Did McChrystal Distort His Involvement in Torture?

[laststeamtrain]

"Mr. President, I oppose the nomination of LTG Stanley
McChrystal to command U.S. forces in Afghanistan for two reasons. The
first relates to a classified matter about which I have serious
concerns. I have conveyed those concerns in a letter to the President.
The second issue is interrogation."--Sen. Russ Feingold

*

Did McChrystal Distort His Involvement in Torture?
Friday, June 19, 2009

Noel Brinkerhoff

When the new commander of the war in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, testified before Congress last week, he gave lawmakers the impression that he was not a supporter of the torture methods employed by the military against insurgents in Iraq, and tried to stop it. But Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) wasn’t convinced that McChrystal, who oversaw all military commando operations until his promotion, was being completely honest during his testimony.

Instead of publicizing his concerns, Feingold quietly published them in the Congressional Record, saying the general’s testimony “appears to be incomplete, at best.” He also expressed doubts about McChrystal being “uncomfortable” with some forms of torture, due to the general’s declared support for other “techniques” used to make detainees talk.

While McChrystal was in charge of the U.S. Special Operations Command, members of the Special Forces helped operate prisoner camps in Iraq where detainees were allegedly abused, including severe beatings with rifle butts, burning and more. One of these locations, Camp Nama, located at Baghdad International Airport, was reportedly posted with signs reading “No Blood, No Foul,” and soldiers often referred to the camp as “Nasty *ss Military Area.”

Despite his comments, Feingold did not object when the Senate approved McChrystal under unanimous consent to his new post in Afghanistan...http://www.allgov.com/ViewNews/Did_McChrystal_Distort_His_Involvement_in_Torture_90619

[EFerrari]

1. Did anyone bring up the way he hid prisoners from the ICRC?

This guy is very bad news. :(

[ColbertWatcher]

2. Didn't he also have something to do with the secrecy surrounding Pat Tillman's death? n/t

[EFerrari]

3. The Nation: McChrystal's Pat Tillman Connection

By Dave Zirin
May 13, 2009

When NFL player-turned-Army Ranger Pat Tillman died at the hands of US troops in a case of "friendly fire," the spin machine at the Pentagon went into overdrive. Rumsfeld and company couldn't have their most high-profile soldier dying in such an inelegant fashion, especially with the release of those pesky photos from Abu Ghraib hitting the airwaves. So an obscene lie was told to Tillman's family, his friends and the American public. The chickenhawks in charge, whose only exposure to war was watching John Wayne movies, claimed that he died charging a hill and was cut down by the radical Islamic enemies of freedom. In the weeks preceding his death, Tillman was beginning to question what exactly he was fighting for, telling friends that he believed the war in Iraq was " illegal." He may not have known what he was fighting for, but it's now clear what he died for: public relations. Today, after five years, six investigations and two Congressional hearings, questions still linger about how Tillman died and why it was covered up.

Now the man who greased the chain of command that orchestrated this great deception is prepared to assume total control of US operations in Afghanistan: Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal. It was McChrystal who approved Tillman's posthumous Silver Star, a medal given explicitly for combat, even though he later testified that he "suspected" friendly fire.

Yet despite this, both Democrats and Republicans are rushing to heap praise on McChrystal, including Sen. John McCain. It was McCain who rushed to speak at Tillman's funeral and then, when the cover-up became known, pledged to help the Tillman family expose the truth. McCain later turned his back on the Tillmans when they raised the volume and demanded answers. As Pat's mother, Mary Tillman, said last year, "He definitely eased out of the situation. He didn't blatantly say he wouldn't help us, it's just that it became clear that he kind of drifted away."

And now the Tillman family, amidst bipartisan praise for Obama's new general, must once again raise the inconvenient truth.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090525/zirin2

[ColbertWatcher]

5. I wonder how people would react to his promotion if they knew he was involved in the Tillman mess?

It's in The Nation, liberals must know.

I wonder if GOPers know?

[EFerrari]

6. Obama knows. What freaks me out is that he seems to think

this guy's Special Ops background outweighs his war crimes background.

This is a mistake.

[ColbertWatcher]

7. I'm hoping Obama is only keeping him on to keep an eye on him.

But, you are correct of course that this guy should be in prison, not receiving a promotion.

[glitch]

10. Freaks me out too.

So many dubious decisions... and those that aren't dubious are downright freakish, like this one.

[Solly Mack]

4. K&R

[MinM]

8. K&R

[Karmadillo]

9. No big deal. He works for a man who is "a strong believer that it's important to look forward

and not backwards" when it comes to torture. "No Blood, No Foul" and "No Ethics, No Conscience" is the post-partisan path we're now following. Psychopaths of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your inhibitions.

[Senator]

11. K&R