Showing posts with label Government Out of Control. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Government Out of Control. Show all posts

September 13, 2019

Guantanamo Bay Has Cost $Billions$ According to Whistle Blower The Q is: WHY?

It seems like for this government in the US every dollar given to programs to help the poor, schools or healthcare, is too much. A dollar is a dollar the government does not have I heard say by some republicans in congress. But Billions to Lock a few guys which are pending a trial for decades, then billions is just a dollar we can afford because this is the U.S. It's only a dollar. The thing it is BILLIONs which could do so much. Just imagine what the schools, the corrections system, courts, et., etc could do but we keep those few people locked up when they should be here with a maximum security jail and close Guantanamo Bay and saving Billions.

The U.S. military court and prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, have cost more than $6 billion to operate since opening nearly 18 years ago and still churn through more than $380 million a year despite housing only 40 prisoners today.
Included in that amount are taxpayer-funded charter planes often flying just a few passengers to and from the island; hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of government electronic devices intentionally destroyed each year due to spills of classified information; some Pentagon-funded defense attorneys billing about half-a-million dollars a year, and total legal costs of nearly $60 million annually even though Guantánamo has had only one finalized conviction.
Criticism of that spending comes even from inside Guantánamo. A former top attorney there has filed a federal whistleblower complaint alleging "gross financial waste" and "gross mismanagement," NPR has learned.
Retired Air Force Col. Gary Brown also claims that he and the former head of the military court were fired because they were negotiating a controversial cost-saving proposal with defense lawyers: allow Guantánamo prisoners — including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four co-defendants in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — to plead guilty in exchange for life in prison rather than face the death penalty. Such plea deals, Brown says, "would stop wasting resources."
"My two words to summarize my time at military commissions was 'Wait — what?' " said Brown, who was the legal adviser to the head of Guantánamo's military commissions from April 2017 until both of them were fired 10 months later. "At least a couple of times a week there was an instance where someone would tell me some expense we had or some individual we were paying for, and I would just have to stop in my tracks and say, 'Wait — what? How can that possibly be?' Many of them involved unnecessary expenditures or a waste of money." 
 Many attorneys and other officials who have worked there openly condemn the spending.
"It's a horrible waste of money. It's a catastrophic waste of money," said Michel Paradis, a Guantánamo defense attorney for Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the alleged mastermind of the bombing of the USS Cole naval warship. "No matter if you want to see all of these guys shot in the street or whether or not you think Guantánamo itself is an aberration that should have closed yesterday — whatever your goal is, the military commissions have failed to achieve that goal."
"There have been billions of dollars spent on Guantánamo that were totally unnecessary," said Morris Davis, Guantánamo's chief prosecutor from 2005 to 2007. Davis says he quit when he felt pressured by his superiors to use evidence obtained through torture, and he calls the military commissions "an overwhelming failure."
When NPR asked in April for the annual cost of Guantánamo's military court and prison, the Defense Department initially responded with a figure of $180 million a year. Three months later, it revised that number to $380 million a year. That does not include the $60 million annual expense of operating Guantánamo's naval base or the salaries of military personnel, including the 1,800 guards overseeing the detention center's prisoners. 
Add the Pentagon's updated tallies to historical figures it has given Congress, and the total cost of Guantánamo's court and the prison has exceeded $6 billion since 2002.
Nearly 800 detainees have passed through Guantánamo since prisoners began arriving there in 2002, and 40 people are still confined there. Some have been held for nearly 18 years without being charged. Only one conviction has been finalized, and Guantánamo's legal cases have been virtually deadlocked for years.
Yet the court and prison continue to spend what Brown calls an "eye-popping" amount each year on construction, travel, housing, vehicles, computer systems, linguists, translators, investigators, expert witnesses, case analysts, paralegals, court reporters, various types of contractors and hundreds of attorneys.
Brown said it wasn't just the spending that shocked him. He also questions whether Guantánamo prosecutors can win death penalty convictions at trial because so much evidence is tainted by torture. He notes that if trials do happen, the appeals process is expected to last another 10 to 15 years, incurring costs of at least another $1.5 billion. And the government argues that even if the defendants are found not guilty at trial, it can continue to keep them imprisoned indefinitely.
Because of the time, expense and possible futility of pursuing death penalty convictions, Brown said he and Harvey Rishikof, who was the "convening authority" of the military commissions, thought a different solution was necessary.
"They haven't been successful. They've stalled. They're incredibly expensive," Brown said. "Instead, wouldn't it be better if we just said, 'You know what? They didn't work this time.' "
So he and Rishikof had begun preliminary settlement negotiations with the Guantánamo prisoners facing the death penalty. That would have saved time and money, "and certainly it would've brought closure to the victims' family members, which was our primary concern," Brown added, "and it would have potentially brought some closure to the wound that Guantánamo is to U.S. national security."
Each lead lawyer for the six Guantánamo prisoners facing the death penalty confirmed to NPR that Rishikof and Brown had approached them about the possibility of settling. But in February 2018 the two men were fired before plea deals could be reached.

January 27, 2019

Finally and Suddenly, America Had Enough and The Political Pressure Vise Was on

By Marc Fisher ,
Ben Guarino and
Katie Zezima
Finally and suddenly, America had had enough.

The drizzle of effects of the government shutdown morphed into a downpour, a winter storm of disruption, dysfunction, and desperation that shocked stubborn politicians into action.

The 35-day shutdown was supposedly going to linger for months because President Trump’s base insisted on a wall along the border with Mexico and the Democratic base demanded that federal workers return to their jobs without condition.

Now, that debate has been kicked down the road for three weeks. Despite his vow that he would never reopen the government without money for the wall, Trump relented without the promise of a single dollar.

The startling about-face happened because the shutdown almost overnight came to seem dangerous: an economic threat, a shock to the safety of the skies, and a political punch that un­settled both parties.
In a 24-hour flurry of events that added up to a breaking point, flight attendants warned that high absenteeism among air traffic controllers who weren’t being paid posed a threat to passengers’ sense of safety. Long delays hit several major airports because of control-tower staffing shortages, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

A flight information board shows new times for flights after the FAA announced delays at LaGuardia Airport in New York on Friday. (Julio Cortez/AP)
A Transportation Security Administration agent works Friday at a checkpoint at New York’s LaGuardia Airport, where delays led to long lines. (Mark Kauzlarich/Bloomberg)

Ford and other major manufacturers warned that the shutdown was delivering a hard hit to the nation’s economy. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce alerted politicians that the travel and tourism industries were suffering harsh consequences. Thousands of Internal Revenue Service workers who had been ordered back to work to process tax refunds stayed home, many saying they couldn’t afford to get to their jobs without pay. 

Several polls showed a serious drop in Americans’ optimism about the economy. The president’s disapproval numbers jumped five points, to 58 percent, from three months ago, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. And some senior members of Trump’s own administration started speaking out against the shutdown in strikingly sharp language.

“Making some people stay home when they don’t want to, and making others show up without pay, it’s mind-boggling, it’s shortsighted and it’s unfair,” FBI Director Christopher A. Wray told bureau employees in a video message. “It takes a lot to get me angry, but I’m about as angry as I’ve been in a long, long time.”

President Trump announces a deal with congressional leaders to reopen the government on Friday. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
The 800,000 federal workers who were either barred from working or forced to work without pay had been frustrated for weeks that their plight was being ignored or pooh-poohed by people in power.

And on Thursday, a series of comments from Trump administration officials exacerbated that feeling. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross drew widespread ridicule for suggesting that federal workers who were lining up at food banks instead should just “get a loan.”

“That was ridiculous,” said Andrew Perry, 51, whose wait Friday for a flight from New York’s LaGuardia Airport to Miami had stretched beyond two hours. “No matter what your means are, you can’t get a loan that quickly. . . . I know what it’s like to live paycheck to paycheck.”

Late-night hosts react to Wilbur Ross’s tone-deaf comments about furloughed workers

Late-night hosts had a lot to say on Jan. 24 about Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross downplaying the hardships caused by a partial government shutdown. (Drea Cornejo/The Washington Post)
The scene at airports in New York, Newark, Philadelphia and other big cities, where long delays resulted from the shortage of traffic controllers, helped persuade Trump that the shutdown had to come to an end, according to White House officials.

Many travelers said Friday’s inconveniences cemented their belief that the shutdown was an unnecessary, juvenile battle that was more about a refusal to back down than about any deep rift over policy.

Stefanie Cornwall, 27, arrived for her Spirit flight out of Philadelphia International Airport 30 minutes earlier than she typically would. Cornwall, who was flying to Los Angeles to visit family, had serious concerns that the shutdown was affecting travel safety.

“It’s obviously annoying when you have to wait in line for a long time, but what’s more concerning is whether the planes are being properly checked,” she said. Although she had been talking about the shutdown with friends and family for weeks, this was the first time she felt directly affected.

“I’m affected because it’s annoying and it’s a nuisance to me, but for these federal workers, they’re not being paid, even when they’re coming in to work,” she said. “It’s ridiculous.”

“Do we have your attention, Congress?” the Association of Flight Attendants said in a statement early Friday that warned that air safety workers were ­“fatigued, worried and distracted. . . . Our country’s entire economy is on the line.”

Democrats and Republicans alike felt public opinion shifting. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said Friday that the airport trouble “ratchets up pressure tremendously.” And Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) sensed that the effects of the shutdown “have become very real and very personal for a lot of people who aren’t getting paid, and it obviously has a lot of impacts on ATC and TSA and a lot of other pretty important functions and agencies right now.” The initials stand for air traffic controllers and the Transportation Safety Administration.

In the end, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, the public’s mounting worry about the shutdown’s economic impact moved politicians off their hard stances.

“With public sentiment, you can accomplish anything,” she said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) address the media at the Capitol Building after President Trump agreed to end the partial federal government shutdown. (Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post)
For the president, backing down from his vow not to reopen the government without a down payment of $5.7 billion on the wall he wanted to fulfill a signature 2016 campaign promise was both a convenient distraction and a dangerous retreat.

Settling the shutdown crisis provided Trump with a chance to deliver one of his trademark preemptions of bad publicity. His Rose Garden appearance instantly changed the national conversation away from the arrest Friday morning of his longtime adviser, Roger Stone, on charges that Stone lied to Congress about his role in the effort to undermine Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

On cable news channels, a ­seven-hour-long marathon of coverage of the indictment of one of Trump’s most loyal associates ended, replaced by live video of the president’s lectern. It was another assertion of the president’s ability to change the subject and monopolize the nation’s attention.

But Trump also was bitterly attacked for agreeing to end the shutdown without gaining any money for the wall.

Although public opinion weighed heavily against the shutdown all along, it had shifted in the past few days from concern for unpaid workers to insecurity about the well-being and safety even of people with no government ties.

Ben Alderman, who was heading home to Chicago from LaGuardia, said he was “dumbfounded” by Ross’s remarks and appalled by the “political games” that politicians were playing with federal workers’ lives. He said politicians appear to genuinely believe that missed wages “are not really important to people,” said Alderman, 35. “It’s divorced from reality.”

LaGuardia Airport in New York on Friday. The Federal Aviation Administration announced that there was a temporary restriction on flights into and out of the airport because of staffing issues linked to the partial government shutdown. (Justin Lane/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
A frequent air traveler who works in financial services, Alderman said he wasn’t frightened to fly Friday, but he was glad flights were delayed rather than pushed into the air despite high absenteeism among traffic controllers and TSA agents.

“What happened this morning is a testament to our safety,” he said. “If there aren’t enough people working, planes shouldn’t be in the air.”

Joe Keefe, an asset management executive, was booked on a flight from LaGuardia to Boston. But in the middle of his business in New York, he saw the news about the airport delays and changed his plans.

“We decided to take the train,” said Keefe, 65, of Rye, N.H. The change was the first concrete impact the shutdown had had on him, but he’d been upset about it all along. “I hope it’s a political disaster for him,” he said, referring to Trump. “The American people know where the blame lies. . . . It’s a manufactured crisis.”

Pete Nischt, 32, of Akron, Ohio, didn’t like the shutdown from the start, and now his flight from New York to Cleveland was delayed for three hours. In recent days, as he saw how people who had gone without pay for a month were suffering, he came to view the failure to pay public employees as “a breach of the social contract. Trump has been lying the whole time . . . and now we’re paying for it.”

The scope of that suffering seemed to metastasize late this week. At the IRS, at least 14,000 unpaid workers who were supposed to be in the office, preparing to process an avalanche of tax refunds, either could not be reached by their bosses or were out on “hardship” leave, in many cases because they said they could no longer afford gasoline to get to work.

Rosemary Bruscato, 50, who has worked at the IRS in Kansas City, Mo., for 10 years, said her manager placed her on leave after a two-minute conversation. It cost her $20 each week to fill the tank of her Ford Focus, and she had been paid zero dollars in 35 days.

“There was no retaliation or anything,” she said. “They were very understanding.”

Even as Congress finally moved toward funding the shuttered portions of the government, many workers struggled to meet their expenses. In many cases, it was missing that second paycheck on Friday that put them over the edge.

Lisa Oksala volunteers at the Greater DC Diaper Bank, which gave diapers, wipes and feminine hygiene products to furloughed government workers on Friday at the World Central Kitchen on Pennsylvania Avenue NW. (Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post)
In the District, the Greater DC Diaper Bank has given away 33,800 diapers, 50,684 feminine hygiene products and nearly 7,900 incontinence supplies to federal workers, including Deborah Myrick, a D.C. Superior Court employee who picked up diapers and formula for her two grandchildren.

“It’s frustrating,” said Myrick, who lives in Temple Hills, Md. “There’s no other way to put it. I can’t manage without a check.”

Myrick and other employees stood in a line that snaked around World Central Kitchen’s #ChefsforFeds pop-up kitchen, which offered free lunch, vegetables, fruit, pet food and diapers. Some people hung their heads, as though they did not want to be spotted, and many declined to talk about it. One man picking up diapers said he felt a deep sense of shame that, as someone who is employed, he needed to seek help.

“The whole thing is very numbing,” Cynthia Clarke, an administrative assistant with the U.S. Agency for Global Media, said as she sipped vegetable soup. “This is a man-made disaster. I know what a natural disaster looks like. I’ve been through earthquakes. This was man-made. This was unnecessary.”

Furloughed government workers line up at the World Central Kitchen on Pennsylvania Avenue NW on Friday to receive diapers, wipes and feminine products. The giveaway was organized by the Greater DC Diaper Bank, the Coast Guard Chief Petty Officers Association and the World Central Kitchen. (Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post)
Guarino reported from New York. Simone Sebastian in New York, Rebecca Tan in Philadelphia and Mark Berman, Tim Carman, Josh Dawsey, Mike DeBonis, and Danielle Paquette in Washington contributed to this report. 

Marc Fisher
Marc Fisher, a senior editor, writes about most anything. He has been The Washington Post’s enterprise editor, local columnist, and Berlin bureau chief, and he has covered politics, education, pop culture and much else in three decades on the Metro, Style, National and Foreign desks. Follow 

Ben Guarino
Ben Guarino is a reporter for The Washington Post’s Science section. Before joining The Post in 2016, he worked as a freelance science journalist, an associate editor at the Dodo and a medical reporter at the McMahon Group. He also has a background in bioengineering. Follow 

Katie Zezima
Katie Zezima is a national correspondent covering drugs, guns, gambling and vice in America. She covered the 2016 election and the Obama White House for The Washington Post. Follow
The Washington Post

August 4, 2018

Trump Really Wants To Shut The Government Down Due to His Deep Love To This Country? Except He Won't Be Able To!

 A Younger Trump with an Older Cohn who was Lawyer to both Trump and Rep McCarthy (1952),who was on a mission to find homosexuals and commies to drag them to his committee on unamerican activities. Many well known people in Hollywood commited suicide others were jail to latter be released but no one will hire them now. Trump at times, particularly when he went for the families applying for assylum (or crossing the border). No need for that, a decission made from the bottom of his seat after having some Colonel Chicken nuggets.
There is no evidence that Mcarthy hated the "Reds" his  fight was against certain people which  if succesful, will make him move up politicly. He was heading a committee which really had no purpose. If people working in any field happened to like the communism it didn't mean they were spyes. Compare it it now the President of The US saying how much he likes the head of that systema and How he admires him. No one has dragged him to jail yet and they won't uunless there is more proof he is exchanging information for favors, either personal forloans or national for secrets (coliusion).

Donald Trump is a man conflicted. All around him, people counsel caution, particularly when it comes to the midterm elections just three months away. Things are already bad enough, they say, so let’s not make them worse with something foolish like a government shutdown, in yet another attempt to get something (a wall along the southern border) that most Americans don’t want anyway.
Trump listens, but he does not believe. To him, what matters are not the American people, but hispeople — the ones who put him in office, the ones who come to his rallies, the ones whose faith in him only grows stronger, no matter what the polls say.
So when he’s in a friendly place and has the chance to ruminate on his dilemma, the conflict comes out. That’s what happened when he went on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show yesterday. Here are some excerpts of their conversation:
Limbaugh: Here you are suggesting that you’d be willing to maybe — you’d talk about — shutting down the government if that’s what it took to get this wall built.
Trump: Yeah.
Limbaugh: Now the traditional Republican says, “Oh, no! No! Don’t say that!” There you are saying, “Oh, yeah. I’ll be glad to do it if that’s what it takes.”
Trump: Yeah, I actually think it would be positive.
Limbaugh: People don’t understand your voters rally to you for that.
[. . .]
Trump: I have to say that I have heard this theory. I happen to think it’s a good thing politically. I’m not doing it for politics. I’m doing it because it’s the right thing to do. So I’m not looking at politics. But I happen to think that border security would be a good thing before the election, but there are many people within our party that are good people that are like you that agree with you on everything you say. But they’d rather do it after. They don’t agree on doing it before, and I accept their opinion, but I happen to think it would be a good thing to do before.
You can almost hear his aides, and every Republican running in a swing district, cringing in fear. A Republican president shutting down the government by refusing to sign temporary spending bills passed by his own party would be a disaster. But as Trump tells Limbaugh, “My polls are great, but the question is, is it transferable?” He then goes on to list some Republicans running in primaries who won with his endorsement. Of course, when it comes to the electorate as a whole, his polls are the opposite of great, and it’s his unpopularity that is transferable to Republicans. 
The fact that Trump is saying these things to Limbaugh isn’t evidence that he’s going to ignore what everyone is telling him and force a shutdown. But it does show his state of mind. When he’s faced with this kind of conflict — he wants to do one thing while his advisers and allies are begging him to do something else — two things usually happen. First, he backs down when it comes to the policy. And second, he’s so mad about it that he either lashes out on Twitter, to little real effect, or he goes on radio shows to complain.
But you have to understand that, from where he sits, it makes perfect sense to ignore what other people tell him and to trust his own instincts. After all, didn’t all the people who supposedly knew what they were talking about say he had no chance of becoming the Republican presidential nominee in 2016, and then said he’d surely lose the general election? He knew something they didn’t back then, so why can’t it be that he knows something they don’t right now?
The truth is that what he knew then and what he knows now are the same thing: Xenophobia works, anger works, fear works, hate works. If you stir them all together into the most toxic brew you can manage, the political effect can be dramatic. He also believes that conflict and controversy are things to be sought out, not avoided.
But the fact that his white-nationalist campaign succeeded in the particular circumstances of 2016 doesn’t mean that forcing a government shutdown over a border wall is the way to win a midterm election in 2018. It would certainly thrill a certain kind of hardcore Trumpite, but those people aren’t going to be the determining factor in this November’s elections.
If Republicans do indeed lose big on Election Day, as now seems almost inevitable, Trump will know just what to say: It was because the party was too timid, because it didn’t cater enough to his people, and because it didn’t shut down the government and get the wall built. And he’ll be more sure than ever that he should trust his instincts and ignore what everyone tells him. 

February 21, 2018

Peru's Fujimori 10 Years of Jailing and Deaths in the Name of Law and Order

Since the pardoning, four major street protests have taken place, lamenting the decision to give Fujimori a pardon. This has reduced confidence in the current political order of Peru. This affair has raised grave concerns about who now can continue Peru’s path. For businesses, there is no answer and the worst enemy of business in uncertainty. This act of apparent selfishness by Kuczynski in releasing a convicted human rights abuser so that he can remain in government runs the risk of jeopardising the until now certain path of growth and prosperity for Peru. 

To his supporters, Alberto Fujimori was the president who saved Peru from the twin evils of terrorism and economic collapse. To his opponents, he was an authoritarian strongman who rode roughshod over the country's democratic institutions in order to preserve his hold on power.
The son of Japanese immigrants, Mr Fujimori's decade in power from 1990 to 2000 in which he ruled with an iron fist was marked by a series of dramatic twists and turns.
His authoritarian government's crackdown on two violent insurgencies during his tenure resulted in the deaths of an estimated 69,000 people.
Several years after his presidency ended, Mr Fujimori was found guilty of bribery and abuse of power and was sentenced to 25 years in prison for human rights abuses during his time in office - including authorising a number of killings carried out by death squads.

Health issues lead to pardon

Sentenced to 25 years in prison in 2009 at the age of 70, most Peruvians assumed the former leader would spend the rest of his life in jail. 
But in December 2017, the 79-year-old was taken from prison to a hospital in the capital, Lima, because of health concerns; he was suffering from low blood pressure and abnormal heart rhythm.
That same month, Mr Fujimori was granted a pardon by President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski after doctors said his illness was incurable, adding that prison represented a "grave risk to his life".

In response, Mr Fujimori said he was "deeply grateful" and that while his leadership was well received by some, he recognised that he had "let down others", adding: "Those I ask for forgiveness from the bottom of my heart."
Alberto Fujimori, accompanied by his son Kenji Fujimori, leaves the hospital in Lima, 5 January 2018He also called for the country to unite against crime and violence. "We'll be in a country in which security is regained and violence eliminated," he tweeted.

Image copMr Fujimori, 79, leaves the hospital in Lima with his son,i

The news of his pardon was both celebrated and demonstrated against with thousands taking to the streets of Lima. The minister of culture and the defence minister resigned over the pardon.
Within days Mr Fujimori was released from hospital a free man, waving at media from his wheelchair accompanied by his son, Kenji Fujimori.

President's iron fist

One of the key moments of his presidency was the hostage siege by Marxist rebels belonging to the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA), which occurred at the Japanese ambassador's residence in Lima in 1996-97.
After a four-month stand-off, commandos were sent in to take the building.
All 14 rebels were killed and nearly all the 72 hostages were rescued in an operation that at the time cemented Mr Fujimori's talking and acting tough.

Bribery scandal

The president's reputation was later tarnished by a bribery scandal involving former intelligence chief Vladimiro Montesinos, which led to him fleeing to his parents' native Japan in November 2000, where he lived for five years in self-imposed exile.
In an effort to resurrect his political career and launch a new bid for the presidency, he flew to Chile in November 2005, only to be arrested at the request of the Peruvian authorities.

Mr Fujimori then spent two years fighting to block his extradition to face a series of charges, a battle he lost in September 2007.
He was convicted and sentenced to six years in jail in December 2007 on charges of abuse of power, over the removal of sensitive video and audio tapes from Mr Montesinos's home.
In April 2009, judges found him guilty of authorising death-squad killings in two incidents known as La Cantuta and Barrios Altos, and the kidnapping of a journalist and a businessman.
Mr Fujimori repeatedly denied the charges, saying they were politically motivated.

Alberto Fujimori waving as he leaves the residence of the Japanese ambassador in Lima, 22 April 1997Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES

Alberto Fujimori: Key dates

  • 1990: Wins a surprise victory at polls
  • 1992: Dissolves Peru's congress with military backing, assuming greater control 
  • 1995: Restores congress and overwhelmingly wins a second term 
  • 2000: Re-elected for a third term amid allegations of ballot rigging
  • 2000: Flees to Japan after Montesinos scandal breaks
  • 2005: Detained in Chile at the Peruvian authorities' request 
  • 2007: Extradited from Chile to face trial in Peru
  • 2007: Jailed for six years for abuse of power
  • 2009: Convicted of human rights abuses, jailed for 25 years
  • 2013: Request for pardon on humanitarian grounds is rejected by President Humala
  • 2017: Pardoned on health grounds, prompting protests
  • 2018: Ordered to stand trial for the 1992 killings of six farmers

A country in ruins

Mr Fujimori's 15-month trial and the divisions in public opinion it generated echoed the controversy that accompanied him throughout his political career.
When he won the presidential elections in 1990, few Peruvians knew what to expect.
An agricultural engineer born of Japanese parents, Mr Fujimori was a political unknown until weeks before the vote.
He inherited a country on the verge of economic collapse and racked by political violence.
He implemented a radical programme of free-market reforms, removing subsidies, privatising state-owned companies and reducing the role of the state in almost all spheres of the economy.
Though this shock therapy brought great hardship for ordinary Peruvians, it ended rampant hyperinflation and paved the way for sustained economic growth in the second half of the 1990s. 

Alberto Fujimori attending the opening of a meeting of Latin American presidents in Lima, 9 June 2000Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image captionMr Fujimori's radical reforms led to sustained economic growth in Peru

Mr Fujimori also tackled the left-wing rebels whose 10-year insurgency had caused thousands of deaths. But he says he never approved a dirty war against the rebels.
In 1992, with the support of the military, the president dissolved the Peruvian congress and courts and seized dictatorial powers.
He justified the measure by arguing that the legislative and judiciary had been hindering the security forces in their fight against the rebels.
Opposition politicians said he was really seeking to escape any democratic checks on his power.
But he was soon vindicated in the eyes of most Peruvians by the capture of the leader of the main rebel group, the Shining Path.

Spying scandal

In 1995, Mr Fujimori stood for re-election and won an overwhelming victory. Most voters cited his victories over left-wing insurgents and hyperinflation as the reason for giving him their support.
But a growing number of Peruvians began to voice concern that the methods used against the insurgency were also being employed against the president's democratic opponents.
His critics accused him of using the intelligence service led by Mr Montesinos to intimidate and spy on rivals.
They said he exerted unfair control on the media and the judiciary, and used government resources to support his own campaigns.
This criticism increased when he announced he was to stand for an unprecedented third successive term.
Although he won the May 2000 elections, amid further allegations of vote-rigging, the prized third term began the start of his downfall.
After the Montesinos scandal broke, the opposition gained control of Congress for the first time in eight years and dismissed Mr Fujimori on grounds of "moral incapacity".
BBC {for More information and reading about Peru's then and now conditions on human rights)

Adamfoxie🦊 Celebrating 10 years of keeping an eye on the world for You.           [There will be final changes soon] brings you the important LGBT news others ignore. Does not repost from gay sites [except only when a well known athlete comes out]. Will post popular items with a different angle or to contribute to our readers tastes🦊

Featured Posts

The Food Delivery/Ride Companies Wont Allow Drivers to be Employees But California is Changing That

                               Hamilton Nolan Senior Writer. After a monumental...