Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Friday, February 09, 2007

DoD IG Allegedly Target of War Crimes Investigation

DoD IG, Congress Drinking KoolAid on WMD Data

DoD IG added to list of alleged defendants for war crimes [ Ref ]

DoD IG should be reviewed by the AICPA for alleged breaches of auditing standards of conduct, and the results provided to the German war crimes prosecutor for adjudication.

Ref War Crimes Evidence: Discredited DoD IG report, allegedly a cover-up to hide DoD IG failures under laws of war.

Ref White House, Cheney and DoD Manipulated WMD Data.

Ref Auditing Intelligence Community -- Can We Trust DoD IG?

Ref OSP Fallout, WMD Deception, and Illegal Warfare -- Larisa Alexandrovna.

* * *


The DoD IG has issued a report raising the prospect the DoD IG is on the war crimes prosecutor target list. The methodology, results, and conclusions are not supported by information available to war crimes prosecutors.

We judge the DoD IG is not an independent observer, and has been added to the list of suspects being actively targeted by prosecutors for international war crimes. DoD IG appears to have not fully asserted his oath, and is an alleged war criminal for not having timely done what he had the duty to do: Timely report evidence of illegal, aggressive war.

Gaps in the Title 28 and Title 50 exception reports indicate:

1. Members of Congress know, or should know the illegal war crimes were not timely reviewed, investigated, or documented by DoD IG as required; and

2. Members of Congress, upon learning of the WMD data manipulation, did not timely act as they knew they had a duty to act under the Geneva Conventions to follow up on these known gaps in the Title 28 and Title 50 exception reports.

The DoD IG report may be introduced into evidence against the DoD IG related to issues he knew he had a duty to investigate, but has not timely reviewed using the correct Generally Government Accounting Standards.

* * *


The DoD IG released a report on WMD data which is not supported by the open information. It appears DoD IG is concerned that there have been war crimes.

The timelines provided in the DoD IG report do not match what the Vice President and OSP staff knows to be true.

War crimes prosecutors appear to be zeroing in on the DoD IG investigation and report. The issue is to what extent to the DoD IG, despite an oath to fully enforce the Geneva Conventions, has recklessly failed to timely prevent war crimes.

The DoD IG is on the target list of the war crimes prosecutor for alleged failure to prevent, investigate, and provide truthful information related to war crimes the IG knew, or should have known, were occurring.

* * *

Investigators will find no wrong doing if they ignore which way the information is going. As a war crimes defense, Cheney can hardly argue he was induced or misled by the intelligence community when it was Cheney and OSP who were providing the spin and pressure to support policies.

Defense counsel has an incentive to pretend policy makers, the real war criminals pumping out bad WMD data, were the victims. This is a classic defense of denialists. Tyrants expand their power and abuse when the induce others to believe the tyrant is the victim.

More of what the Nazis in 1930s and Israelis in the 21st Century have been doing. Abuse, illegal warfare, and Geneva violations cannot continue on the back of historical grievances. WWII is over. Israel and the US cannot pretend the Nazi abuses forever permit US and Israeli abuse of power.

Senator Rockefeller's remarks on the DoD IG report on WMD intelligence suggests DoD IG and the Congress have fallen under Cheney's spell. Rockefeller has it backwards, ignoring the pressure Cheney put on the intelligence analysis. It’s incorrect and misleading to suggest that the intelligence community or WMD intelligence provided to policy makers was distorted. This incorrectly suggests the problem was at the bottom, and policy makers were unknowingly receiving bad information.

The truth is the opposite and more likely linked with deliberate deceptions that amount to war crimes.

* * *

Cheney and others appear to have induced the public, Congress, and intelligence community to take the fall. Note closely Rockefeller's comment, and you'll see the reversal. Rockefeller:

The intelligence products were inconsistent with the consensus judgments of the intelligence community . . . and as a result policymakers received distorted intelligence.

This is fantasy. Policy makers in the White House didn't "receive" anything; they were the ones generating the misleading information. One cannot argue that the are deceived by something they helped manufacture; the deception requires knowing:

[1] The truth;

[2] The falsity of the misleading information;

[3] Knowledge that the misleading information would be relied on;

[4] Silence about the known disconnect between (a) what was true; and (b) what was a ruse;

[5] Knowledge that the combat operations would not be supported unless the falsity were embraced;

[6] Knowledge of the laws of war requiring this misleading information to appear to meet, which they knew or should have known did not satisfy the Geneva requirements.

* * *

Rather than look broadly at the WMD data problem -- that it was a top-down, policy driven effort imposed on analysts -- DoD IG would have us believe the opposite: That somewhere out of the ether policy makers, including Members of Congress were induced to believe something.

The opposite is the case: Cheney and others including Powell were taking a policy-approach to intelligence, and telling the analysts with repeated trips -- 17 to CIA HQ -- to revisit the issues. This is hardly a sign that policy makers were immediately induced or fooled, contrary to the DoD IG reports contention.

There are a couple of things to consider:

___ Senator Roberts' WMD Phase II report: If there was a "bottom-to-top communication problem" why wasn't that "excuse" touted early and often to deflect attention from the concerns the leadership was ramming bad policy into non-evidence of Iraqi WMD development?


Despite stating that there was inappropriate activity, DoD IG is being used as the shield for Feith and others to suggest there was no wrong doing. Yet, DoD IG is not a judicial tribunal; DoD IG statements are not credible given the pattern of conduct suggesting the leadership and legal counsel knew, or should have known, there were Geneva implications. This is hardly explained away by calling the conduct inappropriate but "under investigation".

DoD IG could be in serious trouble if, as it appears, there were serious problems of US war crimes in 2002-3, but the DoD IG did not review the matters until 2007. The correct approach should be for the DoD IG to have been taken out of the review, and have independent prosecutors review the evidence.

* * *


The data on the WMD issues has been problematic. Senator Roberts [R-KS] as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee took too long to share this finding. It is not likely the DoD conclusion has merit; or that it is true. Roberts and others in the GOP, if they knew this was true, would have quickly reported this finding in an expedited report. The slowness of the response suggests the information was bad, not good -- otherwise they would have revealed this before the election.

With respect to this DoD IG report, there has been a transition from the first reports suggesting there was no wrong doing, to a reversal suggesting there is a serious problem. Damage control doesn't get it wrong, it misleads. If there was no wrong doing, there would be no reason to have this much damage control.

The fact that this convoluted story on the WMD data and DoD IG findings is surfacing now, when the Senators are unclear whether they want to debate or not debate illegal activity, suggests there's a larger effort underway to muddy the waters.


1. The information in the DoD IG report is adverse to the Administration interests.

2. Additional inquiry and review will show the DoD IG report has been recast, and the information has been illegally classified to thwart oversight.

3. There is a deliberate effort to make it appear Cheney, who provided the bad information, is the victim of his deception. This is absurd, and not a credible defense.

4. The number of changes in the DoD IG story indicates this WMD Geneva issue is still in the spin cycle, and the confusion is by design as a war crimes defense.

5. The lack of Timely response on the Senator Roberts Phase II WMD investigation suggests there is bad news related to war crimes.


The more one reviews the public statements on the DoD IG report and the way the information-trail has been reversed indicates that there's a major effort underway to rewrite history, mislead the public, and induce the American citizenry to believe there was no problem. This appears to be a ploy by the GOP to frame the data and report in a favorable light, but is not credible given this "good" news -- if it were real -- would have been released well before the November 2006 election.

It's most likely the aim of the GOP is to lean on the convoluted DoD IG report as a legal defense, wile knowing fully well the DoD IG report is not immunity. The best the GOP legal counsel in DoJ can offer to the White House is a convoluted defense, not a credible legal shield.

DoJ Staff Counsel know they have a serious problem by way of war crimes and Cheney is stuck in the middle of this mess. DoD IG report, at best, confirms the opposite of what the GOP hopes the world believes: The issues of war crimes are serious, real, credible, and supported by the lines of evidence most consistent with illegal, aggressive war.

All contractor records, data, and other evidence should be immediately seized; and all data going into and out of the DoD IG office on this WMD issue needs to be secured for war crimes prosecutors to immediately review.

The DoD IG is now the target of this investigation:

___ When was DoD IG aware of the 5100.77 violations under the laws of war;

___ What was the basis for the conclusion of Senator Roberts and Rockefeller;

___ Why is the information-trail being cast as something that is flowing up, yet the Vice President was flowing information down;

___ Which civilian contractors were part of the ruse, deception, and misinformation;

___ If there was no problem with the WMD data as DoD IG suggests, how does Senator Roberts explain the delay in releasing favorable news for the GOP prior to the November 2006 election;

___ How was the misleading information used by contractors, Members of Congress, and other US government officials to target phony risk areas, expand illegal surveillance, or not do what they should have done;

___ To what extent is Senator Rockefeller, despite the lessons of the FISA-NSA illegalities, asking us to believe he "didn't know something" that he knew he should have, but refused to review?

___ Where are the Title 28 and Title 50 exception reports?

___ When did the Congress learn of the Vice President’s visits to CIA; and how does the timeline of the VP visits square with the DoD IG's conclusion to the opposite that the information was flowing up from the analysts to the VP?