide bomber network Multi-National Corps
Sunday, 24 May 2009
Multi-National Corps – Iraq
Public Affairs Office, Camp Victory
APO AE 09342

www.mnc-i.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
RELEASE No. 20090524-03

May 24, 2009

Iraqi Counter Terrorism Forces cripple suicide bomber network Multi-National Corps – Iraq

BAGHDAD – In an effort to prevent future high-profile attacks, the Iraqi Counter Terrorism Forces arrested the suspected leader of a suicide bomber network operating in the Iraqi capital during an operation May 23.

Operating under the authority of a warrant issued by the Central Investigation Court, the ICTF arrested the suspected leader of a cell responsible for recruiting and preparing females for attacks as suicide bombers.

During the early-morning mission, according to military reports, the suspect was apprehended by a security element of the ICTF as she attempted to flee from a building. As a result of tactical questioning, the suspect confirmed her identity and was taken into custody.

“The arrest of [the suspect] strikes a crippling blow to the female suicide bomber network in Baghdad,” said Maj. Seth Krummrich, the Special Operations Task Force – Central Operations Officer. “The success of this Iraqi-led operation could definitely provide insight and lead to future arrests of senior terrorist leadership.”

“This is a great representation of what a unified and well synchronized ISOF intelligence and operational organization can accomplish,” Krummrich said.

Christmas for the Troops!

Press Release

December 16th, 2008                                                                                   For immediate release

The Chandler’s Watch radio show will be part of a six hour event to spread Christmas cheer to our beloved soldiers and Marines overseas.
•    Monday December 22nd, 2008 starting at 4pm Pacific
•    Blog Talk Radio.com with Buffman and Wrench and Do The Right Thing radio shows
•    Broadcasting from 4pm to 6pm Pacific time
•    Our guests will include Rep. Duncan Hunter (Cpt. USMC Res.), Tim Colceri from Full Metal Jacket and Babylon 5, Kevyn Major Howard of Full Metal Jacket and Fueled By The Fallen, and Victoria Jackson from Saturday Night Live!We will be teaming up with the Buffman and Wrench show and Do The Right Thing radio show to entertain our military men and women in Iraq, Afghanistan and any of our military who will not be home with family this holiday season. The show will include music, guest and reading messages to and from the troops.

We have a special email address set up for the troops to email a message to their families that will be read over the air (internet). Christmas4troops@yahoo.com  (All emails will be deleted after the messages are saved.)

Celebrity guest thus far are:

Congressman-elect Duncan Hunter Veteran of OIF and OEF
Tim Colceri The psycho door gunner from Full Metal Jacket
Kevyn Major Howard “Rafterman” from Full Metal Jacket and Founder of Fueled by the Fallen
Evan Sayet Comedian and Political Speaker
Victoria Jackson Comedian and actress (SNL)

Plus:  Dr Blogstein, The RumbleJetts, Soldier’s Angels, Kaye Johnston from the Sugar Plums, Paul Maurtuano “Paula Abdul Stalker Song”, Slidawg and the Ramblin Rednecks, International Comedian David Naster, Dr Danger American Stuntman, Debra J Smith of Informing Christians, and many more!

Contact:
Chandler Watch Radio Show

Buffman and Wrench Show

Do The Right Thing Show

Or contact us at ChandlersWatch.com

JEFF BEATTY TO JOHN KERRY AND BARACK OBAMA: ‘GIVE LOBBYING MONEY BACK TO FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC’

Kerry and Obama not only mismanaged this latest financial crisis, but are among the highest recipients of lobbying money from the beleaguered  financial giants

BOSTON– Today, U.S. Senate candidate Jeff Beatty condemned John Kerry and Barack Obama for being among the top recipients of campaign contributions from lobbying efforts of the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Beatty is demanding that Barack Obama and John Kerry return these campaign contributions immediately.   This week, the U.S. government agreed to bail out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mea in an attempt to shore up the credit markets and strengthen the economy.  Taking these donations, even as Freddie and Fannie fell into crisis, shows that yet again Kerry and Obama are putting their own political interests above the needs taxpayers and citizens.

“By taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from these finance giants who are known  to game the system, John Kerry and Barack Obama are showing what Americans can expect if they are elected: politics as usual,” Beatty said. “This means that two of the U.S. Senate’s least productive lawmakers are among the top recipients of contributions from these two financial giants.  Well now, it’s the taxpayers who must foot the bill for this bailout and Barack Obama and John Kerry should not benefit by keeping these campaign contributions.”

According to OpenSecrets.org, between 1998 and 2008, John Kerry – one of the richest members of the U.S. Senate — accepted $111,000 in campaign contributions from the embattled financial mortgage giants, second only to Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT). Presidential nominee Barack Obama was third on the list of top recipients, accepting more than $105,000 in contributions.

“From voting for the war in Iraq to accepting six-figure contributions from Washington lobbyists, John Kerry has consistently shown poor judgment while refusing to be held accountable for his decisions,” Beatty said. “As a U.S. senator, I will draw on my experience to restore good judgment and accountability to our government.”

Beatty noted that his grass-roots campaign to defeat John Kerry has raised almost $1.5 million from almost 35,000 individual contributions.  The campaign also has 3,000 volunteers supporting its efforts to bring change to the U.S. Senate.

“Throughout his career, John Kerry has repeatedly put his own political ambitions ahead of the best interests of his constituents,” Beatty said. “The people of Massachusetts deserve a senator who will put their interests first.”

Chandler’s Watch Radio Show Presents
San Diego Enforcers First Annual Hero Bowl

February 22, 2007     For immediate release

Chandler’s Watch Radio Show Presents
San Diego Enforcers First Annual Hero Bowl

The San Diego Enforcers present the first annual Hero Bowl
• Saturday March 17th, 2007
• Cathedral High School football stadium
• Kickoff is at 6:30pm
• Tickets are only $5, 100% goes to help wounded Marines with The Injured Marine Semper Fi Fund
• Live game coverage on Chandler’s Watch Radio Show Sat 6:30pm, News talk 1170am KCBQ San Diego

The San Diego Enforcers football team is comprised of 18 different public safety agencies coming together to raise money for our injured heroes.  In an exciting, action packed tackle football game against The Marine Corps All Star football team from Camp Pendleton.

So, come bring the family out to see San Diego’s best and brightest in public safety battle one of the most elite fighting forces in the world.  It is sure to be one of the greatest sporting events in San Diego history, and it is all for charity.  Show up and be a hero by supporting the heroes of America’s quest to heal America’s heroes.

Sponsored by:
Pala Resort and Casino
Barona Resort and Casino
Jimmy Johnson Chevrolet
King Stahlman Bail Bonds
Chandler’s Watch Radio Show and AMarineForHire.com
Contact:
Chandler Productions
Andria Oates, Vice President of Marketing and PR
Andria@AMarineforHire.com
Visit ChandlersWatch.com or AMarineforHire.com

Chandler’s Watch Radio Show is now on the air!

The Chandler’s Watch Radio Show is proud to announce its’ first show
Saturday February 24th, 2007
News Talk 1170 am KCBQ
Broadcasting at 6:30pm

February 20, 2007     FOR IMMMEDIATE RELEASE

Chandler’s Watch Radio Show is now on the air!
The Chandler’s Watch Radio Show is proud to announce its’ first show
Saturday February 24th, 2007
News Talk 1170 am KCBQ
Broadcasting at 6:30pm
Features an original old time radio drama called “A Marine for Hire”

The Chandler’s Watch Radio Show team is comprised of Tommy Chandler, a former infantry Marine, his brother Robbie who is an active duty Marine and Leo McSweeney, star of Boot Camp on Fox Network and Wild Rules on The Outdoor Life Network,  who is an active duty Marine, former drill instructor, and current police officer.  Together they have over twenty years of military experience, and over two years of combat experience.  Chandler’s Watch is an action packed, provocative talk radio show tackling current issues that affect the military, veterans, and America as a whole.

Chandler’s Watch has something that no other show has; an original old time radio drama like those of the thirties and forties.  The unique drama will entertain young and old alike while imparting wholesome values and essential life lessons.

Sponsored in part by:
The Veterans Journal.net
The San Diego Enforcers
Financial Resource Group
NSO Bookkeeping Services

Listen up and be a hero by helping the heroes of America’s quest to support America’s heroes.
We are accepting additional sponsorship to help make this radio show a success and to continue to support the active duty and veterans communities; any monetary, product, volunteer, press, or other support is greatly appreciated.

Contact: Chandler Productions
Andria Oates, Vice President of Marketing and PR
Andria@AMarineforHire.com
Visit ChandlersWatch.com or AMarineforHire.com
News talk 1170am KCBQ Studio
9255 Towne Centre Drive, Ste. 535
San Diego, CA 92121