And:
[quote:b0142]
Nuclear Training Drill May Have Provided Another Reason For Firing Of Four Star General
Suspicions mount as to real reason why Army General Kevin Byrnes was fired for sexual misconduct only months prior to retirement. Sources close to the Pentagon say Rumsfeld has wanted to get rid of Byrnes for more than three years.
August 15, 2005
By Greg Szymanski
Controversy around a simulated nuclear terrorist attack, called Exercise Sudden Response to be held Aug. 15- 19 at Ft. Monroe, may have provided another reason for the recent firing of General Kevin P. Byrnes, the head of a prestigious Army unit coincidentally taking part in the same nuclear training exercise.
In a highly unusual occurrence, Gen. Byrnes, 55, was relieved of is duties as commander of the prestigious Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) at Fort Monroe, several months short of retirement for what Army brass claims to be sexual misconduct and what insiders say involves an affair with an enlisted female.
Dismissed earlier in the week, Gen. Byrnes has been unavailable for comment.
Under Army regulations, the affair is an actionable offense if found to be an adulterous relationship, but the oddity in the charges against Gen. Byrnes is that he was legally separated from his wife when the alleged sexual misconduct occurred.
Further, it is highly uncommon for a four star officer like Gen. Byrnes to be treated so harshly, especially when he was only several months from full eligibility for Army retirement.
Besides the retirement issue, what makes the Gen. Byrnes firing even more suspicious is that only two other four star officers in the entire military have been fired for misconduct, one being high-ranking Naval officer in 1995 and the other a four star Air Force officer in 1990.
But political observers point to several other more serious reasons why Gen. Byrnes was pushed aside, including to an ongoing feud with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who has wanted to oust Byrnes for more than three years for bucking the neo=con party line.
Military insiders claim Rumsfeld, who has been trying to weed out officers who don’t toe the party since taking over at the Pentagon, finally let the hammer drop on Gen. Byrnes after backing off several times on the advice of several generals who mediated what looks a short-lived compromise.
Rumsfeld has remained silent on the issue, only saying it wouldn’t be proper to comment on an ongoing military investigation. However, two reliable
sources from two different political camps, one conservative and one liberal, claim Gen. Byrnes was stopped in his tracks by Rumsfeld after intelligence reports surfaced that Gen. Byrnes was behind a contingent of at least 40 other high-ranking officers who are trying to thwart the administration’s to engage in a nuclear conflict with Iran.
To back up these claims, recently credible sources inside the Pentagon told the American Conservative Magazine, subsequently verified by Lyndon LaRouche and his political research staff that Vice President Dick Cheney has already instructed Strategic Command (STRATCOM) to prepare for a nuclear attack against Iran in the event of another 9/11-like attack occurs on American soil.
[b\“I think under their time-frame we are weeks away from an attack on our homeland and also an impending nuclear catastrophe,”[/b] said Lyndon LaRouche, an outspoken Bush critic and former third party presidential candidate in a telephone conversation from his Vermont political headquarters called Larouche PAC.
Besides the feud with Rumsfeld and Gen. Byrnes’ involvement in a military faction to overthrow the neo-con war agenda, the upcoming nuclear training exercise set for next week at Ft. Monroe also has political observers nervous.
Reports have surfaced that Gen. Byrnes was also fired due to certain irregularities involved in the nuclear training session, which is set to simulate a large nuclear bomb being brought on board a ship into a large U.S. city.
Bush critics also site the danger of these “simulated attacks” since the same type of training sessions occurred just prior to both 9/11 and 7/7, wit simulated jetliner and subway attack training exercises providing an eerie backdrop for the actual attacks that followed.
Regarding the nuclear exercise, Capt. Kevin McNamara, media relations officer, said the training session will be conducted officially by the Joint Task Force Civil Support (JTF-CS) with a press conference being held for credentialed media at Building 261, 363 Fenwick Road. Fort Monroe,VA at 10a.m.
“The exercise will focus on the Department of Defense’s ability to support civil and federal authorities in providing a coordinated response to a nuclear explosion in a major U.S. city. The exercise will be a computer-based field training exercise with very limited troop movements. All unit-level troop movements and response activities will be simulated,” said Capt. McNamara.
When asked about the Gen. Byrnes firing, Capt. McNamara said he wasn’t in a position to comment, deferring all questions to TRADOC media relations, who has failed to offer further details besides it has not been determined whether Gen. Byrnes will be determined or whether criminal charges will be filed.
And to further add fuel growing speculation that a homeland nuclear attack and impending global war are near, ominous reports are coming from the Washington Post, obviously fed the story by the military this week, that the Pentagon has developed its first ever war plans for operations within the United States, plans justifying and making necessary preparations for martial law in case of a homeland terrorist attack.
As reported in the front-page article, sources working at the headquarters of the military’s Northern Command (Northcom), located in Colorado Springs, Colorado gave details to Post reporter Bradley Graham, who was recently given a tour of Northcom headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base.
Observers say the article appears to be a deliberate military leak conducted for the purpose of getting America accustom to hearing the possibility of military rule and martial law.
According to the Post, “the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.
“The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement.”
For more informative articles, go to
http://www.arcticbeacon.com.[/quote:b0142]
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/ar ... /31538.htm
08-10-2005, 05:17 PM
Linear Mode
