Prairie Voice

The Cost Risk of Privatizing War

By Dan Kenney

Co-coordinator of

No Private Armies

March 5, 2011

            The Bipartisan Congressional commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan came out with their second Interim Report to Congress on February 24^th. This report dispels any doubts about whether privatization is costing taxpayers too much. The Federal reliance on contractors is not only costing too much but billions are being lost to fraud and waste. The report proves that the unprecedented outsourcing that has occurred in these wars needs to be stopped. The “Commission believes the United States has come to over-rely on contractors.”

            The Commission’s conservative estimate is that since October 2001 at least $177 billion has been spent on private contracts and grants to support U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is equivalent to $407,000,000 per Congressional district or $1,505 per U.S. household. Of that misspent amounts run in the tens of billions.

            The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) warned the Commission in January of this year that the entire $11.4 billion for contracts to build nearly 900 facilities for the Afghan National Security Forces is at risk due to inadequate planning. This estimate does not include the waste that has resulted from Afghanistan‘s inability to sustain projects.

            In addition to waste there is also the issue of fraud. According to the Association of Fraud Examiners an estimated 7% of revenue is lost to fraud, or $12 billion. Many observers also believe that waste accounts for substantially greater sums than the fraud and abuse.  

            The Commission conducted more than 900 meetings and briefings, along with a series of trips to Afghanistan and Iraq, and over 19 Commission hearings. After their research they have developed over 30 recommendations for congress and the Obama Administration.

            The Obama Administration has been just as silent as the previous administration on this issue privatization. In March of 2009 Obama issued a memo on government contracting in which he stated:

                        “The Federal Government must have sufficient capacity

                          to manage and oversee the contracting process from start

                          to finish, so as to ensure that taxpayer funds are spent wisely

                          and are not subject to excessive risk.”

The Obama administration failure to act on this memo however is made evident in a statement made by the Special Inspector General of Afghanistan Reconstruction. Major General Arnold Fields told the Commission in a hearing entitled “Recurring Problems in Afghan Construction” January 24^th 2011, “We don’t have enough trained folks within the federal establishment to provide the oversight of the very contractors we are brining on board.” When government agencies lack experienced and qualified workers to provide oversight, the potential for waste, fraud, and abuse in contract performances increases exponentially. In some cases contractors are hired to perform the oversight of other contractors for the federal agencies. To this fact the Commission stated, “The Commission firmly believes that contractors need to be managed by military and government civilian personnel. Anything less is unacceptable.”

During the same January 2011 hearing Secretary of Defense Gates expressed his own concern for the government’s “level of dependency” on contractors.

“Although there is historical precedent for contracted support to our military forces, I am concerned about the risks introduced by our current level of dependency, our future total force mix, and the need to better plan for { operational contract support} in the future. . . The time is now-while the lessons learned from recent operations are fresh- to institutionalize the changes necessary to influence a cultural shift.”

The issue of accountability is also covered in the report. The report states, “A serious concern with relying on armed security contractors is a potential gap in legal accountability.” This “legal gray zone” in which these private military contractors operate can lead to diplomatic conflicts with the host nations. Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan governments have all demanded private military companies to leave their countries. But this demand has not been met for the very dependency we have touched on earlier. As a nation the U.S. can not operate in Central Asia or any where else without the support of private companies. These present wars have become the most privatized wars in America’s history. We have moved into new territory and the Commission’s report makes it clear that this has been done haphazardly with great consequence to human life and taxpayer money.

Whether Congress listens to the Commission’s findings is yet to be seen. The report was ignored, coming out during the budget battle, although the connection between the Nation’s deficit and a war that is costing $700 million per week and nearly 50% of that amount going into contracts with over 600 companies operating in these war zones. And now we have the evidence to show that tens of billions of that money is being wasted or stolen. Also at this time of growing attacks on unions, workers, and the middle class in this country under the guise of budget deficits, it seems to be the most responsible choice to draw parallels between this wasting and thievery of public funds by private war profiteers and mercenaries.  

In its conclusion the Commission said, “If, on the other hand, the federal government cannot muster the resources and the will to strategically employ, manage, and oversee mission-critical contractors effectively, then it should reconsider using contractors, or reconsider the scope of its mission with a view to trimming them.”

Now that we have a majority in Congress that is dedicated to the Market solving all problems, and seemingly bent on breaking government down to a postage stamp size capabilities of real oversight, than it seems time for the citizens to call for the passing of the S.O.S. Act. The S.O.S. Act is the Stop Outsourcing Security Act, H.R. 4650, introduced by Rep. Jan Schakowsky D-IL and into the Senate by Mr. Sanders, I-VT.

 The S.O.S. Act calls for the U.S. to phase out use of private military contractors. It seems that given the lack of will in Congress and in this administration to take oversight of these contractors seriously, we should end our use of them. This will be a difficult task given the present climate; it will require a great outpouring of citizen support to make such a cultural change within the Department of Defense, the State Department, and within the intelligence community. (75% of the intelligence agencies activities are performed by private contractors.)

If the resolve and will of the government is missing than this policy change must come from the people. It is after all, our money, the lives of our loved ones, and the future of our nation at risk.

Home Defense: A New Blackwater Course of Special Interest to Christian Warriors

By Dan Kenney

Co-Coordinator of No Private Armies

www.noprivatearmies.org

4/4/2010

In addition to training law enforcement Blackwater, now operating under the name Xe Services, is offering a course designed for any gun toting citizen. The world’s most powerful and best known mercenary company with the reputation of operating outside of the law in the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan is now offering a new class in “Home Defense” at their 6,000 acre North Carolina and their 80 acre northwest Illinois training locations.

Blackwater’s training division is now known as U.S. Training Center. According to the US Training Center website the new course has this aim:  “The course is designed to make the armed citizen more aware of personal security whether at home or away; considerations in protecting self and family members.”

Upon closer examination of what the class entails raises questions about who may be included in the target demographic group for this new training. The training involves the following: “Introduction: This course will inform the concerned citizen on methods of protecting the home front. The students will receive classroom instruction and will engage in shoot/no-shoot, force on force realistic scenarios based on actual events that have occurred where their decision making process will be explored and tested.  This is not a basic firearms course but provides training for the time when use of your weapon becomes your only option. “ (My underlining for emphasis.)

The “students” will pay $595.00 for two days of training. The training involves the following: “Topics:

• Use of Force
• Security of weapons at home and away.
• Away from home considerations
• Gear & weapons
• Mindset/ Indications of Mental State
• Basic room clearing techniques for the homeowner
• Force-on-force scenarios
• Ballistic protection at home and away
• Dealing with the Police “

One must ask in which “scenarios” would a homeowner need to conduct a “room clearing?” Also who better to train a citizen on how to “deal with the police” than a company that is involved with training hundreds of police officers every year.  It would appear that Blackwater is willing to not only train the police but to train the citizen cops as well.

The only prerequisite for the class is that the “student” knows how to fire a gun. “Prerequisite:  Basic pistol marksmanship/familiarization course. This is not a marksmanship course. Handling skills are required prior to attending class.”

The equipment supplied includes: “Included Equipment: Simunition® Pistol (customer preference of Glock, Sig Sauer, Beretta), Simunition® safety gear, 100 rounds of Simunition®, holster & magazine carrier. “

Simunition is a General Dynamics-Ordnance and Tactical Systems-Canada Inc company that developed in the 1980s. Their mission, according to their website is, “to provide the most realistic training systems possible so that officers and military forces around the world can engage in experience building and ultimately lifesaving exercises.”

They also have a philosophy that includes, “helping law enforcement officers, emergency response teams and military personnel to improve their tactical skill and condition their fear response, our family of training products ultimately saves lives.” Interesting that there is no mention of citizens who take the law into their own hands; and also interesting that simulator weapons can be referred to as a “family of training products.” This brings a whole new light onto the term “family.”

The “Home Defense” course however does come with a disclaimer, “Disclaimer: This is NOT a pistol/shotgun course. Students should come prepared to operate their weapon system and be familiar with weapon handling, safety and marksmanship. Local authorities should be consulted on use of Lethal Force and the use of Lethal Force to defend lives and property.”  (My underlining for emphasis.)

Good to know. Always good to consult with “local authorities” before you use your Glock to kill someone. However they do not include a cell phone in their required gear.

Required gear according to the course description on their website:” Gear:  belt, flashlight, ear protection, clothing appropriate for climate and conditions, rain gear, and a water bottle or other hydration system. Cover garment for concealed draw is highly recommended.”

Now this kind of training for any gun carrying citizen taught by any company would be unsettling, but to have it provided by a company that is owned by Erik Prince who has been accused of murder by two former employees under sworn statements filed in a Federal court in Virginia last August is especially disturbing. According to sworn testimony by two former Blackwater employees, who were referred to as John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 for fear they may be murdered by Prince or one of his current gunmen, Erik Prince may have murdered or facilitated the murder of individuals who were cooperating with Federal authorities who were investigating the company. The former employees also alleged that Prince “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe.”  One must ask what other crusades may he see as his mission.

Here is an excerpt from the two five page sworn statements by the former employees:

To that end, Mr. Prince intentionally deployed to Iraq certain men who shared his vision of Christian supremacy, knowing and wanting these men to take every available opportunity to murder Iraqis. Many of these men used call signs based on the Knights of the Templar, the warriors who fought the Crusades.

Mr. Prince operated his companies in a manner that encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life. For example, Mr. Prince’s executives would openly speak about going over to Iraq to “lay Hajiis out on cardboard.” Going to Iraq to shoot and kill Iraqis was viewed as a sport or game. Mr. Prince’s employees openly and consistently used racist and derogatory terms for Iraqis and other Arabs, such as “ragheads” or “hajiis.”

One does not have to stretch too far to see a troubling possible connection between a company headed by someone who according to Jeremy Scahill in his book, Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, was “dedicated to a Christian-supremacist agenda” and the creation of the class to train any armed citizen on how to basically be their own law enforcers, just as Prince’s mercenaries operated in Iraq. Also one can also make the parallel between the rise of armed citizen militias, some of whom have a similar “Christian-Supremacist agenda,” and the need for a class that teaches citizens the same skills that are being taught to the military and to law enforcement.

In addition this is also could be an attempt to bring in more money since last month Blackwater was stopped by GOA from winning a multi-billion dollar contract from the US Army to train Afghan police. Now the contract has to be re-bid and DynCorp is in the running as well. Prince is also selling off his own private air force, Aviation World Services with its subsidiary Presidential Airways for $200 million to AAR Corp. This will mean a cut of another 240 employees after last year layoffs that resulted with the cancellation of the contract to build the Grizzly, an armored vehicle.

The former employees also testified that Erik Prince lives in fear of being prosecuted by the Federal government for the many illegal activities he is suspected of being involved with, such as smuggling illegal arms into Iraq, some of which were sold on the Black Market, tax evasion, wrongful death lawsuits which number in the double digits at last count, etc.

One thing all of this points to is that if you poke a desperate polecat with a stick he is bound to fight back. I wish this meant the downfall of Blackwater and the Prince’s Dark Kingdom were near, but I fear that it only means that a reshaping is taking place and who knows what dark hole it will raise from next.

Open Letter To Congress
January 12, 2010

Open Letter to U.S. Congress
Investigate the Mishandling of Blackwater Case
Enact the Stop Outsourcing Security Act.

On December 31, 2009, United States District Judge Ricardo Urbina
dismissed all criminal charges against five Blackwater security guards
accused of killing 17 unarmed Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square of
Baghdad on September 16th 2007. The contractors had been indicted for 14
counts of manslaughter, 20 counts of attempting to commit manslaughter
and one count of weapons violation. In his decision the Judge did not
rule on the substance of the charges against the security guards, but on
the prosecutorial misconduct of the U.S. attorney Kenneth Kohl and the
trial team.

Judge Urbina’s 90-page opinion does not dispute the investigations by
the Iraqi police, the U.S. Army, and the F.B.I. The Iraqi and U.S.
investigators found that the guards of the Raven 23 convoy had
indiscriminately fired on unarmed civilians in an unprovoked and
unjustified assault in the crowded Nisour Square of Baghdad on September
16, 2007. Witnesses and reports stated some of the victims were shot in
the back trying to flee the scene. A nine year old boy riding in the
back seat of his father’s car was shot in the head and died. None of the
investigators were able to find any physical evidence to support the
guards’ contentions that they had been fired upon. The F.B.I. stated in
their report that the Blackwater guards recklessly violated American
rules for the use of lethal force. The U.S. military investigators went
further saying that all the deaths were unjustified and potentially
criminal. Iraqi authorities called the shootings “deliberate murder.”

Judge Urbina labeled the misconduct of the trial team, headed by
Assistant U.S. attorney Kenneth Kohl, as a “reckless violation of the
defendants’ constitutional rights.” This violation occurred when U.S.
Attorney Kohl and Department of Justice trial lawyer Stephen Ponticello
built their case around the written statements made by the contractors
immediately following the shooting. The Judge stated, “In short, the
government has utterly failed to prove that it made no impermissible use
of defendants’ statements or that such use was harmless beyond
reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the court must dismiss the indictment
against all the defendants.”

However, in the background section of the opinion, it becomes obvious
that this violation could have been avoided. Judge Urbina describes in
detail the many instances where Kohl and the trial team ignored the
directives and warnings of Raymond Hulser, a Deputy Chief in the Public
Integrity Section of the Criminal Division, who was assigned as the
“taint attorney.” His responsibility was to prevent prosecutors and
investigators handling the investigation from using statements that
could contaminate the case causing it to be dismissed.

On page 82 of the written opinion, Judge Urbina points out that the
government’s attempts to characterize Kohl’s failure to heed the
warnings and directives of Hulser as a mere “miscommunication” are
“simply implausible.”

Judge Urbina writes, “These inconsistent, extraordinary explanations
(given in interviews by Kenneth Kohl) smack of post hoc rationalization
and are simply implausible.” He continued, “The only conclusion the
court can draw from this evidence is that Kohl and the rest of the trial
team purposefully flouted the advice of the taint team when obtaining
the substance of the defendants’ compelled statements, and in so doing,
knowingly endangered the viability of the prosecution.”

Rep. Jan Schkowsky (D – IL) said in the Los Angeles Times, “We’re going
to have to understand how this happened.” The Iraqi families and the
U.S. citizens that are funding companies like Blackwater, as well as
paying for the investigations, have a right to know the motivation
behind such reckless misconduct by a seasoned U.S. Attorney.

An adviser to the Iraqi council of ministers said, “This (the dismissal
of the case) is very bad for the overall look of the United States
outside its borders. It’s very important for the Americans to realize
that this will work against their interests in Iraq and other places.”

Given the prosecutorial misconduct of this case, the tragedy of the
shooting incident and the larger trend of private security contractors,
we call upon the U.S. Congress to take the following actions:

1. Conduct a Congressional investigation into the prosecutorial
misconduct of U.S. Attorney Kenneth Kohl and the trial team. Judge
Urbina’s decision describes in detail the many times the investigators
and prosecutors seemed determined to sabotage the case from the
beginning. It is also known that senior officials of the Justice
Department did not want this case to go to trial. According to Scott
Horton, international law expert and contributor to Harper’s, reported
one Congressman who was present at early briefings of the case held on
Capitol Hill said the Justice Department prosecutors assigned to the
case were behaving like defense lawyers building a case to defend the
Blackwater employees, not prosecute them. A Congressional investigation
is needed to verify and explain the Justice Department’s actions and
motivations in this case.

2. Our military personnel are bestowed with a special responsibility to
use lethal force in the course of their work and are held to a higher
standard of conduct as a result, the Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ). The current trend to outsource military operations to private
contractors eliminates that higher standard, resolving it instead
through corporate contract provisions and civilian law which is far from
the higher standard of conduct implied by the authority to use lethal
force. The indictments in this case specifically stated that Blackwater
Worldwide, the primary contractor in the matter, had no responsibility
for the events, despite the fact that the guards were trained by
Blackwater and working according to the “culture” of the firm.
Blackwater (Xe Services) must be held accountable for their involvement
in this event and other events, and the U.S. Congress should grapple
with the shortcoming of current contract law when applied to actors in
combat zones using lethal force who would otherwise be subject to the UCMJ.

3. The U.S. Congress should cancel and cut off all funding of contracts
with Blackwater (Xe Services) and with all of their affiliates. This
should include all contracts now in effect under the Department of
Defense, the Department of State, Homeland Security, The Drug
Enforcement Agency, and the CIA. In addition to the above incident,
Blackwater and its owner Erik Prince are named in two other Grand Jury
investigations involving the company’s possible smuggling of weapons
into Iraq and tax evasion. The company may face charges for obstruction
of justice related to the shooting incident in Nisour Square. In August
of 2008 Rep. Henry Waxman, then chair of the House Oversight and
Government reform Committee, called on then candidate Obama to cancel
Blackwater’s contracts if elected President. Candidate Hillary Clinton
also said that Blackwater contracts should be canceled. We agree with
Rep. Waxman when he said, “I don’t see any reason to have a contract
with Blackwater. They haven’t lived up to their contract and we
shouldn’t be having these private military contracts. We should use our
own military.”

4. This decision also puts the U.S. in breach of its treaty obligations
to prosecute this case, which was an international law obligation. Now
if the U.S. cannot, for the technical reasons set forth in the ruling,
prosecute the case, the U.S. is required to waive the immunity and
surrender these individuals to the Iraqi authorities for prosecution.
Congress should ensure that our Government satisfies all of our
international obligations as they pertain to this case.

5. Reintroduce and swiftly enact the “Stop Outsourcing Security Act”
(known as House Resolution 4102 in the 110th Congress) which cites that
a) the United States is increasingly relying on private security
contractors, b) one quarter of these contractors are third-party
nationals, c) these contractors operate at cross-purposes with our
larger mission and undermine the mission, jeopardizing the safety of
American troops, d) events such as the Nisour Square massacre have
negatively affected the relationship of our country with other countries
in those areas, e) security contracts suffer from inadequate oversight,
f) Congress does not even have access to security contracts, and g) the
use of private security contractors for mission critical functions
should be phased out.

The bill required that a) personnel at any United States diplomatic or
consular mission in Iraq are provided security services only by Federal
Government personnel, b) the military will transition away from the use
of private contractors for mission critical or emergency essential
functions in all conflict zones in which Congress has authorized the use
of force, c) contracts with security contractors shall be open to
inspection by Congress, d) no contracts shall be renewed during the
transition period unless those companies have a clean record, and e)
that the defense department fully document the number and disposition of
all security contractors.

When reintroducing this bill, Congress should insure the scope is
adequately broad to include recent revelations of “black-ops” CIA
activities, and to update it to include regions and operations of
relevance today, including domestic and foreign training operations,
which is a core-competency of our military and must not be relegated to
for-profit firms.

The safety of our soldiers and our citizens, as well as citizens in Iraq
and Afghanistan, can no longer be put into risk by the careless actions
of hired military and security companies like Blackwater. Legal
loopholes that provide immunity for all contractors, regardless of how
murderous their actions may be, continue the pattern of inadequate
accountability. We ask you how much longer will you allow those whom we
fund to get away with murder in our name?

BY THE UNDERSIGNED:

No Private Armies: Dan Kenney & Mary Shesgreen, co-coordinators of
NoPrivateArmies.org Chicago Area (IL)

Voices For Creative Non-Violence: Kathy Kelly http://vcnv.org

Stop Blackwater: Raymond Lutz, coordinator, StopBlackwater.net (San
Diego, CA)

CitizensOversight.org (San Diego, CA)

Blackwater Watch: Christian Stalberg, XeWatch.info (NC)

Peace Resource Center: Carol Jahnkow, director, prcsd.org (San Diego, CA)

Citizens Against Private Armies (Riverside County, CA)

NC Stop Torture Now

ADD YOUR NAME OF ENDORSEMENT BY VISITING http://www.StopBlackwater.net

–

New Year, Same Old Story: Blackwater Still Gets Away with Murder

                                                                                                  By Dan Kenney

                                                                                            No Private Armies

                                                                                                      1/1/10

This may be the first day of a new year, and the start of a new decade, but it is also a day that marks the continuation of an old sad story of injustice. On New Year’s Eve Judge Ricardo Urbina dismissed all charges against five Blackwater contractors that had been indicted for 14 counts of manslaughter, 20 of attempting to commit manslaughter and one weapons violation. This New Year’s Eve gift to Blackwater was bad news for the Iraqi families expecting the American judicial system to deliver justice for the deaths and injuries of their loved ones.

            The old story is that, once again, by using the system to their benefit and with the  possible deliberate sabotage on the part of the U.S. Attorney assigned to the case, the contractors accused of shooting innocent unarmed Iraqi citizens may never be brought to court.

Judge Urbina’s written 90-page opinion does not dispute the investigations by the Iraqi police, the U.S. Army, and the F.B.I. The Iraqi and U.S. investigators found that the guards of the Raven 23 convoy had indiscriminately fired on unarmed civilians in an unprovoked and unjustified assault in the crowded Nisoor Square of Baghdad on September 16, 2007. Witnesses and reports stated some of the victims were shot in the back trying to flee the scene. A nine year old boy riding in the back seat of his father’s car was shot in the head and died. None of the investigators were able to find any physical evidence to support the guards’ contentions that they had been fired upon. The F.B.I. stated in their report that the Blackwater guards recklessly violated American rules for the use of lethal force. The U.S. military investigators went further saying that all the deaths were unjustified and potentially criminal. Iraqi authorities called the shootings “deliberate murder.”

Judge Urbina labeled the misconduct of the trial team, headed by Assistant U.S. attorney Kenneth Kohl, as a “reckless violation of the defendants’ constitutional rights.”  This violation occurred when U.S. Attorney Kohl and Department of Justice trial lawyer Stephen Ponticello built their case around the written statements made by the contractors immediately following the shooting. The Judge stated, “In short, the government has utterly failed to prove that it made no impermissible use of defendants’ statements or that such use was harmless beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the court must dismiss the indictment against all the defendants.”

The Rest of the Story

However in the background section of the opinion it becomes obvious that this violation could have been avoided. Judge Urbina describes in detail the many instances where Kohl and the trial team ignored the directives and warnings of Raymond Hulser, a Deputy Chief in the Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division, who was assigned as the “taint attorney.” His responsibility was to prevent prosecutors and investigators handling the investigation from using statements that could contaminate the case causing  it to be dismissed.

On page 82 of the written opinion, Judge Urbina points out that the government’s attempts to characterize Kohl’s failure to heed the warnings and directives of Hulser as a mere “miscommunication” are “simply implausible.”

Judge Urbina writes, “These inconsistent, extraordinary explanations (given in interviews by Kenneth Kohl) smack of post hoc rationalization and are simply implausible.”

 “The only conclusion,” the Judge continued, “the court can draw from this evidence is that Kohl and the rest of the trial team purposefully flouted the advice of the taint team when obtaining the substance of the defendants’ compelled statements, and in so doing, knowingly endangered the viability of the prosecution,”

As Rep Jan Schkowsky of Illinois said in the LA Times, “We’re going to have to understand how this happened.” The Iraqi families and the U.S. citizens that are funding companies like Blackwater, as well as paying for the investigations, have a right to know the motivation behind such reckless misconduct by a seasoned U.S. Attorney. (It is important to note that Kenneth Kohl was also the U.S. attorney assigned to the anthrax case. He was appointed by the Bush administration.)

The Loophole

          You may recall Order 17, put in place by Paul Bremmer in 2003, which provided immunity for contractors operating in Iraq. The order was struck down in the latest U.S. Security agreement with Iraq. However, the U.S. State department replaced it with the “Hunter Memorandum.” Regional Security Officer Mark Hunter authored a memorandum titled “WPPS (Worldwide Personnel Protective Services, a company of Blackwater) On-Duty Discharge of Firearms Reporting Procedures” (“the Hunter Memorandum.”) The Hunter Memorandum required all Blackwater personnel involved in a shooting incident to report immediately for debriefing by the State

Department. After the debriefing, any employee who discharged his weapon was to be given a sworn statement form attached to the memorandum. The statement that the five contractors signed included this line, “I further understand that neither my statements nor any information or evidence gained by reason of my statements can be used against me in a criminal proceeding, except that if I knowingly and willfully provide false statements or information.” This statement is required and an employee may be terminated for failure to sign it. This is commonly referred to as a “Garrity warning” or “Kalkines warning.” The Hunter memorandum and the attached Sworn Statement form were standard procedure to be followed after any shooting incident. So this is the loophole which allowed any guard involved in a shooting to avoid accountability for his actions.

            This loophole is still in place and you can be sure that it can function in Afghanistan as well.

What Next?

It was reported that the five contractors were “overjoyed” and that a “great burden had been lifted from their shoulders.” However it was a startling blow for the Iraqi government and citizens. As one Iraqi lawmaker said in a speech to Iraq’s parliament, “Ask the Iraqi courts to release all the (Iraqi) defendants…sentenced to death for killing Americans in Iraq, as an act of reciprocity with the U.S. judicial system.”  

            An adviser to the Iraqi council of ministers said, “This is very bad for the overall look of the United States outside its borders. It’s very important for the Americans to realize that this will work against their interests in Iraq and other places.”

            Although Judge Urbina’s decision would make it difficult to reinstate the original charges the guards could still be prosecuted for willfully providing false information in their statements. There is also the possibility that the government will bring obstruction of justice charges against Blackwater managers.

 The Center for Constitutional Rights has a civil case in the courts against Blackwater. The Iraqi government said that they will support this lawsuit as well as ask the U.S. Justice Department to review the criminal case.

This decision also puts the U.S. in breach of its treaty obligations to prosecute this case, which was an international law obligation. Now if the U.S. cannot, for the technical reasons set forth in the ruling, prosecute the case, the U.S. is required to waive the immunity and surrender these individuals to the Iraqi authorities for prosecution.

 Finally, a Congressional investigation should be conducted into the prosecutorial misconduct that tainted this case. Judge Urbina’s decision describes in detail how the trial team seemed determined to sabotage the case from the beginning. It is also known that senior officials of the Justice Department did not want this case to go to trial. One Congressman, who was present at early briefings of the case held on Capitol Hill, said that the Justice Department prosecutors assigned to the case were behaving like defense lawyers building a case to defend the Blackwater employees, not prosecute them. An investigation needs to find out why this occurred.

And the Story Goes On

So the old story goes on. The safety of our soldiers and our citizens put at risk by the careless actions of hired private military and security contractors. Legal loopholes that provide immunity for all contractors, regardless of how murderous their actions may be, continue the pattern of unaccountability. We must ask ourselves and those who represent us, how much longer will we allow those whom we fund to get away with murder in our name. 

By Dan Kenney
No Private Armies
December 19, 2009

Recently I gave a talk to a group of democrats about the danger of outsourcing our security to private military and security companies like Blackwater, Triple Canopy, and others. Part of my talk includes looking at the profits made by pentagon contractors such as Raytheon, Boeing, KBR, etc.. During the questions and comments portion the chair of the committee said, “By your definition of military contractor I would be one, I have worked for Raytheon for over 35 years.”

He said that I should not include Raytheon in with Blackwater. “Raytheon is a good company that provides what our soldiers need, they are nothing like Blackwater.” In a sense he was saying that Raytheon was a “good” military contractor and that Blackwater was a bad one. I have given this talk many times and this is the first time someone challenged me with the possibility that there are “good” war profiteers and there are bad.
The next person to speak said that she agreed with the chair and she felt it was not a good idea to take on these companies right now with the economy the way it is, because “they provide a lot of jobs.” She implied these multi-billion dollar companies that make their money from war are “good” companies to have because of the employment they provide. .

On my drive home I puzzled over what they had said. Could it be that I should present the information about pentagon contractors like Boeing and Raytheon in a separate program? So I decided I needed to take a closer look at Raytheon.
I learned that Raytheon, which means “light from the gods,” is the fifth largest defense contractor in the world and the fourth largest in the United States, with annual revenues of over $20 billion. More than 90 percent of Raytheon’s revenues were obtained from defense contracts. Many of their contracts with the U.S. defense department are “no bid contracts.”

Raytheon is the maker of “Bunker Buster” bombs, Tomahawk and Patriot missiles. Raytheon manufactured the missile that killed 62 civilians, most of them women and children, in a Baghdad market in 2003. Hundreds of Raytheon million dollar cruise missiles have been fired on Afghanistan killing more untold hundreds of civilians. The Tomahawk missiles were used during “shock and awe” in 2003 killing hundreds in Iraq.
The missile that killed 62 in a Baghdad market on a Friday night in 2003 had been manufactured in Texas. Apparently it malfunctioned and did not hit its intended target.

The company refused to take responsibility for the malfunction.
In 2009 Raytheon came out with the “Silent Guardian” or Active Denial System (ADS). It is designed to protect military personnel against small-arms fire without the use of lethal force. Transmitted at the speed of light over a 700 yard distance, the “Pain-Ray” as it is also known, is a millimeter-wave beam that penetrates 1/64th of an inch beneath the skin, causing the water molecules to bubble, producing an intense burning sensation, compared to that of a red hot iron. It has been referred to as the “Holy Grail of crowd control.”
Like Blackwater Raytheon has also had its share of rule violations and illegal behavior. Raytheon has paid millions of dollars in fines for illegal activities. Some of the fines were paid in settlements for several cases of overpricing and inflated costs. Other fines followed guilty pleas for illegally obtaining secret Air Force budget and planning documents and for submitting false claims for work done on missiles.

Raytheon is also fighting a civil action suit that was filed by over 1,000 property owners in St. Petersburg, Fla. The resident accuse Waltham, Mass. based Raytheon of polluting the soil and groundwater around its St. Petersburg, Fla.
So it appears that there are many similarities between Blackwater and Raytheon after all.

What about the jobs? Raytheon does employ over 80,000 workers worldwide. Boeing has over 155,000 and GE over 320,000. CACI employs over 12,000, Dyncorp another 15,000.and Triple Canopy has over 2,000 in Iraq alone. Blackwater’s information about how many they employ is difficult to find, however Gary Jackson former president of Blackwater said in an interview back in 2007 that they had a list of over 25,000 contractors. There is no question that these pentagon contractor companies provide employment, after-all this is what the “military industrial complex” is all about. The issue of employment, the livelihood of millions depending upon the creation of weapons, distributing weapons, on and on; this is the heart of the problem with creating an economy based on war. However we need to face the fact that an economy that is based on weapons and war is not sustainable; in fact it may lead to our own destruction.

One must ask where is the line to be drawn separating the one who drops the bomb from the one who helps create or manufacture the bomb? Is one less responsible for the death of those innocent individuals killed? Is one who works for a company that manufactures the missiles that kill the children less responsible for their deaths? Are those who have their tax dollars pay for the missiles any less responsible for the killings by the missiles? If it were not for our tax dollars how would our government pay the war profiteers? And if my tax dollars are among those used to pay for the missile am I not also responsible in some way? Are we not all responsible in some way for what is done in our names?
It is these questions that lead to an impasse as we struggle for a world without war profiteers: a world of peace instead of one of war.

I have answered one question for myself however, and that is I will continue to talk about Raytheon and Boeing, and the other companies who profit from war in the same presentation as Blackwater and other private military security companies. I have yet to find a “good” war profiteer.