Rumsfeld smears military whistleblowers (Plus: an Able Danger update)

The new book by Captain James Yee reveals that Pentagon policy is to smear as a "sex criminal" anyone in the military who opposes the torture occurring at Gitmo. In fact, anyone who criticizes any aspect of Bush policy will face some sort of retaliation.

From the Balkinization blog:

The Rumsfeld Pentagon has developed destruction of the character of those who get in its way to an art form. Those viewed as troublesome become the target of a special investigation. Wiretaps are applied to their telephones and their emails are read. An evidentiary case is built and humiliating leaks to the press occur.

Let’s stop for a moment and ask: when the persons in question are two-, three- and four-star generals, at what level must this be authorized? In fact, the targets have included two-, three- and four-star generals, and the authority or impetus for such action has almost certainly come from the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The charges brought have tended to fall into two baskets: charges of petty dereliction and sexual misconduct. In the former case, we have seen charges that officers kept classified documents on their laptop computers – when the documents turned out not to be classified; and we have seen charges of petty errors and oversights in contract administration. (Conversely, serious cases of contract misadministration involving billions of dollars and Halliburton are resolved by persecuting the whistleblower.) But the favored technique clearly lies in bringing charges of improper sexual conduct, invariably involving consensual sexual relations.

These charges are easily brought. The number of eunuchs and sexual abstainers among the uniformed military is low and sociological research has long shown that the vast majority of the population has sexual relations outside of wedlock at some point. That means that these charges can be brought against virtually anyone.

Even officers of very high rank have been chastised for un-chastity: Major General Thomas J Fiscus, Lt. General John Riggs, and General Kevin Byrnes. Byrnes and Fiscus had expressed reservations about detainee treatment. Riggs questioned whether the number of troops would be adequate. All ran into legal problems for consensual, heterosexual below-the-waist sins.

The Able Danger connection

And what about Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, the man who revealed the DIA data mining operation which fingered Mohamed Atta well before 9/11 (and at a time when the FBI says Atta wasn't even in the country)? First, Cheney's office squelched Shaffer's testimony. Then Shaffer himself was punished and smeared. The charges refer to such ghastly crimes as "improperly flashing military identification while drunk and stealing pens."

This, at a time when billions go missing in Iraq and nobody receives so much as a wrist-slap. Anyone with any sense knows that Shaffer wouldn't face such charges if he had not stepped on important toes.

Looks like we've received verification of the Able Danger tale. As long as Shaffer was allowed to speak freely, I held suspicions about his motives. Now that he has incurred the wrath of the Bush/Cheney Vengeance Battalions, I'm much more likely to believe his story to be true.