Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
unhappycamper
unhappycamper's Journal
unhappycamper's Journal
March 29, 2014
It is about time that the German parliament takes the protection of civil rights seriously and pressures the government to take action.
No Comment for the Spy: The Daily NSA Scandal
Berliner Zeitung, Germany
By Holger Schmale
Translated By Daniel Eck
20 March 2014
Edited by Robert O’Connor
NSA affair? That was last year, right? The big commotion over the systematic spying on German citizens and politicians by American and British intelligence has oddly quietened, without anything being clarified or ended. President Obama has held his personal promise not to tap Angela Merkel’s phone. However, it is not only about the chancellor’s phone.
This is about the protection of all citizens’ fundamental rights. What has the German government achieved regarding this issue? Nothing. The U.S.A. actively continues its spying activities, and information about new variations is constantly resurfacing. For instance, the dubious System Mystic allegedly allows the NSA to tap into and save telephone conversations being held in a whole country.
And the German government does nothing. The promised no-spy agreement with the U.S. will never exist. One wants to discuss a common idea of a private sphere. How impressive. It is therefore about time that the German parliament takes the protection of civil rights seriously and pressures the government to take action. As demonstrated in the National Socialist Underground case, the instrument from the investigation committee has proven to be extremely efficient.
First and foremost the parliamentarians will ensure that the NSA scandal will not be forgotten. The scandal is not last year’s news. It takes place on a daily basis.
No Comment for the Spy: The Daily NSA Scandal
http://watchingamerica.com/News/235479/no-comment-for-the-spy-the-daily-nsa-scandal/It is about time that the German parliament takes the protection of civil rights seriously and pressures the government to take action.
No Comment for the Spy: The Daily NSA Scandal
Berliner Zeitung, Germany
By Holger Schmale
Translated By Daniel Eck
20 March 2014
Edited by Robert O’Connor
NSA affair? That was last year, right? The big commotion over the systematic spying on German citizens and politicians by American and British intelligence has oddly quietened, without anything being clarified or ended. President Obama has held his personal promise not to tap Angela Merkel’s phone. However, it is not only about the chancellor’s phone.
This is about the protection of all citizens’ fundamental rights. What has the German government achieved regarding this issue? Nothing. The U.S.A. actively continues its spying activities, and information about new variations is constantly resurfacing. For instance, the dubious System Mystic allegedly allows the NSA to tap into and save telephone conversations being held in a whole country.
And the German government does nothing. The promised no-spy agreement with the U.S. will never exist. One wants to discuss a common idea of a private sphere. How impressive. It is therefore about time that the German parliament takes the protection of civil rights seriously and pressures the government to take action. As demonstrated in the National Socialist Underground case, the instrument from the investigation committee has proven to be extremely efficient.
First and foremost the parliamentarians will ensure that the NSA scandal will not be forgotten. The scandal is not last year’s news. It takes place on a daily basis.
March 28, 2014
U.S. Military Averaging More Than a Mission a Day in Africa
by Nick Turse | March 27, 2014 - 8:47am
The numbers tell the story: 10 exercises, 55 operations, 481 security cooperation activities.
For years, the U.S. military has publicly insisted that its efforts in Africa are small scale. Its public affairs personnel and commanders have repeatedly claimed no more than a “light footprint” on that continent, including a remarkably modest presence when it comes to military personnel. They have, however, balked at specifying just what that light footprint actually consists of. During an interview, for instance, a U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) spokesman once expressed worry that tabulating the command’s deployments would offer a “skewed image” of U.S. efforts there.
It turns out that the numbers do just the opposite.
Last year, according AFRICOM commander General David Rodriguez, the U.S. military carried out a total of 546 “activities” on the continent -- a catch-all term for everything the military does in Africa. In other words, it averages about one and a half missions a day. This represents a 217% increase in operations, programs, and exercises since the command was established in 2008.
U.S. Military Averaging More Than a Mission a Day in Africa
http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/nick-turse/55002/u-s-military-averaging-more-than-a-mission-a-day-in-africaU.S. Military Averaging More Than a Mission a Day in Africa
by Nick Turse | March 27, 2014 - 8:47am
The numbers tell the story: 10 exercises, 55 operations, 481 security cooperation activities.
For years, the U.S. military has publicly insisted that its efforts in Africa are small scale. Its public affairs personnel and commanders have repeatedly claimed no more than a “light footprint” on that continent, including a remarkably modest presence when it comes to military personnel. They have, however, balked at specifying just what that light footprint actually consists of. During an interview, for instance, a U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) spokesman once expressed worry that tabulating the command’s deployments would offer a “skewed image” of U.S. efforts there.
It turns out that the numbers do just the opposite.
Last year, according AFRICOM commander General David Rodriguez, the U.S. military carried out a total of 546 “activities” on the continent -- a catch-all term for everything the military does in Africa. In other words, it averages about one and a half missions a day. This represents a 217% increase in operations, programs, and exercises since the command was established in 2008.
March 28, 2014
Government Backing for Toxic Mortgage Securities? The Economic Scam of the Century
Economic Policy
by Mike Whitney | March 27, 2014 - 9:05am
The leaders of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, Sen. Tim Johnson (D., S.D.) and Sen. Mike Crapo (R., Idaho), released a draft bill on Sunday that would provide explicit government guarantees on mortgage-backed securities (MBS) generated by privately-owned banks and financial institutions. The gigantic giveaway to Wall Street would put US taxpayers on the hook for 90 percent of the losses on toxic MBS the likes of which crashed the financial system in 2008 plunging the economy into the deepest slump since the Great Depression. Proponents of the bill say that new rules by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) –which set standards for a “qualified mortgage” (QM)– assure that borrowers will be able to repay their loans thus reducing the chances of a similar meltdown in the future. However, those QE rules were largely shaped by lobbyists and attorneys from the banking industry who eviscerated strict underwriting requirements– like high FICO scores and 20 percent down payments– in order to lend freely to borrowers who may be less able to repay their loans. Additionally, a particularly lethal clause has been inserted into the bill that would provide blanket coverage for all MBS (whether they met the CFPB’s QE standard or not) in the event of another financial crisis. Here’s the paragraph:
In other words, if the bill passes, US taxpayers will be responsible for any and all bailouts deemed necessary by the regulators mentioned above. And, since all of those regulators are in Wall Street’s hip-pocket, there’s no question what they’ll do when the time comes. They’ll bailout they’re fatcat buddies and dump the losses on John Q. Public.
If you can’t believe what you are reading or if you think that the system is so thoroughly corrupt it can’t be fixed; you’re not alone. This latest outrage just confirms that the Congress, the executive and all the chief regulators are mere marionettes performing whatever task is asked of them by their Wall Street paymasters.
Government Backing for Toxic Mortgage Securities? The Economic Scam of the Century
http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/mike-whitney/55003/government-backing-for-toxic-mortgage-securities-the-economic-scam-of-the-centuryGovernment Backing for Toxic Mortgage Securities? The Economic Scam of the Century
Economic Policy
by Mike Whitney | March 27, 2014 - 9:05am
The leaders of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, Sen. Tim Johnson (D., S.D.) and Sen. Mike Crapo (R., Idaho), released a draft bill on Sunday that would provide explicit government guarantees on mortgage-backed securities (MBS) generated by privately-owned banks and financial institutions. The gigantic giveaway to Wall Street would put US taxpayers on the hook for 90 percent of the losses on toxic MBS the likes of which crashed the financial system in 2008 plunging the economy into the deepest slump since the Great Depression. Proponents of the bill say that new rules by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) –which set standards for a “qualified mortgage” (QM)– assure that borrowers will be able to repay their loans thus reducing the chances of a similar meltdown in the future. However, those QE rules were largely shaped by lobbyists and attorneys from the banking industry who eviscerated strict underwriting requirements– like high FICO scores and 20 percent down payments– in order to lend freely to borrowers who may be less able to repay their loans. Additionally, a particularly lethal clause has been inserted into the bill that would provide blanket coverage for all MBS (whether they met the CFPB’s QE standard or not) in the event of another financial crisis. Here’s the paragraph:
“Sec.305. Authority to protect taxpayers in unusual and exigent market conditions….
If the Corporation, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, determine that unusual and exigent circumstances threaten mortgage credit availability within the U.S. housing market, FMIC may provide insurance on covered securities that do not meet the requirements under section 302 including those for first loss position of private market holders.” (“Freddie And Fannie Reform – The Monster Has Arrived”, Zero Hedge)
In other words, if the bill passes, US taxpayers will be responsible for any and all bailouts deemed necessary by the regulators mentioned above. And, since all of those regulators are in Wall Street’s hip-pocket, there’s no question what they’ll do when the time comes. They’ll bailout they’re fatcat buddies and dump the losses on John Q. Public.
If you can’t believe what you are reading or if you think that the system is so thoroughly corrupt it can’t be fixed; you’re not alone. This latest outrage just confirms that the Congress, the executive and all the chief regulators are mere marionettes performing whatever task is asked of them by their Wall Street paymasters.
March 28, 2014
U.S. Navy to order 33 fewer F-35s than planned in next 5 yrs -source
By Andrea Shalal
March 3, 2014 11:02 March 3, 2014 11:02
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Navy is set to order 33 fewer Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets than originally planned over the five years starting in fiscal 2015 due to budgetary pressures, a defense official said Monday.
In a move that will sharply slow work on the F-35 model built to land on aircraft carriers, the Navy will ask Congress to fund 36 F-35Cs instead of 69, said the official, who could not speak publicly ahead of Tuesday's release of the 2015 budget request.
The Air Force is also deferring orders for four conventional landing F-35 A-models in fiscal 2015, but is expected to resume its planned orders for the jet in 2016 and beyond, said a second source familiar with the plans. It plans to order 238 in total
~snip~
Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale told a conference last week that the department's decision to buy eight fewer F-35s in fiscal 2015 was based on affordability, not the aircraft's performance. Defense officials say they remain committed to the program, and still plan to buy a total of 2,443 F-35s over the coming years for all three military services.
U.S. Navy to order 33 fewer F-35s than planned in next 5 yrs -source
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/thomson-reuters/140303/us-navy-order-33-fewer-f-35s-planned-next-5-yrs-sourceU.S. Navy to order 33 fewer F-35s than planned in next 5 yrs -source
By Andrea Shalal
March 3, 2014 11:02 March 3, 2014 11:02
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Navy is set to order 33 fewer Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets than originally planned over the five years starting in fiscal 2015 due to budgetary pressures, a defense official said Monday.
In a move that will sharply slow work on the F-35 model built to land on aircraft carriers, the Navy will ask Congress to fund 36 F-35Cs instead of 69, said the official, who could not speak publicly ahead of Tuesday's release of the 2015 budget request.
The Air Force is also deferring orders for four conventional landing F-35 A-models in fiscal 2015, but is expected to resume its planned orders for the jet in 2016 and beyond, said a second source familiar with the plans. It plans to order 238 in total
~snip~
Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale told a conference last week that the department's decision to buy eight fewer F-35s in fiscal 2015 was based on affordability, not the aircraft's performance. Defense officials say they remain committed to the program, and still plan to buy a total of 2,443 F-35s over the coming years for all three military services.
March 28, 2014
Lockheed Martin has been approved funding for advanced procurement of parts, components and materials for F-35 aircraft, including fighters being built for Israel, Norway, Italy, Japan and Britain.
Pentagon funds advanced procurement of F-35 parts, components
By Richard Tomkins | March 26, 2014 at 12:01 PM
March 26 (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Defense has announced it is awarding Lockheed Martin $698 million for long-lead procurement of F-35 parts, materials and components.
The items to be procured will support the manufacture of 57 F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters in low-rate production lot IX.
The Pentagon said that production lot includes 26 F-35A conventional takeoff and landing aircraft variants for the U.S. Air Force; six F-35B short takeoff vertical landing aircraft for the U.S. Marine Corps; two F-35C carrier variant aircraft for the Navy; six F-35A CTOL aircraft for the government of Norway; one F-35A CTOL for Italy; seven F-35A CTOL aircraft for Israel; two CTOL aircraft for Japan; six F-35B STOVL for Britain; and one F-35B STOVL aircraft for Italy.
“Fiscal 2014 aircraft procurement, Air Force, Marine Corps, Navy funds and international partner funds in the amount of $698,032,384 are being obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year,” the Pentagon said.
Pentagon funds advanced procurement of F-35 parts, components
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2014/03/26/Pentagon-funds-advanced-procurement-of-F-35-parts-components/2851395847037/Lockheed Martin has been approved funding for advanced procurement of parts, components and materials for F-35 aircraft, including fighters being built for Israel, Norway, Italy, Japan and Britain.
Pentagon funds advanced procurement of F-35 parts, components
By Richard Tomkins | March 26, 2014 at 12:01 PM
March 26 (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Defense has announced it is awarding Lockheed Martin $698 million for long-lead procurement of F-35 parts, materials and components.
The items to be procured will support the manufacture of 57 F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters in low-rate production lot IX.
The Pentagon said that production lot includes 26 F-35A conventional takeoff and landing aircraft variants for the U.S. Air Force; six F-35B short takeoff vertical landing aircraft for the U.S. Marine Corps; two F-35C carrier variant aircraft for the Navy; six F-35A CTOL aircraft for the government of Norway; one F-35A CTOL for Italy; seven F-35A CTOL aircraft for Israel; two CTOL aircraft for Japan; six F-35B STOVL for Britain; and one F-35B STOVL aircraft for Italy.
“Fiscal 2014 aircraft procurement, Air Force, Marine Corps, Navy funds and international partner funds in the amount of $698,032,384 are being obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year,” the Pentagon said.
March 28, 2014
Public Works Minister Diane Finley’s department is responsible for the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat. The secretariat told The Hill Times in an email: ‘We will take no decision on the replacement of our CF-18 fleet until our seven-point-plan [to review the F-35 acquisition], the F-35 Joint Program Office has amended the ‘buy profile’ by shifting Canada’s schedule by one year in order to support planning and the development of cost estimates. This moves the national date of first delivery from 2017 to 2018.’
Feds to delay F-35 decision until after next federal election
By TIM NAUMETZ |
Published: Wednesday, 03/26/2014 4:21 pm EDT
Last Updated: Wednesday, 03/26/2014 9:32 pm EDT
PARLIAMENT HILL—The government has delayed its current schedule to sign a contract for an initial delivery of Lockheed-Martin F-35 stealth fighter jets to Canada until after the 2015 federal election year, The Hill Times has learned.
The Public Works Department, while insisting the deadline is “notional” as a special secretariat continues to review expected F-35 capabilities abilities and costs along with three other established fighter jets, confirmed that a U.S. Defence Department office in charge of the F-35 project has changed Canada’s “buy profile” to push back the first delivery of four of the first-strike attack fighters to 2018 from 2017.
The change means an initial “full funding” contract for the 65 planes Canada is still scheduled to acquire over a period of six years would be required in 2016, two years before Lockheed-Martin’s 2018 delivery of the first four planes that would eventually replace Canada’s dwindling and aging fleet of CF-18 fighter jets.
A Department of National Defence report to Parliament last year pegged the estimated lifecycle cost for a fleet of 65 F-35s, including acquisition and maintenance and sustainment over 35 years, at $45.7-billion, including also $1-billion for replacing aircraft lost through attrition during the fleet’s lifetime.
(Canadian) Feds to delay F-35 decision until after next federal election
http://www.hilltimes.com/news/politics/2014/03/26/feds-to-delay-f-35-decision-until-after-next-federal-election/37978Public Works Minister Diane Finley’s department is responsible for the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat. The secretariat told The Hill Times in an email: ‘We will take no decision on the replacement of our CF-18 fleet until our seven-point-plan [to review the F-35 acquisition], the F-35 Joint Program Office has amended the ‘buy profile’ by shifting Canada’s schedule by one year in order to support planning and the development of cost estimates. This moves the national date of first delivery from 2017 to 2018.’
Feds to delay F-35 decision until after next federal election
By TIM NAUMETZ |
Published: Wednesday, 03/26/2014 4:21 pm EDT
Last Updated: Wednesday, 03/26/2014 9:32 pm EDT
PARLIAMENT HILL—The government has delayed its current schedule to sign a contract for an initial delivery of Lockheed-Martin F-35 stealth fighter jets to Canada until after the 2015 federal election year, The Hill Times has learned.
The Public Works Department, while insisting the deadline is “notional” as a special secretariat continues to review expected F-35 capabilities abilities and costs along with three other established fighter jets, confirmed that a U.S. Defence Department office in charge of the F-35 project has changed Canada’s “buy profile” to push back the first delivery of four of the first-strike attack fighters to 2018 from 2017.
The change means an initial “full funding” contract for the 65 planes Canada is still scheduled to acquire over a period of six years would be required in 2016, two years before Lockheed-Martin’s 2018 delivery of the first four planes that would eventually replace Canada’s dwindling and aging fleet of CF-18 fighter jets.
A Department of National Defence report to Parliament last year pegged the estimated lifecycle cost for a fleet of 65 F-35s, including acquisition and maintenance and sustainment over 35 years, at $45.7-billion, including also $1-billion for replacing aircraft lost through attrition during the fleet’s lifetime.
March 28, 2014
Software Testing Problems Continue to Plague F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program
By Robert N. Charette
Posted 27 Mar 2014 | 17:14 GMT
The U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO) earlier this week released its fifth annual report on the state of the F-35 Lightning II, aka the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), aka the “most costly and ambitious” acquisition program ever. What the GAO found was foretold by a report earlier this year by the Department of Defense’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation. The upshot: the F-35 operational and support software development continues to be the major obstacle to the program's success.
In addition, the GAO report states that the projected cost of acquiring the planned 2443 F-35 aircraft (which comes in three flavors) threatens to consume some 20- to 25 percent of annual defense program acquisition funds for the next twenty years or so. The GAO doesn’t explicitly say so, but the operations and maintenance costs of the program—currently estimated to be between $800 billion and $1 trillion dollars or more over the next 50 years—will also consume a significant chunk of DoD’s annual weapon-system related O&M budget as well.
The GAO report states that, “Challenges in development and testing of mission systems software continued through 2013, due largely to delays in software delivery, limited capability in the software when delivered, and the need to fix problems and retest multiple software versions.” Further, the GAO notes that the F-35 program continues to “encounter slower than expected progress in developing the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS),” which is the F-35’s advanced integrated maintenance and support system (pdf). In the latter case, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the F-35 Program Executive Officer, conceded last month that the ALIS system was “way behind” where it should be and was “in catch-up mode.” This, the GAO indicates, was apparently at least partly because of a lack of testing facilities that remains a problem years after ALIS development began.
The GAO notes that as a result of the on-going software problems with the aircraft's mission and support systems, F-35 program officials and contractors alike believe that software development will continue to be the F-35 program’s “most significant risk area.”
Software Testing Problems Continue to Plague F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program
http://spectrum.ieee.org/riskfactor/aerospace/aviation/software-testing-problems-continue-to-plague-f35-joint-strike-fighter-programSoftware Testing Problems Continue to Plague F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program
By Robert N. Charette
Posted 27 Mar 2014 | 17:14 GMT
The U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO) earlier this week released its fifth annual report on the state of the F-35 Lightning II, aka the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), aka the “most costly and ambitious” acquisition program ever. What the GAO found was foretold by a report earlier this year by the Department of Defense’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation. The upshot: the F-35 operational and support software development continues to be the major obstacle to the program's success.
In addition, the GAO report states that the projected cost of acquiring the planned 2443 F-35 aircraft (which comes in three flavors) threatens to consume some 20- to 25 percent of annual defense program acquisition funds for the next twenty years or so. The GAO doesn’t explicitly say so, but the operations and maintenance costs of the program—currently estimated to be between $800 billion and $1 trillion dollars or more over the next 50 years—will also consume a significant chunk of DoD’s annual weapon-system related O&M budget as well.
The GAO report states that, “Challenges in development and testing of mission systems software continued through 2013, due largely to delays in software delivery, limited capability in the software when delivered, and the need to fix problems and retest multiple software versions.” Further, the GAO notes that the F-35 program continues to “encounter slower than expected progress in developing the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS),” which is the F-35’s advanced integrated maintenance and support system (pdf). In the latter case, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the F-35 Program Executive Officer, conceded last month that the ALIS system was “way behind” where it should be and was “in catch-up mode.” This, the GAO indicates, was apparently at least partly because of a lack of testing facilities that remains a problem years after ALIS development began.
The GAO notes that as a result of the on-going software problems with the aircraft's mission and support systems, F-35 program officials and contractors alike believe that software development will continue to be the F-35 program’s “most significant risk area.”
March 28, 2014
Costs skyrocketing as reliability plunges
Report: F-35 Delay to Harm U.S. Warfighting Ability
BY: Adam Kredo Follow @Kredo0
March 27, 2014 8:59 am
A major delay in the shipment of new F-35 fighter jets is expected to diminish U.S. “warfighting capabilities” across the globe and force the Pentagon to significantly boost funding for the plane at a time when military leaders say they cannot afford to, according to a new government report.
Delivery of the plane could be deferred “by as much as 13 months,” leading the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to warn that “delays of this magnitude will likely limit the warfighting capabilities that are delivered to support the military services’ initial operational capabilities,” according to the report.
The F-35 manufacturers are reportedly running into major problems completing and testing “critical software” that allows the jet to properly operate.
The problems will not just deprive the Pentagon of the plane, but force it to “increase funds steeply over the next 5 years and sustain an average of $12.6 billion per year through 2037” and about $15 billion over the next several years.
Report: F-35 Delay to Harm U.S. Warfighting Ability
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/report-f-35-delay-to-harm-u-s-warfighting-ability/Costs skyrocketing as reliability plunges
Report: F-35 Delay to Harm U.S. Warfighting Ability
BY: Adam Kredo Follow @Kredo0
March 27, 2014 8:59 am
A major delay in the shipment of new F-35 fighter jets is expected to diminish U.S. “warfighting capabilities” across the globe and force the Pentagon to significantly boost funding for the plane at a time when military leaders say they cannot afford to, according to a new government report.
Delivery of the plane could be deferred “by as much as 13 months,” leading the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to warn that “delays of this magnitude will likely limit the warfighting capabilities that are delivered to support the military services’ initial operational capabilities,” according to the report.
The F-35 manufacturers are reportedly running into major problems completing and testing “critical software” that allows the jet to properly operate.
The problems will not just deprive the Pentagon of the plane, but force it to “increase funds steeply over the next 5 years and sustain an average of $12.6 billion per year through 2037” and about $15 billion over the next several years.
March 28, 2014
Military sex-assault case shows need for far-reaching reforms
March 22, 2014
Two weeks ago, the Senate blocked legislation championed by Kirsten Gillibrand to overhaul the broken process of rooting out sexual assault in the military. The New York Democrat’s bill would have taken away commanding officers’ power to decide when to prosecute, entrusting that authority instead to neutral military lawyers outside the chain of command. Gillibrand won a bipartisan 55-45 majority but was short of the 60 votes needed to avoid a filibuster. The Senate then unanimously passed a bill sponsored by Missouri’s Claire McCaskill that made some good reforms — most notably in eliminating the “good soldier defense,” in which defendants invoke exemplary service records to suggest they could not have possibly committed sexual assault. But the Senate bill still leaves commanding officers with too much influence over these cases. The House should do better.
The dysfunction of the current system has been evident over the last two weeks in the trial of Brigadier General Jeffrey Sinclair. A former deputy commander of the 82d Airborne in Afghanistan, he faced significant prison time and permanent registration as a sex offender after being accused of sexual assault on an Army captain 17 years his junior with whom he was having an affair. The case riveted the Army, as Sinclair was only the third general in 60 years to face court-martial. In the end, Sinclair pleaded guilty to lesser charges, after the case took many confusing turns that left no one satisfied that justice was served.
In this case, there were suggestions that command influence worked to the defendant’s disadvantage: Early last week, the judge publicly questioned whether the prosecution rejected an earlier plea-bargaining attempt because commanders felt politically pressured to prosecute Sinclair to the fullest extent. This winter, President Obama gave the Pentagon a year to show it was attacking sexual assault, and career military officials are coming to understand that they’ll be judged by whether they take such accusations seriously.
Historically, though, complaints about command influence have run in the opposite direction: Accusers fear that defendants who are held in high esteem by a commanding officer are likely to be protected from legal consequences for any misconduct. What’s needed is a more impartial system — as contemplated in Gillibrand’s legislation. As the House takes up the issue, it should learn the lessons from the Sinclair trial — and of many other cases that preceded it.
Military sex-assault case shows need for far-reaching reforms
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2014/03/22/jeffrey-sinclair-sex-assault-trial-makes-case-for-kirsten-gillibrand-bill/3iicsl2orxHy8XqZi0pPcI/story.htmlMilitary sex-assault case shows need for far-reaching reforms
March 22, 2014
Two weeks ago, the Senate blocked legislation championed by Kirsten Gillibrand to overhaul the broken process of rooting out sexual assault in the military. The New York Democrat’s bill would have taken away commanding officers’ power to decide when to prosecute, entrusting that authority instead to neutral military lawyers outside the chain of command. Gillibrand won a bipartisan 55-45 majority but was short of the 60 votes needed to avoid a filibuster. The Senate then unanimously passed a bill sponsored by Missouri’s Claire McCaskill that made some good reforms — most notably in eliminating the “good soldier defense,” in which defendants invoke exemplary service records to suggest they could not have possibly committed sexual assault. But the Senate bill still leaves commanding officers with too much influence over these cases. The House should do better.
The dysfunction of the current system has been evident over the last two weeks in the trial of Brigadier General Jeffrey Sinclair. A former deputy commander of the 82d Airborne in Afghanistan, he faced significant prison time and permanent registration as a sex offender after being accused of sexual assault on an Army captain 17 years his junior with whom he was having an affair. The case riveted the Army, as Sinclair was only the third general in 60 years to face court-martial. In the end, Sinclair pleaded guilty to lesser charges, after the case took many confusing turns that left no one satisfied that justice was served.
In this case, there were suggestions that command influence worked to the defendant’s disadvantage: Early last week, the judge publicly questioned whether the prosecution rejected an earlier plea-bargaining attempt because commanders felt politically pressured to prosecute Sinclair to the fullest extent. This winter, President Obama gave the Pentagon a year to show it was attacking sexual assault, and career military officials are coming to understand that they’ll be judged by whether they take such accusations seriously.
Historically, though, complaints about command influence have run in the opposite direction: Accusers fear that defendants who are held in high esteem by a commanding officer are likely to be protected from legal consequences for any misconduct. What’s needed is a more impartial system — as contemplated in Gillibrand’s legislation. As the House takes up the issue, it should learn the lessons from the Sinclair trial — and of many other cases that preceded it.
March 28, 2014
Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair received no jail time or demotion in rank despite having a long-standing affair with a captain under his command and inappropriate relationships with three junior soldiers.
General's sentence in sex case called a 'shock,' 'beyond disappointing' (+video)
By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer / March 20, 2014
WASHINGTON
The outcome of a trial that was widely regarded as a litmus test for how the US military handles sexual assault in its ranks has caused an outcry among lawmakers and advocates of victims of sexual assault – as well as many long-serving military officers.
Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair, accused of sexual assault, on Thursday received what was widely regarded as a light sentence, consisting of a $20,000 fine and an official reprimand.
The general had pleaded guilty to having a long-standing affair with a captain under his command and having inappropriate relationships with three other junior soldiers. Earlier in the week the Army dropped sexual assault charges, citing what the judge (an Army colonel) reportedly believed were questions about unreliability in the victim's testimony and “undue command influence” in moving the charges forward.
~snip~
Although he pleaded guilty to “maltreatment of a subordinate, having inappropriate relationships with and soliciting illicit pictures from junior female officers, possessing pornography, misuse of a credit card and using derogatory language,” Representative Tsongas noted, he did not receive any jail time or reduction in rank as part of the sentence.
General's sentence in sex case called a 'shock,' 'beyond disappointing' (+video)
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2014/0320/General-s-sentence-in-sex-case-called-a-shock-beyond-disappointing-videoBrig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair received no jail time or demotion in rank despite having a long-standing affair with a captain under his command and inappropriate relationships with three junior soldiers.
General's sentence in sex case called a 'shock,' 'beyond disappointing' (+video)
By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer / March 20, 2014
WASHINGTON
The outcome of a trial that was widely regarded as a litmus test for how the US military handles sexual assault in its ranks has caused an outcry among lawmakers and advocates of victims of sexual assault – as well as many long-serving military officers.
Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair, accused of sexual assault, on Thursday received what was widely regarded as a light sentence, consisting of a $20,000 fine and an official reprimand.
The general had pleaded guilty to having a long-standing affair with a captain under his command and having inappropriate relationships with three other junior soldiers. Earlier in the week the Army dropped sexual assault charges, citing what the judge (an Army colonel) reportedly believed were questions about unreliability in the victim's testimony and “undue command influence” in moving the charges forward.
~snip~
Although he pleaded guilty to “maltreatment of a subordinate, having inappropriate relationships with and soliciting illicit pictures from junior female officers, possessing pornography, misuse of a credit card and using derogatory language,” Representative Tsongas noted, he did not receive any jail time or reduction in rank as part of the sentence.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Mar 16, 2005, 11:12 AMNumber of posts: 60,364
