But more than that, as far as Iraq goes – the SMU-TF in Levin’s report clearly refers to JSOC (see the slip up on pg.159 where they miss redacting JSOC in relation to the Legal Adviser). And the SMU-TF facility is clearly Nama. Compare pages 159-163 & 193-194 of the Armed Services Committee report with pages 18-23 from the Human Rights Watch Report then compare pages 193-194 (ASC) with the footnote on pg. 6 (HRW).

It’s also very interesting the McCrystal apparently refused to sign any paperwork during his command! Obviously, Levin has to know about all this by now – he complied the un-redacted report for chrissake.

So my question: what does this say about Carl Levin? How much oversight would the Armed Services Committee have in terms of SOP review … has he possessed knowledge of military abuse policy from the start? He’s on the Armed Services Committee, the Intelligence Committee, and the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations … just sayin.

Yes, it’s entirely likely that releasing the photographs of torture and sexual assault – including homosexual rape and, God forgive us, the defilement of children – would lead to dangerous and potentially lethal complications for armed government employees who are killing people and destroying property in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, countries they invaded and continue to occupy by force.

[snip]

I suspect that the “danger” that preoccupies the ruling Establishment is not that confronted by the troops (about whom that Establishment cares little), but rather the danger potentially posed by those troops if enough of them escape the mental dungeon of official indoctrination and take a good, critical look at the people, institutions, and causes for which they’re hired to kill and die. Exposure to the abuse photos, and the battlefield consequences that would ensue, would tend to focus the mind in that direction.

An observation by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who investigated the Abu Ghraib abuses, seems to underscore my point.

“I am not sure what purpose [releasing the 2,000 additional photos of prisoner abuse] would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy – “

Hold it right there: Taguba said “protectors of our foreign policy,” not “defenders of our independence” or “guardians of our liberties.” The foreign policy referred to entails open-ended entanglements in the affairs of nearly every nation on earth, as well as plundering huge sums from taxpayers to sustain a grotesquely huge military establishment and bribe political elites abroad.

That foreign policy cultivates misery and harvests war and terrorism. Why in God’s Name would any decent human being defend that foreign policy in the abstract, much less spill blood to implement it?

Ain’t politics a hoot?