-Caveat Lector-
-----Original Message-----
From: William Shannon
Sent: Mon 12/25/2000 4:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: [CTRL] Questions For Colin Powell
COMMENT | January 8, 2001
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20010108&s=corn
Questions for Powell
by DAVID CORN
> olin Powell, George W. Bush's designated Secretary of State, is a
national
icon, with a personal story celebrated by millions. When he hits Capitol
Hill
for his confirmation, he can expect to receive a fair dose of senatorial
genuflection. But the retired general does not deserve hands-off
hearings. On
policy matters, he may be asked to explain the so-called Powell Doctrine
(which calls for an overwhelming use of force when the military is
unleashed), his initial skepticism toward US involvement in the Gulf War
and
his advocacy of a Pentagon budget that would permit the United States to
fight two regional conflicts simultaneously. Such matters could be
respectfully broached by senators. But there are also some indelicate
questions about Powell's past deeds--queries that challenge the image of
Powell the Hero--that ought to be posed.
� My Lai. In July 1968, Powell was sent to Vietnam and assigned to the
Americal Division as an executive officer. On March 16, 1968, troops
from
this division had slaughtered more than 300 civilians in the hamlet of
My
Lai, and the massacre went unreported. In December 1968, after Powell
had
been promoted to operations officer at division headquarters, he was
forwarded a letter written by Tom Glen, a former GI, who criticized the
American military for brutalizing civilians, torturing prisoners and
for,
"without provocation or justification," shooting at "the people
themselves."
As The New Republic reported in 1995, Powell was told to check out the
allegations, which did not mention My Lai. Powell interviewed a few
officers
and reported that there was nothing to Glen's assertions. He didn't
bother to
ask Glen for more specific information. Powell did not mention this
inquiry
in his 1995 memoir, An American Journey. He did, however, recall the
occasion
in March 1969, when an Army investigator visited his office and asked to
see
the enemy-kill records of March 1968. Powell found a high
number--128--for
March 16 and read the number into the investigator's tape recorder.
(That
investigator, who was probing specific allegations about My Lai,
subsequently
reported that there had been no massacre.) In his autobiography, Powell
noted
that his "curiosity" was aroused by the investigator. But he did not
pursue
the matter. Why not? And why had he taken a less-than-vigorous approach
when
conducting the earlier investigation? Why didn't he seek more
information
from Glen? Once the My Lai story broke in November 1969, why didn't
Powell
look into whether he had been lied to by his fellow officers? Moreover,
what
did he learn from this experience about conducting internal
investigations
within a bureaucracy?
� Human rights abuses. In the 1980s Powell served on Ronald Reagan's
national
security team. He was the special military assistant to Defense
Secretary
Caspar Weinberger from 1983 to 1986, then deputy national security
adviser
from late 1986 to 1987 and, after that, National Security Adviser.
Throughout
the Reagan years, the Administration supported militaries in Guatemala,
El
Salvador and Honduras--and the contras in Nicaragua--which engaged in
blatant
human rights abuses, misdeeds that frequently were publicized by human
rights
advocates and dismissed by the Reagan Administration. In his book Powell
noted that during his stint with Weinberger, he became "the chief
administration advocate" for the contras. Referring to the corruption of
several contra leaders, Powell wrote, "In the old days of East-West
polarization, we worked with what we had." What today might justify
Washington's support for corrupt or abusive forces abroad? Did Powell
ever
take an interest in the human-rights violations committed by the contras
and
the US-backed armies in Central America?
� Iran/contra. In 1987 independent counsel Lawrence Walsh asked
Weinberger to
hand over records regarding the Iran/contra scandal. Weinberger produced
a
modest amount of nonincriminating material. That same year,
Congressional
investigators questioned Powell about the scandal and asked whether
Weinberger maintained a diary. In sworn testimony, Powell replied, "The
secretary, to my knowledge, did not keep a diary." In 1991 Walsh
discovered
that Weinberger had written thousands of pages of diary notes--which
included
material contradicting his Iran/contra testimony. A grand jury indicted
Weinberger for concealing these records. Weinberger's lawyers asked
Powell
for a sworn statement in which he would confirm that Weinberger had not
treated these diaries as secret material that could be hidden from
Walsh.
Powell obliged and declared, "I observed on his desk a small pad of
white
paper, approximately 5'' X 7''. He would jot down on this pad in
abbreviated
form various calls and events during the day. I viewed it as his
personal
diary." This sworn affidavit contradicted Powell's 1987 sworn statement.
In
his final report, Walsh concluded that Powell's 1987 testimony was "at
least
misleading" and "designed to protect Weinberger." But Walsh opted not to
prosecute Powell. In his memoirs Powell claimed that he told the
investigators in 1987 that Weinberger kept notes but that he (Powell)
had not
considered these papers to be a diary until they were shown to him in
1991.
But in 1987 Powell had not stated that Weinberger kept specific notes.
And
Walsh produced evidence indicating that Powell had actually helped
create
Weinberger's daily diary entries. So why didn't Powell in 1987 describe
the
diaries to the investigators in the detailed terms he used in 1991?
According
to his book, Powell waited for the investigators to "press" him with
"follow-up questions" and said nothing more because they didn't ask. Is
this
his view of cooperation with Congress--never volunteer?
� Operation Just Cause. In December 1989 Powell, then Chairman of the
Joint
Chiefs of Staff, oversaw the US invasion of Panama. As American troops
pursued narco-dictator and onetime US asset Manuel Noriega, they swept
through El Chorrillo, a poor neighborhood in Panama City, and many
civilians
were caught in the combat. At first, the Pentagon referred to civilian
casualties vaguely as "collateral damage." Two weeks later--after
Noriega was
nabbed--the Pentagon announced that 201 Panamanian civilians had been
killed
(and twenty-three American troops). Several months later, Americas
Watch, a
human rights organization, released a report finding that US forces had
violated the Geneva Conventions by failing to minimize harm to the
civilian
population. The report noted that the "command of the American forces
also
failed to live up to its duties as to the collection of and accounting
for
the wounded and the dead among civilians." And a Physicians for Human
Rights
inquiry found that at least 300 civilians had died in the invasion, that
3,000 Panamanians received serious injuries during the operation and
that
15,000 Panamanians were displaced (of which only 3,000 received US
assistance). In his book, Powell concluded that Just Cause confirmed the
Powell Doctrine: "Use all the force necessary and do not apologize for
going
in big if that's what it takes." Why did his military not conduct a
thorough
evaluation of civilian casualties and better tend to the displaced and
injured? How does he reconcile the Powell Doctrine with the Geneva
Conventions?
� Gulf War Syndrome. The Persian Gulf War turned Powell into a star. But
in
the years following Desert Storm, thousands of vets developed a variety
of
illnesses. As of the end of 1999, 184,000 of the 697,000 Gulf War troops
had
filed disability claims with the Department of Veterans Affairs, of
which
136,000 were approved. The VA has acknowledged that Gulf War veterans
suffer
from chronic and ill-defined symptoms, including fatigue and
neurocognitive
and musculoskeletal problems. The Pentagon concedes that 100,000 US
troops
were exposed to low levels of nerve gas. Veterans advocates have accused
Powell of being MIA on Gulf War Syndrome. "Four to five years ago, Gulf
War
vets were being turned away from the VA," says Charles Sheehan-Miles, a
director of the National Gulf War Resource Center and a healthy Gulf War
tank
crewman. "You'd expect the military leaders would have something to say
about
that. We got silence from Powell, Schwarzkopf and Cheney. We wrote a
couple
of letters to Powell asking for help and never got a response. This was
a
severe disappointment." In 1998, when studies showed that Gulf War vets
were
sick possibly due to nerve gas exposure, Powell, in an interview,
downplayed
the link between Gulf War service and illness. Why was Powell reluctant
to
recognize Gulf War syndrome? Why has he not been a vocal supporter of
the
troops who fought for him?
Not standing with sick veterans, misleading Congressional investigators,
leaving the counting of civilian dead to others, participating in a
foreign
policy apparatus that ignored and discounted human rights violations,
mounting a less-than-vigorous inquiry into charges of military
atrocities--all is not glory with Colin Powell. It is unlikely senators
will
wade too far into the muck of Powell's none-too-heroic past. Powell's
rise--often hailed as proof that the American Dream is
real--demonstrates a
potent political reality: Star-power shine can be a most effective
camouflage.
</HTML>
<A HREF!ttp://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
���CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
������������������������rchives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF!ttp://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF!ttp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
������������������������o subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send
email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
