Blackwater again....

Eric5273 · #1 10-02-2007, 01:19 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/wa...ref=middleeast
Report Says Firm Sought to Cover Iraq Shootings

WASHINGTON, Oct. 1 — Employees of Blackwater USA have engaged in nearly 200 shootings in Iraq since 2005, in a vast majority of cases firing their weapons from moving vehicles without stopping to count the dead or assist the wounded, according to a new report from Congress.

In at least two cases, Blackwater paid victims’ family members who complained, and sought to cover up other episodes, the Congressional report said. It said State Department officials approved the payments in the hope of keeping the shootings quiet. In one case last year, the department helped Blackwater spirit an employee out of Iraq less than 36 hours after the employee, while drunk, killed a bodyguard for one of Iraq’s two vice presidents on Christmas Eve.

If your family member was killed by the American mercenaries working for this company, who would you think were the terrorists? And we wonder why we are viewed the way we are by the rest of the world. You can be certain this is no isolated incident. There are probably a dozen or more companies like Blackwater in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sponsored Links

Eric5273 · #2 10-02-2007, 01:21 AM

Can someone please fix my post. X5world is acting up again and for some reason put all that giberish at the end of my post, but will not allow me to edit it...it just keeps booting me back to the home page of X5World.

rebound · #3 10-02-2007, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Trigger-Happy Journalists
Some of our finest special-op soldiers serve companies like Blackwater.

BY BEN RYAN
Monday, October 1, 2007 12:01 a.m.

"They are immature shooters and have very quick trigger fingers," says an anonymous lieutenant colonel.
"Why are we creating new vulnerabilities by relying on what are essentially mercenary forces?" asks a nameless intelligence officer. "They often act like cowboys over here," says an unidentified commander.

Ever since a recent shootout in downtown Baghdad, newspapers have been ablaze with charges that private security contractors in Iraq are trigger-happy.

This rush to pass judgment is hardly surprising. Frequently derided as "mercenaries" and "rent-a-cops," security contractors make an easy target for war opponents.

As a former employee of a major Blackwater competitor, I find this categorical smearing of contractors to be starkly at odds with my experience. I served as an officer in the Navy SEALs for six years. After I left, I joined a private security firm and was promptly sent to Iraq.

Contrary to the popular belief that Blackwater contractors are "thugs for hire," most are highly professional and well trained. Blackwater operates the world's largest private military training facility. Its 1,000 contractors working in Iraq are drawn from the ranks of former military and law enforcement officials. Many of its workers are former SEALs or veterans of other special-operations units.
The risks these workers assume are underscored by the infamous 2004 ambush in Fallujah, in which four Blackwater contractors were murdered and mutilated. To date, Blackwater has lost 30 contractors. For all anyone knows, last month's incident could have turned into another Fallujah had Blackwater's contractors reacted differently. The details are still terribly unclear.

The contractors--and the U.S. diplomats they were escorting--claim they were ambushed. Yet Iraq's Ministry of Interior almost immediately issued a report declaring that the contractors were "100% guilty." Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has charged that the operators killed "in cold blood."

With conflicting reports, condemnations should not be made until the joint Iraqi-U.S. investigation is completed. The media, however, has accepted the Ministry of Interior's version of events, all but writing off the accounts of both Blackwater and the State Department.

This follows a long-established pattern of unfounded claims in the press about security contractors. For instance, numerous reports reference contractors making over $1,000 a day--far more than active-duty soldiers. Some point to the more than $700 million Blackwater has received in State Department contracts in order to denounce security firms as war profiteers.

The truth, however, is that contractors are cost-effective. Blackwater contractors, for example, are generally paid $450-$650 a day. More important, unlike U.S. servicemen, they usually receive no benefits and are paid only for the days they work. Security contractors at the better firms have typically retired from active duty or left the military on their own accord after extended service. They are honorable veterans who have chosen to risk their lives to protect American diplomats in a war zone.

Instead of depleting our armed forces, security contractors allow the government to recapture its investment in these men during wartime and avoid the extraordinary expense of training new recruits. In short, they're already trained and experienced--and cost money only when they're needed.

Another common myth is that contractors are above the law. True, the June 2004 Coalition Provisional Authority Order 17 exempts contractors (and other diplomatic personnel) from local prosecution. But that doesn't mean that contractors have been granted blanket immunity from prosecution. In fact, the order clearly states that this immunity is limited only to acts necessary to fulfill contracts. Indiscriminate attacks on civilians--as alleged in last month's incident--are not covered.
Contractors are also subject to numerous U.S. statutes and regulations, as well as international treaties. Just last year, Congress amended the Uniform Code of Military Justice to include contractors. Contractors can also be prosecuted under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2000, which permits charges to be brought in federal court for crimes abroad.

Like soldiers, security contractors are sometimes forced to make split-second decisions with enormous consequences. They must be--and are--accountable to our government for their actions. But the people I worked with in Iraq, including veterans working for Blackwater, were hardly rogue cowboys. I did, however, meet some trigger-happy journalists over there.

Mr. Ryan is a former U.S. Navy SEAL officer who spent time in Iraq as an employee of Triple Canopy, a private security firm.

WSJ Link

ncx · #4 10-02-2007, 08:45 AM

Fixed 1st post.

Wagner · #5 10-02-2007, 09:44 AM

There a merc security force, it isn't shocking that they kill people. The shocking part is that people are surprised by it.

Eric5273 · #6 10-02-2007, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wagner

There a merc security force, it isn't shocking that they kill people. The shocking part is that people are surprised by it.

The only part that truely surprises me is that it's being discussed by the American mainstream media. This sort of stuff is usually only discussed by "conspiracy theorists" and is brushed under the rug by the mainstream media.

That said, I think the disturbing part of the article is that our government tried to help them cover it up rather than prosecute them, or at least fire them.

xxx · #7 10-02-2007, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

The only part that truely surprises me is that it's being discussed by the American mainstream media. This sort of stuff is usually only discussed by "conspiracy theorists" and is brushed under the rug by the mainstream media.

That said, I think the disturbing part of the article is that our government tried to help them cover it up rather than prosecute them, or at least fire them.

Just like many other "theories".

If there was wrong doing members responsible should be charged and prosecuted all the way up to the politicians that initiated the actions.

Laws created by the joint international community must be respected by all if they are to be implemented against any. Hague was created for a reason, it's about time some Americans passed trough.

In this case if members of Backwater were to be found guilty the members of American government that tried to cover it up should also be charged for their wrong doing.

Eric5273 · #8 10-02-2007, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxx

Hague was created for a reason, it's about time some Americans passed trough.

Fat chance of that happening:

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/08/aspa080302.htm

U.S. President George Bush today signed into law the American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002, which is intended to intimidate countries that ratify the treaty for the International Criminal Court (ICC). The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague. This provision, dubbed the "Hague invasion clause," has caused a strong reaction from U.S. allies around the world, particularly in the Netherlands.

blondboinsd · #9 10-02-2007, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

Fat chance of that happening:

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/08/aspa080302.htm

U.S. President George Bush today signed into law the American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002, which is intended to intimidate countries that ratify the treaty for the International Criminal Court (ICC). The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague. This provision, dubbed the "Hague invasion clause," has caused a strong reaction from U.S. allies around the world, particularly in the Netherlands.

UM Are you Shocked? Bush is a horrible man, A worse president and a pathetic speajer, I just find it comical people are only now figuring it out