What Happened to Michael Hastings?

Submitted By: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger

Michael_Hastings_election_night_2012As erudite and informed as I pretend to be, the fact is that there is much that is important that I either miss, or fail to see any significance in. The death of investigative reporter Michael Hastings showed me that because my first reaction to the news flash was “who is Michael Hastings?” Reading further into the story I discovered that he was the reporter who brought down General William McChrystal and that he was considered to be one of America’s premier investigative journalists. As I read that original story, the thought occurred to me that possibly Hastings’s death in an auto “accident” was not simply a case of reckless driving, but I initially dismissed that as merely the operation of my cynical mindset.  Nevertheless, the thought nagged at the back of my consciousness and then I saw a story on http://whowhatwhy.com/ , my favorite investigative website, run by the renowned Russ Baker. The stories title: “The Michael Hastings Wreck-Video Evidence Offers a few Clues”     http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/07/14/the-michael-hastings-wreck-video-evidence-offers-a-few-clues/

For my own benefit and perhaps yours, I’ve done a little research into who Michael Hastings was and what he did that deserves attention. I explore the possibility that his death was no accident. I admit that I have no proof beyond speculation. Hopefully I can give you enough information to make your own judgments. In a world where American Presidents openly arrogate to themselves the right to kill people deemed enemies of the United States, all things suddenly become possible. When the basic right of habeas corpus can be denied to American citizens, based upon unproven allegations of their being threats to this country, isn’t it possible for those with the power to detain and to eliminate individuals, to make decisions as to someone’s existence doing harm to this country? Finally, doesn’t this unconstitutional expansion of powers give individuals with government connections the leeway to take revenge on those who expose them? While I’m not privy to knowledge of the actions of those in power and can claim no inside information, I certainly can speculate based on the experience of my lifetime. This then is my speculation about the death and life of Michael Hastings in the context of current life in these United States.

At about 4:30am a man driving a Mercedes swerved off of the straight as an arrow North Highland Avenue, in Los Angeles and into a Palm Tree. It is known that the man was driving at a high rate of speed. That man was:

“Michael Mahon Hastings (January 28, 1980 – June 18, 2013) an American journalist, author, contributing editor to Rolling Stone, and reporter for BuzzFeed.[4] He was raised in New York, Canada, and Vermont, and attended New York University. Hastings rose to prominence with his coverage of the Iraq War for Newsweek in the 2000s. After his fiancee, Andrea Parhamovich, was killed when her car was ambushed in Iraq, Hastings wrote his first book, I Lost My Love in Baghdad: A Modern War Story (2008), a memoir about his relationship with Parhamovich and the violent insurgency that took her life.”

“He received the George Polk Award for “The Runaway General” (2010), a Rolling Stone profile of General Stanley McChrystal, commander of NATO‘s International Security Assistance Force in the Afghanistan war. The article documented the widespread contempt for civilian officials in the US government by the general and his staff and resulted in McChrystal’s resignation. Hastings followed up with The Operators (2012), a detailed book account of his month-long stay with McChrystal in Europe and Afghanistan.

Hastings became a vocal critic of the surveillance state during the investigation of reporters by the US Department of Justice in 2013, referring to the restrictions on the freedom of the press by the Obama administration as a “war” on journalism.[5] His last story, “Why Democrats Love To Spy On Americans”, was published by BuzzFeed on June 7.[6] Hastings died in a fiery high-speed automobile crash on June 18, 2013 in Los Angeles, California.[7]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_%28journalist%29

It is of course possible that Michael Hastings death was an accident and that he was merely driving too fast on the wrong road. The WhoWhatWhy article linked above looks into the accident and I think fairly concludes that foul play was possible, but certainly not proven. We do know from Hastings’s friends that in the days before his death he felt he was being harassed our government:

“Earlier the previous day, Hastings indicated that he believed he was being investigated by the FBI. In an email to colleagues, which was copied to and released by Hastings’ friend, Army Staff Sergeant Joe Biggs,[45] Hastings said that he was “onto a big story”, that he needed to “go off the radar”, and that the FBI might interview them.[46][47] WikiLeaks announced that Hastings had also contacted one of its lawyers a few hours prior to the crash,[48] and the LA Times reported that he was preparing new reports on the CIA at the time of his demise.[49] The FBI released a statement denying that Hastings was being investigated.[44]

Hastings was eulogized by co-workers at Buzzfeed,[50] media figures such as Christopher Hayes[51] and Rachel Maddow[52] and others.[53]

According to Biggs, Hastings’ remains were cremated and returned to Vermont. Biggs stated that his family did not want Hastings to be cremated. Los Angeles medical examiner and police authorities indicated that it took two days to identify Hastings because he had been burned beyond recognition, and that the cause of death was undetermined, pending the results of an autopsy and toxicology tests.[54] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist

We probably will never know what CIA stories Michael Hastings was working on before he died in that auto crash, or if indeed the FBI was investigating him, but given all that we have learned and are beginning to learn about the excessive use of government powers both by civilian and military intelligence, is it possible that Hastings was deemed a “threat” to our country and eliminated? Were I not a young adult in the 60’s I might have banished that type of idea with dismissive disdain. However, as I have written before, the assassinations of the 60’s and the murders at Kent State, have taught me to not be dismissive of the possibilities of conspiratorial actions by some with present or past connections to government. http://jonathanturley.org/2012/03/17/a-real-history-of-the-last-sixty-two-years/ and: http://jonathanturley.org/2012/10/27/murder-at-kent-state/

Hastings’ article that led to the McChrystal dismissal is a detailed and nuanced story of a tough, Spartan-like General: “McChrystal is reported to run 7 to 8 miles daily, eat one meal per day, and sleep four hours a night.”  The General and his hand-picked staff had disdain for civilian leadership and basically he was given carte blanche by the President, who the General felt he had cowed in their meetings together. If you read it, as linked below, it seems a fair appraisal of the man and those men who he surrounded himself with.

“Even though he had voted for Obama, McChrystal and his new commander in chief failed from the outset to connect. The general first encountered Obama a week after he took office, when the president met with a dozen senior military officials in a room at the Pentagon known as the Tank. According to sources familiar with the meeting, McChrystal thought Obama looked “uncomfortable and intimidated” by the roomful of military brass. Their first one-on-one meeting took place in the Oval Office four months later, after McChrystal got the Afghanistan job, and it didn’t go much better. “It was a 10-minute photo op,” says an adviser to McChrystal. “Obama clearly didn’t know anything about him, who he was. Here’s the guy who’s going to run his fucking war, but he didn’t seem very engaged. The Boss [McChrystal] was pretty disappointed.” This was a statement from one of McChrystal’s aides.

“As McChrystal leaned on Obama to ramp up the war, he did it with the same fearlessness he used to track down terrorists in Iraq: Figure out how your enemy operates, be faster and more ruthless than everybody else, then take the fuckers out. After arriving in Afghanistan last June, the general conducted his own policy review, ordered up by Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The now-infamous report was leaked to the press, and its conclusion was dire: If we didn’t send another 40,000 troops – swelling the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan by nearly half – we were in danger of “mission failure.” The White House was furious. McChrystal, they felt, was trying to bully Obama, opening him up to charges of being weak on national security unless he did what the general wanted. It was Obama versus the Pentagon, and the Pentagon was determined to kick the president’s ass.” This was Michael Hastings’s interpretation based on his access to General McChrystal and his team.

Below was Hastings assessment of the staff and culture that McChrystal surrounded himself with as taken from an evening in Paris:

“The general’s staff is a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs. There’s a former head of British Special Forces, two Navy Seals, an Afghan Special Forces commando, a lawyer, two fighter pilots and at least two dozen combat veterans and counterinsurgency experts. They jokingly refer to themselves as Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority. After arriving in Kabul last summer, Team America set about changing the culture of the International Security Assistance Force, as the NATO-led mission is known. (U.S. soldiers had taken to deriding ISAF as short for “I Suck at Fighting” or “In Sandals and Flip-Flops.”) McChrystal banned alcohol on base, kicked out Burger King and other symbols of American excess, expanded the morning briefing to include thousands of officers and refashioned the command center into a Situational Awareness Room, a free-flowing information hub modeled after Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s offices in New York. He also set a manic pace for his staff, becoming legendary for sleeping four hours a night, running seven miles each morning, and eating one meal a day. (In the month I spend around the general, I witness him eating only once.) It’s a kind of superhuman narrative that has built up around him, a staple in almost every media profile, as if the ability to go without sleep and food translates into the possibility of a man single-handedly winning the war. 

By midnight at Kitty O’Shea’s, much of Team America is completely shitfaced. Two officers do an Irish jig mixed with steps from a traditional Afghan wedding dance, while McChrystal’s top advisers lock arms and sing a slurred song of their own invention. “Afghanistan!” they bellow. “Afghanistan!” They call it their Afghanistan song.

McChrystal steps away from the circle, observing his team. “All these men,” he tells me. “I’d die for them. And they’d die for me.” http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-runaway-general-20100622

Those three quotations can give you a feeling for why Michael Hastings article in Rolling Stone was explosive enough to lead to the end of Stanley McChrystal’s military career. Hastings was an excellent writer and whether you agree with his conclusions or not the full Rolling Stone article will give you a flavor of his competence as a journalist and I suggest to reading it in its entirety.

I’ve written much on what I call the “Corporate/Military/Intelligence/Complex” (CMIC) as I see it. http://jonathanturley.org/2013/07/12/who-do-you-trust-us-or-your-lying-eyes/#more-66997  One of its’ features is that there is an interrelationship between those in the Military and Intelligence fields with those corporations who receive funding for providing supplies for them. I see this interrelationship as rather incestuous and harmful to our country, since the permeability between these entities can and often does leads to corruption of all parties. In General McChrystal’s case one can see that his Army Retirement has certainly not ended his career:

“In 2010, after leaving the Army, McChrystal joined Yale University as a Jackson Institute for Global Affairs senior fellow. He teaches a course entitled “Leadership,” a graduate-level seminar with some spots reserved for undergraduates. The course received 250 applications for 20 spots in 2011 and is being taught for a third time in 2013.[69][70][71]

In November 2010, JetBlue Airways announced that McChrystal would join its board of directors.[72] On February 16, 2011, Navistar International announced that McChrystal would join its board of directors.[73] He is also Chairman of the Board of Siemens Government Systems, and is on the strategic advisory board of Knowledge International, a licensed arms dealer whose parent company is EAI, a business “very close” to the United Arab Emirates government.[74]

McChrystal co-founded and is a partner at the McChrystal Group LLC, an Alexandria, Virginia-based consulting firm.[75][76]

In 2011, McChrystal advocated instituting a national service program in the United States. McChrystal stated, “‘Service member’ should not apply only to those in uniform, but to us all … America is falling short in endeavors that occur far away from any battlefield: education, science, politics, the environment, and cultivating leadership, among others. Without a sustained focus on these foundations of our society, America’s long-term security and prosperity are at risk.”[77][78]

McChrystal’s memoir, My Share of the Task, published by Portfolio of the Penguin Group, was released on January 7, 2013.[79] The autobiography had been scheduled to be released in November 2012, but was delayed due to security clearance approvals required from the Department of Defense. Portfolio publishers stated, “We have decided to delay the publication date of General McChrystal’s book, My Share of the Task, as the book continues to undergo a security review by the Department of Defense … General McChrystal has spent 22 months working closely with military officials to make sure he follows all the rules for writing about the armed forces, including special operations.”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_A._McChrystal This is a case of Old (General) Soldiers not only not dying but certainly not fading away. In fact one can detect a political future in the making.

Based on what I presented above let me present a hypothetical, which is only buttressed by my background as a psychotherapist, life experience and love of history. I have little doubt that the General and his cronies believe themselves to be good men and patriots all. They view the world from a perspective that arrogates to themselves knowledge not available to those who have never “walked in their shoes”. While capable of nuanced judgment, it is a judgment nevertheless informed by their world perspective and self-concept of being heroic individuals. Among his men the General is no doubt looked at as the Alpha. As he was quoted in saying: “McChrystal steps away from the circle, observing his team.”All these men,” he tells me. “I’d die for them. And they’d die for me.” I believe the General is stating the truth. So then hypothetically, how would he and/or his men view Hastings’s article that led to the General’s retirement?  They believed that the General had the insight to bring the war to a successful conclusion.  They believed that our President and his vice President didn’t have a clue as to how to successfully prosecute this war. They therefore then believed that those who opposed the General and his plans were acting against the best interests of the United States, possibly skirting treason. Finally though, Hastings’s was a person who they opened up to and allowed to sit in on their inner circle. They trusted him to produce an article that would highlight the greatness and successes of Stanly McChrystal, after all how could he not after spending so much time with them? Hastings’s article and McChrystal’s ouster probably infuriated them all and raised an angry reaction in men who were described by Hastings as:

“The general’s staff is a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs. There’s a former head of British Special Forces, two Navy Seals, an Afghan Special Forces commando, a lawyer, two fighter pilots and at least two dozen combat veterans and counterinsurgency experts. They jokingly refer to themselves as Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority.”

Am I being unfair in speculating that perhaps the death of this Journalist, three years after this article, may well have been payback? Who knows, not I, but my senses tell me that there are at least two scenario’s whereby Michael Hastings death may be no accident. One could be the government itself, or certain parts of it related to the CMIC and another could be those able to take revenge on someone who in their opinion “brought a good man down to the detriment of our country”. I doubt that the public will ever know the truth if the death was not accidental and really that is not my point in writing this. What I’m trying to bring out is that beyond the unconstitutional behavior of our government in the name of “National Security”, which escalated after 9/11, a situation which in itself is terrible, is the heightened speculation and concomitant loss of faith in our government which follows in its wake. We are supposed to be a nation that exists under the rule of law and guided by our Constitution. How can we maintain faith in these institutions if we suspect that those in government or in the Corporate/Military/Intelligence Complex are able to act outside the law with impunity? What do you think?

Submitted By: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger

Other links about Hastings death and the suspicions about it:

http://www.infowars.com/friend-michael-hastings-marked-for-death/

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/hastings-panicked-email-fbi-death-article-1.1380539

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-09/elusive-details-michael-hastings-death
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/21/email-sent-by-michael-hastings-hours-before-his

http://www.globalresearch.ca/death-of-rolling-stone-muckracker-the-michael-hastings-wreck-

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/18/19027717-journalist-michael-hastings-dies-at-33..

http://www.sandiego6.com/story/details-of-reporter-hastings-death-remain-elusive-20130708

233 thoughts on “What Happened to Michael Hastings?”

  1. You have touched upon a number of very significant institutional issues that each deserve substantial investigation. Irrespective of what may have happened to Hastings, you exhibit keen insight with respect to the elite war fighters who, having been incubated in the special operations community, have a superior sense of righteousness that can be very dangerous when set free from strict military discipline and good management. I know this world very well, particularly when it transitions to the commercial world.

  2. “The toxicology reports are key. I want to know them before exploring more sinister possibilities.”

    Nick,

    Yes the toxicology reports would be key, but will we ever get them?

  3. MIke,
    Interesting questions. I too wondered about the smell test when I heard of the Hastings “accident”. However, we have very little to go on at this point. the idea that his body was cremated without the approval of the family is one item that jumps out at me.

  4. When you investigate anything, there are NO COINCIDENCES, unless proven. I had read one piece about this guy and it seem curious. After reading this good, in depth post, it seems a bit more curious. The toxicology reports are key. I want to know them before exploring more sinister possibilities.

  5. When I heard of the death of Michael Hastings, I too reacted with suspicion. To me, however, the most frightening consequence of Mr. Hastings death is not his death in and of itself, tragic though it is, but what it says about the state of our government at this time in history. The fact that we as Americans can justifiably point our collective finger at Washington and, given the state of affairs since 9/11, ask the question ‘Is my government actually capable of such an action’ is frightening enough, but to be able to answer ‘Yes it is’ is the most frightening of all. IMHO

  6. A group put this video together playing out their concerns of what might start unfolding one day soon.

    I’m seeing it is something that could happen on just about any day.

    If not how do we get to a better solution & who will be the new leaders, if any leaders at all?

    PURGE – “Operation Paul Revere InfoWars.com Contest”

  7. For example: this line I think is worthy of some explication: We are supposed to be a nation that exists under the rule of law and guided by our Constitution.

    Are we prepared to say this is no longer the case? That we are supposed to be, but are we?

    I don’t know. It seems there is a strong case to be made that we are not, even while we maintain the forms of being ruled by Constitutional law.
    I’d love to hear from those legal scholars on this question. Are we still, meaningfully a Legal society? Or has the corruption so infiltrated the system and the society that the only viable response is apathy and a cynical “… its all gone to hell….”

    Curious.

  8. Murder of inconvenient people has long been a staple of US capitalism, so this would not be surprise. I can cite numerous frame ups of labor activists in the US and their executions. More recently Kerr/McGee was more than likely behind the murder of Karen Silkwood of my old union, OCAW. So it may well not be the government, but other nasty players who are unkinown as of yet. I would most definitely NOT treat this as a run of the mill accident and would take a very hard look at it. It may well be that, but our history does not bode well for such a finding.

  9. Then there is also the Pat Tillman’s death cover up, both McChrystal & Michael Hastings are some how tied to that story.

    It’s really pretty tough to see just who the good guys are from the bad guys on some of this stuff.

    When it comes to the UN, NATO, Red Cross & a bunch of others it’s clear to me they don’t have American’s best interest in mind.

  10. [quote]What I’m trying to bring out is that beyond the unconstitutional behavior of our government in the name of “National Security”, which escalated after 9/11, a situation which in itself is terrible, is the heightened speculation and concomitant loss of faith in our government which follows in its wake. We are supposed to be a nation that exists under the rule of law and guided by our Constitution. How can we maintain faith in these institutions if we suspect that those in government or in the Corporate/Military/Intelligence Complex are able to act outside the law with impunity? [/quote]
    ———–
    Well said and well asked.
    I appreciate the article, even if a bit surprised to see it on this august blog.
    It is a reasonable story to solicit the concluding paragraph and the questions posed in it.
    The questions, however, are essential ones are are not limited to just this example/event. I wish there would be a full throated discussion of these questions that would a) stay on point b) not get into silly non sequitur c) not get sidetracked into small eddies, no matter how interesting they might be (ie, debating endlessly over the mechanics of the crash) d) be open eyed and unflinching in addressing the questions raised above, and go whereever the ‘evidence’ leads. e) have whatever points and thoughts augmented with some deeper legal perspective of the sort that JT and others bring to the conversation.

    From this basis it would be amazing and fantastic if something more than impotent hand wringing or cynical conclusions could be asserted.

    Of course, as others in other places have well pointed out, the country is in some horrible transition. Others assert the transformation is already fiat accompli’. And I share some of those sentiments.

    What I am hoping for is something deeper than just the simply saying so of it all. Meaning: example the point. Express some underlying principles or possibilities. Or if hopelessness is the only rational conclusion then support it.

    Anyway… that is my “agenda”. Maybe it is not congruent with the commetariat here? It does seem however that it is congruent with the overall point of the various original posts on this blog.

    My two bits.

    Michael

  11. Good Job Mike Spindel!

    And a good topic.

    Ed Meese was an American hating piece of trash that worked for Ronnie Ray Gun.

    Many of you likely recall Meese & Ollie North spent hours on end shredding damning documents that may have been related to Iran/Contra.

    It was a data wash.

    The data wash by these type traitors haven’t stopped & continue to this day.

    I mention this here because everyone needs to store plenty of back up copies, with hard copies, in different locations.

    Remember with the Nazi GW Bush, the washing of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was just the PR stunt for the public that helps hide the larger ongoing data wash.

    Those BIA records weren’t destroyed just because they were bored!

    Those Bond records weren’t destroyed in NYC just because of storage space issues.

    etc…………

  12. Mike,

    From what I’ve read from the most conservative to the most liberal….. They all stated that he sent out an email not to long before his demise that he feared for his life and that the Authorities had been questioning family and friends….. Now how credible his email was is whether you believe our government is capable of such a thing….. I think so…. Is it possible that somebody in government could do something like this….. YES…. You may not be paranoid if folks are out to get you and they do….

  13. Mike,

    Coincidence happens, but that being said, this pushed my suspicion button as well. He may have been killed for something he did. Revenge is a dish best served cold and the amount of time passed between event and his death seems about right from an objective planning standpoint to both allay suspicion from an information control/propaganda standpoint but not so far out as to allow Hastings to “do more damage”. I think you are familiar with my understanding of information theory and propaganda enough to know that may be speculation, but it is informed speculation. Then again, he may have been killed for something he was about to do. The flurry of activity before he “went off the radar” could be smoke for a fire not fully set. Or it could be simply an accident.

    I’m comfortable in remaining suspicious.

    At worst, the suspicions are unfounded. At best, they are wise.

  14. An eyewitness said that Hastings was travelling at an extremely high rate of speed and spun out of control but who knows for sure. The far right wing infowars is cited again. ugh..

  15. Mike,

    I knew who Michael Hastings was when I read the story about his death–and the first thing that I wondered about was whether his death was really caused by an accident. Call me suspicious!

Comments are closed.