VA’s failure to appoint an accountable official to lead implementation of GI BIll

Report blames lack of leadership at VA for Forever GI Bill implementation failures

The San Diego Union-Tribune (TNS)
By Andrew Dyer
Mar 23, 2019

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs failed to modify its electronic systems and lacked an accountable official to oversee implementation of the Forever GI Bill, resulting in a bungled introduction last year that affected thousands of college students, a new report from the agency’s inspector general says.

The Forever GI Bill, the widely used name for the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2017, was approved unanimously in Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump in the summer of 2017.

The law changed how education benefits are applied for veterans, revising the formula that determines students’ stipend amounts and removing a 15-year expiration date included in the previous version of the law.

However, beginning in August, the VA’s system could not handle the intricacies of those changes in more than 400,000 claims, the report said. The result was that some students were underpaid and, in some cases, not paid at all.

In November, the VA decided to delay full implementation until Dec. 1, 2019.

According to the inspector general’s report, the VA’s failure to appoint an accountable official to lead implementation of the program resulted in “unclear communication of implementation progress and inadequately defined expectations, roles and responsibilities of the various VA business lines and contractors involved.”

Additionally, investigators found that the VA’s Office of Information and Technology and the Veterans Benefits Administration Education Service did not agree on how to solve problems once they arose.

Investigators found a 10-month gap from the time the Forever GI Bill became law and when the VA received the computer software to implement it. During those months, the VA worked with contractor Booz Allen Hamilton to develop the program.
read more here

After VA GI Bill scam, jail next mission for ex-VA employee

11 years in jail for ex-Veterans Affairs official in disabled vet fraud scheme

WTOP News
Valerie Bonk
February 18, 2019

WASHINGTON — A former U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs official has been sentenced 11 years in prison for a $2 million bribery scheme involving a program for disabled military veterans.

James King, 63, of Baltimore, previously pleaded guilty to one count of honest services and money wire fraud, one count of bribery of a public official and one count of falsifying records to obstruct an investigation, authorities said in a news release.

King was sentenced Friday to serve 132 months in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release and to pay $155,000 in restitution to Veterans Affairs.

Three school owners and employees, who admitted to bribing King, were sentenced last week.

Albert Poawui, the owner of Atius Technology Institute, was sentenced to serve 70 months in prison and ordered to pay $1.5 million in restitution.

Sombo Kanneh, Poawui’s employee, was sentenced to serve 20 months in prison and ordered to pay $113,000 in restitution.

Michelle Stevens, the owner of Eelon Training Academy, was sentenced to serve 30 months in prison and ordered to pay $83,000 in restitution.

“James King and his associates exploited an important VA program that provides valuable services to our disabled military veterans,” said Justice Department Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski in a release. “This prosecution once again demonstrates the Justice Department’s commitment to hold accountable those who seek to defraud government programs for their own personal enrichment.”
read more here

College Veterans Benefits Not Being Paid Still!

Veterans haven't received GI Bill benefits for months due to ongoing IT issues at VA

NBC News 
By Phil McCausland 
November 11, 2018

"I’m about to lose everything that I own and become homeless. I don’t want to be that veteran on the street begging for change because I haven’t received what I was promised."

U.S. War veterans salute during the Veterans Day parade in New York on Nov. 11, 2017.Eduardo Munoz / Reuters file

Shelley Roundtree departed the U.S. Army in 2013 after seeing friends and fellow soldiers die in combat during his tour in Afghanistan. He was committed to transitioning to civilian life, and one of his first steps was to enroll in college with tuition and housing benefits he'd earned under the GI Bill.

Roundtree, 29, began studying marketing at Berkeley College in Midtown Manhattan. He dreams of working in the fashion industry, and he's close to graduating — but now there's a serious obstacle.

The Department of Veterans Affairs is suffering from a series of information technology glitches that has caused GI Bill benefit payments covering education and housing to be delayed or — in the case of Roundtree — never be delivered.

"I’m about to lose everything that I own and become homeless," Roundtree said. "I don’t want to be that veteran on the street begging for change because I haven’t received what I was promised."

Without the GI Bill's housing stipend, Roundtree was kicked out of his apartment and is now living on his sister's couch, miles from school, where he feels like a burden on his family. The new living situation required him to move all his belongings into a storage container, which he can no longer afford. Now all of his possessions are in danger of being auctioned off by the storage facility.

"It’s just confusing," said Roundtree. "Who is there for us? Who is representing us? Who is helping us? Who is doing what they need to do to better the situation for veterans?"
read more here

New Program Eases Veterans' Transition to College Life

VA Announces Expansion of VetSuccess on Campus Pilots
New Program Eases Veterans' Transition to College Life

WASHINGTON (Oct. 5, 2010) -- "Two community colleges and three other
four-year colleges and universities are being added to the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) VetSuccess on Campus pilot program. VA counselors
are being assigned to assist Veterans attending school under the
Post-9/11 GI Bill make the most of their educational opportunities at
Salt Lake City Community College, the Community College of Rhode Island,
Rhode Island College, Arizona State University and Texas A&M University.

"A growing number of the eight million students in America's community
colleges are Veterans," said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K.
Shinseki. "VA will do all it can to make Veterans' experiences in our
community colleges and universities fulfilling and productive for them,
their schools and the Nation."

The pilot program is designed to ensure Veterans' health, educational,
and benefits needs are met as they make the transition from active-duty
military service to college life.

The announcement comes as the White House holds the first-ever community
college summit chaired by Dr. Jill Biden, wife of Vice President Joe
Biden and adjunct English professor at Northern Virginia Community
College. The meeting of top school and federal education officials will
focus on ways that community colleges can help meet education and
workforce demands.

"I am thrilled to see the expansion of the VetSuccess program" said Dr.
Biden. "I know the transition from military to student life can be
challenging and we owe it to those who have served our country to make
their transitions as easy and successful as possible."

Under the pilot program already underway at the University of South
Florida, Cleveland State University, and San Diego State University,
experienced VA vocational rehabilitation counselors and outreach
coordinators from VA's Vet Centers are assigned to campuses to provide
vocational testing, career and academic counseling, and readjustment
counseling services to ensure Veterans receive the support and
assistance needed to successfully pursue their educational and
employment goals.

VA counselors work directly with school officials to establish effective
communications channels with Veteran students and coordinate the
delivery of VA benefits and services.

Peer-to-peer counseling and referral services are also available to help
resolve any problems that could potentially interfere with a Veteran's
educational program, including referrals for more intensive health
services through VA Medical Centers, Community-Based Outpatient Clinics,
or Vet Centers, as needed.

For more information on VA benefit programs and VetSuccess, go to
http://www.vba.va.gov or www.vetsuccess.gov
or call 1-800-827-1000.

Military Officers Assoc. honors Sen. Webb

Military Officers Assoc. honors Sen. Webb

By Allison Brophy Champion

Published: April 24, 2009

The Military Officers Association of America honored Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., this week with its highest award for his consistent support of service members and their families.

A Vietnam veteran and Marine, Webb introduced the Post-9/11 GI Bill on Jan. 3, 2007, his first day in office.

The legislation was signed into law last summer, providing educational benefits — similar to those given to World War II vets — to veterans of the post-9/11 era.

It was for his advocacy that the MOAA presented Webb its highest honor at a ceremony in Washington Tuesday — the 2009 Col. Arthur T. Matrix Congressional Leadership Award, named for the group’s founder.
go here for more
Military Officers Assoc. honors Sen. Webb

McCain lost veterans votes when he voted against them

For a lot of veterans, the straw that broke McCain's support from veterans came when they understood McCain did not deserve their support. They opened their eyes to the fact that when it came to taking care of them, McCain was simply not interested. When he called Senator Jim Webb's GI Bill, "too generous" that was the end of his free ride over the backs of veterans who supported him just because he was one of them. It's almost as if McCain just took them for granted thinking they would always be loyal to him no matter how he treated them.

Democrats See Benefit Boosts as a Way to Pry Veterans from GOP
Shawn Zeller


CQ Today

Sep 03, 2008
September 2, 2008 - John McCain is rarely thrown off kilter during town hall meetings. So it was surprising when, last month in Denver, a nasty exchange ensued after a veteran accused McCain of speaking out against the new GI Bill and voting against increased funding for veterans' health care.

Republicans have typically enjoyed wide support from veterans, but McCain can expect a lot more where that came from.

Barack Obama is making a concerted push for veterans' votes in November. He's getting help from a number of new, liberal-minded veterans' groups and from the union representing civil servants at the departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs. They say Democrats can win over the veterans' vote by offering generous benefits to returning troops.

"The watershed moment is going to be the GI Bill," said Patrick Campbell, chief legislative counsel for one of the new groups, the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA). "Here you had John McCain opposing a proposal that was endorsed by every veterans' service organization, endorsed by a majority of the Senate and two-thirds of the House, with huge bipartisan support on either side of the aisle, and John McCain said it's too generous."
go here for more
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/ArticleID/11061

McCain's "us" is really "them"

McCain's heart belongs to Bush. Not us.

When McCain says the word "us" most of us think he's talking about us, the regular people. We think he's talking about the men and women who are in fact the backbone of this country. Everyday people who go to work, dealing with problems the majority of the citizens deal with. Yet, when you consider what he's really saying, what he's proven to really be interested in, the "us" is really the people like McCain and not like the rest of us.

Jim Webb is one of us and cared about us while McCain went against us.

McCain, well, he never had to worry about paying for college because he served and the tax payers took care of his bill. Not that he needed the funding but because he earned it. This is one thing he thought was too good for the men and women serving today when he tried to kill Jim Webb's GI bill. He fought against it saying "it's just too generous" and "will hurt retention" by "making it more attractive to leave the military" and then he flipped when the bill was passed saying he thought it wasn't generous enough. Yet if you raise the fact Obama and his wife spent years to finish paying off their student loans, McCain will say that "but I was a POW and spent five years getting an education at the hands of the Vietnamese."

McCain never had to worry about healthcare because yet again, the tax payers took care of his medical care, because he was a veteran and senator. He doesn't think the rest of the veterans in this country deserve the same care and has proven this by voting against the increase needed for the VA to be able to take care of the new veterans and especially the wounded. We've all read how bad it has been for them but McCain, well, they are just not in the same category he's in. If you say that Obama and his wife had to worry about it most of their lives, he'll yet again say, "but I was a POW and instead of having his health taken care of it was jeopardized at the hands of the Vietnamese."

McCain never had to worry about filling his gas tank to get to a job. As a matter of fact, he didn't even know what gas prices were. Speaking of jobs, he never had to stand in an unemployment line either. He's been on government payroll all his life never having held a regular job the rest of us do and the rest of the veterans have to deal with when they are done serving and have to deal with trying to find a job in the economy Bush/McCain policies created. As veterans come back dealing with trying to readjust, the VA has been unable to keep up with the demands of helping them. Then we have the citizen soldiers who are members of the National Guards and Reservists who have to leave their jobs over and over again, their families, their incomes only to return to find their jobs and businesses are no longer there and their homes have been foreclosed on. Yet again if you raise this with McCain he'll say "I was a POW and my job was staying alive" which he ended up doing what it took in order to survive. He's been doing that ever since. Stooping to any level in order to get elected.

While the rest of us are worrying about losing our homes, McCain can't remember how many he has. Again when this was raised McCain did in fact bring up the fact for five years he was living as a POW at the hands of the Vietnamese.

McCain has never been poor and never living off government payroll. When it comes to his term of "us" he means people in his class not the rest of us. When he refers to "us" as in veterans, he's talking about the ones who are not paying attention and not having to fight to survive for over thirty years trying to have their wounds taken care of and their bills paid when they lost the ability to pay them because they were wounded serving in Vietnam, in the Gulf War and in the two occupations going on right now.

McCain is not one of "us" he's proven he's one of them. The people responsible for the hardships we have to live with because he cared more about the "them" that did it all to us. kc

Bush's speech on Webb's GI Bill was a load of lies

YouTube - COUNTDOWN: Sen. Jim Webb On The GI Bill 6/30/08
Jim Webb discuss the recent GI bill he sponsored and the hypocritical stance of President Bush and Sen. John McCain trying to take credit for it when they

Statement of Senator Jim Webb on the White House's Embrace of his 21st Century GI Bill
"For the past 17 months, I and my staff have been working every day to provide first-class educational benefits to those who have served since 9/11. I am delighted that after having opposed this legislation, the President has now pledged that he will not veto it when it comes before him as part of this year's supplemental appropriations package.

"The bill being sent to the President contains every provision in S. 22, which has received meticulous scrutiny and the full support of every major veterans' organization. It will pay for a veteran's tuition, books, and a monthly stipend, along the lines of the benefits given to those who returned from World War II. As such, it fulfills the pledge I made on my first day of office to provide today's veterans with the opportunity to move forward into an absolutely first-class future.

"I would like to again express my appreciation to the veterans' service organizations, many of whom communicated their support of this bill directly to a skeptical White House, and to the 58 Senate and 302 House cosponsors of this landmark legislation. This bipartisan coalition consistently rejected the allegations of this Administration, and of Senators McCain, Burr and Graham, among others, who claimed that the bill was too generous to our veterans, too difficult to administer and would hurt retention.

"It has now been nearly seven years since 9/11 -- seven years since those who have been serving in our military began earning the right for a proper wartime GI Bill. I am looking forward to the President living up to his word, and signing this legislation at his earliest opportunity."
To view a Fact Sheet on S.22, please click here
To download a complete press packet on S.22, please click here
To view the Senate co-sponsors, please click here
To view the House co-sponsors, please click here
New York Times Op-Ed: A Post-Iraq G.I. Bill by Senators Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel (November 9, 2007)
Washington Post Editorial: Reward for Service, Veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan deserve an improved GI bill (November 11, 2007)
Prominent GI Bill Beneficiaries (Edward Humes, Over Here: How the GI Bill Transformed the American Dream)
Chart on WWII Veterans in the Senate--How Much the GI Bill Would Cover Then & Now

but here is Bush's speech

President Bush Signs H.R. 2642, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008
Oval Office

Video (Windows)
Presidential Remarks
Audio
En Español



9:48 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. A few moments ago I signed legislation that funds our troops who are in harm's way. Our nation has no greater responsibility than supporting our men and women in uniform -- especially since we're at war. This is a responsibility all of us in Washington share -- not as Republicans or Democrats, but as Americans. And I want to thank leaders of the House and Senate for getting this bill to my office.

America remains a nation at war. There are enemies who intend to harm us. Standing in their way are brave men and women, who put on the uniform, who raise their right hand, and took an oath to defend our freedom. They volunteered to deploy in distant lands, far from their families, far from their homes, and far from comfort of America. And every day, they risk their lives to defeat our adversaries and to keep our country safe.

We owe these brave Americans our gratitude. We owe them our unflinching support. And the best way to demonstrate that support is to give them the resources they need to do their jobs and to prevail. The bill I sign today does exactly that. It provides necessary funds to support our troops as they conduct military operations in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and in other theaters in the war on terror.

I appreciate that Republicans and Democrats in Congress agreed to provide these vital funds without tying the hands of our commanders, and without an artificial timetable of withdrawal from Iraq. Our troops have driven the terrorists and extremists from many strongholds in Iraq; today violence is at the lowest level since March of 2004. As a result of this progress, some of our troops are coming home as result of our policy called "return on success." We welcome them home. And with this legislation we send a clear message to all that are servings [sic] on the front line that our nation continues to support them.

We also owe a debt of gratitude to our nation's military families. They endure sleepless nights, and the daily struggle of caring for children while a loved one is serving far from home. We have a responsibility to provide for them. So I'm pleased that the bill I sign today includes an expansion of the GI Bill. This legislation will make it easier for our troops to transfer unused education benefits to their spouses and children. It will help us to recruit and reward the best military on the face of the Earth. It will help us to meet our responsibilities to those who support our troops every day -- America's great military families.

The bill also includes agreed-upon funding for other critical national priorities. This bill includes $465 million for the Merida Initiative -- a partnership with Mexico and nations in Central America to crack down on violent drug trafficking gangs. The bill includes nearly $2.7 billion to help ensure that any state facing a disaster like the recent flooding and tornadoes in the Midwest has access to needed resources. This bill includes a measured expansion of unemployment insurance benefits with a reasonable work requirement. And this bill holds overall discretionary spending within the sensible limits that I requested.

The bill is a result of close collaboration between my administration and members of both parties on Capitol Hill. I appreciate the hard work of my Cabinet -- especially the leaders of Defense and State, and Veterans Affairs, the Office of National Drug Control Policy, as well as OMB. I want to thank House and Senate leadership and leaders of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. I am particularly grateful to Congressmen Boehner, Hoyer, Obey, and Lewis. And I want to thank members who worked hard for the GI Bill expansion -- especially Senators Webb and Warner, Graham, Burr, and McCain.

This bill shows the American people that even in an election year, Republicans and Democrats can come together to stand behind our troops and their families.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/06/20080630.html

Too bad the fact is Bush, McCain and others fought against this bill and that is why Webb had to fight so hard to get this many to sign onto it. He had to make sure Bush could not be able to veto it as he promised he would and was on tape saying he would veto it. McCain fought it because he said it was just too generous.

Now I heard on the Randi Rhodes show today that McCain is getting disability payments from the VA for his wounds. If he is, he does deserve them but you would think he wouldn't have become part of the "I got mine, screw you club!" since he always votes against veterans.

Bush signs war funding, GI Bill overhaul

Bush signs war funding, GI Bill overhaul

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Jun 30, 2008 10:17:41 EDT

A $162 billion war funding bill that includes a $63 billion overhaul of GI Bill education benefits was signed Monday by President Bush.

“The bill shows even in an election year, Republicans and Democrats can come together to stand behind our troops,” Bush said, predicting the GI Bill increases would be a boost to military recruiting and also a boon to families if educational benefits are transferred to family members.

The signing of HR 2642 brings an end to a Pentagon cash-flow crisis that threatened to disrupt military and civilian payroll, cancel or delay maintenance, and postpone nonessential training and travel.

And, for the first time since the Vietnam War, there will be a completely free veterans’ education benefit program that pays enough to fully cover the cost of getting a four-year college degree.

go here for more
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/06/military_gibill_signed_063008w/

Iraq Vet Driven by Friend's Death

Iraq Vet Driven by Friend's Death
Daniel W. Reilly


Politico

Jun 25, 2008

June 25, 2008 - On the eve of last month’s Senate vote on Sen. Jim Webb’s GI Bill, Patrick Campbell clicked "send" on one last lobbying e-mail to staffers. Then he broke down and cried.

Campbell, the legislative director for Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, had started his message by laying out all of the latest developments on Webb’s bill.

In the final paragraphs, the Iraq war veteran shared the news that was foremost in his mind, news that he hadn’t shared with anyone outside his unit.

"Yesterday," he wrote, "one of my buddies from Iraq committed suicide."

It should have been a heady week for Campbell, a week in which the former staffer for Sen. Barbara Boxer (Calif.) and other Democrats shared a rally stage with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-­Calif.), saw the Senate vote overwhelmingly in favor of Webb’s bill and graduated from law school at Catholic University.
go here for more
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/ArticleID/10492

How The GI Bill Changed America

How The GI Bill Changed America
Sunday Morning: Legislation For Servicemembers Returning From WWII Now Updated For A New Generation Of Vets

June 22, 2008


(CBS) PL 346 was the Congressional designation of a landmark bill signed into law 64 years ago today - legislation designed to smooth the transition to civilian life for millions of World War II servicemen. In the process it changed America for ALL of us. Congress is very close to approving expanded benefits for service men and women of today's Iraq War era. Our Cover Story is reported now by Thalia Assuras.

They returned to a hero's welcome - sixteen million men and women who had served their country during World War II, one out of every nine Americans.

Yet, along with all the smiles and the tears of joy, there were fresh worries: Would returning vets be able to find jobs? A place to live? What was next?

"There was a near certainty that after the war - assuming the allies were victorious - that a depression would follow, just as happened after World War I - that the economy would tank," said author and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Ed Humes.

In his book "Over Here," Humes tracks the fate of those returning GIs.

"You had an economy that had been totally retooled to manufacture arms," he said of wartime America. "You had women entering the workforce in record numbers to take the jobs that the men had to leave to go fight. And so suddenly saying, 'Okay, back to normal,' it was gonna hit us like an explosion."

But it didn't.

In a display of foresight not often seen in Washington, long before victory was assured, President Franklin Roosevelt put into motion a plan to ease vets back into the fragile economy.
go here for more
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/22/sunday/main4200692.shtml


We've all heard for years about how important this "war on terror" is to the security of this country and yet those who seem to scream the loudest about giving Bush every dime he asks for are also the last to pay for it. They won't fund the money going into Iraq or Afghanistan. Sure they can write checks but the fund it all on borrowed money. What's worse is they have no problem doing it with borrowed lives either. Think about the men and women who serve this nation. They borrow their lives to do the jobs the President and the congress say needs to be done. When they are done serving, they also expect these men and women to be left on their own after. When they are wounded, they expect them to just stand in line as their lives fall apart wondering how to pay their bills and support their families. These same war approvers are also the last ones to pay for the lives they borrowed in terms of taking care of their needs. If the "war on terror" is all so important to the security of this nation, wouldn't their lives be worth whatever money it takes to take care of them for real?

Senate passes Webb GI Bill

Senate passes Webb GI Bill

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday May 22, 2008 16:17:38 EDT

The Senate voted 75-22 for a GI Bill education benefits package that defense and service officials say would hurt the military but that veterans groups say is an overdue adjustment to make the benefit more like the World War II-era GI Bill.

The House of Representatives passed the bill last week, meaning the fate of the proposal — which would pay full tuition at a four-year public college or university plus living expenses and a book allowance — rests on whether President Bush vetoes the measure, as Pentagon officials have recommended and White House officials have threatened.

Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., chief sponsor of the bill, said he hoped the president would listen to veterans groups and sign it, which he said would be a boost to recruiting and a reward for those who have served in the military since the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The main Pentagon objection, and there are several, is that the benefits package does not include an administration proposal that would blunt the draw of leaving the service to use GI Bill benefits by giving those who stay for six years or longer the option of transferring benefits to a spouse or children.

The benefits package, called the 21st Century GI Bill of Rights, is attached to a wartime supplemental funding bill that has been loaded with billions of dollars for nondefense proposals, including extended unemployment compensation, aid for farmers and highway construction funds — which gives President Bush a variety of reasons to veto the bill even though defense officials are begging for money for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
go here for more
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/05/military_gibill_passescongress_052208w/

McCain says the legislation is too expensive on GI Bill

McCain says the legislation is too expensive and has proposed his own version, which would increase the monthly benefit available to most veterans to $1,500 from $1,100. It would not offer the equivalent of a full scholarship.

The ad by VoteVets.org Action Fund, features Iraq and Afghanistan veterans noting that both McCain and President Bush oppose the bill.

"McCain thinks covering a fraction of our education is enough," one veteran says. Another one, pictured recovering from head wounds, adds in a voiceover: "We didn't give a fraction in Iraq. We gave 100 percent."

"Senator McCain" an announcer concludes, "we respect your service. Please respect ours."http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/20/AR2008052000020.html

I heard this ad. McCain said the GI Bill was too generous in one of the speeches he gave. Can you imagine that? Too generous? For men and women who were willing to risk their lives, do what they were asked to do and always gave 100% while deployed doing their jobs! McCain doesn't think they are worth it. I don't think he's worth any support from any of them. Think about it. While McCain seems to be running on being a Vietnam Vet and POW, he has voted against the veterans and the troops while in the senate. He is no longer a POW and he is longer in the military, so that makes him a veteran, yet he cannot be bothered to vote in their best interests or in the interests of the troops serving now.

He is a Senator and must be held accountable for what he has done, along with what he has not done all these years serving in the Senate. That is what this election has to come down to. Yes, he deserves respect as any veteran does, but just because he is a veteran that does not mean he is not a jerk and a hothead who does not give a damn about any of the needs veterans have. Begin a veteran does not give him the rank of saint demanding unquestioning worship! Stop bowing down to him and hold him accountable.

I would be the first one backing him if he cared about the troops and the vetearns. After all, I voted for him when he ran against Bush in 2000. He is no longer that same man who cared more about the country than the power he could obtain from this country. He has found people more worthy of his attention than the troops and most of them are lobbyists.

What benefits soldiers will benefit all of us

What benefits soldiers will benefit all of us
By MITCH ALBOM
Thursday, May 15, 2008 11:17 AM CDT


It was my uncle, your grandfather, his best friend. It was your dad or his neighbor or his brother-in-law. They were soldiers in World War II, and when they finished serving their country, they came home to a grateful embrace - not just words, but action.

There was something called the GI Bill, passed in 1944, and it quite literally changed the face of America. It paid for returning soldiers to study at trade schools, colleges, universities - even medical and law schools.

Paid in full.

Nearly 8 million soldiers had participated by the time the original bill expired in 1956. Men who otherwise might never have gotten a higher education did so - and improved the lives of their families as a result. It was a seeding of American society, a leg up for those who stood up. It made sense. It was humane.

Today, a new bill is being proposed, one that would essentially do for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan what we did for those in World War II. A new, expanded GI Bill. It has bipartisan support from senators and congressmen. But not from the White House.

The same White House that features a president and vice president who never saw combat, the same White House that throws around the phrase “support our troops” to serve its purposes, thinks this bill is too expensive. It costs $2 billion to $4 billion a year. Too expensive?

“That’s what we’re spending in a few days in Iraq,” said Patrick Campbell, who served in Baghdad, saw several of his fellow soldiers killed and is now legislative director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “This is a travesty. If we don’t invest in this, instead of having the next Greatest Generation, we’re going to have a generation of veterans who came home and just got lost in the system.”

Amen. The Bush administration should be ashamed for opposing this. Forget bumper stickers or mantras on talk radio. You want to prove you support the troops? Tell your lawmakers to invest our tax dollars not just in steel and metal, but in human potential.

go here for more
http://bgdailynews.com/articles/2008/05/15/opinion/commentary/comment2.txt

Virtually throughout the entire Bush presidency, he made countless speeches on the fact we must support the troops, yet he is the first one to deny them what they need.

Fully funding the VA is too expensive. Funding the GI Bill is too expensive. Building VA hospitals and Veteran's Centers is too expensive. On and on the list goes at the same time he makes more speeches about supporting the troops and how valuable the military families are. It appears that the end of supporting the troops comes when they come home and the value of the military families is only valuable when he wants their votes.

Bush fought against the pay raises. He didn't seem to value any of them when the families were and still are on food stamps. He has fought against everything that provides for the troops he screams at us to support. When it came to accountability, it was duck, dodge and cover up for all he lacked. Appreciation was limited to a speech given in front of them and behind their backs he tried to end any talk of spending money to care for them. Grateful ended when he discovered there was a loophole in the enlistment papers and he could keep them longer than they agreed to do by sending them back under stop loss. When the casualties began to rise, he discovered that if he lowered the standard requirements for enlisting, ranging from lacking education, to gang members, to felony records and drug convictions, it was no longer necessary to have moral standards as long as he got the numbers of boots on the ground. Nothing else mattered.

When it came time for him to order extended tours of duty, the view of detrimental conditions, were considered too trivial to matter and rest time was reduced as well.

Every time we read of the Democratic attempts to undo the harm being done, there is Bush and the GOP standing in the way of doing anything worthy of the same troops they claim to support. When it comes to the men and women who serve, they are last on the to do list until they need their votes and faces behind them during speeches. If you doubt any of this, just look up their voting records and the bills they introduced at a time when the troops needed action for their sake, the GOP had better things to do with their time.

Just one more case to my point.

Congress backs higher pay raise than Bush

Lawmakers clearly don’t share the Bush administration’s view that bigger military pay raises are a waste of money.
Read More

GI Bill costs are worth it, vets groups say

GI Bill costs are worth it, vets groups say

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday May 13, 2008 13:03:28 EDT

Two veterans groups — the nation’s largest and one of the newest — are urging lawmakers to weigh the cost of improved veterans’ benefits against the cost of America’s current wars.

“The GI Bill is a cost of war as much as any other expenditure,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan War Veterans, founded in 2004. “Any member of Congress who votes for a $170 billion war bill and then votes against the GI Bill is nickel-and-diming our troops. Veterans of all generations will be outraged by that decision.”

Marty Conatser, national commander of the American Legion, said that when the Legion fought in 1944 for the original World War II GI Bill, “even some veterans’ groups complained that it would break the treasury.”

“Instead, the GI Bill transformed the economy and has been widely hailed as the greatest domestic legislation Congress has ever passed,” said Conatser, whose organization has 2.7 million members.
go here for more
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/05/military_veterans_gibill_051308w/

Tell Gates and McCain "retention" is no reason to shaft troops

Defense Secretary Robert Gates criticized Webb’s bill as a detriment to service retention efforts in an April 29 letter to the Senate Armed Services Committee. Gates also endorsed key features of the Graham bill without citing the bill by name or number. Clearly the Bush administration hopes that Graham and colleagues have put enough alluring features in S 2938 to draw bipartisan support away Webb’s bill. S 22 already has 58 co-sponsors in the Senate and 250 House members back a companion bill, HR 5740.

In battle over GI Bills, Webb still holds high ground
By Tom Philpott, Special to Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Saturday, May 3, 2008



In perhaps any other year, the new Republican plan for enhancing the Montgomery GI Bill, which Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) introduced this week with Sens. Richard Burr (N.C.) and John McCain (Ariz.), would win high praise from advocates for service members and veterans.

But as momentum builds on Capitol Hill to pass S. 22, Sen. Jim Webb’s hefty new GI Bill to replace MGIB for any service member – active, Guard or Reserve – with qualifying active duty service since the attacks of 9-11, the Republican plan still might be a few critical features short of an acceptable replacement for S 22 among leaders of GI Bill reform.

Graham’s bill, the Enhancement of Recruitment, Retention and Readjustment through Education Act (S 2938), is cleverly crafted and will seem generous in comparison to a more basic MGIB reform bill, HR 5684, which the House Veterans Affairs Committee endorsed April 29th.
go here for more
http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=54499

John McCain needs to remember he's a veteran

GI Bill Sparks Senate War
Politico: Sens. McCain, Webb Locked In Battle Over Webb's New GI Bill
Comments 6
April 30, 2008


The Politico) This story was written by David Rogers.

From Annapolis to Vietnam and back to the Pentagon, John McCain and Jim Webb trod the same paths before coming to the Senate. Iraq divides them today, but there’s also the new kinship of being anxious fathers watching their sons come and go with Marine units in the war.

So what does it say about Washington that two such men, with so much in common, are locked in an increasingly intense debate over a shared value: education benefits for veterans?

“It’s very odd,” said former Nebraska Democratic Sen. Bob Kerrey, a mutual friend. And that oddness gets greater by the day as the two headstrong senators barrel down colliding tracks.

An Arizona Republican, McCain has all but locked up the Republican presidential nomination and is preparing for a fall campaign in which his support of the Iraq war is sure to be a major issue. Yet the former Navy pilot and Vietnam POW makes himself a target by refusing to endorse Webb’s new GI education bill and instead signing on to a Republican alternative that focuses more on career soldiers than on the great majority who leave after their first four years.

Undaunted, Webb, who was a Marine infantry officer in Vietnam, is closing in on the bipartisan support needed to overcome procedural hurdles in the Senate, where the cost of his package - estimated now at about $52 billion over 10 years - is sure to be an issue. But McCain’s support would seal the deal like nothing else, and the new Republican bill, together with a letter of opposition Tuesday from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, threatens to peel off support before the Democrat gets to the crucial threshold of 60 votes.
click post title for more

John McCain loves to remind people he served during the Vietnam war and was a POW. He has held this part of his life up as a reason to make him Commander-in-Chief of the military and also seems to think this makes him the perfect person to become President. If this reason alone qualified him to become President then there are a lot of others who would also qualify to become President since there were a lot of other prisoners of war.


There are these from the occupation of Iraq

Most of the POWs were captured from the ambush of the 507th Maintenance Company when a convoy of vehicles from the 507th got lost and entered the Iraqi held town of Nasiriyah on March 23, 2003. The 507th was in charge of supporting actual combat troops but were not combat troops themselves and were ill equipped for fighting and quickly surrendered after all their weapons jammed. From their unit nine soldiers in the company were captured in the ambush and following soldiers surrendered to Iraqi forces:
Spc. Edgar Hernandez, 21, of Mission, Texas, was hit in the biceps of his right arm.
Spc. Joseph Hudson, 23, of Alamogordo, New Mexico, was shot three times, twice in the ribs and once in the upper left buttocks.
Spc. Shoshana Johnson, 32, a naturalized American from Panama, was shot with a single bullet that sliced through both ankles. She was the first black woman ever taken prisoner in the American military history.
Private First Class Patrick Miller, 23, of Wichita, Kansas
Sgt. James Riley - 31-year-old bachelor from Pennsauken, New Jersey. As the senior soldier present it was he who ordered the surrender.

And famous one

Jessica Lynch born April 26, 1983 in Palestine, West Virginia suffered a head laceration, an injury to her spine, and fractures to her right arm, both legs, and her right foot and ankle. She was knocked unconscious after her Humvee crashed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_P.O.W.s_in_2003_Invasion_of_Iraq

We also have these from the Gulf War

Acree, Clifford M. USMC Jan.18, 1991 POW 03/05/91
Andrews, William USAF -- MIA 03/05/91
Berryman, Michael C. USMC -- MIA 03/05/91
Cornum, Rhonda USA -- * 03/05/91
Dunlap, Troy USA -- * 03/05/91
Eberly, David W. USAF Jan. 17, 1991 POW 03/05/91
Fox, Jeffrey USAF Feb. 19, 1991 POW 03/05/91
Griffith, Thomas E. Jr. USAF Jan. 17, 1991 POW 03/04/91
Hunter, Guy L. Jr. USMC Jan. 18, 1991 POW 03/05/91
Lockett, David USA Jan. 20, 1991 MIA 03/04/91
Roberts, Harry M. USAF Jan. - 1991 POW 03/05/91
Rathbun-Nealy, Melissa USA Jan. 30, 1991 MIA 03/04/91
Slade, Lawrence R. USN Jan. 21, 19915,3 POW 03/04/91
Small, Joseph USMC Feb. 25, 1991 MIA 03/05/91
Sanborn, Russell A.C. USMC Feb. 09, 1991 MIA 03/05/91
Stamaris, Daniel USA -- * 03/05/91
Storr, Richard Dale USAF -- MIA 03/05/91
Sweet, Robert J. USAF Feb. - , 1991 MIA 03/05/91
Tice, Jeffrey Scott USAF Jan. -, 1991 POW 03/05/91
Wetzel, Robert USN Jan. 17, 1991 MIA 03/04/91
Zaun, Jeffrey Norton USN Jan. 17, 1991 POW 03/04/91
http://www.nationalalliance.org/gulf/returnees.htm

And more from Vietnam

List of 1,205 P.O.W.s
In April 1993, Harvard scholar Stephen Morris discovered a document in a Soviet archive indicating that Vietnam may have misled Americans about the numbers of P.O.W.s it held at the war's end. The document, a translation of writings allegedly prepared by North Vietnamese general Tran Van Quang, stated that North Vietnam held 1,205 American P.O.W.s as of September 1972, just a few months before the release of the 591 P.O.W.s in Operation Homecoming. U.S. government officials suggested that the discrepancy in numbers might have been an exaggeration on the part of Tran Van Quang, or that a confusion of statistics between American soldiers and South Vietnamese commandos caused by an error in translation. Several independent analysts, however, including former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, said that the document appeared authentic.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/trenches/mia.html

Then you have survivors of the Korean War as well. But the only thing all of these people have in common is that they served their country and were held in some of the most horrific conditions anyone could endure. Fully 100% of people who have been tortured develop PTSD because of the treatment they received.

Yes, Mc Cain was a POW but he has also been a senator with a very poor record of voting for veterans. Again if being a POW qualifies him to be President then line up everyone else and let them all run against McCain. The media will not go after any of them on what they say because they never question McCain even though he has a record to either stand or fall on as a Senator.

McCain runs as a veteran but he also runs away from being one when it comes time to taking care of them. When the votes were needed to take care of the wounded from Iraq and Afghanistan, before he put his hat in the ring for the presidency, he voted against veterans. Did anyone ask him why?

These are just a few.

In mid 2007, Senator Reid noted that McCain missed 10 of the past 14 votes on Iraq. However, here is a summary of a dozen votes (two that he missed and ten that he voted against) with respect to Iraq, funding for veterans or for troops, including equipment and armor. I have also included other snippets related to the time period when the vote occurred.

September 2007: McCain voted against the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments. At the time, nearly 65% of people polled in a CNN poll indicted that "things are going either moderately badly or very badly in Iraq.

July 2007: McCain voted against a plan to drawdown troop levels in Iraq. At the time, an ABC poll found that 63% thought the invasion was not worth it, and a CBS News poll found that 72% of respondents wanted troops out within 2 years.

March 2007: McCain was too busy to vote on a bill that would require the start of a drawdown in troop levels within 120 days with a goal of withdrawing nearly all combat troops within one year. Around this time, an NBC News poll found that 55% of respondents indicated that the US goal of achieving victory in Iraq is not possible. This number has not moved significantly since then.

February 2007: For such a strong supporter of the escalation, McCain didn’t even bother to show up and vote against a resolution condemning it. However, at the time a CNN poll found that only 16% of respondents wanted to send more troops to Iraq (that number has since declined to around 10%), while 60% said that some or all should be withdrawn. This number has since gone up to around 70%.

June 2006: McCain voted against a resolution that Bush start withdrawing troops but with no timeline to do so.

May 2006: McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.

April 2006: McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.

March 2006: McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.

March 2004: McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes. Jeez, McCain really loves those tax loopholes for corporations, since he voted for them over our veterans' needs.

October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.

April 2003: McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.

August 2001: McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000. To his credit, he also voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, which he now supports making permanent, despite the dire financial condition this country is in, and despite the fact that he indicated in 2001 that these tax cuts unfairly benefited the very wealthy at the expense of the middle class.
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/articleid/9559

When the media finally asked him about the new GI Bill, first he said he didn't have time to read it. Imagine that! All these veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan and he didn't have time to even read the bill because he was out campaigning to become Commander-in-Chief of the military. Then the media asked him again why he did not support the bill. This time he responded by saying that he didn't think it was a good idea to make it more "attractive" to leave the military than to stay in it.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, seemed to give a thumbs down to bipartisan legislation that would greatly expand educational benefits for members of the military returning from Iraq and Afghanistan under the GI Bill.
McCain indicated he would offer some sort of alternative to the legislation to address concerns that expanding the GI Bill could lead more members of the military to get out of the service.
Read the whole story here.

The questions here are very simple ones. If Mc Cain wants to run as a veteran then why does he run away from what veterans need from him? Why does he keep turning his back on other veterans? Why is the media afraid to ask him questions they would have no problem at all asking anyone else? Do they think fact checking and asking him questions would insult the fact he was a POW? If that's the case then this would qualify all POW's this nation has for taking over as President and I'm sure they could all do a much better job for the sake of their brothers and sisters who deserve and earned so much more than he is willing to provide them with.


Chaplain Kathie Costos
Namguardianangel@aol.com
www.Namguardianangel.org
www.Namguardianangel.blogspot.com
www.Woundedtimes.blogspot.com
"The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of early wars were treated and appreciated by our nation." - George Washington

John McCain forgets a lot

Vets’ groups push for better GI Bill

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Apr 14, 2008 20:20:37 EDT

Two groups of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans have launched efforts to persuade more members of Congress to endorse a major increase in GI Bill benefits.

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, which claims about 85,000 members, is running full-page newspaper advertisements to get support for S 22, the 21st Century GI Bill, which would raise education benefits to fully cover the cost of tuition and fees at a four-year public college, plus pay a monthly stipend.

IAVA officials said the ads are targeted at five key lawmakers: Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Reps. Norman Dicks, D-Wash.; Jerry Lewis, R-Calif.; John Murtha, D-Penn.; and David Obey, D-Ohio.

The four representatives are all members of the House Appropriations Committee, which oversees federal spending.

Paul Rieckhoff, IAVA executive director, said the current GI Bill, with a maximum monthly benefit of $1,101, is “just a fraction” of the original post-World War II benefit that fully paid for college.

“Honoring our nation’s veterans is not a partisan issue,” Rieckhoff said in a statement. “Every lawmaker should stand with us to truly support America’s newest generation of heroes. Congress must pass a new GI Bill this year.”

Another group of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, members of VoteVets.Org., are targeting a single person — Arizona Sen. John McCain — to get his support for S 22.
go here for more
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/04/military_gibill_improvements_041408w/

Oh but wait. On the same page of Army Times there is this little bit of news on McCain;

McCain reveals confusion over Petraeus role

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Apr 14, 2008 17:58:09 EDT

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona may not have been paying the closest of attention last week during hearings on the Bush administration’s Iraq policy.

Speaking Monday at the annual meeting of the Associated Press, McCain was asked whether he, if elected, would shift combat troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to intensify the search for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

“I would not do that unless Gen. [David] Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that,” McCain said, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Petraeus, however, made clear last week that he has nothing to do with the decision. Testifying last week before four congressional committees, including the Senate Armed Services Committee on which McCain is the ranking Republican, Petraeus said the decision about whether troops could be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan was not his responsibility because his portfolio is limited to the multi-national force in Iraq.

Decisions about Afghanistan would be made by others, he said.

“I’ve been sort of focused on another task,” Petraeus said when pressed about whether more troops should be diverted to Afghanistan rather than Iraq.
go here for more of this

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/04/military_mccain_petraeus_041408w/

So it seems we have McCain running as a veteran who doesn't care about veterans when it comes to his votes, and now it seems he's running for the role of Commander-in-Chief without knowing that General Petraeus is not in charge of Afghanistan and in fact was not the boss of either operation. Admiral Mullen was.

Admiral Mullen reports for duty
By Derrick Z. Jackson, Globe Columnist October 2, 2007

WE HAVE a new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The question is: What will happen if he says something that the commander-in-chief does not want to hear?


Navy Admiral Mike Mullen yesterday replaced Marine General Peter Pace because Pace became too much a symbol of the Iraq quagmire. In June, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said he originally wanted to renominate Pace for another two years. But Gates determined that the nation would not have been served by a "divisive ordeal" of renomination hearings.

"The focus of his confirmation process would have been on the past rather than the future, and further, that there was the very real prospect the process would be quite contentious," Gates conceded.

Almost by default, Mullen was viewed in Washington as fresh air, unafraid to blow back at the hot air that got us into Iraq in the first place. So far, he does not appear to be a senseless cheerleader. In his July Senate confirmation hearing, he was pressed by South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham to "assess our likelihood of winning, given what you know now."

Mullen listed seven mistakes. They were, as he wrote them:
"1) Did not fully integrate all elements of US national power in Iraq.
"2) Focused most attention on the Iraqi national power structures with limited, engagement of the tribal and local power structures.
"3) Did not establish an early and significant dialogue with neighboring countries, adding to the complex security environment a problematic border situation.
"4) Disbanded the entire Iraqi Army, a potentially valuable asset for security, reconstruction, and provision of services to the Iraqi people, providing a recruiting pool for extremist groups.
"5) Pursued a de-Ba'athification process that proved more divisive than helpful, created a lingering vacuum in governmental capability that still lingers, and exacerbated sectarian tensions.
"6) Attempted to transition to stability operations with an insufficient force.
"7) Unsuccessful in communicating and convincing Iraqis and regional audience of our intended goals."

go here for more of this

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_
opinion/oped/articles/2007/10/02/admiral_mullen_reports_for_duty/

Fallon resigned

Fallon resigns as chief of U.S. forces in Middle East
Story Highlights
Bush: "He deserves considerable credit for progress that has been made"

Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he accepts the resignation with regret

Gates says Fallon will be replaced by his deputy, Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey

Fallon cites what he calls inaccurate news reports for decision to step aside

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Adm. William Fallon has resigned as chief of U.S. forces in the Middle East and Central Asia after more than a year in the post, citing what he called an inaccurate perception that he is at odds with the Bush administration over Iran.


Adm. William Fallon had been serving as chief of U.S. forces in the Middle East and Central Asia since 2007.

Fallon, the head of U.S. Central Command, was the subject of a recent Esquire magazine profile that portrayed him as resisting pressure for military action against Iran, which the Bush administration accuses of trying to develop nuclear weapons.

In a written statement, he said the article's "disrespect for the president" and "resulting embarrassment" have become a distraction.

"Although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command area of responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there," Fallon said.

In Washington, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters at the Pentagon that he accepted Fallon's resignation "with reluctance and regret."

But, he added, "I think it's the right decision." Watch why some believe Fallon was forced to resign »

"Admiral Fallon reached this difficult decision entirely on his own. I believe it was the right thing to do, even though I do not believe there are in fact significant differences between his views and administration policy," Gates said.

In a written statement, President Bush praised Fallon for helping "ensure that America's military forces are ready to meet the threats of an often troubled region of the world.

"He deserves considerable credit for progress that has been made there, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Fallon, a 41-year veteran of the Navy, took over as chief of Central Command in early 2007. Gates said he will be replaced by Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey, his deputy, who commanded an Army division in Iraq in the early days of the war and led efforts to train the Iraqi military.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/03/11/fallon.resigns/

And no, he is not in charge of Afghanistan either. The Canadian General is.

The Canadian general now in charge of coalition troops in Afghanistan is an experienced international peacekeeper who says this mission will focus on bringing peace and stability to the country.

Brig.-Gen. David Fraser took charge Tuesday of the multinational force, including 2,200 Canadians, that will patrol six provinces in the southern part of Afghanistan.

He applauded the work done by the U.S. Task Force Bayonet, and said his force would continue with humanitarian and reconstruction efforts.

"We're not going to fight unless we have to. My soldiers are trained to fight. But they're also trained in humanitarian assistance and peace support, and that's our focus," Fraser said in an interview with CTV's Lisa LaFlamme.

"And we're here to work with the Afghans, to work on those non-fighting aspects, because that's the road to success. That's the road in the future to provide hope and opportunity."

This brigade is taking over from the U.S.-led force, and eventually NATO's International Security Assistance Force will be in command of the region.


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/
CTVNews/20060228/david_fraser_060228/20060228?hub=TopStories

We can doubt that McCain knows anything about this either,

The U.S. government suspended, on March 27, 2008, AEY Inc. of Miami, Florida, a company hired by the U.S. military, for violating its contract. The company is accused of supplying ammunition, which was corroded and made in China from 1962 through 1974, to the Afghan National Army and police. United States Army-documents showed that since 2004 the company entered agreements with the U.S. government that totaled about $10 million. The papers also revealed the company struck it big in 2007 with contracts totaling more than $200 million to supply ammunition, assault rifles and other weapons. Army criminal investigators were sent to look at the packages in January 2008. The House Oversight Committee plans to hold a hearing into the matter on April 17, 2008. The 22-year-old international arms dealer Efraim Diveroli and president of AEY Inc will face a congressional inquiry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)

Or maybe he just forgot. While we did not hear from Mullen or Fallon, but we did hear from Pace and Petraeus. it makes the rest of us wonder what's up with all of this anyway. There is a lot that McCain gets wrong but given all that has happened he's been connected to, it must be easy to forget a lot of things that are not that important for him to remember. After all, there is only so much room in the mind of a senior citizen his age. As for the veteran's bill he hasn't signed, I bet he just forgot where he put his pen.

McCain runs as Veteran then runs from Veterans

McCain loves to talk about his military record and the record of his family members. What he does not like to talk about his is lousy record as a veteran when it comes to voting to take care of veterans. He should be ashamed of himself. Look up his record in case you've missed the posts on it here. His record is never standing with the veterans while he wants to run as a veteran for the Presidency. Instead of standing up for them, he runs from them. His theme music should be Run-run-run-run away!

Robert Lopez served 8 years in our military, fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as a tank commander. He was told he'd get his whole education bill paid for when he got out of the service. Mr. Lopez has fought and sacrificed for our country but like so many others, Mr. Lopez has faced the bleak reality of a government that has turned its back on its veterans.

That is why Senators Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel proposed the new GI Bill, which would bring back WWII-style standards of providing vets with full tuition, room and board. And that is why 51 senators have signed on, including 9 Republicans like John Warner, giving this GI Bill tremendous bi-partisan support.

But it isn't enough.

Faced with unprecedented filibusters, the only way to ensure Senate passage of the GI Bill is to get 60 co-sponsors. So far, John McCain has refused. The same McCain who insists he supports our troops. The same McCain who is voting lockstep with the Bush administration (who have also resisted this bill). We need to get John McCain to do the right thing -- to sign now and signal to other Republican leaders that we should be strongly behind our vets.

Sign the petition to John McCain!

The original GI Bill transformed American history, providing education for returning soldiers. Not only was this our nation's moral duty for the unbelievable sacrifices of our World War II veterans, it helped create America's middle class and spurred decades of economic growth for our country.
Why then is John McCain silent on passing a new GI Bill for our "new greatest generation"?
Robert Lopez thinks John McCain ought to stand in his shoes to know how difficult it is to be a vet and have to pay staggering education costs. This is your call to arms. Pass the video along and implore your friends to sign the petition.
Click here to watch the video and sign the petition today!

VoteVets.org, WesPAC and Brave New Films feel passionately about giving our veterans the support they rightly deserve. Our government owes our troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan the opportunity to receive full educational benefits. These patriots have fought hard for our government; it's time our government started fighting hard for them.

Sincerely yours,

General Wesley Clark,

Robert Greenwald, and

Jon Soltz

McCain won't back GI bill for veterans

Webb: McCain Refuses to Co-Sponsor GI Bill for Post-9/11 Veterans
Think Progress

Mar 22, 2008
March 20, 2008 - On his first day in office in January 2007, Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) introduced the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007, intended to be “a mirror image of the WW II G.I. Bill.” A new version with broad bipartisan support was introduced in February to help fund education for service members who had served in active duty since Sept. 11, 2001. Veterans would receive education benefits equaling the highest tuition rate of the most expensive in-state public college or university and a monthly stipend for housing.

The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America hailed Webb’s bill, calling educational benefits “the military’s single most effective recruitment tool” and emphasizing that “an expanded GI Bill will play a crucial role in ensuring that our military remains the strongest and most advanced in the world.”

Today, The Hill reports that Webb is still waiting for an important co-sponsor who could help push other Republicans to approve the bill: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ):

“McCain needs to get on the bill,” Webb told reporters after a Christian Science Monitor breakfast meeting on Wednesday. He said legislation mirroring the post-World War II GI bill should not be considered a “political issue.” […]

Webb’s bill has 51 co-sponsors, including nine Republicans. Webb, a former secretary of the Navy, said he may have to get 60 co-sponsors to ensure Senate passage, but then added that many more Republicans could vote for the bill if McCain endorsed it.

McCain prides himself on being “a tireless advocate of our military.” Yet this is hardly the first time that Webb has taken McCain to task when it comes to veterans’ advocacy.
go here for the rest
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/ArticleID/9640

McCain wants to be seen as a "war veteran" but never acts like one when it comes to what they need from him.