Tagged: duty

0

Ellison Wants Answers About White Supremacists in the Military

Rep. Keith Ellison[1] wants the Pentagon to disclose any information it has about white supremacists currently serving in the the military[2].

The Minnesota Democrat sent a letter to Defense Secretary James Mattis last week asking about “steps currently being taken to screen recruits for extremist ties,” Military Times reported.

Ellison’s letter came after a ProPublica and “Frontline” report found that three active duty service members were associated with Atomawaffen, a white supremacist group that has been tied to five murders in the past year.

“The involvement of service members in white supremacist organizations or other hate groups is cause for significant concern, particularly given their combat and weapons training,” Ellison wrote in his letter[3].

Ellison also pointed to a Military Times survey that found that nearly 25 percent of respondents said they had seen “examples of white nationalism from their fellow service members.”

Similarly, the survey said that 42 percent of non-white troops had personally experienced white nationalism in the military.

Ellison’s letter requested that Mattis produce information on the number of reports of service members with extremist ties for the past five years.

“In addition, I seek information on the steps currently being taken to screen recruits for extremist ties,” he said.

The ProPublica and “Frontline” report highlighted that one member of the Marines was allegedly involved in the racial violence around white nationalist demonstrations in Charlottesville, Virginia, last year.

Since then, Mattis has praised the military’s “widely diverse force.”

Ellison requested that Mattis send the response by May 21.

Watch: Trump Thanks Kanye Again, Mocks Obama on North Korea

Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone[4] or your Android[5].

0

Reports of Sexual Assault in the Military Rise by 10 Percent, Pentagon Finds

WASHINGTON — More than 6,700 Defense Department employees reported being sexually assaulted in the 2017 fiscal year — the highest number since the United States military began tracking reports more than a decade ago, according to Pentagon data released on Monday.

The new data showed a 10 percent increase of military sexual assault reports from the previous fiscal year. The uptick occurred amid a Marine Corps scandal over sharing nude photos and heightened public discourse about sexual harassment in American culture.

Pentagon officials sought to portray the increase as reflective of more troops and military civilians trusting commanders and the military’s judicial system enough to come forward.

In all, 6,769 people reported assaults for the 2017 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30. It was the largest yearly increase since 2014 and the most reports since the Pentagon started tracking the data in 2006.

Roughly two-thirds of the reports resulted in disciplinary action, the data show. The remaining 38 percent were discounted because evidence was lacking, victims declined to participate in hearings or other reasons.

The Army, Navy and Air Force each saw a roughly 10 percent uptick in sexual assault reports. The increase nearly reached 15 percent in the Marine Corps.

Separately, roughly 700 complaints of sexual harassment were reported across the military in the 2017 fiscal year, according to the Pentagon data. Ninety percent of the reports were from enlisted troops.

In March 2017, a social media group made up of active duty and former Marines was accused of sharing explicit photos of female colleagues, prompting a widespread investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. A number of Marines were punished, and the service started a campaign to educate its troops on sexual harassment and assault.

Despite efforts to rid the internet of military-themed groups such as the one found last year, others have continued to pop up.

Gen. Robert B. Neller, the Marine Corps commandant, said the service was in a “better place” after the scandal.

Lawmakers have long hammered the military on its predominantly male culture and have sometimes lobbied for military courts to be civilian run so due process is absent of command influence.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, who last week called sexual assault a “cancer” in the military, has demanded that leaders throughout the ranks make sure the problem does not spread.

0

Civil Rights Groups Are Fighting to Read Homeland Security's Mysterious 'Race Paper'

Image: Ted S. Warren (AP)

Two civil rights groups, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and Color of Change (COR), have filed a motion[1] asking a judge to force the Department of Homeland Security to un-redact a mysterious document known as the “Race Paper.” Following FOIA requests, the DHS turned over hundreds of pages to CCR and COR, but has fought releasing the so-called “Race Paper,” as its referred to in internal DHS emails. Little is known about the document, including its actual title, though COR and CCR believe it is potentially related to data-driven surveillance of protestors.

In 2016, CCR and COR, assisted by the Kramer Law Center, filed FOIA requests for documents relating to FBI and DHS surveillance of Black Lives Matter protestors. The DHS responded with hundreds of documents, including emails from the early months of the Trump administration in which DHS agents talked about composing and editing the “Race Paper.”

However, when the DHS handed the mysterious “race paper” over to the civil rights groups, it was redacted into oblivion, with nine full pages of completely obscured text.
[2]

Advertisement

Little is known about this document, but lawyers believe it may be related to surveillance of Black Lives Matter protestors. All references to its actual name have been redacted.

“There’s not too much wiggle room when something is called ‘The Race Papers,’” Stephanie Llanes, one of the CCR lawyers filing the motion, told Gizmodo.

Here’s what we know for sure: the paper is a nine-page document put out by members of the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis. The DHS worked on its creation for months, producing multiple draft versions, all of which have been redacted. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis specializes in “information sharing and delivering predictive intelligence and analysis.” The office operates a network of Fusion Centers[3], which specialize in intelligence collection, analysis, and sharing between “state, local, tribal, territorial, and private sector partners.” It follows, then, the paper may relate to predictive technology or surveillance.

Advertisement

“One of the emails says that the person included a section on ‘drivers and indications,’” Llanes said. “Given what [the Office of Intelligence and Analysis] does, which is predictive intelligence, it just raises serious concerns of the relationship between racial identity and drivers of future behavior.”

It’s speculative, but police have used data analysis to surveil[4] minority protestors in the past. From Massachusetts to Missouri, officers have used complex data-mining software[5] that could provide the locations of social media users to monitor protestors using the #BlackLivesMatter or #MuslimLivesMatter hashtags.

Being asked to produce the “Race Paper” and then handing over nine all-black pages might seem like a cheeky response, but, incredibly, the DHS argued that the documents, redactions intact, satisfy the FOIA request. The DHS insisted it is exempt from releasing all preliminary versions of the document because, as they were draft versions, they “wouldn’t be an accurate assessment of what the agency thinks,” Llanes explains.

Advertisement

However, the DHS redacted all versions of the document, including the final version, which seemingly would accurately represent the agency’s stance. DHS argued that even partially redacting the final version would threaten national security by revealing sensitive information about how the agency operates.

“They haven’t explained at all how that would be the case. A government agency cant just make this broad, sweeping argument… without explaining how so,” Llanes said. “They still have to un-redact parts of the document that are purely factual, based on publicly available information, [or] would not reveal the pre-deliberative [assessment].”

CCR lawyers are arguing that, under FOIA law, the DHS has a duty to un-redact passages that are based on unclassified facts or public knowledge. By completely redacting every single word, including even the title of the document, the DHS is essentially claiming that every single detail of the “race paper” is, to some degree, sensitive, classified, or private.

Advertisement

The next step in the case is for the DHS to reply to the motion. If they deny the lawyers’ claims, the case would move onto oral arguments.

[The Intercept[6]]

References

  1. ^ have filed a motion (ccrjustice.org)
  2. ^ race paper (ccrjustice.org)
  3. ^ Fusion Centers (www.dhs.gov)
  4. ^ used data analysis to surveil (gizmodo.com)
  5. ^ complex data-mining software (www.usatoday.com)
  6. ^ The Intercept (theintercept.com)
0

Civil Rights Groups Are Fighting to Read Homeland Security's Mysterious 'Race Paper'

Image: Ted S. Warren (AP)

Two civil rights groups, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and Color of Change (COR), have filed a motion[1] asking a judge to force the Department of Homeland Security to un-redact a mysterious document known as the “Race Paper.” Following FOIA requests, the DHS turned over hundreds of pages to CCR and COR, but has fought releasing the so-called “Race Paper,” as its referred to in internal DHS emails. Little is known about the document, including its actual title, though COR and CCR believe it is potentially related to data-driven surveillance of protestors.

In 2016, CCR and COR, assisted by the Kramer Law Center, filed FOIA requests for documents relating to FBI and DHS surveillance of Black Lives Matter protestors. The DHS responded with hundreds of documents, including emails from the early months of the Trump administration in which DHS agents talked about composing and editing the “Race Paper.”

However, when the DHS handed the mysterious “race paper” over to the civil rights groups, it was redacted into oblivion, with nine full pages of completely obscured text.
[2]

Advertisement

Little is known about this document, but lawyers believe it may be related to surveillance of Black Lives Matter protestors. All references to its actual name have been redacted.

“There’s not too much wiggle room when something is called ‘The Race Papers,’” Stephanie Llanes, one of the CCR lawyers filing the motion, told Gizmodo.

Here’s what we know for sure: the paper is a nine-page document put out by members of the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis. The DHS worked on its creation for months, producing multiple draft versions, all of which have been redacted. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis specializes in “information sharing and delivering predictive intelligence and analysis.” The office operates a network of Fusion Centers[3], which specialize in intelligence collection, analysis, and sharing between “state, local, tribal, territorial, and private sector partners.” It follows, then, the paper may relate to predictive technology or surveillance.

Advertisement

“One of the emails says that the person included a section on ‘drivers and indications,’” Llanes said. “Given what [the Office of Intelligence and Analysis] does, which is predictive intelligence, it just raises serious concerns of the relationship between racial identity and drivers of future behavior.”

It’s speculative, but police have used data analysis to surveil[4] minority protestors in the past. From Massachusetts to Missouri, officers have used complex data-mining software[5] that could provide the locations of social media users to monitor protestors using the #BlackLivesMatter or #MuslimLivesMatter hashtags.

Being asked to produce the “Race Paper” and then handing over nine all-black pages might seem like a cheeky response, but, incredibly, the DHS argued that the documents, redactions intact, satisfy the FOIA request. The DHS insisted it is exempt from releasing all preliminary versions of the document because, as they were draft versions, they “wouldn’t be an accurate assessment of what the agency thinks,” Llanes explains.

Advertisement

However, the DHS redacted all versions of the document, including the final version, which seemingly would accurately represent the agency’s stance. DHS argued that even partially redacting the final version would threaten national security by revealing sensitive information about how the agency operates.

“They haven’t explained at all how that would be the case. A government agency cant just make this broad, sweeping argument… without explaining how so,” Llanes said. “They still have to un-redact parts of the document that are purely factual, based on publicly available information, [or] would not reveal the pre-deliberative [assessment].”

CCR lawyers are arguing that, under FOIA law, the DHS has a duty to un-redact passages that are based on unclassified facts or public knowledge. By completely redacting every single word, including even the title of the document, the DHS is essentially claiming that every single detail of the “race paper” is, to some degree, sensitive, classified, or private.

Advertisement

The next step in the case is for the DHS to reply to the motion. If they deny the lawyers’ claims, the case would move onto oral arguments.

[The Intercept[6]]

References

  1. ^ have filed a motion (ccrjustice.org)
  2. ^ race paper (ccrjustice.org)
  3. ^ Fusion Centers (www.dhs.gov)
  4. ^ used data analysis to surveil (gizmodo.com)
  5. ^ complex data-mining software (www.usatoday.com)
  6. ^ The Intercept (theintercept.com)
0

Civil Rights Groups Are Fighting to Read Homeland Security's …

Image: Ted S. Warren (AP)

Two civil rights groups, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and Color of Change (COR), have filed a motion[1] asking a judge to force the Department of Homeland Security to un-redact a mysterious document known as the “Race Paper.” Following FOIA requests, the DHS turned over hundreds of pages to CCR and COR, but has fought releasing the so-called “Race Paper,” as its referred to in internal DHS emails. Little is known about the document, including its actual title, though COR and CCR believe it is potentially related to data-driven surveillance of protestors.

In 2016, CCR and COR, assisted by the Kramer Law Center, filed FOIA requests for documents relating to FBI and DHS surveillance of Black Lives Matter protestors. The DHS responded with hundreds of documents, including emails from the early months of the Trump administration in which DHS agents talked about composing and editing the “Race Paper.”

However, when the DHS handed the mysterious “race paper” over to the civil rights groups, it was redacted into oblivion, with nine full pages of completely obscured text.
[2]

Advertisement

Little is known about this document, but lawyers believe it may be related to surveillance of Black Lives Matter protestors. All references to its actual name have been redacted.

“There’s not too much wiggle room when something is called ‘The Race Papers,’” Stephanie Llanes, one of the CCR lawyers filing the motion, told Gizmodo.

Here’s what we know for sure: the paper is a nine-page document put out by members of the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis. The DHS worked on its creation for months, producing multiple draft versions, all of which have been redacted. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis specializes in “information sharing and delivering predictive intelligence and analysis.” The office operates a network of Fusion Centers[3], which specialize in intelligence collection, analysis, and sharing between “state, local, tribal, territorial, and private sector partners.” It follows, then, the paper may relate to predictive technology or surveillance.

Advertisement

“One of the emails says that the person included a section on ‘drivers and indications,’” Llanes said. “Given what [the Office of Intelligence and Analysis] does, which is predictive intelligence, it just raises serious concerns of the relationship between racial identity and drivers of future behavior.”

It’s speculative, but police have used data analysis to surveil[4] minority protestors in the past. From Massachusetts to Missouri, officers have used complex data-mining software[5] that could provide the locations of social media users to monitor protestors using the #BlackLivesMatter or #MuslimLivesMatter hashtags.

Being asked to produce the “Race Paper” and then handing over nine all-black pages might seem like a cheeky response, but, incredibly, the DHS argued that the documents, redactions intact, satisfy the FOIA request. The DHS insisted it is exempt from releasing all preliminary versions of the document because, as they were draft versions, they “wouldn’t be an accurate assessment of what the agency thinks,” Llanes explains.

Advertisement

However, the DHS redacted all versions of the document, including the final version, which seemingly would accurately represent the agency’s stance. DHS argued that even partially redacting the final version would threaten national security by revealing sensitive information about how the agency operates.

“They haven’t explained at all how that would be the case. A government agency cant just make this broad, sweeping argument… without explaining how so,” Llanes said. “They still have to un-redact parts of the document that are purely factual, based on publicly available information, [or] would not reveal the pre-deliberative [assessment].”

CCR lawyers are arguing that, under FOIA law, the DHS has a duty to un-redact passages that are based on unclassified facts or public knowledge. By completely redacting every single word, including even the title of the document, the DHS is essentially claiming that every single detail of the “race paper” is, to some degree, sensitive, classified, or private.

Advertisement

The next step in the case is for the DHS to reply to the motion. If they deny the lawyers’ claims, the case would move onto oral arguments.

[The Intercept[6]]

References

  1. ^ have filed a motion (ccrjustice.org)
  2. ^ race paper (ccrjustice.org)
  3. ^ Fusion Centers (www.dhs.gov)
  4. ^ used data analysis to surveil (gizmodo.com)
  5. ^ complex data-mining software (www.usatoday.com)
  6. ^ The Intercept (theintercept.com)
0

Vice chief: Women serve in every BCT battalion, but sexual …

Since the service lifted the final ban on women in direct-combat units[1] in 2016, more than 600 women have joined infantry and armor units[2], Gen. James McConville told an audience at the Army Women’s Summit on Capitol Hill.

“Every single infantry, armor and artillery battalion in every single active-duty brigade combat team has women assigned,” he said.

The Army is still tracking percentages as a gauge of its success with its Leaders First integration initiative, which transferred female officers and noncommissioned officers into the 82nd Airborne Division and 1st Cavalry Division, ahead of accepting graduated one-station training graduates last summer.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army's infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army's infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army’s infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

And, he added, 10 of those women are sporting Ranger tabs, since the course opened to women in 2015, with seven more in training now.

“I’d like to see the day in the near future where we no longer need to count percentages of individuals,” he said.

But women who do step up still face discrimination and, at the extreme, sexual assault from their fellow soldiers, and multiple audience members took the microphone to ask McConville about the Army’s efforts to prevent violence and mistreatment.

Sign up for the Army Times Daily News Roundup
Don’t miss the top Army stories, delivered each afternoon
Thanks for signing up!

McConville’s three children are active-duty soldiers, he said, including his daughter.

“She says it’s better than it used to be, but it’s no where near where it needs to be,” he said.

McConville encouraged survivors, men and women, to report, to give the Army an opportunity to prosecute predators to the fullest extent of the law.

“But they have to report, or we’re not going to fix it, as we go forward,” he said.

McConville likened sexual assault to friendly-fire negligence on the job, and suggested that commanders treat it the same way.

“If you’re on a range and you accidentally shot someone, and you hurt them, we would hold you accountable,” he said. “And we’d go through this whole process, and your fellow soldiers would look at you and say, ‘How could you do this to our fellow soldiers?’”

To combat assault and harassment within units, organizations need to start looking at them in the context of unit cohesiveness, he added.

“Sexual harassment and sexual assault is worse, because it’s intentional. It’s intentional fratricide,” he said. “Why would you commit intentional fratricide against one of your fellow soldiers?”

Similarly, the service’s Sexual Harassment and Assault Response and Prevention program should focus less on instilling fear of consequences in soldiers.

“What we have to do is get people to think beyond that,” he said. “What we need in the Army is cohesive teams of trusted professionals.”

Harassment and assault should be treated as readiness issues, he said.

“If you don’t treat them with dignity and respect, if you’re harassing them and assaulting them, what kind of organization are you going to have?” he said. “You’re an American soldier. You treat everyone with dignity and respect because that is the right thing to do.”

The Army has been encouraged by an increase in reporting numbers but a decrease in incidents over recent years, though conviction rates for both assaults and whistleblower retaliation remain low.

“We’re not there yet. We’ve got a long way to go,” McConville said.

References

  1. ^ direct-combat units (www.armytimes.com)
  2. ^ infantry and armor units (www.armytimes.com)
  3. ^ Congress advances new sexual assault, harassment rules for the military (www.armytimes.com)
0

Vice chief: Women serve in every BCT battalion, but sexual …

Since the service lifted the final ban on women in direct-combat units[1] in 2016, more than 600 women have joined infantry and armor units[2], Gen. James McConville told an audience at the Army Women’s Summit on Capitol Hill.

“Every single infantry, armor and artillery battalion in every single active-duty brigade combat team has women assigned,” he said.

The Army is still tracking percentages as a gauge of its success with its Leaders First integration initiative, which transferred female officers and noncommissioned officers into the 82nd Airborne Division and 1st Cavalry Division, ahead of accepting graduated one-station training graduates last summer.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army's infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army's infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army’s infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

And, he added, 10 of those women are sporting Ranger tabs, since the course opened to women in 2015, with seven more in training now.

“I’d like to see the day in the near future where we no longer need to count percentages of individuals,” he said.

But women who do step up still face discrimination and, at the extreme, sexual assault from their fellow soldiers, and multiple audience members took the microphone to ask McConville about the Army’s efforts to prevent violence and mistreatment.

Sign up for the Army Times Daily News Roundup
Don’t miss the top Army stories, delivered each afternoon
Thanks for signing up!

McConville’s three children are active-duty soldiers, he said, including his daughter.

“She says it’s better than it used to be, but it’s no where near where it needs to be,” he said.

McConville encouraged survivors, men and women, to report, to give the Army an opportunity to prosecute predators to the fullest extent of the law.

“But they have to report, or we’re not going to fix it, as we go forward,” he said.

McConville likened sexual assault to friendly-fire negligence on the job, and suggested that commanders treat it the same way.

“If you’re on a range and you accidentally shot someone, and you hurt them, we would hold you accountable,” he said. “And we’d go through this whole process, and your fellow soldiers would look at you and say, ‘How could you do this to our fellow soldiers?’”

To combat assault and harassment within units, organizations need to start looking at them in the context of unit cohesiveness, he added.

“Sexual harassment and sexual assault is worse, because it’s intentional. It’s intentional fratricide,” he said. “Why would you commit intentional fratricide against one of your fellow soldiers?”

Similarly, the service’s Sexual Harassment and Assault Response and Prevention program should focus less on instilling fear of consequences in soldiers.

“What we have to do is get people to think beyond that,” he said. “What we need in the Army is cohesive teams of trusted professionals.”

Harassment and assault should be treated as readiness issues, he said.

“If you don’t treat them with dignity and respect, if you’re harassing them and assaulting them, what kind of organization are you going to have?” he said. “You’re an American soldier. You treat everyone with dignity and respect because that is the right thing to do.”

The Army has been encouraged by an increase in reporting numbers but a decrease in incidents over recent years, though conviction rates for both assaults and whistleblower retaliation remain low.

“We’re not there yet. We’ve got a long way to go,” McConville said.

References

  1. ^ direct-combat units (www.armytimes.com)
  2. ^ infantry and armor units (www.armytimes.com)
  3. ^ Congress advances new sexual assault, harassment rules for the military (www.armytimes.com)
0

Vice chief: Women serve in every BCT battalion, but sexual …

Since the service lifted the final ban on women in direct-combat units[1] in 2016, more than 600 women have joined infantry and armor units[2], Gen. James McConville told an audience at the Army Women’s Summit on Capitol Hill.

“Every single infantry, armor and artillery battalion in every single active-duty brigade combat team has women assigned,” he said.

The Army is still tracking percentages as a gauge of its success with its Leaders First integration initiative, which transferred female officers and noncommissioned officers into the 82nd Airborne Division and 1st Cavalry Division, ahead of accepting graduated one-station training graduates last summer.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army's infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army's infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

Hundreds of women have joined the Army’s infantry and armor units, but those who do step up still face discrimination from their fellow soldiers, says Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville.

And, he added, 10 of those women are sporting Ranger tabs, since the course opened to women in 2015, with seven more in training now.

“I’d like to see the day in the near future where we no longer need to count percentages of individuals,” he said.

But women who do step up still face discrimination and, at the extreme, sexual assault from their fellow soldiers, and multiple audience members took the microphone to ask McConville about the Army’s efforts to prevent violence and mistreatment.

Sign up for the Army Times Daily News Roundup
Don’t miss the top Army stories, delivered each afternoon
Thanks for signing up!

McConville’s three children are active-duty soldiers, he said, including his daughter.

“She says it’s better than it used to be, but it’s no where near where it needs to be,” he said.

McConville encouraged survivors, men and women, to report, to give the Army an opportunity to prosecute predators to the fullest extent of the law.

“But they have to report, or we’re not going to fix it, as we go forward,” he said.

McConville likened sexual assault to friendly-fire negligence on the job, and suggested that commanders treat it the same way.

“If you’re on a range and you accidentally shot someone, and you hurt them, we would hold you accountable,” he said. “And we’d go through this whole process, and your fellow soldiers would look at you and say, ‘How could you do this to our fellow soldiers?’”

To combat assault and harassment within units, organizations need to start looking at them in the context of unit cohesiveness, he added.

“Sexual harassment and sexual assault is worse, because it’s intentional. It’s intentional fratricide,” he said. “Why would you commit intentional fratricide against one of your fellow soldiers?”

Similarly, the service’s Sexual Harassment and Assault Response and Prevention program should focus less on instilling fear of consequences in soldiers.

“What we have to do is get people to think beyond that,” he said. “What we need in the Army is cohesive teams of trusted professionals.”

Harassment and assault should be treated as readiness issues, he said.

“If you don’t treat them with dignity and respect, if you’re harassing them and assaulting them, what kind of organization are you going to have?” he said. “You’re an American soldier. You treat everyone with dignity and respect because that is the right thing to do.”

The Army has been encouraged by an increase in reporting numbers but a decrease in incidents over recent years, though conviction rates for both assaults and whistleblower retaliation remain low.

“We’re not there yet. We’ve got a long way to go,” McConville said.

References

  1. ^ direct-combat units (www.armytimes.com)
  2. ^ infantry and armor units (www.armytimes.com)
  3. ^ Congress advances new sexual assault, harassment rules for the military (www.armytimes.com)