Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Accused Of Altering Gitmo Evidence  
User currently offlineSKYSERVICE_330 From Canada, joined Sep 2000, 1419 posts, RR: 5
Posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1384 times:

...at least, according to this AP article.

Mar 13, 2:38 PM EDT

US Accused of Altering Gitmo Evidence
By MICHAEL MELIA
Associated Press Writer

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba (AP) -- A U.S. military commander altered a report on a firefight in Afghanistan to cast blame for the death of a Delta Force commando on a Canadian youth who was captured after the shooting stopped, a defense attorney said Thursday.

The attorney, Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler, made the allegation at a pretrial hearing as he argued for access to the officer, identified only as "Col. W," as well as details about interrogations that he said might help clear his client of war-crimes charges.

From: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...LMYR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
_____________

These allegations should be investigated to the fullest extent in order to maintain the integrity of the trial. If proven to be untrue, Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler should be questioned as to his motives and reasons for making the accusations in the first place. If proven to be true, then the person who altered the report "months later" must explain their actions.

I'm curious to know the thoughts of serving members of the US military, past and present, given their experience and knowledge of the military, and of course all other members as well. As always, please keep it civil.

37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1384 times:

An attorney making disparaging comments about the evidence being used against his client?

Why is this news? It is part of his job, no matter how right or wrong he might be.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineSKYSERVICE_330 From Canada, joined Sep 2000, 1419 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1373 times:



Quoting L-188 (Reply 1):
An attorney making disparaging comments about the evidence being used against his client?

Why is this news? It is part of his job, no matter how right or wrong he might be.

Granted it is the attorneys job to question the evidence, no doubt. However, the issue here is the nature of that questioning, particularly the accusation that a US government institution manipulated evidence. That is a pretty strong accusation that, as I said before, is hopefully cleared up in the trial in order to maintain the integrity of the process.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1371 times:

Thread title is inaccurate and misleading.

The US didn't (supposedly) alter anything.

And the report isn't regarding anything to do with GITMO. Rather a firefight 10,000 miles away.

I realize you're quoting the news source and it didn't come from your keyboard. This is what happens when you get a Chairwarmer reporter writing a story on some place she's never been and probably had to use a spell checker/world map to find.

. . . . .

The Defense Attorney will pull every string he/she can to get their client off. It's their job. Of course, if there is even a shred of evidence the report was altered it MUST be investigation.


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1343 times:



Quoting SKYSERVICE_330 (Reply 2):
Granted it is the attorneys job to question the evidence, no doubt. However, the issue here is the nature of that questioning, particularly the accusation that a US government institution manipulated evidence. That is a pretty strong accusation that, as I said before, is hopefully cleared up in the trial in order to maintain the integrity of the process

Countries don't alter evidence - iIndividuals alter evidence. The first sentence of the article say "A U.S. military commander altered a report..."

What agenda are you advancing by suggesting that the entire United States government is responsible for this alleged act?


User currently offlineSKYSERVICE_330 From Canada, joined Sep 2000, 1419 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1331 times:



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
Countries don't alter evidence - iIndividuals alter evidence. The first sentence of the article say "A U.S. military commander altered a report..."

Good point. As ANC correctly noted, the title is misleading and it should read "A member of the US military is accused of..."

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
What agenda are you advancing by suggesting that the entire United States government is responsible for this alleged act?

I assure you I have no agenda to push and I should have wrote "a member of a government institution..." If Khadr did what he is being accused of doing, then he MUST be punished. My intention was to bring forward a development in a case that has been getting news attention here in Canada and was curious to know peoples thoughts on it. It was not my intention to suggest the entire US government is responsible for this alleged act. The US government is a massive organization and inappropriate actions by some are not a reflection of the whole.


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1315 times:



Quoting SKYSERVICE_330 (Reply 5):
My intention was to bring forward a development in a case that has been getting news attention here in Canada and was curious to know peoples thoughts on it. It was not my intention to suggest the entire US government is responsible for this alleged act. The US government is a massive organization and inappropriate actions by some are not a reflection of the whole.

Thanks.

If an individual altered an offical report as has been alleged, I hope he is appropriately prosecuted.


User currently offlineAnalog From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1291 times:



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
Countries don't alter evidence - iIndividuals alter evidence.

The individual in question was acting as an agent of the US. If one cannot hold countries responsible for the actions of its agents (employees, soldiers, etc.) then countries are not responsible for anything at all.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
The US didn't (supposedly) alter anything.

Yes it did: through it's agent. Just as corporations are responsible for the actions of their employees, the US is responsible (ethically, if not legally) for the actions of its agents. This is especially true if the US does not in any way claim that its agent acted illegally.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1279 times:



Quoting Analog (Reply 7):

 sarcastic 

 redflag 

Sensationalistic Journalism Headline to grab the attention of the less intelligent to make them read the article.


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1273 times:



Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
on some place she's never been

US Accused of Altering Gitmo Evidence
By MICHAEL MELIA
Associated Press Writer
Is that like a boy named Sue?  eyebrow   duck 

In reality this guy is another bleeding heart reporter.
http://ap-330.newsvine.com/

As to the thread, reports are altered after the fact all the time when new evidence comes to light. Would anybody be making a stink if the detainee had been charged with the Delta Ops murder and then the report was altered based on new evidence that exonerated him and he was released? What, why, or who gave the evidence that caused the report to be altered, that should be the focus of the defense attorneys investigation. Instead it's all part of some big conspiracy.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1264 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 9):
Instead it's all part of some big conspiracy.

Good grief, I never thought to see you admit there was one of those things Rj. Best check what you write next time. Big grin

Meanwhile, it appear Brownback J is going to take an activist role.
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/0...accused-of-altering-gitmo-evidence
"The judge, Army Col. Peter Brownback, scolded both sides for not cooperating more closely on evidence-related issues that could delay the trial, currently scheduled for May. He said he would rule on most of the defense motions by late Friday.

Brownback also ordered prosecutors to provide the defense with official correspondence regarding the case between the U.S. and Canadian governments."

Not that Rj will find it odd, but one of the troublesome aspects of many of these proceedings has, in many cases, been the insistence of the prosecution that prisoners not know the accusations, and even more particularly the nature of evidence against them. Mayhap Brownback has decided that this road leads to perdition - well at least to a system that many are not going to call justice.

As to the nitpicking. The case seems to be between someone and the US government? In which case if the US is using evidence that has been altered, it would probably be the US (Govt) that was being accused of using altered evidence. Interesting near typo there, I originally accidentally typed "being accursed". Hmmm, that version could end up being prescient - or not.

I have to say, the versions of that story that have appeared in the papers here is a great deal better written and informative. The actual story now being put forward has a fair degree of implausibility and IIRC the evidence for the version tabled is to say the least weak.

But Gitmo proceedings seem literally to be a law unto themselves. Perhaps we can agree on that. Halls?


User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13140 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1264 times:

I have considerable concern that testimony and accusations by or from USA military officers to be used as to Gitmo prisoners have been altered or are inaccurate. Look at the string of lies as to the death of USA soldier Tillman that we now know was a friendly fire cause. The officers on the scene feared the bad attention and hurt upon their status from a friendly fire cause of his death so they lied - also illegal for an officer to do. With these prisoners, there is very political pressure to make sure they are convicted, even of false charges out of fear of losing face or their status in the military. Problem is that they may have committed war crimes they could or should face.

User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1253 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 10):
Not that Rj will find it odd, but one of the troublesome aspects of many of these proceedings has, in many cases, been the insistence of the prosecution that prisoners not know the accusations, and even more particularly the nature of evidence against them.

Don't find it odd at all. At least some of the evidence will be sensitive in nature and as such should be held from public scrutiny. Would you care to name the "many cases"? Or the ones where they don't know what they are accused of?

Why don't we just turn them all loose, say in Australia?


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1248 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 12):
Why don't we just turn them all loose, say in Australia?

Two in Aus so far. But actually, you did not turn both loose. With Hicks you insisted on a vow of silence until the end of this month. And it seems the fear of being sent back to Gitmo has been enough to make him keep the vow. It may also appear that the Gitmo treatment has scrambled what was probably not in the first instance one of the worlds great intellects!

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 11):
I have considerable concern that testimony and accusations by or from USA military officers to be used as to Gitmo prisoners have been altered or are inaccurate. Look at the string of lies as to the death of USA soldier Tillman that we now know was a friendly fire cause.

Our case has been out of Iraq, Pte Kovco. First they lost his body. Then they left the report on how they lost the body in an airport lounge and the finder IIRC gave it to a TV studio. Then the enquiry evidence was to put it mildly odd. And now an inquest suggests a high proportion of the previous evidence was rubbish.

Maybe the world has always been this way, but Tillman, Kovco, what has happened to correct evidence? The same sort of strange activities seem to be associated with Gitmo and with E Rendition.

Rather than me mention the many cases, Rj, would you care to mention a case where the evidence has appeared to be "kosher". With Hicks most charges were withdrawn when challenged. Khadr we know about. So who has had "good" evidence presented against them. Blessed if I know. So over to you Rj for the cases where the evidence has turned out OK.  Big grin

(Probably best not to hold my breath.)


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1238 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 13):
Rather than me mention the many cases, Rj, would you care to mention a case where the evidence has appeared to be "kosher".

I'm not the one making accusations of impropriety so I have nothing to defend. I love it when someone who can't defend their position tries to turn it like that. Nice try though.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 13):
With Hicks most charges were withdrawn when challenged.

If the charges were withdrawn what may I ask, did he plead guilty to?


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1231 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 14):
so I have nothing to defend.

You do not seem to have noticed that 11 at Gitmo have been charged, and the charges for Hamdan and Kahr had their charges dismissed without prejudice and the cases for other 8 for the most part have not been heard.

With Hamdan, SCOTUS was not impressed by the Military Tribunals, you could say.

Perhaps someone can tell me if there are other US courts where 3 out of 21 lawyers "Requested transfer because the proceeding seemed unjust" to quote Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_military_commission

Overall, I will not put your failure to cite charges that have been documented to be "kosher" down to inaction because so far it does not appear that there are any! Convince me otherwise instead of making accusations that are not, it seems, backed by facts.


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1223 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 15):
You do not seem to have noticed that 11 at Gitmo have been charged,

13 actually.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 15):
and the charges for Hamdan and Kahr had their charges dismissed without prejudice and the cases for other 8 for the most part have not been heard.

And OJ Simpson, until recently, walked the streets a free man as well.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 15):
With Hamdan, SCOTUS was not impressed by the Military Tribunals, you could say.

Well that's a nice spin on the ruling. The Supreme Court said nothing of the sort, what they actually said was that Congress would have to set up an inferior court, which is in line with the Constitution as outlined in Article 1 section 8. As such the Administration and Congress worked swiftly to pass the Military Commissions Act which addressed the Supreme Courts ruling.

Of course up till now military tribunals were considered by you to be completely unfair. Now that there is a Judge, and military officer at that, who is demanding that both sides cooperate, the tune changes.

But none of that answers the question at hand, which you once again studiously avoid answering by throwing up every piece of ash and trash possible to distract from the real question. Are reports, both civilian and military, routinely reviewed and if necessary revised given new evidence that comes to light? If so, is the military altering or correcting the record?


User currently offlineAnalog From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1215 times:



Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 8):

Quoting Analog (Reply 7):

sarcastic

Do you rolling eyes mean that you disagree with my statement that a government is responsible for acts done by its soldiers and employees in the course of their employment?


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1212 times:



Quoting Analog (Reply 17):
Do you rolling eyes mean that you disagree with my statement that a government is responsible for acts done by its soldiers and employees in the course of their employment?

It means your assessment if off the wall.

That's what it means.

It also means exactly what I said in my previous response to you:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 8):
Sensationalistic Journalism Headline to grab the attention of the less intelligent to make them read the article.



User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1209 times:



Quoting Analog (Reply 7):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
Countries don't alter evidence - individuals alter evidence.

The individual in question was acting as an agent of the US. If one cannot hold countries responsible for the actions of its agents (employees, soldiers, etc.) then countries are not responsible for anything at all.

Ever heard of the term "sovereign immunity?"

Either the individual in question altered the reports on his/her own, or did it at the direction of someone else. Whether it was one or 10 people involved, their actions would likely be outside the scope of their employment, since I'm not aware of any statute that permits a government employee to affirmatively falsify a official report.

Quoting Analog (Reply 7):
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
The US didn't (supposedly) alter anything.

Yes it did: through it's agent. Just as corporations are responsible for the actions of their employees, the US is responsible (ethically, if not legally) for the actions of its agents. This is especially true if the US does not in any way claim that its agent acted illegally.

In general, the USG is only responsible for the actions of its employees IF the conduct that led to the incident was within the scope of their employment.

I'll bet a determination has already been made inside my department that the actors in this case aren't getting government representation.

Which is a polite way of saying "you're on your own."


User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2771 posts, RR: 18
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1199 times:



Quoting SKYSERVICE_330 (Reply 2):
However, the issue here is the nature of that questioning, particularly the accusation that a US government institution manipulated evidence. That is a pretty strong accusation that, as I said before, is hopefully cleared up in the trial in order to maintain the integrity of the process.

Some people simply don't seem to understand that there is NO INTEGRITY to the kangaroo court process underway at Gitmo. The world condems the actions of the USA at Gitmo and will continue to do so until the USA follows basic rights of Habeus Corpus. To go one single step less just highlights the US's hypocracy.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 10):
.....one of the troublesome aspects of many of these proceedings has, in many cases, been the insistence of the prosecution that prisoners not know the accusations, and even more particularly the nature of evidence against them. Mayhap Brownback has decided that this road leads to perdition - well at least to a system that many are not going to call justice.

The judicial process to "face your accuser" or challenge the evidence placed before the court is one of the cornerstones of true justice. Once again, just another mighty example of American hypocracy in action.

Someday, the world can only hope that what goes around comes around and finally the average American citizen will understand.


User currently offlineAnalog From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1196 times:



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 19):
Ever heard of the term "sovereign immunity?"

I wasn't talking specifically about legal or financial responsibility, I was speaking more generally about responsibility, i.e. morally/ethically.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 19):
Either the individual in question altered the reports on his/her own, or did it at the direction of someone else. Whether it was one or 10 people involved, their actions would likely be outside the scope of their employment, since I'm not aware of any statute that permits a government employee to affirmatively falsify a official report.

Of course there is no statute explicitly authorizing the falsification of a report; generally things are either explicitly illegal or implicitly legal (everything that is not illegal).

Even if the actions were illegal or against the rules one can still hold the supervisors & employer responsible. The government does this; if managers at a company repeatedly engage in illegal acts/discrimination and are not penalized for it (implicit approval), the employer can be held responsible for the illegal acts. Note that I am NOT claiming that this happened in the case in question, merely that the act's illegal nature does not always absolve the actor's employer of responsibility for the actions.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 19):
In general, the USG is only responsible for the actions of its employees IF the conduct that led to the incident was within the scope of their employment.

I'll bet a determination has already been made inside my department that the actors in this case aren't getting government representation.

If that determination has been made and the government takes action against the person who falsified the records (if it does turn out that the records were falsified), I'll agree that the government does not bear responsibility in this case.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 18):
It means your assessment if off the wall.

My comment was in response to blanket statements that the government did not do the acts in question. How is my claim that the government bears responsibility for the actions of its agents (acts done in its name by people employed by the government) "off the wall"? Again, please note that I did not and do not claim that the government bears responsibility for the specific alleged act in question. We don't even know for sure that it happened.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 18):

It also means exactly what I said in my previous response to you:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 8):
Sensationalistic Journalism Headline to grab the attention of the less intelligent to make them read the article.

I did not write the headline, so I presumed that this statement wasn't directed at me.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1192 times:



Quoting Analog (Reply 7):
the US is responsible (ethically, if not legally) for the actions of its agents



Quoting Analog (Reply 21):
Again, please note that I did not and do not claim that the government bears responsibility for the specific alleged act in question.

Well, which is it gonna be?

Make up your mind . . . .


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1191 times:



Quoting Analog (Reply 21):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 19):
Ever heard of the term "sovereign immunity?"

I wasn't talking specifically about legal or financial responsibility, I was speaking more generally about responsibility, i.e. morally/ethically.

 rotfl  Well, there's your problem. You actually expect the government to behave ethically and responsibly.


User currently offlineAnalog From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1187 times:



Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 22):

Quoting Analog (Reply 7):
the US is responsible (ethically, if not legally) for the actions of its agents



Quoting Analog (Reply 21):
Again, please note that I did not and do not claim that the government bears responsibility for the specific alleged act in question.

Well, which is it gonna be?

Make up your mind . . . .

Oops. I perhaps shouldn't have been so cut-and-dry with the first comment. My apologies. How's this: "The US is responsible (ethically, if not legally) for the actions of its agents done within the scope of their employment."

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 23):
Well, there's your problem. You actually expect the government to behave ethically and responsibly.

How foolish of me Big grin. Or should it be  Sad ?


25 ANCFlyer : In so far as they must investigate and if necessary, prosecute an offender.
26 Post contains images Allstarflyer : Unless, of course, someone high in the government told that individual to alter the evidence. The last two remarks conflict. Enron had its name plowe
27 Analog : How could those two statements possibly conflict? How does not knowing whether the specific accusation is true or not conflict with a general stateme
28 Analog : Hypothetically, would the government bear any responsibility if it turns out that the accusation is true and no action is taken against the guy who d
29 Post contains images Allstarflyer : You're basically saying in the 1st that the government does bear responsibility for the actions of its agents (otherwise you wouldn't ask how that as
30 Analog : No. In the first statement that you quoted I stated that in this case we don't know what happened. In no way does that conflict with a general statem
31 Halls120 : If the accusation turns out to be accurate, it will have an extremely negative impact on the government's criminal case - regardless of whether actio
32 Post contains links Analog : Really? That's a pretty sweeping statement. Was the police officer that paralyzed Albert Mosley acting within the scope of his employment? The office
33 Post contains images Allstarflyer : Your first statement basically reiterated what you said in reply 7 - the US was responsible via its own agent. You reiterated so in reply 21, the fir
34 Analog : How does what you quoted give you that?
35 Post contains images SKYSERVICE_330 : There will always be rogue individuals in organizations and as such the whole organization cannot be condemned for a few bad apples. I would think, a
36 Post contains images Halls120 : Of course it was a sweeping statement. In response to your sweeping comment. You want to debate specific cases, I suggest you start a new thread comp
37 Baroque : I see the bad apple justification is being rolled out again. Down in Aus it gets about the credence it deserves after however long it was that the Mil
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Troops Accused Of Theft After Home Raids posted Wed May 26 2004 04:31:55 by Qb001
Ouch, Obama Accused Of Back Room Nafta Deal posted Mon Mar 3 2008 18:18:53 by RJdxer
Southwest FA Accused Of Homophobia During Flight posted Mon Dec 17 2007 05:50:44 by Johnboy
Rep. Dingell Wants To Tax Us Out Of Global Warming posted Thu Sep 27 2007 15:43:42 by RJdxer
Man Accused Of Rape Hours After He Left Jail posted Fri Jul 6 2007 02:05:15 by Halls120
Gavin Newsom Accused Of Using Cocaine? posted Thu Jun 21 2007 18:36:33 by Superfly
Gen. Pace Accused Of Dereliciton Of Duty posted Thu Jun 14 2007 13:26:54 by RJdxer
Policeman Accused Of Sexual Assault On Prisoner.. posted Wed May 16 2007 12:24:51 by Diesel1
Actress Accused Of Threatening To Molest Dog posted Sat Dec 16 2006 03:43:26 by 777ER
US Secretary Of Defense Frequents Online Forums! posted Fri Dec 8 2006 19:52:05 by DfwRevolution