AP IMPACT: An insider attack: Trust cost 2 lives

WASHINGTON (AP) ? It was a sneak attack, but not by the enemy they feared.

U.S. Army Capts. Joshua Lawrence and Drew Russell were inside a small command post on an Afghan army base, wrapping up a long day of coordinating the safe arrival of nearly 100 Afghan religious and tribal leaders for a peace conference at a nearby palace.

Darkness had fallen.

Some of their fellow soldiers had retired for the evening. Two stood guard.

All seemed well.

But as several soldiers sprawled on nearby cots, playing cards, the calm collapsed catastrophically at 9:27 p.m.

An exploding grenade shattered the stillness, followed in seconds by bursts of gunfire. Before any of the Americans could raise a hand to defend themselves, Lawrence was dead from a bullet to the head, and Russell was dying, shot three times in the back.

They were not killed by the Taliban, as the U.S.-led military coalition indicated the day after the Oct. 8, 2011, assault. Lawrence, 29, of Nashville, Tenn., and Russell, 25, of Scotts, Mich., were killed in what U.S. investigators later called a "calculated and coordinated" attack by Afghan soldiers entrusted to work alongside their U.S. partners.

This is the first published account of the attack and is based on internal Army records and interviews in the U.S. and Afghanistan.

For Russell's family, the anguish is still fresh. His father, Jim, said the loss was even harder to accept after learning from the Army's investigation report early this year that it was a supposed ally, not the Taliban, who killed his son.

"It wasn't like a battle, you know. He pretty much got ambushed," he said, pausing at length to settle his emotions. "That makes it difficult."

On that moonlit Saturday evening, Russell was the designated "battle captain," or duty officer, in the command center. Lawrence worked beside him as a plans officer. Both were members of the 4th Infantry Division's 2nd "Warhorse" Brigade. They deployed to Afghanistan in June 2011. Lawrence had married just one week before leaving; the honeymoon was to wait until he returned home.

The Associated Press learned details of the attack from formerly secret Army investigation records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. The Army removed substantial portions of the documents to protect what it called properly classified information as well as the identities of most people involved. The AP established some identities on its own.

The investigation ? a standard process in a war zone ? found that security at the U.S.-Afghan command post was so relaxed that guards were not told to check anyone entering. Potential Afghan thievery, not treachery, was judged the chief threat. Thus the killers had unfettered access and moved about without arousing suspicion.

Only 10 designated Afghan security personnel were supposed to be in the compound, but U.S. guards were given no access roster. Unknown numbers "freely entered and exited the compound unchecked," an Army investigator found.

The Americans had been told to treat the Afghans as if they were mingling in Iron Horse Park, a recreation area on their home base, Fort Carson, Colo., according to a staff sergeant who was present but whose name is blacked out on his sworn statement to investigators.

The Americans had convinced themselves, 10 years into a war whose successful outcome depended on empowering local security forces, that they could trust their Afghan colleagues. That was a deadly miscalculation in this instance and dozens more in the months that followed as growing numbers of Afghan troops turned their guns on their coalition partners.

As the attacks mounted this year, U.S. officials in Kabul and Washington insisted these were "isolated incidents." They routinely withheld details and, until pressed by the AP, did not publicly disclose attacks in which coalition troops were wounded but not killed.

At least 63 coalition troops ? mostly Americans ? have been killed, by the AP's count, and more than 85 wounded in at least 46 insider attacks so far this year. That's an average of nearly one attack a week. In 2011, 21 insider attacks killed 35.

The attack that killed Lawrence and Russell in the southern city of Kandahar was the 17th of 2011. Breaking it down in detail shows how easily it can be done.

The two officers and five other U.S. soldiers were inside a soft-skinned, tan-colored tent that served as a temporary "tactical command post" on an Afghan army base known as Old Corps Headquarters. Their task was to coordinate a security plan for the three-day peace conference at nearby Mandigak Palace. Their body armor was stacked in one corner, their weapons in another.

Their partners that day included liaison officers from Afghan security services, including the national intelligence agency and the army. The four liaisons excused themselves for the night and left the compound shortly before the attack. They had been working inside the tent and would have been in the line of fire had they stayed.

The Army investigator called this circumstance "worth noting," but he established no proof of complicity by the Afghan security officers.

An Afghan investigation concluded that only one soldier, a sergeant identified as Enayut (Afghans often use just one name) fired on the Americans, according to a summary of the probe, while the U.S. Army concluded there were two shooters.

Several U.S. soldiers recalled noticing two, possibly three, Afghans enter the compound about 9 p.m. They stood out because they were armed with one rocket-propelled grenade and at least one M16 rifle. At least one was wearing an Afghan army uniform, the report said. No one questioned them, since there was no screening requirement in place.

"They just walked in like they owned the place," a U.S. sentry at the compound's barricaded entrance told investigators afterward. Like others, his name was blacked out of the report.

In the moments that followed, hints of trouble were obscured by the appearance of normalcy.

At 9:02 p.m., just a few minutes after taking up his guard position at the front entrance of the command post tent, Spc. Paul A. LeVan was told he was being repositioned to a guard tower overlooking the compound. He was not replaced at the tent. There was no explanation as to why.

LeVan's sergeant led him to the empty guard tower, where, as a standard precaution, they discussed the locations of friendly forces in LeVan's line of fire. He was armed with an M249 light machine gun.

Soon, two of the Afghans who had entered the compound at 9 p.m. joined them in the tower. One was in military garb and, rather curiously, armed with a grenade launcher and one grenade. The other was unarmed and spoke English. LeVan's sergeant then left the tower and, upon entering the command tent, mentioned the grenade launcher to those inside, including an enlisted soldier who recalled later that the weapon seemed "out of the ordinary."

"But since (Afghan soldiers) were allowed to carry RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades), we did not give it much thought," the enlisted soldier, whose name was blacked out of the report, told investigators.

Another unidentified soldier said in the report that he, too, noticed the RPG and thought it "seemed reckless" to permit it inside the compound.

In his final report, the Army investigator found it curious that neither LeVan nor his sergeant challenged or questioned the two Afghans about "why a tower guard would have an RPG and no rifle."

LeVan, 21 at the time and a member of the 209th Military Police Company, said he assumed the Afghans were a properly assigned guard and his interpreter, although he noticed that the armed Afghan was avoiding eye contact and closely tracking movements inside the compound. LeVan shook hands with both men, but the veneer of friendliness soon vanished.

"I had a gut feeling that something was out of place," he told the AP in a telephone interview. He was the only American to witness the attack from start to finish.

Suddenly and without explanation the Afghans descended from the tower.

"I got nervous, so I kept a very close eye on the two men," LeVan told an Army investigator two days later.

LeVan said he watched through his night vision goggles as the Afghan armed his grenade launcher and took aim at several Army medics playing cards on cots they had set up at the rear of their armored ambulance. A medic recalled spotting the gunman pointing the RPG at them from point blank range. "I stood up and shouted, 'Hey! What the f--- are you doing?'" she told investigators.

His rocket missed the soldiers and slammed into a nearby concrete barrier. Shrapnel wounded the medic in her stomach and back. A piece of shrapnel also penetrated the nearby command tent, wounding the U.S. sergeant who had just left LeVan in the guard tower.

By several accounts, bullets began flying about five seconds after the grenade exploded.

"The timing was perfect," LeVan recalled. He watched from the tower as another gunman ? not the one who launched the rocket, and not the English-speaking Afghan, either ? advanced swiftly on the command tent, firing bursts from an M16 semi-automatic rifle.

Inside the tent, which was ringed with sandbags but filled with dust from the grenade blast, Lawrence and Russell hit the ground and began low-crawling side-by-side toward their body armor.

Neither would get back to his feet. The M16 shooter fired a total of 14 bullets into the tent, the last few from the front entrance. None of the Americans inside saw their attacker well enough to identify him.

"I saw someone standing in the entrance to the tent shooting at all of us," said the sergeant who had been hit in the leg by shrapnel. "I put my head down. I believe I heard five or six rounds fired, and then the shooting stopped."

Maj. Keith Walters, who was in the tent and suffered a severe leg wound from the M16 fire, said that by the time the gunman vanished it was too late.

"As the firing stopped, I remember yelling out to hold fire as I knew we had friendly U.S. and Afghan forces somewhere in the compound and that by then they would probably be approaching the tent. We did not return a single shot," Walters wrote in an email to investigators three weeks later from his hospital bed in Washington, where he underwent surgery.

The Army denied an AP request to interview Walters, saying the matter was too sensitive; later it said Walters had decided on his own not to be interviewed.

Lawrence apparently died instantly of his head wound. Russell was declared dead a short time later at a nearby helicopter landing zone as colleagues prepared to evacuate him and three seriously wounded soldiers to medical facilities at Kandahar Air Field.

Four other soldiers were wounded less severely.

The killers escaped ? apparently with inside help. They remain at large.

Gen. Jallaad Rahimi, who was the chief military prosecutor in Kandahar at the time, told the AP in a recent interview that the father and brother of Sgt. Enayut, plus three of his fellow soldiers, are in detention. The three soldiers are not accused of shooting anyone but are charged with neglecting their duties or assisting Enayut, Rahimi said. For example, the rocket-propelled grenade fired by Enayut was assigned to a member of his unit who told investigators that Enayut had taken it from him that evening when he was not looking, Rahimi said.

Rahimi said two of the detained soldiers are accused of helping Enayut escape the compound.

Enayut's father and brother were arrested after authorities found evidence at their home that Enayut had been in contact with insurgents, Rahimi said. The brother and the father knew about this contact, Rahimi said, but didn't tell authorities and may have covered up for Enayut. The U.S. investigation found no links to insurgents.

Enayut, 23 at the time of the shooting, joined the Afghan army in 2006. An expert in disarming bombs, he had a history of going AWOL and receiving no punishment for it. U.S. investigators found that he had slipped away for an unauthorized visit to Pakistan just weeks before the attack.

Investigators were unable to pin down identifying information about the other shooter, although it appeared he also was a soldier and was probably a member of Enayut's unit, the 4th Battalion, 1st Brigade, 205th Corps. LeVan said both wore Afghan army uniforms in the attack.

In a two-sentence statement the next day, the U.S.-led military command in Kabul said two service members had been killed in an "insurgent attack." A day later, in identifying Lawrence and Russell as the casualties, the Pentagon reported that "enemy forces" killed them.

The Army's investigation records show that U.S. officials in Afghanistan were told immediately after the assault that it was perpetrated by one or more Afghan soldiers ? not insurgents.

"Yes, we know the shooter," the Afghan army liaison officer told Lt. Col. John Cook, the commander of Lawrence's and Russell's unit, after being summoned back to the compound just moments after the killings. The Afghan officer named Enayut without hesitation.

Asked why its Oct. 9 report was never corrected, the international military command in Kabul said it knew that at least one of the shooters was wearing an Afghan army uniform, "but as that information was unconfirmed, a correction to the original (press) release was not appropriate."

In April the AP was alerted to the attack's true circumstances by an American soldier who knew the real story. The U.S. military in Kabul acknowledged to the AP in May that it had added the incident to its 2011 list of insider attacks. But it refused to provide any details of what happened.

The story of the killing of Lawrence and Russell raises hard questions about the insider attack problem, starting with this: How can it happen to arguably the world's best-trained, best-equipped army? The answer, in this case, is that the Americans designed their security with external threats in mind ? known Taliban tactics like suicide car bombings, for example ? rather than threats from their Afghan allies.

Was that reasonable?

Yes, says Maj. Gen. James L. Huggins, who ordered the internal Army investigation in his capacity as the senior U.S. commander in southern Afghanistan at the time. In rejecting the investigation's central finding ? that U.S. officers had failed to take necessary security precautions ? Huggins wrote that the security arrangements were "appropriate responses" to available intelligence.

"Only (in) hindsight do we now understand the insider threat present at the time of the attack," he wrote on Dec. 17, 2011.

In making that judgment, Huggins overruled the colonel who conducted the investigation. The colonel, whose name was removed from the copy of the report provided to the AP, wrote in his account that the U.S. chain of command in Kandahar "failed to use the appropriate security and force protection measures to secure the compound and safeguard their soldiers."

The colonel faulted the Kandahar commanders for "unchecked reliance" on the Afghans to "police their own ranks." He recommended action be taken against those leaders, but Huggins rejected the advice, saying he believed they had taken reasonable precautions, given that there was "no known insider threat at the time."

Of the 16 insider attacks that preceded this one in 2011, none had occurred in Kandahar province, but two took place in adjacent provinces within Huggins' area of responsibility, according to U.S. records.

Huggins, who now works for the director of the Army staff at the Pentagon and has been selected for promotion to lieutenant general, declined through a spokesman to be interviewed for this story. In a brief encounter last week, Huggins told the AP he could not remember enough about the case to discuss it.

The U.S. military never established a clear motive for the attack in Kandahar. In its aftermath numerous Afghans told U.S. officers they felt shamed by the killings and were sorry for any mistrust it created. But that sentiment apparently was not universal.

LeVan told investigators that the day after the attack he and other soldiers encountered an Afghan soldier who "gave us a vibe that he wished we were killed."

___

Associated Press writer Rahim Faiez in Kabul contributed to this report.

___

Robert Burns can be followed on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/robertburnsAP

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/ap-impact-insider-attack-trust-cost-2-lives-073706461.html

oolong tea survivor one world lil kim progeria what will my baby look like gary carter died cmas

Confrontation between rival protesters looms in Egypt

CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood called for a rally backing President Mohamed Mursi outside his palace on Wednesday and leftists planned a counter-demonstration, raising fears of clashes in a crisis over a disputed push for a new constitution.

Mursi returned to work at his compound a day after it came under siege from opposition protesters furious at his drive to ratify a new constitution in a snap referendum set for December 15 after temporarily expanding his powers by decree.

The Islamist president said he acted to prevent courts still full of appointees from the era of autocratic predecessor Hosni Mubarak from derailing the draft constitution meant to complete a political transition in the Arab world's most populous state.

The Brotherhood, from which Mursi emerged to narrowly win a free election in June, summoned supporters to a demonstration outside the palace in response to what it termed "oppressive abuses" by opposition parties.

Brotherhood spokesman Mahmoud Ghozlan was quoted on its Facebook page as saying opposition groups "imagined they could shake legitimacy or impose their views by force".

Leftist opposition leader Hamdeen Sabahy promptly urged his supporters to go to the streets as well, heightening the chances of confrontation between Islamists and their opponents.

A spokeswoman for Sabahy's Popular Current movement asked protesters to head to the palace to reinforce those still camped out there after Tuesday evening's protests, in which officials said 35 protesters and 40 police were wounded.

Although they fired tear gas when protesters broke through barricades to reach the palace walls, riot police appeared to handle those disturbances with restraint.

About 200 protesters camped out overnight, blocking one gate to the palace in northern Cairo, but traffic was flowing normally and riot police had been withdrawn.

"Our demands to the president: retract the presidential decree and cancel the referendum on the constitution," read a placard hung by demonstrators on a palace gate.

The rest of the Egyptian capital was calm, despite the political furore over Mursi's November 22 decree handing himself wide powers and shielding his decisions from judicial oversight.

Crowds had gathered on Tuesday for what organisers dubbed a "last warning" to Mursi. "The people want the downfall of the regime," they chanted, roaring the signature slogan of last year's uprising that ousted Mubarak.

But the "last warning" may turn out to be one of the last gasps for a disparate opposition that has little chance of stopping next week's vote on a constitution drafted over six months and swiftly approved by an Islamist-dominated assembly.

MURSI STANDS HIS GROUND

Facing the gravest crisis of his six-month-old tenure, the Islamist president has shown no sign of buckling under pressure, confident that the Muslim Brotherhood and its Islamist allies can win the referendum and a parliamentary election to follow.

Many Egyptians yearn for an end to political upheaval that has scared off investors and tourists, damaging the economy.

Ahmed Kamel, spokesman for the Congress Party led by former Arab League chief Amr Moussa, said Mursi should meet opposition demands, not call for an Islamist counter-demonstration.

Some protesters have already gone beyond opposition calls for Mursi to scrap his decree, defer the referendum and set up a "representative committee" to revise the draft constitution, instead demanding the president's overthrow.

"The demands of the street are moving faster than those of the politicians," said Elijah Zarwan, a fellow with the European Council on Foreign Relations. "Now is the time for the Egyptian liberals to negotiate without conditions."

COURT PROTEST

Dozens of pro-Mursi demonstrators, watched by equal numbers of police, waved flags outside the Supreme Constitutional Court, whose rulings have complicated the Islamists' rise to power.

"You are not a political agency," read one banner held by the demonstrators, addressing a court that in June ordered the dissolution of the Islamist-led lower house of parliament.

Mursi issued his decree temporarily putting his actions above the law to forestall any court ruling to dissolve the upper house or the assembly that wrote the constitution.

State institutions, with the partial exception of the judiciary, have mostly fallen in behind Mursi.

The army, the power behind all previous Egyptian presidents in the republic's six-decade history, has gone back to barracks, having apparently lost its appetite to intervene in politics.

In a bold move, Mursi sacked Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, the Mubarak-era army commander and defence minister, in August and removed the sweeping powers that the military council which took over after Mubarak's fall had grabbed two months earlier.

The liberals, leftists, Christians, ex-Mubarak followers and others opposed to Mursi, elected in a close result against a secular rival, have yet to generate a mass movement or a grassroots political base to challenge the Brotherhood.

Protesters have scrawled "leave" over Mursi's palace walls, but the president has made clear he is not going anywhere.

"The crisis we have suffered for two weeks is on its way to an end, and very soon, God willing," Saad al-Katatni, head of the Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, told Reuters.

Investors have seized on hopes that Egypt's turbulent transition, which has buffeted the economy for two years, may soon head for calmer waters, sending stocks 1.6 per cent higher after a 3.5 percent rally on Tuesday.

The most populous Arab nation has turned to the IMF for a $4.8 billion loan to help it out of a crisis that has depleted its foreign currency reserves.

The government said on Wednesday the process was on track and Egypt's request would go to the IMF board as expected.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/egypts-mursi-back-palace-night-protests-090428384.html

aziz ansari katherine jenkins peyton manning broncos mexico city earthquake stand your ground law dancing with the stars season 14 david garrard

Ford Fusion Wins ?Green Car of the Year? Award at LA Auto Show ...

It?s no secret that car manufacturers are focusing most of their efforts on smaller vehicles. While SUV?s saw a huge jump in popularity in the ?90s and early 2000?s, concerns about the environment and rising fuel costs have seen that trend far in the other direction. Savvy car brands are listening to their customers, and what they want is efficiency. It?s better for the earth and better for the wallet. While Toyota?s Prius has led the way in the hybrid market for quite some time, U.S. auto manufacturers are beginning to make some serious inroads, based primarily on the quality of their offerings. The Chevy Volt has found a strong fanbase in the niche electric market, but it is Ford?s Fusion that may have the largest chance at long-term success. Ford showed just how seriously they are taking that challenge with a strong appearance at the Los Angeles Auto Show, and the jury rewarded their efforts, naming the midsize Fusion sedan their ?Green Car of the Year? for 2013.

The Ford Motor Company has made it clear they are aiming for increased fuel efficiency, while simultaneously trying to entice a large fanbase with a full gas, a hybrid and a plug-in hybrid electric version of the Fusion sedan. And that overall focus towards sustainability is certainly something to celebrate. But what won them the award, according to representatives from the Green Car Journal that sponsors the ?Green Car of the Year? prize, are the variety of powertrain options.

The Chevy Volt and Honda?s natural gas Civic have both won the award previously, and the hope at the LA Auto Show is that continuing to acknowledge the work of these car companies will help increase the prevalence of hybrid vehicles on the road. As of now, fewer than 3% of all new cars sold in 2012 are hybrids. Obviously that?s not going to make the sort of impact needed to stem mankind?s effect on climate change, or help push off the day the earth is finally bled dry of fossil fuels. Fully electric vehicles aren?t selling as well as industry experts have hoped, even as the price of gasoline hovers around all-time high numbers. The problem is that the batteries required to fuel cars like the Chevy Volt or Nissan Leaf are quite costly, which keeps the sticker price elevated and scares off shoppers worried about having to buy replacements. Traditional gas engines are also becoming more efficient, making the need to go hybrid less obvious than before.

Ford?s Fusion may be the best of both worlds. The gas model gets as much as 34 mpg when driving on the highway. The hybrid Fusion reaches just under 50 mpg. The plug-in model, known as the Ford Fusion Energi, has a hybrid powertrain but can also run 20 miles solely on electric power. That makes it ideal for quick trips around town, while still making it a useful vehicle for highway travel. It?s great news for consumers, and further proof that Ford is serious about fuel economy. In fact, they?ve raised the average economy of their entire fleet of vehicles more than three mpg over the past five years.

The winning vehicle was chosen by a panel of environmental leaders, and the finalists were all vehicles that are currently available for consumers. That?s a nice change as well,. If you?re in the market for a new vehicle and want to find low priced car insurance, you can pick up a hybrid and receive the green discount most agencies provide. So if you?d like to find out more about the nominees, head online and check out the Ford C-Max, the Dodge Dart Aero, the Mazda CX-5 SkyACTIV and the Prius c.

Related posts:

  1. Ford Invests $135 Million Toward Electric Vehicle Development
  2. The Latest Electric Car From BMW to Debut at La?s Auto Show
  3. How Green is the New Ford Fiesta?
  4. Green Truck? Maybe Just Green Thinking!
  5. Car Sharing Service Autolib? Enjoys Success After First Year

Source: http://www.oureverydayearth.com/ford-fusion-wins-green-car-of-the-year-award-at-la-auto-show/

the client list yahoo.com/mail baylor april 9 albatross louis oosthuizen phil mickelson

Archives Gig - Telecommute: Social Media & Communications ...

SAA ACQUISITIONS & APPRAISAL SECTION ? SOCIAL MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS INTERNSHIP
The Acquisitions and Appraisal Section invites applications for an intern position to manage the social media and communications of the section. The intern will be responsible for developing and maintaining social media and communications efforts under the directorship of the section chair.

Position Description:

This is an unpaid appointment with an expectation of approximately one hour of work per week with a start date of approximately January 7, 2013. The position usually runs from August to August of each year. Preference will be given to applicants who can remain in the position until August 2014. The intern will increase and maintain the section?s social media presence. He/she/per will also provide support for the official communications of the section, including dissemination of any publications or newsletters. The intern will work closely with the Chair, Vice-Chair, and Web Liaison and will be responsible for keeping records of activities and procedures for his/her/per successor and staying current in acquisition and appraisal issues.
Requirements:
? Current enrollment in a graduate archival education program.
? Knowledge of social media outlets such as LinkedIn, Facebook, Google+, Pinterest, Twitter, etc.
? Knowledge of and willingness to keep updated with current research, tools, and methods in acquisition and appraisal topics
? Ability to participate in section meetings virtually or in-person. (Please note, the intern is not expected to attend the annual section meeting at SAA, but is expected to attend teleconferences/web conferences held throughout the year).
? Current SAA membership with preference given to section members.
? Ability to manage personal image online.
? Demonstrate initiative and identify new PR opportunities, innovative thinker, able to work independently
? Ability to communicate efficiently in writing
Application Procedures:
Submit a current resum? along with a brief statement (up to 150 words) on how the section could improve its online presence to the vice chair, virginia_hunt(at)harvard.edu and chair, luglean(at)uwyo.edu. Applications are due December 16, 2012.

Source: Thanks to Jen G. for this one!

Source: http://archivesgig.livejournal.com/758466.html

the alamo anencephaly tesla model x lou gehrig toby mac blue ivy carter photos purple squirrel