Regular readers here may have noticed the leave of absence I have taken for the last several months. I have been extremely busy with a new job and family obligations as well as personal issues that I am still working through. In March, due to an unfortunate chain of events, the Salt Lake Police Department helped me make the decision to spend some inpatient time working on my PTSD problems. Long story short, my boss almost ended up looking like an E-type silhouette on a Fort Benning ARM range. All in all it was for the best, and when I was released I felt much better than I ever have. I was placed back on PTSD meds (not by my choice) and directed to follow up with regular visits at the VA mental health facility. This started the downward spiral that I have become all to familiar with at the VA.
Now please understand that I have no problems with the VBA. They are a totally separate group that has been truly amazing. The VA Employment Coordinator and the office of Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment have been wonderful. They always have the answers and they are always willing to put in the time to do whatever is necessary. I am back in school now thanks solely to Dan Crandall and his work at the VR&E office. I do plan on following up here soon with another article (much nicer) on the incredible job they do. I have been truly impressed.
No, my concern (outrage) is more with the hospital side of the VA. Please allow me to elaborate. I was released from inpatient care on the last day of March and immediately followed up with the VA. I have seen a psychiatrist once since then. I have been seeing a counselor there weekly with the exception of the weeks when she was on vacation. I still don't understand why they can't let me see someone else while she is gone. Every session I have been in with her (every session) she has had to take calls from other vets. So I sit there while she is on the phone. When I showed up for my appointment today (made 2 weeks ago) she informed me she only had 5-10 minutes. I canceled my follow up appointment. She had previously directed me to go to regular meetings at
North Star (their version of an AA program). But after meeting a few times with the head of the program he did not feel I needed to be there. At least that is my assumption. I asked about their meetings like she told me to, he talked to me a few times, but didn't really follow up, so I'm assuming everything is fine. I have gone to AA on my own though. Maybe if I stop going to VA mental health, and a few other veterans do as well, they will have more time.
I had to go in to my primary care physician at the Blue clinic back in April. They did a good bit of bloodwork due to ongoing liver issues. I get to find out the results next month from a different primary care PA. Why do I have to wait until August to find out about the results of tests done in April? Because if I waited to see my current primary care doctor it would be September. I'm scheduled to go back to the liver clinic in late August. The last time I was there they didn't have info on my appointment so we had to wait out in the hall for them to clear a room so they could do my biopsy.
I'm 36 years old. Over time I have come to expect a certain amount of incompetence. I just don't like it when it becomes routine. I don't mean to rant. I understand they have a lot of veterans to work with. I'd just like to be one of them.
If you or someone you know is a veteran who is having issues with PTSD, please tell them to call 1-800-273-TALK. This is a National Crisis Hotline. They might have time to talk if they aren't too busy. They may even be able to schedule you for an appointment with your local VA mental health clinic. If they can fit it into their schedule.
Stars and Stripes' Jeff Schogol reports that very few who are entitled to retroactive stop-loss pay have received their entitlement:
The end of the retroactive stop-loss pay program is fast approaching, but in the nine months the program has been in effect only a small fraction of eligible troops have received compensation.
Those who were stop-lossed between September 2001 and September 2008 can get $500 for every month they were kept beyond their initial separation date. But of the roughly 145,000 people eligible for the money, only about 30,000 claims have been paid, defense officials said. The program ends on Oct. 21, but many veterans simply don't know it exists.
So here I am doing my due diligence. Folks, if you were stop-lossed in the eligible period, fill out a claim and get your money. You've only got three months left before you won't ever be able to get it again. I got my $5,500 check with very few hiccups. It took a little while, but it's better than never, which is when you'll be getting it if you don't apply by October 21st.
KABUL, Afghanistan -- A second U.S. Navy Sailor who went missing in a dangerous part of eastern Afghanistan was found dead and his body recovered, a senior U.S. military official and Afghan officials said Thursday.
The family of Petty Officer 3rd Class Jarod Newlove, a 25-year-old from the Seattle area, had been notified of his death, the U.S. military official said on condition of anonymity, because he was not authorized to disclose the information.
More thoughts and/or prayers go out to Petty Officer Newlove's family.
An Air Force cargo plane flying a training mission crashed in flames on Wednesday evening at Elmendorf Air Force Base in Anchorage, but military officials gave no immediate word on the fate of the four crew members.
The cargo aircraft, a C-17 Globemaster, was assigned to the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf, a unit consisting of 6,000 Air Force personnel who fly fighter jets and other military aircraft.
The plane crashed at 6:14 p.m. local time in a wooded area near the runway. A smoky plume over the area was visible to nearby residents.
Pressure works. Influential organizations and individuals often fail to make the right decisions without pressure from their constituency. Such was the case today when I came across this on Stars and Stripes:
If you can't tell this is the image that appears in the bottom right:
Now, normally, I love Stars and Stripes. There is a reason they get a ton of links on our front page. They consistently provide some of the best, most objective reporting on military and Veterans issues in American media. Don't take my work for it. Stars and Stripes recently won a Polk Award for their reporting on the Pentagon using "a public relations company to profile journalists and steer them toward positive coverage of the war in Afghanistan." Those guys are good.
So it was with a heavy heart that I contacted an associate at the paper asking why the image above appeared on the front page of such a respected media outlet.
Now, I have no problem with Stripes putting something like that on their front page. Representing all reasonable points of view is certainly an admirable endeavor for any journalistic organization. But that was exactly the problem. There was no balance provided for the incredibly absurd and bigoted letter to the editor highlighted on Stripes' online front page. Excerpts below:
Ending "don't ask, don't tell" will have a devastating effect on readiness, recruitment and retention, and will destroy cohesion within the ranks.
Now I will no longer be allowed to freely exercise my religious beliefs. Jude and Paul clearly condemned homosexual behavior as sinful (Jude 7, Romans 1:26-27). Throughout history many philosophers and ethicists, back to the ancient Egyptians, have recognized that homosexuality is deviant, anti-social, anti-family and even perverted.
[Adm. Mike Mullen] seems to be saying that there is no longer any room in the military for people who believe in traditional morality. This isn't about homosexuals being allowed to serve. It is about the members of a radical political movement wanting the full power of the federal government behind them so they can criminalize and eradicate dissent. We who hold onto traditional family values may soon be persecuted. Who are they to impose their immorality upon me?
My associate at Stripes put me in touch with, Howard Witt, the Senior Managing Editor at Stripes, who sent me the following response:
We elected to highlight the letter on our front page because it was generating a lot of robust commentary from readers, both for and against the DADT law. We are not promoting one side or the other in the debate over the fate of DADT. In fact, if you assess the tenor of most of the comments attached to that letter, the vast majority are sharply critical of the letter writer's "anti-repeal" sentiments. So while you claim that we are taking the "anti-repeal" side by highlighting that letter, someone else could just as easily criticize us for highlighting a "pro-repeal" comment thread. Bottom line: We are strictly neutral on the issue. We just wanted to point readers to a lively debate.
Highlighting an article because of the debate contained within is fair enough. I could argue that it still isn't exactly objective, as the likelihood of readers actually reading beyond the letter to the comments is slim for most. But I trust that Mr. Witt's intentions were good. I have no reason to believe otherwise. The problem is, that debate wasn't happening on the front page of Stars and Stripes, or even mentioned. The "debate" was highlighted with this image and teaser:
I followed up with Mr. Witt with this concern and attached a copy of the screenshot above. I've got to give Mr. Witt and Stripes credit. I received this response from him and a change on the front page of the online edition of Stars and Stripes:
You're right, it's not worded as well as it could be. I've just updated
that teaser. Thanks for the suggestion.
Our traditional media outlets, even those we most respect, don't get it right all the time. For Fox News some it's purposeful. For Stars and Stripes others it is with good intentions. But they all sometimes need a nudge in the right direction.
This scenario illustrates the importance of citizen journalism. I had already started writing a piece that was highly critical of Stripes for giving legitimacy to a bigoted Lieutenant without providing balance. But pressure influenced a biased frame and corrected it to an objective one. That illustrates importance of our mission, and how our actions can affect the biased narratives that can arise.
We can't rely on the traditional media, even the respected outlets, to present objective frames on their own. If we don't provide the needed pressure, our decisions will be made for us by those who often need help to get it right.
LONDON -- WikiLeaks' editor-in-chief claims his organization doesn't know who sent it some 91,000 secret U.S. military documents, telling journalists that the website was set up to hide the source of its data from those who receive it.
Julian Assange didn't say whether he meant that he had no idea who leaked the documents, or whether his organization simply could not be sure. But he did say the added layer of secrecy helped protect the site's sources from spy agencies and hostile corporations.
"We never know the source of the leak," he told journalists gathered at London's Frontline Club late Tuesday. "Our whole system is designed such that we don't have to keep that secret."
This is a disregard for journalistic standards of the highest level. How can anyone take this guy seriously?
Look, I don't mean to say these documents are fake. In fact, I know for a fact some of them are real because I saw them three years ago when I was in theater. But they do lack context. A SIGACTs report in the leaked documents may contain statements of what troops on the ground thought to be true at the time, but was later found to be false. We can't be sure of things like that when we mine raw, unvetted data for answers.
The fact that Wikileaks doesn't even know their source indicates that the organization could not have vetted the data or sought to contextualize it even if it wanted to. Consequently, anything that comes out of Wikileaks is suspect.
In 2007 I was lost. I was petrified that I was about to be deployed a mere six months after coming home. I was nowhere near mentally ready for this. I was convinced I was going to die this time, I had already used up too many lives. I didn't know how to tell my story or who to tell it to. A friend suggested Daily Kos. So, a blogger was born. Another veteran, Brandon Friedman, found me on Daily Kos and asked me to write for the new site, Vet Voice. I agreed. At about the same time I got hooked up with Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), who helped me tell my story. For me, it helped me to tell this story, to find others like me who supported me, who understood. Having other people tell me that they asked for help because they heard me speak was invigorating, I was convinced that telling my story was helping other vets. Finding other female vets who understood was a prayer ( I didn't even know I was praying) answered. I became an advocate for veterans, especially women who had experienced combat, through telling my story. This story-telling, and my VA care, helped me adjust to a world that had felt so foreign.
When a company receives a contract to manufacture body armor to protect service members in harms way, I don't think it is an unreasonable expectation that the money that firm receives be used to build the best product possible for the price. David H. Brooks, former CEO of the leading provider of Interceptor body armor to the Department of Defense, would appear to disagree. He apparently had some interesting ideas about what counts as overhead:
Using the company coffers -- which were flush with Pentagon money -- Brooks allegedly bought gifts for his family, including pornographic videos for his son, plastic surgery for his wife and textbooks for his daughter. He also bought luxury cars, country club memberships and a stable full of racehorses.
The prostitutes? They were to boost morale. From the NYT:
His lawyers also defended the hiring of prostitutes for employees and board members, arguing in court papers that it represented a legitimate business expense "if Mr. Brooks thought such services could motivate his employees and make them more productive."
And then there's the belt buckle, which prosecutors have reportedly been waving around in the courtroom: $100,000 worth of diamonds, rubies and sapphires in the shape of the American flag.
And there's more: Brooks spent $10 million on his daughter's bat mitzvah, hiring 50 Cent, Tom Petty and Aerosmith to perform. The leather-bound invitations cost $40,000 alone.
How many more/better IBAs could DHB (Brooks's company) have provided to our troops if he wasn't on a hedonistic spending spree? I say throw away the key.
One of two U.S. sailors missing in Afghanistan since last week has been confirmed dead and his body recovered, a NATO spokesman said Tuesday.
The search continues for the other missing sailor, said Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale, a spokesman for NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
The two Navy personnel went missing Friday in the eastern province of Logar, after an armored sport utility vehicle was seen driving into a Taliban-held area. NATO officials were unable to say what they were doing in such a dangerous part of eastern Afghanistan.
I don't know what else to add to this. Like all of our K.I.A.'s, this just sucks.
I'm not going to go into the back story on the Wikileaks release of classified documents relating to the war in Afghanistan from 2004-2009. You've probably already read plenty. I'm also not going to tell you what I think of what's in them. What I am going to tell you is why I'm not going to do that, and why no one else should either.
I'm not going to offer analysis on the release of classified documents, something that never should have happened in the first place (things are classified for a reason) because I haven't read them. This release came over the weekend. Its Monday. There are 91,000 documents. It would be irresponsible to offer judgment on something I haven't read. That's why it blows my mind that so many are passing judgment already. With you readers as my witness, I swear that if anyone who has offered criticism of the documents has legitimately read all of them in their entirety, I will give up writing and never be heard from again.
And even if anyone has read them, these documents do not contain high level vetted analysis. From what I understand, these are raw reports, unrevised as events were further investigated. I'd like to know how much fact checking Wikileaks has done to determine the veracity of the information contained within. My guess is little to none.
So, this is my message to my contemporaries: let this thing play out. Maybe their are a long list of atrocities in there. I hope not, but I suppose it's possible. The fact is, right now I don't know and neither does anyone who is currently writing about it (a statement I will retract if Wikileaks has fact checked the documents. I don't anticipate having to take that step). Let's just all cool off and see where this thing goes. Otherwise, those offering criticism may end up eating crow.
A year and a half after his inauguration, Obama has failed to deliver on a key counterterrorism goal: to close Guantanamo Bay. Indeed, with new revelations about a secret prison in Bagram, proposals to legalize indefinite detention, and the festering debates about where to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, questions about how and where we should hold detainees remain contentious. This panel will revisit these questions and discuss ways to close Gitmo and return to the rule of law in our detainee treatment.
Matthew Alexander
Matthew Alexander (a pseudonym) is a former senior military interrogator and author of How to Break a Terrorist: The U.S. Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality, to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq. He led the interrogation team in Iraq that located Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, the former Al Qaida leader, who was killed in a subsequent airstrike. He has conducted or supervised more than 1,300 interrogations. He appears frequently on television and radio as an expert on interrogations and counterterrorism and has published Op-Eds in The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, and The New York Times, as well as articles in The National Interest, The Daily Beast, Small Wars Journal, The Huffington Post, and The Guardian. He has been featured in Time Magazine as well as other U.S. and foreign publications. Alexander's television appearances include The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, CNN International, Countdown with Keith Olbermann, MSNBC News, Fox News, ABC's Nightline, and the CBS Evening News. He has consulted/briefed the U.S. Secret Service, the United States Marines, the US Army, United States Military Academy, numerous universities, and private contractors who train the CIA and FBI. He is currently a Fellows for the Open Society Institute.
Adam Sewer
Adam Serwer is a Staff Writer at the American Prospect. He writes mostly on issues of civil and human rights, criminal justice, and national security.
Marcy Wheeler
Marcy Wheeler blogs as "emptywheel" at FireDogLake.com, and also for the Campaign for America's Future. She is best known for her book, Anatomy of Deceit, which served as a primer of the CIA Leak case, and her live-blogging of the Scooter Libby trial. She has covered efforts to hold the Bush Administration accountable for its illegal warrantless wiretapping and torture programs. Wheeler has a PhD from the University of Michigan and has spoken on blogging and politics at Amherst College, Massachusetts Foundation for the Humanities and Duke Law School. She was recently awarded the 2009 Hillman Prize for Blog Journalism.
Rep. Jerry Nadler
Congressman Jerrold "Jerry" Nadler represents the Eighth Congressional district of New York. New York's Eighth, one of the nation's most diverse districts, includes parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn.
Nadler began his political career in 1976 in the New York State Assembly, where he served for 16 years. In 1992, Nadler was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in a special election and has served in Congress ever since. He was re-elected to his ninth full term in 2008.
Nadler serves as the Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties. In that capacity, he has chaired numerous hearings, directed many investigations, and introduced a significant body of legislation on a range of civil rights issues. Among the bills he has recently introduced are the State Secrets Protection Act, the National Security Letters Reform Act, the Respect for Marriage Act, and the Uniting American Families Act. He is also a senior Member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
Vincent Warren
Vincent Warren is the Executive Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), a national legal and educational organization dedicated to advancing and defending the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Vince oversees CCR's groundbreaking litigation and advocacy work which includes combating the illegal expansion of presidential power and policies such as illegal detention at Guantanamo, rendition, torture and warrantless wiretapping; holding corporations and government officials accountable for human rights abuses; and, challenging racial injustice and mass incarceration. Vince has spearheaded a public campaign, "Beyond Guantanamo: Rescue the Constitution" coinciding with CCR's landmark Supreme Court victory in Al Odah v. U.S. and Boumediene v. Bush, which held that the detainees at Guantánamo Bay have a constitutional right to the writ of habeas corpus. Prior to his tenure at CCR, Vince held the position of national senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), where he led constitutional and impact litigation to advance civil rights and liberties. Among the cases he has litigated are: • Gratz v. Bollinger, companion case to the landmark Supreme Court decision to uphold affirmative action in college admissions. • Dasrath v. Continental Airlines on behalf of plaintiffs removed from an airplane shortly after 9/11 because they were perceived to be Arab or Muslim, and • White v. Martz, a class action lawsuit which helped create Montana's first statewide public defender system. He also monitored South Africa's historic Truth and Reconciliation Commission hearings and worked as a criminal defense attorney for the Brooklyn Legal Aid Society. Vince holds a law degree from Rutgers School of Law and a B.A. from Haverford College. Vince is a frequent national cable, network and independent media commentator, having appeared on MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show, CNN's The Situation Room and Paula Zahn Now, Democracy Now! and numerous National Public Radio programs.
This has been out there for a while, but it feels good to see it in black and white:
President Obama has nominated Marine Corps Gen. James N. Mattis to serve as commander of U.S. Central Command, the Defense Department announced Wednesday.
Mattis is currently serving as commander of U.S. Joint Forces Command.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates selected Mattis for the post on the heels of the Senate's June 30 confirmation of Army Gen. David Petraeus as the new Afghanistan war commander, which ended his tenure as CENTCOM chief.
It was believed that Mattis would retire when he was passed over for the Commandant of the Marine Corps job that went to James Amos. Then Stan McChrystal threw back a few Bud Light Limes and let his staff act a little to loose lipped and so began the musical chairs of four-star commands.
Everyone in the CENTCOM AO is going to benefit from James Mattis sticking around for another tour. He's a warrior's warrior, but also cerebral enough to understand the nuances of combat with an insurgency. It was Mattis who said it was fun to shoot the Taliban (something he's gotten heat for from people who didn't listen to the entire quote in context), but it was also Mattis who said "engage your brain before you engage your weapon".
This is a good thing, and Mattis is an outstanding leader.
As you read this, I'll be getting on a plane to make my way to Las Vegas for the 5th Annual Netroots Nation convention. Netroots Nation is the largest annual gathering of progressive activists in America. Featured speakers this year include Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Ed Schultz, Al Franken and several of the VoteVets.org endorsed candidates.
Among other activities VoteVets will be involved in this weekend, VetVoice front-page contributor Matthew Alexander will be sitting on a panel discussing the closing of the prison at Guantanamo Bay and a return to the rule of law. Matthew's panel will be Saturday from 4:45-6:00 PM EST. We'll be streaming the video from the panel here live on that day.
The VoteVets staff and VetVoice contributor delegation this year includes the already mentioned Matthew Alexander, myself, front-page contributor Kate Hoit, VoteVets.org Vice Chair Peter Granato, and Chairman Jon Soltz. We'll also be joined by Mark Star, Program Coordinator for the Vet Voice Foundation (no relation).
If you're going to be in Vegas for the conference, drop a line in the comments and we'll make sure we include you in any VoteVets meet-up activities.
Underpayments of living stipends to veterans using the Post-9/11 GI Bill will be corrected in August when the Veterans Affairs Department issues one-time catch-up checks to anyone who has received the stipend since Jan. 1.
The checks represent a fix to a problem caused when VA did not update living stipends in January after military housing allowances, on which the stipends are based, increased.
First, the good: Every time there has been a hiccup in the process of administering the post-9/11 G.I. Bill, this Department of Veterans Affairs has been really great about seeing to it that the problem is resolved fairly and in as timely a manner as possible. VA deserves to be commended for that.
Now, the bad: We're coming up on the post-9/11 G.I. Bill's first birthday. Shouldn't the kinks be worked out by now? It's seems to me that we are passed the point where hiccups are acceptable.
Hopefully, VA has it's act together now and we won't see any more problems like this.
We've reported here at length on KBR's complicity in the deaths of American Soldiers as a result of their shotty electrical work on showers. However, KBR isn't just killing troops with electrocution. The company has found other ways to make deployed service members deathly ill:
The day after the 9/11 terrorist attack, Glen Bootay of Pleasant Hills enlisted in the Army. He was fit enough to complete boot camp, advanced combat training and airborne school before he helped coalition troops take control of the Baghdad Airport.
On Tuesday, he needed a walker and assistance to navigate the halls of U.S. District Court, Downtown.
Sitting through a two-hour hearing to determine whether his lawsuit against Houston-based defense contractor KBR Inc. will continue exhausted him, his brother said.
"He's not doing well," Robert Bootay said later.
U.S. District Judge Terrence McVerry didn't immediately rule after listening to lawyers' arguments. Bootay is one of at least 140 veterans who have sued KBR for health problems they link to chemical exposure at a water treatment plant in Iraq. The company is contesting the cases.
Glen Bootay, 31, undergoes chemotherapy weekly and takes up to 35 medications daily to treat medical problems that include constant headaches, chest pain, irregular heartbeat, collapse of the lungs, extreme fatigue, skin rashes, inability to sweat, vomiting, numbness, high blood sugar, kidney stones, loss of consciousness and short-term memory loss, according to his lawsuit.
KBR has repeatedly shown negligence and a lack of regard for the lives and/or quality of life of American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet somehow, these war profiteers continue to be awarded contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Would we pay millions to the Taliban to kill American troops? Why are paying KBR to do the same?
Conservative military scholar Max Boot articulates what I've been saying for months:
[Afghanistan's rules of engagement have] resulted in a handful of highly publicized cases, recycled many times in news accounts, in which troops complain that they were prevented from calling in badly needed air strikes. It appears likely that McChrystal's broad directives, while well-intentioned, were interpreted too bureaucratically and too narrowly by some units. That is something that General David Petraeus and his operational commander, Lieutenant General David Rodriguez, are now studying to determine whether adjustments are necessary.
I'm not pretending that Max Boot stole this idea for me. These are simply the facts and Boot and I, among others, have come to the same conclusion on them-- that is the rational conclusion.
The problem, however, still needs to be fixed. A culture needs to be developed within the ranks where leaders insure that the RoE is understood, with all its nuance, from the regional commander all the way down to the lowest E-1 in a rifle squad. We can't keep dumbing things down to a card that fits in the wallet or breast pocket and expect Soldiers and leaders to then make the most tactically sound decisions. Our Soldiers are intelligent. We have the most professional fighting force in the history of the world. To expect any less of them is an insult to their professionalism and threatens their safety on the battlefield.
Back in May, Fox News, a company owned by Rupert Murdoch and a bunch of foreign oil barons, refused to carry one of our clean energy ads, stating it was "too confusing". As Politico reported yesterday afternoon, Fox News is again rejecting an ad which points out that our dependence on foreign oil is to the detriment of our national security and puts our troops in harms way. This time, however, Fox News did not offer any rationale for rejecting our ad, which features Brigadier General Steven Anderson, Chief of Logistics in Iraq under General Petraeus, pointing out the obvious-- that the clean energy bill currently held up in the Senate will reduce our dependence on countries that aide terrorism.
I wish I could say I was surprised, but Fox News gave up any hint of objectivity over a decade ago.
Moving fuel in a warzone. It's probably the most dangerous job in the world, costing over 1000 American lives. I should know. I was the Chief Logistics Officer under General David Petraeus in Iraq. During my 15 months over there, I became convinced our young men and women are getting killed moving fuel we wouldn't need if our military was more efficient. That's why I chose to be in this new clean energy ad for VoteVets.org
There are many ways that energy reform will help save lives. For example, simply insulating our inefficient structures in theater will not only save Billions of dollars (Yes, with a "B"), but will get thousands of fuel trucks and escorts off the most dangerous roads in the world. It's through my experiences of overseeing the fuel resupply effort in Iraq that I learned the importance of energy efficiency, reducing risks to our troops, getting us off of foreign oil, and developing new, renewable fuel technologies.
A clean energy plan seems common sense to me, but passage of the plan isn't a sure thing. I see this plan as a way to save American lives, protect America, and create thousands of new jobs. Some industries sees it as a threat to their bottom line but fail to see a great opportunity for not only their bottom line, but our national security, financial independence, and economic prosperity.
Right now, the Senate is considering a clean energy climate plan, that will cut our dependence on foreign oil in half, drive our nation to embrace energy efficiency, and bring about a revolution in new clean, renewable fuel technologies that won't just help us here at home, but will save American lives abroad. Our Senators have to make a choice - keep spending billions of dollars a day on foreign oil, or let America keep paying the price.
We don't have a moment to waste, and I'm committed to doing everything I can to see that Congress passes a clean energy plan this year. Can I count on you to stand with me? Can we stand together to fight for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan supporting fuel missions in which every bend in the road could be their last? Please click the link above, and join me in this important fight.
Thanks for all of your support.
Sincerely,
Brigadier General Steven M. Anderson, US Army (Retired)
Former Chief of Logistics (MNF-I C4) in Iraq (August 2006-November 2007)
"The welcome mat for memoirs by veterans of operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom might never wear out so long as they write with the savvy of Brandon Friedman . . . Friedman's take is vivid, frank, precise and dramatic."--Military Times
"Add Brandon Friedman's The War I Always Wanted to the ranks of outstanding non-fiction produced by officers from elite combat units in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Always truthful, often excruciatingly so, The War I Always Wanted rises at numerous points to the level of literature."--Steven Pressfield, author of Gates of Fire
"A Time To Lead confirms the rewarding benefits of military service at a time when such service is experiencing considerable strain. It also includes a comprehensive description of America's current national imperatives, which deserve serious consideration."--General Alexander M. Haig, Jr., former Secretary of State
"This is a primer on leadership forged in battle and by decades of experience. . .This isn't just a book; it's a manual for leading people and living a good life."--Barry McCaffrey, General, USA (ret.)
"Whip smart, sassy, with a mouth as foul as a sailor's, 28-year-old Sergeant Kayla Williams. . .tells what it's like to be a female soldier in Iraq."--Booklist
". . .echoes military memoirists from Julius Caesar to Ernie Pyle."--Publishers Weekly
". . .a shocking, on-the-ground view of one military woman's experience in Iraq."--Bookmarks Magazine
Diaries and comments at VetVoice do not necessarily represent the views of VoteVets.org. VetVoice will strive to remove any illegal material as soon as it is flagged. Similarly, VetVoice will use its discretion in determining whether to remove exceedingly offensive material. However, between posting and removal, any offensive or illegal material does not reflect the condoning or endorsing of said material by VoteVets.org or VetVoice.
Similarly, the views expressed on this website are those of the authors alone. Opinions on this website do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Defense or any of its components.
Paid for VoteVets Political Action Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. VoteVets Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) organization which primarily focuses on nonpartisan education and advocacy on behalf veterans and their families. VoteVets Political Action Committee is a federal political committee which primarily helps elect Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran candidates and educates about veterans and military issues aimed at influencing the outcome of the next election.
Matthew Alexander
Adam Sewer
Marcy Wheeler
Rep. Jerry Nadler
Vincent Warren
