Tagged: officer

0

Emails detail how senior US military officers grappled with false Hawaii missile alert


Cars drive past a highway sign on the H-1 Freeway in Honolulu on Jan. 13. (Cory Lum/Civil Beat via AP)

The Hawaii government’s erroneous warning of an imminent ballistic missile attack caused confusion at U.S. military facilities, frustrating senior officers and causing them to question procedures for communicating with state officials, according to emails obtained by The Washington Post.

The emails were sent in succession after thousands of people received a text-message warning Jan. 13 that prompted hysteria in parts of Hawaii. The U.S. military had no role in sending the mistaken message but nonetheless had to deal with the fallout.

“Apparently, they were getting ready to do a drill when the ‘drill’ part was lost in translation,” Adm. Harry Harris, the chief of U.S. Pacific Command, wrote to Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an hour after the message was sent. “Totally uncoordinated with us of course.”

[‘Is this the end of my life?’: False alert of missile attack sends Hawaii scrambling[1]]

The emails were obtained Friday night through the Freedom of Information Act. They detail efforts by the U.S. military to address what happened, gather information internally and answer questions to better handle crises in the future. They make no mention of President Trump or White House staff, who declined to address the issue and referred to the gaffe as a “state issue.”

The warning, sent to people’s cellphones at 8:07 a.m. local time, was issued by an employee who did not realize a drill was underway, a federal investigation found.

“BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII,” the warning said. “SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.”

It took the Hawaii government 38 minutes to issue a follow-up text message indicating the alert had been sent in error, though officials did attempt to assuage concerns through social media.

The employee who posted the message was fired. An investigation found that he thought the threat was real and had made similar mistakes in the past.

[Hawaii’s false missile alert sent by troubled worker who thought an attack was imminent, officials say[2]]

U.S. Pacific Command began responding to media questions about the alert by 8:23 a.m., saying there was no threat and state officials would issue a correction. Harris’s email to Dunford and other senior Pentagon officers indicated that the notification system “worked as we hoped it would” and that Pacific Command had several tasks to do.

“There will be heavy press play here, for sure, which we’ll handle for those questions which concern PACOM forces,” Harris wrote. “Will also work with the State of Hawaii and internal to PACOM — am sure there are lessons learned where we can improve.”

However, there was “a lot of explaining by the State of Hawaii to do,” Harris added.


Navy Adm. Harry Harris asked a slew of questions about the U.S. military response to a false missile alert issued by the state of Hawaii. (Roslan Rahman/AFP/Getty Images)

Dunford’s response was short: “Tracking all Harry… thanks,” he wrote. “Safe travels.”

The email to Dunford was forwarded a short time later to other senior members of Pacific Command’s staff, prompting conversation about what exactly state officials needed to fix.

Andrew Singer, a retired admiral who is now Harris’s deputy director for intelligence, wrote to Air Force Maj. Gen. Kevin Schneider, Harris’s chief of staff, that the state “has more than the alert system to work on.” It is unclear what he was alluding to; parts of his email are redacted.

“Happened to be in Yoga class when one of the ladies blurted out missile attack and ran out followed by most others,” Singer wrote. “Looking about town most just kept pursing [sic] getting their coffee or Malasadas,” he added, referring to a doughnut-like pastry.

Schneider responded a short time later agreeing with Singer, saying that there is “lots of work to be done on the communications piece.”

Harris also emailed the top Air Force officer in the Pacific, Gen. Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy, asking for additional information about a warning broadcasted on Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

“Just for my education and edification, when the Big Voice went off at Pearl Harbor-Hickam this morning, there was no indication that this was a drill; in fact just the opposite,” Harris wrote. “So, what happens on the flight line, and what message, if any was passed to aircraft in the air?”

O’Shaughnessy’s responses are partially redacted, but he told Harris that afternoon in another email that air-traffic controllers did not pass warnings of incoming ballistic missiles to aircraft or hold any aircraft on the ground.

“Thanks Shags,” Harris responded. “I think we’re going to learn a lot here. For ~25-30 minutes, there was a real alert, mistaken though it was.” Part of his email is redacted.

Pacific Command’s deputy commander, Army Lt. Gen. Bryan Fenton, followed up with Schneider that night, saying that Harris wanted additional information, including what ships, squadrons and ground units were told to do and how military families were informed. Harris also was concerned that word of the false alert did not immediately reach the Pacific Command operations center because U.S. troops there are required to leave their cell phones outside as a security measure.

Harris asked similar questions of Rear Adm. Matthew J. Carter, the deputy commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet based in Hawaii. Carter responded that they were planning a “deep dive on this event,” including mapping out and surveying shelters on military installations.

“This is a good outcome for all the Components,” Harris responded. “We should take full advantage of this unforced error by the State of Hawaii.”

A Pacific Command spokesman, Navy Cmdr. David Benham, declined to answer specific questions about the emails, including whether questions that Harris raised in them have been resolved.

“We are a learning organization,” Benham said, “and took this false alert as an opportunity to review and improve our communication and coordination with state and federal emergency management agencies.”

False Hawaii Missile Warning[3] by Dan Lamothe[4] on Scribd

0

Emails detail how senior U.S. military officers grappled with false …


Cars drive past a highway sign on the H-1 Freeway in Honolulu on Jan. 13. (Cory Lum/Civil Beat via AP)

The Hawaii government’s erroneous warning of an imminent ballistic missile attack caused confusion at U.S. military facilities, frustrating senior officers and causing them to question procedures for communicating with state officials, according to emails obtained by The Washington Post.

The emails were sent in succession after thousands of people received a text-message warning Jan. 13 that prompted hysteria in parts of Hawaii. The U.S. military had no role in sending the mistaken message but nonetheless had to deal with the fallout.

“Apparently, they were getting ready to do a drill when the ‘drill’ part was lost in translation,” Adm. Harry Harris, the chief of U.S. Pacific Command, wrote to Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an hour after the message was sent. “Totally uncoordinated with us of course.”

[‘Is this the end of my life?’: False alert of missile attack sends Hawaii scrambling[1]]

The emails were obtained Friday night through the Freedom of Information Act. They detail efforts by the U.S. military to address what happened, gather information internally and answer questions to better handle crises in the future. They make no mention of President Trump or White House staff, who declined to address the issue and referred to the gaffe as a “state issue.”

The warning, sent to people’s cellphones at 8:07 a.m. local time, was issued by an employee who did not realize a drill was underway, a federal investigation found.

“BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII,” the warning said. “SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.”

It took the Hawaii government 38 minutes to issue a follow-up text message indicating the alert had been sent in error, though officials did attempt to assuage concerns through social media.

The employee who posted the message was fired. An investigation found that he thought the threat was real and had made similar mistakes in the past.

[Hawaii’s false missile alert sent by troubled worker who thought an attack was imminent, officials say[2]]

U.S. Pacific Command began responding to media questions about the alert by 8:23 a.m., saying there was no threat and state officials would issue a correction. Harris’s email to Dunford and other senior Pentagon officers indicated that the notification system “worked as we hoped it would” and that Pacific Command had several tasks to do.

“There will be heavy press play here, for sure, which we’ll handle for those questions which concern PACOM forces,” Harris wrote. “Will also work with the State of Hawaii and internal to PACOM — am sure there are lessons learned where we can improve.”

However, there was “a lot of explaining by the State of Hawaii to do,” Harris added.


Navy Adm. Harry Harris asked a slew of questions about the U.S. military response to a false missile alert issued by the state of Hawaii. (Roslan Rahman/AFP/Getty Images)

Dunford’s response was short: “Tracking all Harry… thanks,” he wrote. “Safe travels.”

The email to Dunford was forwarded a short time later to other senior members of Pacific Command’s staff, prompting conversation about what exactly state officials needed to fix.

Andrew Singer, a retired admiral who is now Harris’s deputy director for intelligence, wrote to Air Force Maj. Gen. Kevin Schneider, Harris’s chief of staff, that the state “has more than the alert system to work on.” It is unclear what he was alluding to; parts of his email are redacted.

“Happened to be in Yoga class when one of the ladies blurted out missile attack and ran out followed by most others,” Singer wrote. “Looking about town most just kept pursing [sic] getting their coffee or Malasadas,” he added, referring to a doughnut-like pastry.

Schneider responded a short time later agreeing with Singer, saying that there is “lots of work to be done on the communications piece.”

Harris also emailed the top Air Force officer in the Pacific, Gen. Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy, asking for additional information about a warning broadcasted on Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

“Just for my education and edification, when the Big Voice went off at Pearl Harbor-Hickam this morning, there was no indication that this was a drill; in fact just the opposite,” Harris wrote. “So, what happens on the flight line, and what message, if any was passed to aircraft in the air?”

O’Shaughnessy’s responses are partially redacted, but he told Harris that afternoon in another email that air-traffic controllers did not pass warnings of incoming ballistic missiles to aircraft or hold any aircraft on the ground.

“Thanks Shags,” Harris responded. “I think we’re going to learn a lot here. For ~25-30 minutes, there was a real alert, mistaken though it was.” Part of his email is redacted.

Pacific Command’s deputy commander, Army Lt. Gen. Bryan Fenton, followed up with Schneider that night, saying that Harris wanted additional information, including what ships, squadrons and ground units were told to do and how military families were informed. Harris also was concerned that word of the false alert did not immediately reach the Pacific Command operations center because U.S. troops there are required to leave their cell phones outside as a security measure.

Harris asked similar questions of Rear Adm. Matthew J. Carter, the deputy commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet based in Hawaii. Carter responded that they were planning a “deep dive on this event,” including mapping out and surveying shelters on military installations.

“This is a good outcome for all the Components,” Harris responded. “We should take full advantage of this unforced error by the State of Hawaii.”

A Pacific Command spokesman, Navy Cmdr. David Benham, declined to answer specific questions about the emails, including whether questions that Harris raised in them have been resolved.

“We are a learning organization,” Benham said, “and took this false alert as an opportunity to review and improve our communication and coordination with state and federal emergency management agencies.”

False Hawaii Missile Warning[3] by Dan Lamothe[4] on Scribd

0

Emails detail how senior U.S. military officers grappled with false …


Cars drive past a highway sign on the H-1 Freeway in Honolulu on Jan. 13. (Cory Lum/Civil Beat via AP)

The Hawaii government’s erroneous warning of an imminent ballistic missile attack caused confusion at U.S. military facilities, frustrating senior officers and causing them to question procedures for communicating with state officials, according to emails obtained by The Washington Post.

The emails were sent in succession after thousands of people received a text-message warning Jan. 13 that prompted hysteria in parts of Hawaii. The U.S. military had no role in sending the mistaken message but nonetheless had to deal with the fallout.

“Apparently, they were getting ready to do a drill when the ‘drill’ part was lost in translation,” Adm. Harry Harris, the chief of U.S. Pacific Command, wrote to Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an hour after the message was sent. “Totally uncoordinated with us of course.”

[‘Is this the end of my life?’: False alert of missile attack sends Hawaii scrambling[1]]

The emails were obtained Friday night through the Freedom of Information Act. They detail efforts by the U.S. military to address what happened, gather information internally and answer questions to better handle crises in the future. They make no mention of President Trump or White House staff, who declined to address the issue and referred to the gaffe as a “state issue.”

The warning, sent to people’s cellphones at 8:07 a.m. local time, was issued by an employee who did not realize a drill was underway, a federal investigation found.

“BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII,” the warning said. “SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.”

It took the Hawaii government 38 minutes to issue a follow-up text message indicating the alert had been sent in error, though officials did attempt to assuage concerns through social media.

The employee who posted the message was fired. An investigation found that he thought the threat was real and had made similar mistakes in the past.

[Hawaii’s false missile alert sent by troubled worker who thought an attack was imminent, officials say[2]]

U.S. Pacific Command began responding to media questions about the alert by 8:23 a.m., saying there was no threat and state officials would issue a correction. Harris’s email to Dunford and other senior Pentagon officers indicated that the notification system “worked as we hoped it would” and that Pacific Command had several tasks to do.

“There will be heavy press play here, for sure, which we’ll handle for those questions which concern PACOM forces,” Harris wrote. “Will also work with the State of Hawaii and internal to PACOM — am sure there are lessons learned where we can improve.”

However, there was “a lot of explaining by the State of Hawaii to do,” Harris added.


Navy Adm. Harry Harris asked a slew of questions about the U.S. military response to a false missile alert issued by the state of Hawaii. (Roslan Rahman/AFP/Getty Images)

Dunford’s response was short: “Tracking all Harry… thanks,” he wrote. “Safe travels.”

The email to Dunford was forwarded a short time later to other senior members of Pacific Command’s staff, prompting conversation about what exactly state officials needed to fix.

Andrew Singer, a retired admiral who is now Harris’s deputy director for intelligence, wrote to Air Force Maj. Gen. Kevin Schneider, Harris’s chief of staff, that the state “has more than the alert system to work on.” It is unclear what he was alluding to; parts of his email are redacted.

“Happened to be in Yoga class when one of the ladies blurted out missile attack and ran out followed by most others,” Singer wrote. “Looking about town most just kept pursing [sic] getting their coffee or Malasadas,” he added, referring to a doughnut-like pastry.

Schneider responded a short time later agreeing with Singer, saying that there is “lots of work to be done on the communications piece.”

Harris also emailed the top Air Force officer in the Pacific, Gen. Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy, asking for additional information about a warning broadcasted on Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

“Just for my education and edification, when the Big Voice went off at Pearl Harbor-Hickam this morning, there was no indication that this was a drill; in fact just the opposite,” Harris wrote. “So, what happens on the flight line, and what message, if any was passed to aircraft in the air?”

O’Shaughnessy’s responses are partially redacted, but he told Harris that afternoon in another email that air-traffic controllers did not pass warnings of incoming ballistic missiles to aircraft or hold any aircraft on the ground.

“Thanks Shags,” Harris responded. “I think we’re going to learn a lot here. For ~25-30 minutes, there was a real alert, mistaken though it was.” Part of his email is redacted.

Pacific Command’s deputy commander, Army Lt. Gen. Bryan Fenton, followed up with Schneider that night, saying that Harris wanted additional information, including what ships, squadrons and ground units were told to do and how military families were informed. Harris also was concerned that word of the false alert did not immediately reach the Pacific Command operations center because U.S. troops there are required to leave their cell phones outside as a security measure.

Harris asked similar questions of Rear Adm. Matthew J. Carter, the deputy commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet based in Hawaii. Carter responded that they were planning a “deep dive on this event,” including mapping out and surveying shelters on military installations.

“This is a good outcome for all the Components,” Harris responded. “We should take full advantage of this unforced error by the State of Hawaii.”

A Pacific Command spokesman, Navy Cmdr. David Benham, declined to answer specific questions about the emails, including whether questions that Harris raised in them have been resolved.

“We are a learning organization,” Benham said, “and took this false alert as an opportunity to review and improve our communication and coordination with state and federal emergency management agencies.”

False Hawaii Missile Warning[3] by Dan Lamothe[4] on Scribd

0

Emails detail how senior US military officers grappled with false Hawaii missile alert


Cars drive past a highway sign on the H-1 Freeway in Honolulu on Jan. 13. (Cory Lum/Civil Beat via AP)

The Hawaii government’s erroneous warning of an imminent ballistic missile attack caused confusion at U.S. military facilities, frustrating senior officers and causing them to question procedures for communicating with state officials, according to emails obtained by The Washington Post.

The emails were sent in succession after thousands of people received a text-message warning Jan. 13 that prompted hysteria in parts of Hawaii. The U.S. military had no role in sending the mistaken message but nonetheless had to deal with the fallout.

“Apparently, they were getting ready to do a drill when the ‘drill’ part was lost in translation,” Adm. Harry Harris, the chief of U.S. Pacific Command, wrote to Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an hour after the message was sent. “Totally uncoordinated with us of course.”

[‘Is this the end of my life?’: False alert of missile attack sends Hawaii scrambling[1]]

The emails were obtained Friday night through the Freedom of Information Act. They detail efforts by the U.S. military to address what happened, gather information internally and answer questions to better handle crises in the future. They make no mention of President Trump or White House staff, who declined to address the issue and referred to the gaffe as a “state issue.”

The warning, sent to people’s cellphones at 8:07 a.m. local time, was issued by an employee who did not realize a drill was underway, a federal investigation found.

“BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII,” the warning said. “SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.”

It took the Hawaii government 38 minutes to issue a follow-up text message indicating the alert had been sent in error, though officials did attempt to assuage concerns through social media.

The employee who posted the message was fired. An investigation found that he thought the threat was real and had made similar mistakes in the past.

[Hawaii’s false missile alert sent by troubled worker who thought an attack was imminent, officials say[2]]

U.S. Pacific Command began responding to media questions about the alert by 8:23 a.m., saying there was no threat and state officials would issue a correction. Harris’s email to Dunford and other senior Pentagon officers indicated that the notification system “worked as we hoped it would” and that Pacific Command had several tasks to do.

“There will be heavy press play here, for sure, which we’ll handle for those questions which concern PACOM forces,” Harris wrote. “Will also work with the State of Hawaii and internal to PACOM — am sure there are lessons learned where we can improve.”

However, there was “a lot of explaining by the State of Hawaii to do,” Harris added.


Navy Adm. Harry Harris asked a slew of questions about the U.S. military response to a false missile alert issued by the state of Hawaii. (Roslan Rahman/AFP/Getty Images)

Dunford’s response was short: “Tracking all Harry… thanks,” he wrote. “Safe travels.”

The email to Dunford was forwarded a short time later to other senior members of Pacific Command’s staff, prompting conversation about what exactly state officials needed to fix.

Andrew Singer, a retired admiral who is now Harris’s deputy director for intelligence, wrote to Air Force Maj. Gen. Kevin Schneider, Harris’s chief of staff, that the state “has more than the alert system to work on.” It is unclear what he was alluding to; parts of his email are redacted.

“Happened to be in Yoga class when one of the ladies blurted out missile attack and ran out followed by most others,” Singer wrote. “Looking about town most just kept pursing [sic] getting their coffee or Malasadas,” he added, referring to a doughnut-like pastry.

Schneider responded a short time later agreeing with Singer, saying that there is “lots of work to be done on the communications piece.”

Harris also emailed the top Air Force officer in the Pacific, Gen. Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy, asking for additional information about a warning broadcasted on Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

“Just for my education and edification, when the Big Voice went off at Pearl Harbor-Hickam this morning, there was no indication that this was a drill; in fact just the opposite,” Harris wrote. “So, what happens on the flight line, and what message, if any was passed to aircraft in the air?”

O’Shaughnessy’s responses are partially redacted, but he told Harris that afternoon in another email that air-traffic controllers did not pass warnings of incoming ballistic missiles to aircraft or hold any aircraft on the ground.

“Thanks Shags,” Harris responded. “I think we’re going to learn a lot here. For ~25-30 minutes, there was a real alert, mistaken though it was.” Part of his email is redacted.

Pacific Command’s deputy commander, Army Lt. Gen. Bryan Fenton, followed up with Schneider that night, saying that Harris wanted additional information, including what ships, squadrons and ground units were told to do and how military families were informed. Harris also was concerned that word of the false alert did not immediately reach the Pacific Command operations center because U.S. troops there are required to leave their cell phones outside as a security measure.

Harris asked similar questions of Rear Adm. Matthew J. Carter, the deputy commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet based in Hawaii. Carter responded that they were planning a “deep dive on this event,” including mapping out and surveying shelters on military installations.

“This is a good outcome for all the Components,” Harris responded. “We should take full advantage of this unforced error by the State of Hawaii.”

A Pacific Command spokesman, Navy Cmdr. David Benham, declined to answer specific questions about the emails, including whether questions that Harris raised in them have been resolved.

“We are a learning organization,” Benham said, “and took this false alert as an opportunity to review and improve our communication and coordination with state and federal emergency management agencies.”

False Hawaii Missile Warning[3] by Dan Lamothe[4] on Scribd

0

Emails detail how senior US military officers grappled with false Hawaii missile alert


Cars drive past a highway sign on the H-1 Freeway in Honolulu on Jan. 13. (Cory Lum/Civil Beat via AP)

The Hawaii government’s erroneous warning of an imminent ballistic missile attack caused confusion at U.S. military facilities, frustrating senior officers and causing them to question procedures for communicating with state officials, according to emails obtained by The Washington Post.

The emails were sent in succession after thousands of people received a text-message warning Jan. 13 that prompted hysteria in parts of Hawaii. The U.S. military had no role in sending the mistaken message but nonetheless had to deal with the fallout.

“Apparently, they were getting ready to do a drill when the ‘drill’ part was lost in translation,” Adm. Harry Harris, the chief of U.S. Pacific Command, wrote to Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an hour after the message was sent. “Totally uncoordinated with us of course.”

[‘Is this the end of my life?’: False alert of missile attack sends Hawaii scrambling[1]]

The emails were obtained Friday night through the Freedom of Information Act. They detail efforts by the U.S. military to address what happened, gather information internally and answer questions to better handle crises in the future. They make no mention of President Trump or White House staff, who declined to address the issue and referred to the gaffe as a “state issue.”

The warning, sent to people’s cellphones at 8:07 a.m. local time, was issued by an employee who did not realize a drill was underway, a federal investigation found.

“BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII,” the warning said. “SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.”

It took the Hawaii government 38 minutes to issue a follow-up text message indicating the alert had been sent in error, though officials did attempt to assuage concerns through social media.

The employee who posted the message was fired. An investigation found that he thought the threat was real and had made similar mistakes in the past.

[Hawaii’s false missile alert sent by troubled worker who thought an attack was imminent, officials say[2]]

U.S. Pacific Command began responding to media questions about the alert by 8:23 a.m., saying there was no threat and state officials would issue a correction. Harris’s email to Dunford and other senior Pentagon officers indicated that the notification system “worked as we hoped it would” and that Pacific Command had several tasks to do.

“There will be heavy press play here, for sure, which we’ll handle for those questions which concern PACOM forces,” Harris wrote. “Will also work with the State of Hawaii and internal to PACOM — am sure there are lessons learned where we can improve.”

However, there was “a lot of explaining by the State of Hawaii to do,” Harris added.


Navy Adm. Harry Harris asked a slew of questions about the U.S. military response to a false missile alert issued by the state of Hawaii. (Roslan Rahman/AFP/Getty Images)

Dunford’s response was short: “Tracking all Harry… thanks,” he wrote. “Safe travels.”

The email to Dunford was forwarded a short time later to other senior members of Pacific Command’s staff, prompting conversation about what exactly state officials needed to fix.

Andrew Singer, a retired admiral who is now Harris’s deputy director for intelligence, wrote to Air Force Maj. Gen. Kevin Schneider, Harris’s chief of staff, that the state “has more than the alert system to work on.” It is unclear what he was alluding to; parts of his email are redacted.

“Happened to be in Yoga class when one of the ladies blurted out missile attack and ran out followed by most others,” Singer wrote. “Looking about town most just kept pursing [sic] getting their coffee or Malasadas,” he added, referring to a doughnut-like pastry.

Schneider responded a short time later agreeing with Singer, saying that there is “lots of work to be done on the communications piece.”

Harris also emailed the top Air Force officer in the Pacific, Gen. Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy, asking for additional information about a warning broadcasted on Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

“Just for my education and edification, when the Big Voice went off at Pearl Harbor-Hickam this morning, there was no indication that this was a drill; in fact just the opposite,” Harris wrote. “So, what happens on the flight line, and what message, if any was passed to aircraft in the air?”

O’Shaughnessy’s responses are partially redacted, but he told Harris that afternoon in another email that air-traffic controllers did not pass warnings of incoming ballistic missiles to aircraft or hold any aircraft on the ground.

“Thanks Shags,” Harris responded. “I think we’re going to learn a lot here. For ~25-30 minutes, there was a real alert, mistaken though it was.” Part of his email is redacted.

Pacific Command’s deputy commander, Army Lt. Gen. Bryan Fenton, followed up with Schneider that night, saying that Harris wanted additional information, including what ships, squadrons and ground units were told to do and how military families were informed. Harris also was concerned that word of the false alert did not immediately reach the Pacific Command operations center because U.S. troops there are required to leave their cell phones outside as a security measure.

Harris asked similar questions of Rear Adm. Matthew J. Carter, the deputy commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet based in Hawaii. Carter responded that they were planning a “deep dive on this event,” including mapping out and surveying shelters on military installations.

“This is a good outcome for all the Components,” Harris responded. “We should take full advantage of this unforced error by the State of Hawaii.”

A Pacific Command spokesman, Navy Cmdr. David Benham, declined to answer specific questions about the emails, including whether questions that Harris raised in them have been resolved.

“We are a learning organization,” Benham said, “and took this false alert as an opportunity to review and improve our communication and coordination with state and federal emergency management agencies.”

False Hawaii Missile Warning[3] by Dan Lamothe[4] on Scribd

0

Emails detail how senior US military officers grappled with false Hawaii missile alert

Cars drive past a highway sign on the H-1 Freeway in Honolulu on Jan. 13. (Cory Lum/Civil Beat via AP)

The Hawaii government’s erroneous warning of an imminent ballistic missile attack caused confusion at U.S. military facilities, frustrating senior officers and causing them to question procedures for communicating with state officials, according to emails obtained by The Washington Post.

The emails were sent in succession after thousands of people received a text-message warning Jan. 13 that prompted hysteria in parts of Hawaii. The U.S. military had no role in sending the mistaken message but nonetheless had to deal with the fallout.

“Apparently, they were getting ready to do a drill when the ‘drill’ part was lost in translation,” Adm. Harry Harris, the chief of U.S. Pacific Command, wrote to Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an hour after the message was sent. “Totally uncoordinated with us of course.”

The emails were obtained Friday night through the Freedom of Information Act. They detail efforts by the U.S. military to address what happened, gather information internally and answer questions to better handle crises in the future. They make no mention of President Trump or White House staff, who declined to address the issue and referred to the gaffe as a “state issue.”

The warning, sent to people’s cellphones at 8:07 a.m. local time, was issued by an employee who did not realize a drill was underway, a federal investigation found.

“BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII,” the warning said. “SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.”

It took the Hawaii government 38 minutes to issue a follow-up text message indicating the alert had been sent in error, though officials did attempt to assuage concerns through social media.

The employee who posted the message was fired. An investigation found that he thought the threat was real and had made similar mistakes in the past.

U.S. Pacific Command began responding to media questions about the alert by 8:23 a.m., saying there was no threat and state officials would issue a correction. Harris’s email to Dunford and other senior Pentagon officers indicated that the notification system “worked as we hoped it would” and that Pacific Command had several tasks to do.

“There will be heavy press play here, for sure, which we’ll handle for those questions which concern PACOM forces,” Harris wrote. “Will also work with the State of Hawaii and internal to PACOM — am sure there are lessons learned where we can improve.”

However, there was “a lot of explaining by the State of Hawaii to do,” Harris added.

Dunford’s response was short: “Tracking all Harry… thanks,” he wrote. “Safe travels.”

The email to Dunford was forwarded a short time later to other senior members of Pacific Command’s staff, prompting conversation about what exactly state officials needed to fix.

Andrew Singer, a retired admiral who is now Harris’s deputy director for intelligence, wrote to Air Force Maj. Gen. Kevin Schneider, Harris’s chief of staff, that the state “has more than the alert system to work on.” It is unclear what he was alluding to; parts of his email are redacted.

“Happened to be in Yoga class when one of the ladies blurted out missile attack and ran out followed by most others,” Singer wrote. “Looking about town most just kept pursing [sic] getting their coffee or Malasadas,” he added, referring to a doughnut-like pastry.

Schneider responded a short time later agreeing with Singer, saying that there is “lots of work to be done on the communications piece.”

Harris also emailed the top Air Force officer in the Pacific, Gen. Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy, asking for additional information about a warning broadcasted on Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

“Just for my education and edification, when the Big Voice went off at Pearl Harbor-Hickam this morning, there was no indication that this was a drill; in fact just the opposite,” Harris wrote. “So, what happens on the flight line, and what message, if any was passed to aircraft in the air?”

O’Shaughnessy’s responses are partially redacted, but he told Harris that afternoon in another email that air-traffic controllers did not pass warnings of incoming ballistic missiles to aircraft or hold any aircraft on the ground.

“Thanks Shags,” Harris responded. “I think we’re going to learn a lot here. For ~25-30 minutes, there was a real alert, mistaken though it was.” Part of his email is redacted.

Pacific Command’s deputy commander, Army Lt. Gen. Bryan Fenton, followed up with Schneider that night, saying that Harris wanted additional information, including what ships, squadrons and ground units were told to do and how military families were informed. Harris also was concerned that word of the false alert did not immediately reach the Pacific Command operations center because U.S. troops there are required to leave their cell phones outside as a security measure.

Harris asked similar questions of Rear Adm. Matthew J. Carter, the deputy commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet based in Hawaii. Carter responded that they were planning a “deep dive on this event,” including mapping out and surveying shelters on military installations.

“This is a good outcome for all the Components,” Harris responded. “We should take full advantage of this unforced error by the State of Hawaii.”

A Pacific Command spokesman, Navy Cmdr. David Benham, declined to answer specific questions about the emails, including whether questions that Harris raised in them have been resolved.

“We are a learning organization,” Benham said, “and took this false alert as an opportunity to review and improve our communication and coordination with state and federal emergency management agencies.”

False Hawaii Missile Warning[1] by Dan Lamothe[2] on Scribd

0

Emails detail how senior U.S. military officers grappled with false …


Cars drive past a highway sign on the H-1 Freeway in Honolulu on Jan. 13. (Cory Lum/Civil Beat via AP)

The Hawaii government’s erroneous warning of an imminent ballistic missile attack caused confusion at U.S. military facilities, frustrating senior officers and causing them to question procedures for communicating with state officials, according to emails obtained by The Washington Post.

The emails were sent in succession after thousands of people received a text-message warning Jan. 13 that prompted hysteria in parts of Hawaii. The U.S. military had no role in sending the mistaken message but nonetheless had to deal with the fallout.

“Apparently, they were getting ready to do a drill when the ‘drill’ part was lost in translation,” Adm. Harry Harris, the chief of U.S. Pacific Command, wrote to Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an hour after the message was sent. “Totally uncoordinated with us of course.”

[‘Is this the end of my life?’: False alert of missile attack sends Hawaii scrambling[1]]

The emails were obtained Friday night through the Freedom of Information Act. They detail efforts by the U.S. military to address what happened, gather information internally and answer questions to better handle crises in the future. They make no mention of President Trump or White House staff, who declined to address the issue and referred to the gaffe as a “state issue.”

The warning, sent to people’s cellphones at 8:07 a.m. local time, was issued by an employee who did not realize a drill was underway, a federal investigation found.

“BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII,” the warning said. “SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.”

It took the Hawaii government 38 minutes to issue a follow-up text message indicating the alert had been sent in error, though officials did attempt to assuage concerns through social media.

The employee who posted the message was fired. An investigation found that he thought the threat was real and had made similar mistakes in the past.

[Hawaii’s false missile alert sent by troubled worker who thought an attack was imminent, officials say[2]]

U.S. Pacific Command began responding to media questions about the alert by 8:23 a.m., saying there was no threat and state officials would issue a correction. Harris’s email to Dunford and other senior Pentagon officers indicated that the notification system “worked as we hoped it would” and that Pacific Command had several tasks to do.

“There will be heavy press play here, for sure, which we’ll handle for those questions which concern PACOM forces,” Harris wrote. “Will also work with the State of Hawaii and internal to PACOM — am sure there are lessons learned where we can improve.”

However, there was “a lot of explaining by the State of Hawaii to do,” Harris added.


Navy Adm. Harry Harris asked a slew of questions about the U.S. military response to a false missile alert issued by the state of Hawaii. (Roslan Rahman/AFP/Getty Images)

Dunford’s response was short: “Tracking all Harry… thanks,” he wrote. “Safe travels.”

The email to Dunford was forwarded a short time later to other senior members of Pacific Command’s staff, prompting conversation about what exactly state officials needed to fix.

Andrew Singer, a retired admiral who is now Harris’s deputy director for intelligence, wrote to Air Force Maj. Gen. Kevin Schneider, Harris’s chief of staff, that the state “has more than the alert system to work on.” It is unclear what he was alluding to; parts of his email are redacted.

“Happened to be in Yoga class when one of the ladies blurted out missile attack and ran out followed by most others,” Singer wrote. “Looking about town most just kept pursing [sic] getting their coffee or Malasadas,” he added, referring to a doughnut-like pastry.

Schneider responded a short time later agreeing with Singer, saying that there is “lots of work to be done on the communications piece.”

Harris also emailed the top Air Force officer in the Pacific, Gen. Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy, asking for additional information about a warning broadcasted on Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

“Just for my education and edification, when the Big Voice went off at Pearl Harbor-Hickam this morning, there was no indication that this was a drill; in fact just the opposite,” Harris wrote. “So, what happens on the flight line, and what message, if any was passed to aircraft in the air?”

O’Shaughnessy’s responses are partially redacted, but he told Harris that afternoon in another email that air-traffic controllers did not pass warnings of incoming ballistic missiles to aircraft or hold any aircraft on the ground.

“Thanks Shags,” Harris responded. “I think we’re going to learn a lot here. For ~25-30 minutes, there was a real alert, mistaken though it was.” Part of his email is redacted.

Pacific Command’s deputy commander, Army Lt. Gen. Bryan Fenton, followed up with Schneider that night, saying that Harris wanted additional information, including what ships, squadrons and ground units were told to do and how military families were informed. Harris also was concerned that word of the false alert did not immediately reach the Pacific Command operations center because U.S. troops there are required to leave their cell phones outside as a security measure.

Harris asked similar questions of Rear Adm. Matthew J. Carter, the deputy commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet based in Hawaii. Carter responded that they were planning a “deep dive on this event,” including mapping out and surveying shelters on military installations.

“This is a good outcome for all the Components,” Harris responded. “We should take full advantage of this unforced error by the State of Hawaii.”

A Pacific Command spokesman, Navy Cmdr. David Benham, declined to answer specific questions about the emails, including whether questions that Harris raised in them have been resolved.

“We are a learning organization,” Benham said, “and took this false alert as an opportunity to review and improve our communication and coordination with state and federal emergency management agencies.”

False Hawaii Missile Warning[3] by Dan Lamothe[4] on Scribd

0

Military Trial Opens For 17-Year-Old Palestinian Activist

Palestinian activist Ahed Tamimi was arrested and indicted after a public outcry in Israel when a video of her altercation with the soldiers, posted by her mother, went viral. Ariel Schalit/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Ariel Schalit/AP

The trial opened Tuesday in an Israeli military court for 17-year-old Ahed Tamimi. She is accused of assaulting Israeli soldiers outside her home in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

For many Palestinians, Tamimi is a symbol of resistance to a half-century military occupation that stands in the way of Palestinian independence and shows no sign of ending.

For many Israelis, Tamimi is a provocateur who goads soldiers on video and champions rock-throwing, influenced by relatives who have been involved in protests and attacks against Israelis.

Tamimi was arrested and indicted after a public outcry in Israel when a video of an altercation with the soldiers, posted by her mother, went viral[2].

Tamimi has been in Israeli jail since December, and the case has garnered international attention. She was ushered into the small courtroom Tuesday morning, appearing calm, as a large group of reporters, foreign diplomats and some Israeli peace activists crowded the area.

But shortly after, the military judge ordered that the trial be held behind closed doors, and Tamimi was ushered out of the courtroom. The reporters and observers were ordered to leave, then allowed back into the courtroom as Tamimi’s lawyer argued to keep the trial open.

“I don’t think this is in the interest of the minor” to have a large crowd in the courtroom, military judge Lt. Col. Menachem Lieberman ruled, clearing the courtroom of all but her family and lawyers.

“What I think is that the court doesn’t think it’s good for the court to have all of you inside of it,” Tamimi’s attorney Gaby Lasky told reporters outside, “so you cannot carry on watching her trial.” She said the military prosecutors did not object to an open trial.

Tamimi is indicted on 12 counts, including assaulting an Israeli officer and soldier — as seen in the video — on Dec. 15 and for five additional events in which she allegedly assaulted Israeli forces, threw rocks at them, threatened them, obstructed them during their duties and participated in riots and incited others to do so. She could face several months or years in jail if convicted.

An indictment also was filed against Nariman Tamimi, Ahed’s mother, who uploaded the video to Facebook. In it, the soldiers don’t appear to react to Tamimi’s confrontation. The military said in a statement that it is charging Nariman Tamimi with using Facebook to “incite others to commit terrorist attacks.”

Both women are being held until the end of their proceedings, which could last months.

The altercation with soldiers happened shortly after Tamimi’s cousin was shot in the head with a rubber bullet during a demonstration as he climbed a wall of a complex that Israeli soldiers had commandeered, according to Bassem Tamimi, Ahed’s father, who is a well-known leader of protests in his village.

Military prosecutors say Ahed Tamimi’s slapping, kicking and punching of soldiers was assault. Bassem Tamimi recently told NPR that his daughter’s confrontation is a natural reaction to a life of watching her relatives being arrested and killed.

Lasky, Tamimi’s lawyer, said Israel “wants to deter Ahed and other young people from resisting occupation nonviolently.”

In an interview with NPR, Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Michael Oren recently described the video as very personal for Israelis. Referring to soldiers, he said that “for an Israeli audience to see again and again photos of our children being beaten up and not have the army react in any way was very, very difficult for the society.”

Human rights advocates, including Human Rights Watch, have criticized Ahed Tamimi’s pre-trial detention – now at more than 55 days. “Her case raises concern that Israel’s military justice system, which detains hundreds of Palestinian children every year, is incapable of respecting children’s rights,” the rights group stated[3].

Bassem Tamimi said he rejected the authority of the military court and did not expect justice to be delivered in his daughter’s trial.

B’tselem, an Israeli human rights organization, criticized the decision to close the trial to reporters. “The sudden concern for her rights is even less convincing considering their violation up till now, including her nighttime arrest, which was released to the media, her lengthy investigation in which she faced her interrogators by herself, and her remand in custody,” B’tselem added.

Lasky told reporters that in her preliminary arguments on Tuesday, she argued that the military court itself is illegitimate “because of the illegality of the occupation.”

She said Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, now in its 51st year, is no longer temporary — because of the existence of Israeli settlements and lawmakers’ efforts to annex Israeli settlement areas to Israel — and so therefore not legal.

“Occupation is illegal, and so this court cannot be holding trial,” she told reporters.

A statement from activists representing the Tamimis said Lasky also argued there is “abuse of process” because Israeli authorities prosecute residents of the West Bank under two separate legal systems — civil courts for Israeli settlers and military courts for Palestinians.

Israel argues that its presence in the West Bank is not illegal and that its disputed status should be determined through negotiations. It also argues the Palestinians have repeatedly declined Israeli offers of compromise on the territory.

The prosecution read the indictment, but Ahed Tamimi has not yet entered a plea. The next hearing is scheduled for March 11, Lasky said.

References

  1. ^ Enlarge this image (media.npr.org)
  2. ^ posted by her mother, went viral (www.facebook.com)
  3. ^ the rights group stated (www.hrw.org)
0

Military Trial Opens For 17-Year-Old Palestinian Activist

Palestinian activist Ahed Tamimi was arrested and indicted after a public outcry in Israel when a video of her altercation with the soldiers, posted by her mother, went viral. Ariel Schalit/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Ariel Schalit/AP

The trial opened Tuesday in an Israeli military court for 17-year-old Ahed Tamimi. She is accused of assaulting Israeli soldiers outside her home in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

For many Palestinians, Tamimi is a symbol of resistance to a half-century military occupation that stands in the way of Palestinian independence and shows no sign of ending.

For many Israelis, Tamimi is a provocateur who goads soldiers on video and champions rock-throwing, influenced by relatives who have been involved in protests and attacks against Israelis.

Tamimi was arrested and indicted after a public outcry in Israel when a video of an altercation with the soldiers, posted by her mother, went viral[2].

Tamimi has been in Israeli jail since December, and the case has garnered international attention. She was ushered into the small courtroom Tuesday morning, appearing calm, as a large group of reporters, foreign diplomats and some Israeli peace activists crowded the area.

But shortly after, the military judge ordered that the trial be held behind closed doors, and Tamimi was ushered out of the courtroom. The reporters and observers were ordered to leave, then allowed back into the courtroom as Tamimi’s lawyer argued to keep the trial open.

“I don’t think this is in the interest of the minor” to have a large crowd in the courtroom, military judge Lt. Col. Menachem Lieberman ruled, clearing the courtroom of all but her family and lawyers.

“What I think is that the court doesn’t think it’s good for the court to have all of you inside of it,” Tamimi’s attorney Gaby Lasky told reporters outside, “so you cannot carry on watching her trial.” She said the military prosecutors did not object to an open trial.

Tamimi is indicted on 12 counts, including assaulting an Israeli officer and soldier — as seen in the video — on Dec. 15 and for five additional events in which she allegedly assaulted Israeli forces, threw rocks at them, threatened them, obstructed them during their duties and participated in riots and incited others to do so. She could face several months or years in jail if convicted.

An indictment also was filed against Nariman Tamimi, Ahed’s mother, who uploaded the video to Facebook. In it, the soldiers don’t appear to react to Tamimi’s confrontation. The military said in a statement that it is charging Nariman Tamimi with using Facebook to “incite others to commit terrorist attacks.”

Both women are being held until the end of their proceedings, which could last months.

The altercation with soldiers happened shortly after Tamimi’s cousin was shot in the head with a rubber bullet during a demonstration as he climbed a wall of a complex that Israeli soldiers had commandeered, according to Bassem Tamimi, Ahed’s father, who is a well-known leader of protests in his village.

Military prosecutors say Ahed Tamimi’s slapping, kicking and punching of soldiers was assault. Bassem Tamimi recently told NPR that his daughter’s confrontation is a natural reaction to a life of watching her relatives being arrested and killed.

Lasky, Tamimi’s lawyer, said Israel “wants to deter Ahed and other young people from resisting occupation nonviolently.”

In an interview with NPR, Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Michael Oren recently described the video as very personal for Israelis. Referring to soldiers, he said that “for an Israeli audience to see again and again photos of our children being beaten up and not have the army react in any way was very, very difficult for the society.”

Human rights advocates, including Human Rights Watch, have criticized Ahed Tamimi’s pre-trial detention – now at more than 55 days. “Her case raises concern that Israel’s military justice system, which detains hundreds of Palestinian children every year, is incapable of respecting children’s rights,” the rights group stated[3].

Bassem Tamimi said he rejected the authority of the military court and did not expect justice to be delivered in his daughter’s trial.

B’tselem, an Israeli human rights organization, criticized the decision to close the trial to reporters. “The sudden concern for her rights is even less convincing considering their violation up till now, including her nighttime arrest, which was released to the media, her lengthy investigation in which she faced her interrogators by herself, and her remand in custody,” B’tselem added.

Lasky told reporters that in her preliminary arguments on Tuesday, she argued that the military court itself is illegitimate “because of the illegality of the occupation.”

She said Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, now in its 51st year, is no longer temporary — because of the existence of Israeli settlements and lawmakers’ efforts to annex Israeli settlement areas to Israel — and so therefore not legal.

“Occupation is illegal, and so this court cannot be holding trial,” she told reporters.

A statement from activists representing the Tamimis said Lasky also argued there is “abuse of process” because Israeli authorities prosecute residents of the West Bank under two separate legal systems — civil courts for Israeli settlers and military courts for Palestinians.

Israel argues that its presence in the West Bank is not illegal and that its disputed status should be determined through negotiations. It also argues the Palestinians have repeatedly declined Israeli offers of compromise on the territory.

The prosecution read the indictment, but Ahed Tamimi has not yet entered a plea. The next hearing is scheduled for March 11, Lasky said.

References

  1. ^ Enlarge this image (media.npr.org)
  2. ^ posted by her mother, went viral (www.facebook.com)
  3. ^ the rights group stated (www.hrw.org)
0

Military Trial Opens For 17-Year-Old Palestinian Activist

Palestinian activist Ahed Tamimi was arrested and indicted after a public outcry in Israel when a video of her altercation with the soldiers, posted by her mother, went viral. Ariel Schalit/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Ariel Schalit/AP

The trial opened Tuesday in an Israeli military court for 17-year-old Ahed Tamimi. She is accused of assaulting Israeli soldiers outside her home in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

For many Palestinians, Tamimi is a symbol of resistance to a half-century military occupation that stands in the way of Palestinian independence and shows no sign of ending.

For many Israelis, Tamimi is a provocateur who goads soldiers on video and champions rock-throwing, influenced by relatives who have been involved in protests and attacks against Israelis.

Tamimi was arrested and indicted after a public outcry in Israel when a video of an altercation with the soldiers, posted by her mother, went viral[2].

Tamimi has been in Israeli jail since December, and the case has garnered international attention. She was ushered into the small courtroom Tuesday morning, appearing calm, as a large group of reporters, foreign diplomats and some Israeli peace activists crowded the area.

But shortly after, the military judge ordered that the trial be held behind closed doors, and Tamimi was ushered out of the courtroom. The reporters and observers were ordered to leave, then allowed back into the courtroom as Tamimi’s lawyer argued to keep the trial open.

“I don’t think this is in the interest of the minor” to have a large crowd in the courtroom, military judge Lt. Col. Menachem Lieberman ruled, clearing the courtroom of all but her family and lawyers.

“What I think is that the court doesn’t think it’s good for the court to have all of you inside of it,” Tamimi’s attorney Gaby Lasky told reporters outside, “so you cannot carry on watching her trial.” She said the military prosecutors did not object to an open trial.

Tamimi is indicted on 12 counts, including assaulting an Israeli officer and soldier — as seen in the video — on Dec. 15 and for five additional events in which she allegedly assaulted Israeli forces, threw rocks at them, threatened them, obstructed them during their duties and participated in riots and incited others to do so. She could face several months or years in jail if convicted.

An indictment also was filed against Nariman Tamimi, Ahed’s mother, who uploaded the video to Facebook. In it, the soldiers don’t appear to react to Tamimi’s confrontation. The military said in a statement that it is charging Nariman Tamimi with using Facebook to “incite others to commit terrorist attacks.”

Both women are being held until the end of their proceedings, which could last months.

The altercation with soldiers happened shortly after Tamimi’s cousin was shot in the head with a rubber bullet during a demonstration as he climbed a wall of a complex that Israeli soldiers had commandeered, according to Bassem Tamimi, Ahed’s father, who is a well-known leader of protests in his village.

Military prosecutors say Ahed Tamimi’s slapping, kicking and punching of soldiers was assault. Bassem Tamimi recently told NPR that his daughter’s confrontation is a natural reaction to a life of watching her relatives being arrested and killed.

Lasky, Tamimi’s lawyer, said Israel “wants to deter Ahed and other young people from resisting occupation nonviolently.”

In an interview with NPR, Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Michael Oren recently described the video as very personal for Israelis. Referring to soldiers, he said that “for an Israeli audience to see again and again photos of our children being beaten up and not have the army react in any way was very, very difficult for the society.”

Human rights advocates, including Human Rights Watch, have criticized Ahed Tamimi’s pre-trial detention – now at more than 55 days. “Her case raises concern that Israel’s military justice system, which detains hundreds of Palestinian children every year, is incapable of respecting children’s rights,” the rights group stated[3].

Bassem Tamimi said he rejected the authority of the military court and did not expect justice to be delivered in his daughter’s trial.

B’tselem, an Israeli human rights organization, criticized the decision to close the trial to reporters. “The sudden concern for her rights is even less convincing considering their violation up till now, including her nighttime arrest, which was released to the media, her lengthy investigation in which she faced her interrogators by herself, and her remand in custody,” B’tselem added.

Lasky told reporters that in her preliminary arguments on Tuesday, she argued that the military court itself is illegitimate “because of the illegality of the occupation.”

She said Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, now in its 51st year, is no longer temporary — because of the existence of Israeli settlements and lawmakers’ efforts to annex Israeli settlement areas to Israel — and so therefore not legal.

“Occupation is illegal, and so this court cannot be holding trial,” she told reporters.

A statement from activists representing the Tamimis said Lasky also argued there is “abuse of process” because Israeli authorities prosecute residents of the West Bank under two separate legal systems — civil courts for Israeli settlers and military courts for Palestinians.

Israel argues that its presence in the West Bank is not illegal and that its disputed status should be determined through negotiations. It also argues the Palestinians have repeatedly declined Israeli offers of compromise on the territory.

The prosecution read the indictment, but Ahed Tamimi has not yet entered a plea. The next hearing is scheduled for March 11, Lasky said.

References

  1. ^ Enlarge this image (media.npr.org)
  2. ^ posted by her mother, went viral (www.facebook.com)
  3. ^ the rights group stated (www.hrw.org)