If you click on the link above you will see a very heart wrenching story about America's forgotten veterans who have died but have yet yo be buried, they were cremated and stuck in cans on the shelves some since WW1 I ask you to watch and then get involved and help make the states pass laws requiring the funeral homes assist these groups of people get our "hero's" buried in national Cemetaries where they belong and off the "shelves"
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Vet gets help from DVA after news story
CORINTH -- Things are looking up for Sgt. Matthew Welch and his family.
A story that ran on the front page of Monday's edition of The Post-Star detailing the Operation Iraqi Freedom veteran's quest to receive his disability benefits led to an outpouring of support from neighbors and ranking public officials.
"The support has been pretty unreal, and there have been too many people to count," Welch said. "Several businesses have sent money, as well as individuals who sent us checks. ... I can't even begin to tell you how grateful I am."
The same day it was published by The Post-Star, Welch's story was featured on television news programs. The attention may have put pressure on the organizations which had been juggling Welch's paperwork for two years.
Miraculously, the Army found all their papers," Welch said, adding that U.S. Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-Greenport, has been advocating on his behalf with the Army.
The Department of Veterans Affairs also made amends, sending the soldier a back paycheck for monies he was owed.
"Someone from the VA saw the article and forwarded a copy to the deputy director of the state, who took care of everything," Welch said."
In correspondence with Post-Star news partner WNYT-TV Channel 13's Mark Mullholland, New York State Division of Veterans Affairs Senior Counselor/Field Supervisor Gerald Ladouceur wrote, "Our New York State Veterans Counselor assigned to Saratoga-Warren Counties saw your piece and contacted our Deputy Director in New York City. Our Deputy Director was able to get Mr. Welch's VA disability approved that same day."
Welch also got job offers.
"I had a woman offer me an opportunity for a home-based business and a local cab company offered me a job as a driver," he said.
He has yet to accept an offer.
"I'm terrible with directions," he said.
I am glad when any veteran gets the mess the VA has created with their claims file straightened out, the veteran and his family are truly suffering when it reaches a 2 year point in the process, I know I have been there, I first filed my compensation claim in November 2002 by writing then Secretary of the VA Anthony Principi about my many medical problems that I felt ranged from problems that had occurred over a 15 year military career including a 2 month stint as a "medical volunteer" in the Edgewood Arsenal chemical weapons and drugexperiments in June thru August 1974. The Army/CIA were forced by Congress to stop these experiments in 1975, of the 7120 men used from 1955 thru 1975 in this program a March 2003 IOM study Long Term Health Effects of Exposure to Sarin and other Antichloresternase Chemical Warfare Agents written by a Doctor William Page P.H.D. of the MUFA Unit of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) shows that of the 7120 test subjects only 4022 survivors could be found in FY2000 when the data was gathered which indicates 3098 men could not be located a indicated 40% death rate, the report does indicate that of the 4022 survivors, that 54% of them were determined to be disabled " the report indicates that of the groups 42% of one group and 46% of one of the othertest groups are considered to be in great health or good health, so what is causing the 64% and 58% respectively to have them indicating poor or worse health? Why did DR Page ignore these questions of men that had been exposed to 254 different drugs or chemical weapons by the hands of government researchers?
It also makes me question why didn't DRPage use any of the KNOWN chemical warfare long term health studies available to him and othe researchers, it's not like there is a lot of study papers on these issues. There is the 1994 Toxicity of the Organophosphate Chemical Warfare Agents GA, GB, and VX: Implications for Public Protection published by the NIH and these researchers Nancy B. Munro, Kathleen R. Ambrose, and Annetta P. Watson of Health Sciences Research Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6383 USA. A credible source of data, and then there is a 1975 study by DR Karl Heinz Lohs a German Doctor who studied and treated the Wermacht soldiers of the Third Reich's chemical warfare program and their long term health Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
To conclude this section, the closing observations from Spiegelberg’s monograph
will be cited (these remarks do not refer exclusively to organophosphorus
CW agents) :
A psychiatric delayed-effect syndrome was found as a result of systematic investigations
on former members of CW production and testing stations for the Wehrmacht. In
terms of frequency, two groups of symptoms can be distinguished–each consisting of
four separate symptoms or signs.
(1) The great majority of persons examined showed:
(a) persistently lowered vitality accompanied by marked diminution in drive;
(b) defective autonomic regulation leading to cephalalgia, gastrointestinal and
cardiovascular symptoms, and premature decline in libido and potency;
(c) intolerance symptoms (alcohol, nicotine, medicines);
(d) impression of premature aging.
(2) Further, one or more symptoms of the second group were found:
(a) depressive or subdepressive disorders of vital functions;
(b) cerebral vegetative (syncopal) attacks;
(c) slight or moderate amnestic and demential defects;
(d) slight organoneurological defects (predominantly microsymptoms and singular
signs of extrapyramidal character).
Our results are a contribution to the general question of psychopathological delayed
and permanent lesions caused by industrial poisoning. On the basis of our studies of
the etiologically different manifestations of toxication, the possibility of a relatively
uniform–though equally unspecific–cerebro-organic delayed effect syndrome is conceivable.
Yet, DR William Page published a report that found NO long term medical problems related to chemical warfare exposures, how and why? Does the fact that the "client" the agency that paid for the report to be done was the Department of Defense, and the result of a finding of long term medical problems would have found DOD to be liable for either Capter 61 medical retirements or allowed the veterans to obtain from the Veterans Administration benefits for any of these problems found by the NIH or SIPRI, which appear to be extensive, thus expensive both in treatment and compensation levels, there were over 500,000 Allied soldiers in the theater of operations in the Persian Gulf when the Army destroyed the Iraqi Ammunition bunkers at Kamisayah, Iraq in March 1991 with Sarin and Mustard Agent filled rockets and artillery shells.
I am not a scientist nor a researcher, I am an infantryman and a Mail Man by career. I however do have the health problems as described in the SIPRI report, of those known medical problems I have the following medical problems
1992 Stroke in left parietal/occipital lobes
1993 Herniated disks in L5/S1
Feb 1994 Heart attack and artherectomy (rotor rooter)
Feb 1997 Triple Bypass
May 1997 Blood clot caused heart attack and angioplasty
Aug 1997 Bypass collapsed and stent placed
Nov 1997 Another bypass collapsed, reopened original artery and placed 2nd stent
Feb 1998 Heart attack heart pump and angioplasty
June 1998 Stress induced heart attack angioplasty
June 2002 Congestive Heart failure
Oct 2002 Cardiac cath determines 2 bypasses closed off no further surgery can be done and ejection fraction of 25% and doctor told me I was permanently disabled and file for SSD.
Jan 2003 VA Mental Health due to breakdown, diagnosed after 4 months of onterviews and tests with PTSD
Feb 2003 Diagnosed with COPD
Feb 2003 Diagnosed with psoriasis, and other abnormal skin scaling on elbows and feet
Feb 2003 Diagnosed with GERD and Hiatal Hernia
Feb 2003 ED
Feb 2003 Tinnitus
Feb 2003 Dementia and premature shrinking of brain
Now I could grant that some of my medical symptoms are just a coincidence with the above known long term effects of exposure to chemical weapons, except for the fact I was used in the chemical warfare and drug experimentation program at Edgewood Arsenal in 1974 from June 25 thru August 22, 1974. Let's just state I have reasonable doubts. Especially since I have so many of the known problems linked to chemical weapons, not just one or two but nearly all of them and they started in my mid 30s and I am now 52 and have been totally disabled since 2000 at the age of 45.The other 16 "test vets" I am in contact with are in similar health that I am in and it also started in their "younger years" not in old age.
I also question the validity of DR Page's March 2003 Sarin Study.Sphere: Related Content
Senator Tester and Sec Peake face veterans
By TOM LUTEY
Of The Gazette Staff
Limited by staff and space, veterans' health care services in Montana fall short, said U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., who brought U.S. Veterans Affairs Secretary James Peake to Billings to meet with local veterans.
"What I'm getting at is the staff and the square footage is a big issue," Tester said Wednesday. "That's not just here. It's the same in Great Falls and other places."
Tester and Peake got a firsthand look at the tight cramped quarters of the Veterans Affairs Primary Care Center in Billings. Roughly a decade old, the facility at 2345 King Ave. W. is no longer big enough to accommodate services for Billings-area veterans. Plans to relocate to a larger facility are in the works, but the VA Primary Care Center is also short on staff members.
Veterans speaking to Tester and Peake said phone calls to the VA Primary Care Center sometimes go unanswered for half an hour. Getting in to see a counselor about war-related stress can take days. Peake said help was on the way in the form of more community-based outreach clinics. The VA is rolling out 24 new clinics nationwide, including in Havre, Cut Bank and Lewistown. The administration is also hiring 3,100 more people to process veteran care claims. The average time for processing claims is 185 days, and only one in 10 claims is filed correctly, according to the Veterans Benefits Administration.
The secretary said shortening the processing times to 145 days should improve service for veterans, many of whom described VA health care as slow or unresponsive. Part of that time reduction hinges on scrapping a paperwork-heavy claims system that has gone relatively unchanged since World War II. Peake said he wants the VA to convert to a "paperless system" in which files are computer-based and more easily processed.
Last week, the Veterans Benefits Administration told Congress that 650,000 benefits claims awaited processing.
There's a debate about how many claims will still be made by veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Bush administration estimates that 33,690 new veterans will enter the system, but the majority of staff for the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, on which Tester serves, expects 200,000 claims by veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.
If the committee is correct, the president's budgeted amount for new claims could leave funding short for about 150,000 veterans.
The Senate has also proposed an extension to health care benefits for veterans leaving service. The cost of the health care depended on a veteran's income and severity of injury, but no veteran could be denied coverage for his or her first five years after service. The VA supports the proposal, which passed the Senate in December.
Veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan "will be able to access health care for five years instead of two," Peake said.
Tester brought Peake to Montana so the secretary could see challenges of veterans' health care in rural areas first hand. Peake, who announced the creation of a rural health advisory committee, said some areas of Montana went beyond rural and were actually frontier.
Nationwide, an estimated 38 percent of veterans live in rural areas. On Tuesday, Peake toured VA facilities in rural eastern Washington. The tour was a first for Peake, who has been in office less than three months. During his December confirmation hearing, the former Army surgeon general assured senators that he would look into complaints of understaffing at rural facilities.
"This advisory committee, working within the highest levels of VA, will ensure the department remains responsive to the health care needs of rural veterans," Peake said.
Wednesday, Peake said the VA needed to evolve to meet the needs of young veterans returning home from war. Adequate mental-health care for returning veterans, particularly troops suffering from head injuries or post-traumatic stress disorder, has been a point of debate almost since troops were deployed to Afghanistan in 2001. Roughly one-third of all veterans seek treatment for mental-health problems. Veterans are twice as likely to commit suicide as other Americans.
The need for better mental-health care was later driven home during a town hall meeting, in which the father of a suicidal Marine living in Billings pleaded for the release of his son's military records so the young man could get help. Trembling and near tears, the man could barely make his request.
Other veterans attending the meeting at the Hilton Garden Inn spoke of lost paperwork or grueling cross-state drives for treatment. Although dozens of veterans lined up to speak to Tester and Peake, none had served in the current Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. A few praised VA care in Montana, but others, like Army veteran Brandie Strong, were highly critical.
Strong, 35, spent one year in the Army during the Persian Gulf War era. Barely into her commitment, she became ill and eventually lapsed into a coma. Eventually, she needed a liver transplant, and a future kidney transplant seems imminent. Since then, Strong has traveled extensively for VA care. Her transplant doctor is in Colorado. She sees a VA dermatologist in Sheridan, Wyo. For female-specific problems, she must travel to Fort Harrison in Helena. Until recently, her per-mile reimbursement from the VA was minimal.
"It was 11 cents a mile, but they just increased it to 28 cents," said Strong, who asked Peake and Tester why veterans traveling for medical attention didn't get the congressional rate of 48 cents.
Neither man responded.
When Air Force veteran Dave Bovee filled in the sign-up sheet at the front door, he identified himself as "I'm the one not killed yet by the VA."
He told Tester and Peake that his medical condition had been misdiagnosed by the VA. An asthma sufferer and diabetic, Bovee said the VA later canceled his prescriptions. Getting his benefits back was a real fight.
"In the months it took to get my benefits from your incompetents, it was always my fault," Bovee said, wheezing.
As for the absence of new veterans among the 20 or so people who spoke, Tester said he thinks soldiers returning from Iraq or Afghanistan were not ready to weigh in on health care.
"I think they're just happy to be home," Tester said.
Another reason for the no-show could have been wariness among new veterans to use the VA, said Chelly Harada. A veteran service officer in Wolf Point, Harada said a lot of American Indian vets are influenced by VA stories told by their fathers and grandfathers.
Many of the new veterans who could use the VA are opting to use Indian health care instead, Harada said. Consequently, Indian health care is strapped for cash and administrators are wishing American Indian vets would use the VA's services.
I see the Indian health care administrators are like VA administrators, they want vets to use Medicare rather than the VA so they can pass the health care costs on to another federal agency. I am always harrassed by the VA about my lack of Medicare, I am 100% SC why should they expect me to pay for Medicare's services when I "earned" and paid for my VA healthcare when I became totally disabled thru my military service?
While the VA is touting the new 28 cnets amile versus the old 11 cemts, they ignore the fact that they raised the retake from 6 dollars per trip the VA center keeps from the milage rate to 15.00 dollars per trip so in most cases the raise becomes a moot point, the VA is just keeping 15 dollars rather than 6, so how does the veterans get ahead, gas prices are still higher?
Why is only one claim in ten being prepared properly? We are told we need a VA approved veterans Service Officer and most veterans use the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) the American Legion (AL) The Purple Heart Association, or any of the other numerous groups allowed by the VA, so are these experts messing the veterans over by filing the claims improperly? The veterans don't have the expertise to file these massive claims papers nor do they know which is the correct medical condition to file for under the massive CFR and the way they break down health problems, filing for heart problems is not enough, exactly what is the problem, a stroke, hypertension, stents, triple bypass, what is the ejection faction, are you employable or not, are you in a power chair due to poor heart function etc.You think the VA would assist a veteran that disabled, nope, deny and keep denying until the veteran gets lucky and finds a VSO that knows what they are doing.
Picking a VSO is kind of like hiring a lawyer out of the phone book and playing the lottery at the same time hope you pick a winner, or the next few years of your life can and will be hell.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
General Wesley Clark as VP for eithe Clinton or Obama
Clark seen eyeing running mate position
By Ralph Z. Hallow
February 20, 2008
Retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark has been attending Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign events and making speeches on behalf of the Democratic presidential candidate. (Getty Images)
Retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark is signing fundraising letters for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and making campaign speeches on her behalf, raising speculation he might be auditioning as a vice-presidential nominee.
Both Republicans and Democrats said the four-star general could do for Mrs. Clinton — or even for Sen. Barack Obama — what Vice President Dick Cheney, a former secretary of defense in the first Bush White House, did for George W. Bush in 2000.
"Wes Clark is one of the few generals who understands military leadership as well as political leadership," said former Rep. Butler Derrick, South Carolina Democrat. "He would help reassure voters for both [Sen. Barack Obama] and Clinton that their administrations would be firm and reliable on national defense."
Mr. Clark could be particularly effective to counter Sen. John McCain, the probable Republican standard-bearer, whose credentials as Vietnam War hero and Senate tenure dealing with military matters are regularly praised.
Donald J. Devine, a Republican Party consultant and former Reagan White House official, said Mr. Clark is a central casting version of a national candidate — a sleek and immaculately coiffured general who commanded Operation Allied Force in the Kosovo war when he was NATO's supreme allied commander in Europe.
Mr. Derrick said Mr. Clark "would lend credibility to Clinton's position on the war, as he was against it from the beginning, which is almost unheard of for a retired general."
Mr. Clark might be even more of an asset to the Illinois senator, who has little foreign policy or military experience.
"Citizens have doubts about Obama's depth of knowledge in this area," said Mr. Derrick. "Wes Clark would help reassure the doubters."
Please go to the web site and read the rest of the article, it is the Washington Times so they have to take a few cheap shots at the general, after all he is a Democratic activist.
Now for my two cents, I have known General Wesley Clark since the early 1980s, when he was a Colonel and I was a SSG at NTC, I grew to respect him for his command and control and his leadership abilities. He cared about the soldiers families, the schools, the facilities for laundry, PX and Commissary issue's, stuff that most Commanders just did not care about, yet have a major impact on daily lives of the troops, because if the wives and kids aren't happy, then daddy can't give his job the 100% effort they need to.
I went back to NTC as part of the 48th Brigade for Operation Desert Storm and ran into Brigadier General Wesley Clark, he was tasked with getting a division level task force thru the OP Force rotation and get the National Guard units from georgia, Arkansas and Lousiana ready to go to war. There were additional add on units, we utilized the entire 1000 square miles of training area on Fort Irwin. Part of General Clarks mission was to use the national Guard Brigades to build a copy of the Iraqi berm complexes that the Alied forces would be attacking when the invasion of Iraq began.
He ran the 48th brigade and others thru the different attack formations of the Iraqi defenses week after week, so that he sent the best battle plan available to General Swarzkopf and the G3 elements to pan the invasion to minimize the damage to our allied forces, and quite frankly the plan worked and we quickly kicked the Iraqi forces defenses to pieces very quickly due to General Clarks hard work. I don't remember ever reading where he got much credit for that behind the scenes work for the first Gulf war. He did get on the fast track for promition though as he had been for years, since his duty in Vietnam, and graduating #1 at West Point, his Rhoades Scholarship, and he was eventually held the same job general Eisenhower did, Commander of all NATO Forces.
He is one of the most educated military officers in history, he has extensive experience in foreign affairs and diplomacy, he would be an asset to any administration, Democratic or republican, he is a true American hero, he does not believe in Blue America or red America he believes in the United States of America, he see's everything in OD green.
He would give either Senators Clinton or Obama the credentials for military experience that Senator McCain is going to beat either of them over the head with, the fact they lack knowledge on how to use military forces properly, and when and why. Hell he would make a better secretary of defense than Donald Rumsfeld ever was, but due to rules he is not eligible until 2011 ten years after he left active duty.
But as a Vice President he would make one hell of a choice for Senator Obama to take on Senator McCain, I have heard Sen Webb suggested due to his Marine Corp service and his service as Secretary of the Navy, yes he is an attractive possibility but he is not General Clark, it is my belief that General Clark is the smartest choice for either Senators, Clinton or Obama to name as their VP, they do not need a VP to carry a state, the voters are charged and ready to vote, they need a reliable military name on the ballot, and Wes Clark gives them that.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Canadian Cold War Soldiers sue government over radiation exposure
Ex-soldiers sue Ottawa over radiation exposure
Janet French, Canwest News Service
Published: Tuesday, February 19, 2008
SASKATOON -- Former soldiers the Canadian military once sent to stand as close as two kilometres away from nuclear explosions have launched a class action lawsuit against the government of Canada.
Regina lawyer Tony Merchant filed the statement of claim in federal court Tuesday on behalf of what he describes as an estimated 1,000 "atomic human guinea pigs," who were sent to the U.S., Australia, and islands in the South Pacific between 1946 and 1963.
There, soldiers were exposed to huge doses of radiation that caused radiation sickness and, later, cancers and untimely deaths, the suit claims.
The statement of claim also alleges the government was well aware of the harmful effects of radiation when the military volunteered its soldiers to be unwitting test subjects.
"I really feel that we have been deserted," says Bob Henderson, a High Level, Alta., man who is one of the plaintiffs named in the suit.
"We served our country with pride, with dignity, and most of all with honour, and the government has done absolutely nothing for us. I doubt that they ever will."
Once a member of Lord Strathcona's Horse, Henderson was assigned to survey atomic explosion sites for radiation. He was present for an estimated 25 nuclear explosions.
During the blasts, he stood in what was described as a "safe area" an estimated eight kilometres from the explosion sites.
"The light is unbelievable," he said. "I could see through my arm. And the two gentlemen behind me, I could see through their heads."
The soldiers would be decontaminated, then climb right back into dirty trucks covered in fallout from the explosions, he said. Radioactive particles were all over his clothes, on him and in him, he said.
No one ever did medical tests to see if the radiation had affected him, he said.
He later developed cancer of the kidney, then the bowel. He had heart attacks and cataracts, and both of his daughters developed cancers in their 20s.
Merchant says it's hard to say why the Canadian military would volunteer its soldiers for such tests. However, he said, if U.S. had resorted to using nuclear weapons in Germany, troops would have had to move into the area immediately after the blast to capture anyone who remained alive.
"They had to know the huge damage that would be done, but they still wanted some knowledge of the effects," Merchant said. "What is particularly troublesome is we were doing things with the Canadian troops that the American troops weren't even doing."
After an uproar from American soldiers also on site during the tests, the U.S. government in 1990 awarded $75,000 to each exposed soldier.
Merchant said any Canadian involved in the tests should get at least $150,000 in compensation from the government. The people who got sick from radiation, or the families of the soldiers who died, are entitled to more, depending on individual circumstances, he said.
Jim Huntley of Calgary said he, other veterans and their widows resorted to the class action suit when their pleas to government for recognition and compensation went without responses.
Huntley was sent to Nevada in 1957 for top-secret "training" exercises. Equipped with nothing but his regular military uniform, he watched at least six blasts detonate. He was knocked over by shock waves, and one trench he sheltered in collapsed.
The statement of claim alleges the government sent Huntley to Nevada to test the effects of radiation on humans.
"Scientific personnel, dressed in white ‘space suits,' ran ticking Geiger counters up and down Huntley's body," it says. While senior officers were decontaminated, Huntley and his platoon were cleaned off with straw brooms.
Huntley was 18 at the time, and didn't worry about the blasts because officers told him the radiation "will go away with the wind."
In 1982, a colonel admitted to Huntley he'd been overdosed with radiation and advised him to be tested regularly for cancer, the claim says.
"What makes me mad is these politicians today can stand in front of you, and say, ‘You were done wrong. Somebody should have looked after you,'" he said. "They've admitted it, but they're not doing anything about it."
Jay Paxton, press secretary to Minister of Defence Peter MacKay, said Tuesday the Government of Canada is aware members of the military participated in allied forces' nuclear weapons testing.
"We recognize that this is a serious issue that needs to be dealt with the utmost care and patience to ensure that it is handled properly," Paxton wrote in an e-mail. "Our goal is to find an acceptable resolution that honours those who have given so much for this country.
"All those who serve their country -- past or present -- deserve the respect, admiration and care of a grateful nation."
Given that my step father Dale (NMN) Jennings TSGT Retired USAF was a survivor of the above ground experiments at the Nevavda test sight, and some of the Pacific Island tests/detonations, he was a radio operator on B29s and other aircarft they used to fly thru the Mushroon clouds to gather raw data, Dale endedup with three different kinds of cancer that was covered by the RECA act, the government program that paid the veterans 75,000 dollars, Dale never saw a nickle of it, it was aproved in 1999 and he died in September 2000 and he felt if he filed for the money they would take it outof his AF retirement. That is one of themain reasons he never filed for Veterans benefits, they would have just taken away his AF retirement in excghanfe for any veterans compensation dollar for dollar, he saw no advantage for the frustration of fighting with the VA to get what he already had. I fillu support the Canadians used in these nuclear tets.
SCOTUS refuses to hear Bush Spy Case
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned down a legal challenge to the warrantless domestic spying program President George W. Bush created after the September 11 attacks.
The American Civil Liberties Union had asked the justices to hear the case after a lower court ruled the ACLU, other groups and individuals that sued the government had no legal right to do so because they could not prove they had been affected by the program.
The civil liberties group also asked the nation's highest court to make clear that Bush does not have the power under the U.S. Constitution to engage in intelligence surveillance within the United States that Congress has expressly prohibited.
"The president is bound by the laws that Congress enacts. He may disagree with those laws, but he may not disobey them," Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU's National Security Project, said in the appeal.
Bush authorized the program to monitor international phone calls and e-mails of U.S. citizens without first obtaining a court warrant. The program's disclosure in December 2005 caused a political uproar among Democrats, some Republicans and civil liberties activists.
The administration abandoned the program about a year ago, putting it under the surveillance court that Congress created more than 30 years ago.
The high court's action means that Bush will be able to disregard whatever legislative eavesdropping restrictions Congress adopts as there will be no meaningful judicial review, the ACLU attorneys said.
The journalists, scholars, attorneys and national advocacy groups that filed the lawsuit said the illegal surveillance had disrupted their ability to communicate with sources and clients The appeals court based in Cincinnati dismissed the case because the plaintiffs could not state with certainty they had been wiretapped by the government's National Security Agency.
Administration lawyers opposed the appeal and said further review by the Supreme Court was unwarranted.
The Supreme Court sided with the administration and rejected the appeal without any comment.
(Reporting by James Vicini, editing by Lori Santos)
I know I am not a learnered scholar or even a lawyer, but I am an old disabled infantryman and I know right from wrong. It is MY opinion that the Chief Justice Roberts Supreme Court has just given President Bush and VP Dick Cheney a free pass on the violation of American citizens rights to privacy. '
None of us loyal to the United States question the ability to chase terrorists, but let's see what we do know, Osama Bin ladin is alive and well in Pakistan, and President Bush and Cheney keep sending Musharaf billions in assistance, the recent "keep America Safe Act" was not threatened to be vetoed due to the law per se, rather the lack of the retro immunity Bush and Cheney were demanding for the laws they had already broken, saying that is they could stop the pending lawsuits for violating American citizens rights, the Telecoms would be facing billions in punitive damages, as they should be, some of the telecoms actually told Mr Bush and Cheney to go F themselves, where's the court orders? You know those nasty little legal requirements, we Americans are proud of, something we have had for more than 200 years.
We abolished the King in 1776, and when SCOTUS gave George W the election in 2000 they did not appoint him King George 2000. Regardless of what he and Tricky Dick 2 have decided, he is not the "decider in chief" the American public is the "decider in chief" and they are really pushing for impeachment, they make Nixon look like a nice man.
This is not what I served in an Army Uniform thru Vietnam and Desert Storm for, not do I think my father served in the 7th Calvary in 1914-1916 and went with General Black Jack Pershing after Pancho Villa for in 1916, nor my grandfather Joshua Eaton Bailey served the California 4th Volunteers from 1861 - 1865 to maintain the Union.
Nor my great great grandfather Bailey who served at Valley Forge with General Washington as a doctors assistant. They served this nation to make it a free country, and this administration has taken it back to as close to a kingdom as they can get, they have a Supreme Court that rubber stamps their law breaking, that will not let people tortured file law suits and they shut them down by claiming state secrets, hell the VP even got away with shooting a lawyer, where were the charges the rest of us would have been slapped with, illegal discharge of a firearm, failure to report a crime promptly, he didn't even bother telling the President until the next day. They don't think we have a right to know who visits the White House the national residence, it is not a home, it is the head of states place of business, we pay for it, we have the right to know who enters and when they leave. What about the missing or misplaced 5 million e mails they used the RNC routers and servers for to conduct legal business for the Executive Office President (EOP.gov) they have made Nixon look like a pure amatuer, Scooter Libby and the VP out a CIA agent and destroy a long term cover company used for detection of WMD and Scooter gets a get out of jail free card. This administration will go down in history as one of the worst and Justice Roberts is tying his name to the thuggery of Cheney and Company, is this his real desire? To be remembered as the Justice who allowed crime to flourish in the White House?
On: 19.02.08 05:06
British Iraq Dossier Surfaces, Without Crucial Weapons Claim
The New York Times
February 19, 2008
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
LONDON (AP) — An early version of a British dossier of prewar intelligence on Iraq did not include a claim about unconventional weapons that became crucial to Prime Minister Tony Blair’s case for war, the newly published document showed Monday.
The document, from 2002, says Saddam Hussein’s government acquired uranium and had equipment necessary for chemical weapons, but it does not include a claim that Iraq could launch chemical or biological weapons within 45 minutes of an order to use them. That statement, later discredited, became central to Mr. Blair’s case for supporting the American-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Critics of his policy contend that the 45-minute claim was inserted into later drafts of the document on the orders of Mr. Blair’s press advisers, who were seeking to strengthen the case for invasion — an accusation the government has strongly denied.
Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who published the intelligence document on Monday after a request filed under freedom of information laws, said the early draft — produced by John Williams, then the chief of the Foreign Office press office — was not used as the basis for later documents, drafted by the Joint Intelligence Committee.
Mr. Miliband criticized the decision by freedom of information authorities to order the release of the Williams document, saying officials should be free to draft policy papers without fears they could be made public.
Mr. Blair presented a final draft of the Joint Intelligence Committee dossier, “Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction,” to Parliament on Sept. 24, 2002. It included the 45-minute claim.
On Monday, Edward Davey, an opposition Liberal Democrat lawmaker, said the Williams document was proof of the role government press officers had in drafting Iraq intelligence reports.
“A press official should never have been drafting a document that ended up being used as the justification for going to war,” he said. “There has to be a clear distinction between those that offer impartial intelligence advice and the government’s spin machine.”
A second document, on Iraq’s supposed concealment of unconventional weapons, which was published in February 2003 and became known as the “dodgy dossier,” was found to have repeated, sometimes verbatim, parts of articles from magazines and academic journals.
Hans Blix, the former United Nations chief weapons inspector, said last year that he believed that Mr. Blair had replaced “question marks with exclamation marks” in intelligence dossiers to justify the decision to invade Iraq.
An inquiry in 2004 into intelligence on Iraq did not fault Mr. Blair’s government, but criticized intelligence officials for relying partly on seriously flawed or unreliable sources. The inquiry said the dossiers had pushed the government’s case to the limits of available intelligence and left out major caveats.
David Kelly, a government weapons scientist, killed himself in 2003 after he was exposed as the source of a British Broadcasting Corporation report that accused Mr. Blair’s office of “sexing up” intelligence to make a stronger case for war.
Writing in The Guardian, Mr. Williams acknowledged Monday that many in the government had failed to spot problems with Mr. Blair’s case for joining the invasion of Iraq.
“Others were more perceptive, including one of the ministers I advised for a time,” Mr. Williams wrote, referring to Foreign Secretary Robin Cook. Mr. Cook, who died in 2005, resigned from Blair’s cabinet in opposition to the war.
“He was right,” Mr. Williams wrote. “Those of us who carried on working for the government were wrong.”
Document available from: http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/wmd_jul_2002.pdf
Can they say OOPS now?
New defense force battalion will start
The Virginia Defense Force's 3rd Brigade will activate another battalion to serve in the Staunton, Charlottesville, Lexington and Clifton Forge areas. The strength increase could mean as many as 150 new state troops available in the region during times of emergency.
In recent years, the VaDF has increasingly conducted missions to augment these areas' local resources, including providing search and rescue services, less-than-lethal security at community events and supporting the Virginia National Guard in these areas. As the need to support these area increases, senior VaDF officers have reorganized to better serve the region. The VaDF also has focused it operations on natural and man-made disasters, including limited activation of support personnel during Hurricane Katrina.
The new battalion will report to Brigade Commander Col. Bo Christensen and will be headquartered in the Thomas D. Howie Memorial Armory in Staunton, with companies in the Charlottesville, Lexington and Covington armories.
The new unit is designated the 13th Battalion and will be activated Feb. 24 during an annual brigade "dining-in" ceremony. The battalion will become operational next month and should reach its full strength within the calendar year.
Major Columbus Cartwright of Lexington will command the unit. Cartwright is a graduate of Virginia Military Institute. Command Sgt. Major Michael Wilson, a retired master sergeant from the Army Reserve, will be the battalion's senior non-commissioned officer.
Many of the troops in the new battalion will be transferred from other units within the defense force. However, significant efforts will be made to recruit local troops to bolster the ranks of the all-volunteer force. Because of their knowledge of geography and local community ties, recruiting local troops will ensure a huge operational advantage.
The new battalion will give many veterans in the area a chance to return to service. For those who have never served in the military, the battalion offers a local opportunity to learn military skills and serve in a military setting without the possibility of being deployed overseas or serving in combat. Troops can be between the ages of 16 and 65 who are legal residents of Virginia.
For more information, (646) 595 8691 or (703) 237 1716.
Virginia's new Home Guard
Monday, February 18, 2008
Women soldiers affected by deployments
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 18, 2008; Page A01
"Little man, I love you! Mommy misses you," Spec. Amy Shaw spoke softly as she looked into the video camera in her Baghdad barracks, surrounded by photographs of tiny Connor James, the infant son she left behind in Wisconsin. "Mommy'll be home soon."
Connor was three months old when Shaw and her husband, Brad, a sergeant with the military police, began a 15-month deployment to Iraq, their second tour in the combat zone. Like thousands of other new military mothers, the 22-year-old Army medic faced a stark choice: Give birth and quickly leave the baby behind, or lose her job.
Many female soldiers hoping to start families face the prospect of missing most of their child's first year. The Army grants six weeks of maternity leave before a new mother must return to her job or training, and four months until she can be sent to a war zone. The Marine Corps and Navy allow from six months to a year before a new mother must deploy.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have placed severe strains on the Army, including longer deployments in which soldiers serve 15 months in the war zone, followed by 12 months at home. Under that system, a woman who wishes to have a child and remain with her unit must conceive soon after returning home so she can give birth, recover and prepare for her next overseas tour.
Female soldiers interviewed over the past year say the tight schedule cuts short precious time for mother and infant to bond and breast-feed, forcing women to choose between their loyalty to their comrades -- as well as their careers -- and nurturing their families.
Shaw had spent less than four months with Connor when her medical company shipped out with the 4th Brigade of the 1st Infantry Division, one of the five brigades President Bush sent to Iraq last year during a troop buildup. Now an ocean apart from her firstborn child, she is doing everything she can to remain a presence in her son's life, hoping that if nothing else he will recognize her voice when she returns.
"I do phone calls. I do e-mails," she said, sitting on her bed holding a large photograph of Connor on her lap. "I use Web cam, letters, packages -- things like that -- the best I can."
The constraints on reproduction, child-rearing and family are a key factor leading many female soldiers to quit the Army, and have discouraged many civilian women from considering enlistment, according to Army officials. Surveys show that time away from families, because of long, frequent deployments, is the top reason for soldiers to leave the Army. The willingness of women to serve in the military has dropped faster than that of men in recent years, from a high of 10 percent among 16- to 21-year-olds in November 2003 to 4 percent last July, according to periodic youth surveys on "propensity to serve" conducted for the Army.
"With the operations tempo that we have right now, it makes it hard to work in family planning and being able to deploy with your units," said Army Capt. Stephanie Cediel, who served in Iraq while her son was a toddler and delayed having a hoped-for second child because of the stress of deployments.
Shaw works 12 hours a day, with half a day off each week, handling everything from sprained ankles to shrapnel wounds and amputations. "The months just run together," she said last week in an interview from Baghdad. "Once you hit that year mark, you are like, 'Last time I deployed I was already at home. Now I'm still here.' "
Husband Brad sends e-mails to Connor about life in Iraq, which Shaw's mother reads aloud to the baby. Shaw said she tries to call Connor three or four times a week, and her mother holds the phone to the boy's ear.
"I tell him how my day's gone," Shaw explains. But, she admits, "it's pretty much a one-sided conversation."
please go to the link to read the other two pages
Sunday, February 17, 2008
VAC Subcommittee Disability Claims Process Oversight Meeting
February 14, 2008
Instead of a subcommittee hearing, this was the perfect example of Veterans Affairs being nothing but a fill in committee. On the 14th this oversight meeting should have been listed as a micro-miniature subcommittee as there appeared to be, two members there and sometimes down to one holding oversight meetings on the claims process system. Assuming there is one - other than reject, deny, and stall.
Compare that to the Roger Clements congressional “standing room only hearing” and we can clearly see where the congressional importance is as well as the nation in all the talk shows and news shows. Moreover, it isn’t the Veterans or how they are treated for doing nothing wrong or even suspected of any wrongdoing as the subject matter.
The most important subject that affects the most Veterans and their families regarding how claims are handled and adjudicated and why there is a backlog of over 600,000 claims and growing was discussed at way to high of a level for the most part. A backlog that has been the subject at least since the 1980’s and still it cannot be and has not been resolved nor even the real rational as to why it cannot be solved even been identified. Excuses and so-called fixes are about gone and used up; although several have been revisited. Now, VA just makes up things and they are allowed to make statements with no challenges.
A quorum of two subcommittee members in oversight heard the testimony of four panels of experts (see http://veterans.house.gov/hearings/hearing.aspx?NewsID=189)
Three of the panels it was hard to tell the difference between the VA speaking and the panel members. One panel had a legal background and some had worked for the VA prior to being associated with this panel.
Our submitted statements for the record to reduce 200,000 claims in six months as you can see in panel five did not make the grade. While Kurt Pressman’s testimony, one of our guys did make it in. I think you will find the submitted statements by the Harvard Professor Linda Bilmes interesting as to how the civilian world processes claims in comparison to the VA; handling 30 million claims a year and pays 98% of them within 60 days. I think you will also find it interesting that the VSO’s, especially the VFW, made a direct point that they did not support the recommendations by the Harvard professor and her analogy and recommendations. Bet that makes you wonder why you are paying dues to these folks and their organizations. Just maybe there is a conflict of interest there, as VA can politically lobby (threaten) the VSO’s to support this or that or not support this or that; but in turn, VSO cannot return the favor. Also makes me wonder why congress even puts any credence at all, in what they say or present as representatives (?) of stakeholders; but yet they still do. I was also miffed at VVA not being there or submitting for the record.
One can only say, with the longevity of this issue of decades that within the government the ultimate reasons it has not been solved; is because the government does not want to solve the problem due to yearly budget control to mask the cost of war, cover the mistakes made by DoD in herbicides and Gulf War issues (etc), and the White House philosophy of only support what you have to keep enlistment. Those that served in the past, the White House memo by the Reagan/Bush White House to all federal agencies not to associate death and disability to the usage of DoD herbicides should have read = We “the Presidents,” as their commander’s and chief have chosen not to fund or identify our government damaged Veterans…just let them die off and become disabled with no compensations or award of service connection compensations or recognition of dying for the nation…their damaged offspring and widows that are left, can fend for themsleves.
Some highlights that I recall:
· The amount of abandoned VA claims was simply mind-boggling. This was attributed to many reasons. One of which was the complexity of the process and the lack of real professional legal guidance. I was hoping they would give the delta between Veterans claims and Widows claims that were abandon as the subject came up. That did not happen. Nor was it stated the number only represented Veterans claims and was not inclusive to the widows that finally just give up.
· The analogy of the little fellow pushing the rock up the hill then only to find once at the top it rolled backed down and he had to start all over pushing the rock back up again was compared to the VA system of claims processing. My analogy would have been Veterans or widows A-Z push up the ball. The balls name is one of the many disorders that should be classified as presumptive. So, lets call the ball Esophageal Cancer. Each one in turn tries to roll the ball up the hill called VA. After five years some are BVA approved, some are denied, and some are remanded. Yet, the ball was the same only with different A-Z pushing. The exact same ball; and some make it, some take longer, some never do make it, and some just give up. As each A-Z gets to the perches on the hill and continues after each perch, the incline of the hill (VA) gets government controlled increased thus making it harder and harder to climb the hill.
· The amount of overturned VA claims on one side stated that 80% of VA denials were BVA overturned. Of course, VA denied this and said that they only had 20% of their claim decisions overturned.
This is where the crux of our submitted recommendations was rooted. Even at 20-40% of the claims being eventually overturned, one must realize the amount of claims we are talking about. These claims would be in the range of 2 – 10 year claim resolution down to a maximum of six months to approve. Considering that many of these are simply duplicates of the exact same claim with different Veterans or widows rolling the rock uphill. If one is approved even if it was approved in, the context “it is just as likely as not” was herbicide, gulf war, or service in an area, etc attributable then all such claims should be approved. An error has been found and the flow down back to the VA should be that all such claims that are similar should be approved. An example of this was given in our proposal of such cases as esophageal cancers that BVA found at least as likely as not associated to service in Vietnam and herbicides.
· Of course, the subject was brought up that VA in some cases just ignores BVA pronounced and mandated actions on a claim. On the other hand, as we have found in the past they sit for five years while VA sits on them with no action at all.
· One of my pet topics was the fact VA says they determine claims within 6 months or so. VA seems to have a hard time figuring out what day of the week it is within 6 months. Arguing over whether it should be 160 days or 145 days is pointless. The reason why? This seems to be when you get the first denial or request for more data – resolution or determination of the claim has just begun not some - we are done within 6 months therefore give us credit. Presumptive cancer disorders are not approved in 6 months that require little if any real thinking or decisions. Remembering the civilian counter point of 30 million claims in one year and resolved in 98% of the cases within 60 days gives one reason to question why the government keeps paying VA for non-performance. I think most of us know why.
As you may recall Nicholson recanted under oath before the committee that all parts of the claim must be resolved and that was one reason for the delay of years for the Veteran receiving anything with regard to financial support. Yet, one of the lead VA guys testified under oath that VA in some cases such as amputees that VA fund that immediately and worry about the loss of hearing and such as that later. Now that is directly opposed to the excuses made previously. That I would like to see a real honest report on as to how many VA is treating this way without an act of congress. I would also point out that an amputee recovering is probably not going to die while there are many issues that the Veteran is going to die from and still cannot get this kind of service this VA fellow was discussing under the same scenarios of award the known and associated now and figure out the other later. While Nicholson got out of this VA mess, I think he inherited nothing but a cluster foul up. The only thing he said while in office that made any sense to me was, Veterans should not have to fight for earned benefits. Yet, we know they did then and still do.
The one issue that chapped my butt and always has. Somehow, in context of Veterans Entitlements was brought up. Entitlements are something the government gives away based on something that does not involve any earning of such entitlements. In other words, the government receives nothing in exchange, as the red grows even larger with more and more entitlement programs > leaning evermore towards a socialistic society. Veterans Benefits the nation received something in exchange called freedom and a constitution that still stands. While everyone must agree that, those receiving these benefits based on honorable service and in many cases valorous service under the most despicable of all circumstances one citizen can ask of another citizen is hardly in the context of an entitlement. In addition, it is clear that those receiving these “earned benefits” are not privy to the constitutional guarantees that our constitution demands of our lawmakers and elected officials for all citizens. Now we find that our lawmakers even mandate these guarantees to the illegal as well as the terrorist bent on destroying the constitution that those removed by our lawmakers from these constitutional rights have defended.
Something not right with this way of thinking? You bet!!!
One politician in our history stated centuries ago in the form of; “when the government creates the Veteran the citizen is not laid aside.” Yet, it has been down hill since then with more and more rights being stripped away. A hallmark of inverse action so eloquently stated by our first President was in the form of the Feres Doctrine and its nefarious usage by both DoD and VA and the Executive Branch. Somehow our congress agreed with this stripping of the marquee sign on the Supreme Court = Equal Justice for All. For Veterans, this is nothing but a joke; a sick congressional joke. It probably should be revised to say; Equal Justice for All (except for Veterans and their families) this no longer applies to those that served in accordance with the wishes of the nations elected politicians.
In that vane and with comparisons of the legal rights of many different segments of society where Veterans do not have those same rights one of the panel suggested that Veterans must be guaranteed “The Veterans Bill of Rights.”
Exhibit C: THE VETERANS BILL OF RIGHTS
Preamble: It is the intent of Congress to honor the service and personal sacrifices of veterans and their families by ensuring that they have fair and timely access to all the benefits to which they are entitled, including death and disability compensation, medical care, educational assistance, job training, housing and pensions (“VA Benefits”). To this end,
1. Congress recognizes that all veterans have and have always had a Fifth Amendment property interest in the receipt of all VA Benefits.
2. Veterans shall have an unfettered access to retain attorneys at their own expense, and the Fee Prohibition in 38 U.S.C. § 5904(c)(l) shall be abolished.
3. Veterans should have full rights to judicial review in Article III courts, and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims should be abolished, with a transition plan for implementation.
4. Veterans shall have the right to subpoena documents or records from all federal agencies, and all federal agencies shall treat veterans’ document or record requests expeditiously and shall produce all responsive documents within 60 days.
5. Veterans shall have the right to call any VA employees as witnesses at any regional office hearings related to veterans’ benefits, including treating physicians or other medical personnel and anyone else who has made any determination in connection with a claim.
6. Congress shall take all necessary measures to insure that the VA delivers on its commitments to provide health care to veterans, and the VA’s practice of denying care to veterans it classifies as having a low priority is disapproved.
7. The VA shall adopt remedies and procedures to timely address cases of alleged denial of or unreasonable delays in providing health care, including notice, an opportunity to call witnesses, and a hearing to any veteran contesting such denial, as well as an expedited procedure in cases of emergency.
8. The VA shall award interest at the federal rate on all retroactive awards of any form of death or disability compensation or pension.
9. Congress shall guarantee and appropriate all funds necessary to provide all veterans benefits in accordance with the VA’s budgets.
The above is the minimum of rights that should be guaranteed. To even have to consider this should give most folks and those in congress a moment to pause and think… – What have we done to our Veterans and families? Yet, this will not happen and those that are prospective military personnel should be told before they sign on the dotted line. After they serve they are indeed no longer real citizens but the personal property of the Executive Branch and those in congress that support this stripping of their constitutional rights and to be treated as those politicians in power deem is appropriate…now matter how nonsensical it is and would and could not apply ever to any other segment of society as long as our constitution stands.
When I say the minimum, many issues must be added to this Bill of Rights as specific issues:
X. Any and all process and procedures use in pronouncing associated disorders to a form of exposures or service in a geographical area “shall be” open, transparent, defined in measurable scientific data points that can be addressed by the real constitutional courts and the stakeholders.
· WITH REGARD TO X, any and all government-contracted personnel and heads of such contracts on both sides “shall be” available for testimony under oath and provide the methodology used to determine such associations on behalf of the government and its contracted work.
· WITH REGARD TO X, VA “shall provide” where in the now mandated and defined decision matrix at what level the congressional mandated propaganda of the 1984 Benefit of the Doubt rule is applied.
· Until X is resolved (and the CONGRESSIONAL actions suggested below), VA nor BVA “shall not deny” any case based on any statements made by the Secretary of VA (judge) or findings by the contracted IOM (jury). The case shall be resolved by the merits of the evidence… not statements of findings of exclusion by others that are subject to bias and perjury with an undefined level of decision processes that can no longer be purely subjective.
XX. VA “shall not” ignore those findings that were found associated to civilians around the world from similar exposures that somehow VA has determined does not apply to Veterans.
XXX. VA “shall not” ignore the published findings of laws of chemistry for civilians around the world and then conclude these proven and sacred laws do not apply to Veterans.
While these next two are cynical in presentation, it shows how unscientific many of these VA and IOM decisions and statements are nothing but subjective scientific garbage based on budgets; not facts.
· Since the Secretary of the VA has pronounced time limits, on certain presumptive disorders, VA and IOM “shall present” the actual causation and etiology of such disorders and how a time limit is appropriate in the manifestation. (Obviously, the VA and the IOM must know the actual causation and the processes in that process in order to limit the time after exposures that mandated such decrees by science. Moreover, I am quite sure there are hundreds of thousands of medical doctors around the world that would be interested in what seems to be outside of their intellectual prowess and only privy to the VA and IOM.
· Since the Secretary of the VA has pronounced time limits of medical resolution of created disorders, on certain presumptive disorders, VA and IOM “shall present” the actual causation and etiology of such disorders and how a time limit of complete resolution is appropriate. (Obviously, the VA and the IOM must know the actual causation and the processes in that process in order to limit the actual resolution of created medical disorders after exposures that mandated such decrees by science. Moreover, I am quite sure there are hundreds of thousands of medical doctors around the world that would be interested in what seems to be outside of their intellectual prowess and only privy to the VA and IOM. Especially since in many of these disorder medical science is waiting for the answers as to how to treat these disorders that seemed to be a VA and IOM secret… so the pain and suffering of both civilians as well as Veterans will go away and their associated disorders will resolve itself.
Congressional mandated actions:
Congress, not just the VAC, should immediately call for hearings to the validity of Ranch Hand Study Data used by both VA and BVA in denial. This must include IOM using these flawed statistics and flawed findings to recommend no associations to VA. This would be to determine has there been government interference, has there been a constitutional injustice, and those within the agencies and contracted agencies that have not been forthcoming, for whatever reason, be identified for possible collusion. In addition, an explanation of how so many studies can find increased risk of incidence or significant correlation and yet VA and IOM deny such associations based on what.
I would remind the congress that they met for similar issues on a weekend and with the President flying back from Texas on such constitutional rights issues regarding a single citizen. That being Teri Schiavo. It seems the one citizen is more important than the millions when it comes to constitutional rights. But then again with Veterans, their citizenship status is laid aside by congress.
For published fatal flaws in Ranch Hand see:
Almost half of the “non-exposed comparison group” was actually exposed, creating nothing but flawed useless data that was published from 1982 on…used in VA and IOM denials and also cited by BVA in their denials then and up to including the present.
In addition, see Oversight Congressional transcripts of meeting on Ranch Hand dated March 15, 2000
HEARING before the SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY, VETERANS AFFAIRS, AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS of the COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Serial No. 106-163
Participating scientists under oath of charges of:
· Use of command influence
· Changing concluding medical findings that were already cleared for publication
· Serious protocol violations; to include the usage of another executive branch federal agency directives of the office of the Surgeon General in those protocol violations
· Changing of Exposure Index as data mounted against the government
· Medical issues found associated at a 50% level of increase or higher not brought forward
· Study integrity was sorely lacking
· Data was not being used properly
· Veterans not given a fair assessment of their health status
Also, see questionable testimony of Dr. David Butler (Senior Program Officer, Veterans and Agent Orange Reports, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences
Also, see questionable testimony of Dr. Susan Mather, Chief Public Health and Environmental Hazards Officer, Department of Veterans Affairs
Also, see questionable testimony of Ronald Coene, Executive Secretary, Ranch Hand Advisory Committee, Food and Drug Administration
Congress shall investigate in oversight why it is other government agencies find many issues associated and yet VA and IOM seem to find these scientific facts not associated.
Congress shall investigate in oversight why it is other government agencies find many issues associated and yet VA and IOM seem to find these scientific facts not associated when it deals with Veterans. Does congress now concur with VA and IOM; that Army fatigues and Marine utilities double as some sort of toxic chemical environmental hazard protective clothing?
Congress shall investigate in oversight why it is when government scientists (EPA and CDC for example) with actual integrity come forward they are demoted or suspended. Examples Dr. Cate Jenkins at the EPA and toxicologist Christopher De Rosa at the Centers for Disease Control. For the latest in cover-ups see
Quote from that recent article:
“There were deficits in immune function, which is significant because some of the chemicals, such as PCBs do affect the immune system and suppress the immune system.”
Many studies have shown Veterans exposed as well as civilians develop immune system issues or what is called “a compromised immune system.” This also included many international studies. Yet, exposed Veterans clearly developing the multitude of symptoms some disabling and some not and systemic organ damages are denied by IOM and VA even when medical testing proves their immune system has been compromised. Testing that validates exactly what the studies brought forward. Does congress think this is some sort of spectacular here to fore unknown massive coincidence? It seems so.
This also includes our EPA concluded long ago that the amount needed for this compromised immune system requires a much lesser dosage then for a cancer. At least in the short-term response for some cancers, not all. Also once this happens the outcomes are as many disorders that are listed in the medical books. Yet, if congress looks at our hit parade of cancer killers already associated you will not find one association to only a compromised immune system that can also kill and disable. How is that possible? Certainly there are more outcomes in a compromised immune system than VA can count using their fingers and toes. Including that EPA has concluded that not only do these toxic chemical create an ineffective immune system but also an attacking immune system at the same time; the worst of the medical scenarios. A chronic proinflammatory response and yet an immune system degraded to the point of little if any tumor protection is available.
No congress, diabetes type II is considered a disease of old age and not immune system associated as in type I. Although with the massive amount of type II early in life for Veterans and civilians alike now … this might be a mischaracterization.
Contrary to seemingly congressional belief the chemical companies, using fraudulent studies, do not have more right to produce 50 years of toxic chemicals than citizens do to not live in a toxic chemical environment destroying whole towns and the people in them in the process. (Times Beach, MO and Love Canal, NY.)
Anyone at the VA or the NAS/IOM or the CDC or the congress or congressional staffers wanting to debate me on these issues either separately or all at one time, given that any intestinal fortitude is present, please contact me.