SOME WORDS ON BLACKWATER

[Zlatko Waterman]

The comments, as well as the article, are worth reading.

It's enlightening to read so many opposed to the war, its madness, and the madness of BUSHKO . . .


http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/03/4287/



--Z

[jimboloco]

and American politicians going to irtaq are protected by our private security personnel.

we now have a private American army

[stilltrucking]

But this is not yet another story about payoffs to the GOP faithful who have predominated in the occupation and are totally untrained for their assigned tasks in the restructuring of a country that they know nothing about. The Blackwater guards know their job all too well, which is to guard top U.S. officials by any means necessary-including the casual extermination of innocent Iraqis.

Clearly, paid contractors are better for this task than American military personnel, since contractors operate outside of the restraints imposed on ordinary troops by law and by their own consciences. Many Blackwater contractors have been recruited from the U.S. military at much higher pay than direct service to their country afforded them. Whereas a top Army sergeant is paid $51,100 to $69,350 a year in salary, housing and other benefits, a Blackwater contractor (often a retired sergeant) receives six to nine times as much. The U.S. government pays Blackwater $1,222 per day for one Blackwater “Protective Security Specialist,” which, the congressional report notes, “amounts to $445,891 per contractor” per year. In an unusual display of disapproval aimed at Blackwater from the right side of the aisle, Rep. John J. Duncan Jr., R-Tenn., noted Tuesday that Army Gen. David H. Petraeus’ annual salary amounts to less than half of what some high-ranking Blackwater security officials in Iraq earn.

Well at least we are getting big government off our backs.

[e_dog]

Blackwater's great!

Privatize it! Even tha military. capitalist solutions for everything under the sun.

Blackwater, water w/ oil spill.

Turin' the dessert sands red with tha blood o' terrists.

Mercenaries? no. Heros on a private salary (sponsored by the feds).

If we pull out now from Iraq, those Blackwater guards who were killed and their bodies desecrated, strung up on a bridge, will have been desecrated in vain.

Stay the course.

[Dave The Dov]

To quote the Doobie Brothers in a way.

Oh Blackwater
Keep on killing innocent Iraqis
And denying it
Oh Blackwater
Then get away with it
You're just a goon squad
And nothing more
Oh Blackwater
_________________
definition of recession

[e_dog]

Blackwater is a terrorist org.

They and AlQueda are in cahoots.

[hester_prynne]

Why is it called Blackwater? Who came up with this name?
Just curious, because in my mind, the namer is the creator, right?
H

[stilltrucking]

black water is a North Carolina phrase for the water in those parts, maybe swampy, I have to google because that is just off the top of my head. Unfortunately the top of my head is highly toxic now, or highly intoxicated, something like that.

Interesting artticle today on the washingtonpostdotcom website.

Building Blackwater
Founder Seeks 'Better, Smarter, Faster' Security As History, Iraq Shape the Firm's Fortunes

By Robert O'Harrow Jr. and Dana Hedgpeth
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, October 13, 2007; Page A01

cut and paste:

But critics focused more on Blackwater's role in Iraq, where nearly a thousand of the firm's heavily armed contractors provide security, describe the firm as a private army and Prince as a war profiteer. During a recent hearing, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) questioned whether Blackwater has "created a shadow military of mercenary forces that are not accountable to the United States government or to anyone else."

Prince seemed incredulous that anyone would suggest such a thing.

"The idea we have a private army is ridiculous," he said, as a group of sheriff's department deputies cleaned their weapons nearby. "This idea of a private mercenary army is nonsense. These guys have sworn the oath as military or law enforcement persons. These are guys who served voluntarily. They are all Americans, working for Americans, protecting Americans."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=artslot

[jimboloco]

article on blackwater by jeremie scahill
in the nation
it seems the first imperial american administer to iraq issued a decree
blackwater shall be immune from prosecution in the defense of american state personnell
their prionce is on tv smiling
says they were just doing their job
no state dept personnell have been killed
indeed
so not only do they shoot a car full of bulletts, killing the young parents and their baby girl, then they blow it up burning them alive
and the tell an iraqi lawyer to beat it
and as he does, they shoot him in the back
he lived to tell the tale
and they they go on a rampage shooting up the works
and as people try to flee
they are gunned down too

and coffee joe scarboro calls it cowboy stuff
and blames the iraqia for not wanting them there
says we should pull them out
i agree and all the state dept personnell as well
and all the private contractors
because
it sucks

[e_dog]

Blackwater's a Real American Heros. G.I. Joes!

Fightin' 'gainst them 'raqis an' terr'ists.

Viva BUSH!

[stilltrucking]

Our Own Unlawful Combatants



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Julian E. Barnes writes in the Los Angeles Times: "As the Bush administration deals with the fallout from the recent killings of civilians by private security firms in Iraq, some officials are asking whether the contractors could be considered unlawful combatants under international agreements. . . .

"The designation of lawful and unlawful combatants is set out in the Geneva Convention. Lawful combatants are nonmilitary personnel who operate under their military's chain of command. Others may carry weapons in a war zone but may not use offensive force. Under the international agreements, they may only defend themselves."

In light of reports of apparently unprovoked attacks, some State and Defense department lawyers now "think the contractors in Iraq could be vulnerable to claims that their actions make them unlawful combatants," Barnes writes.

"For a guard who is only allowed to use defensive force, killing civilians violates the law of war, said Michael N. Schmitt, a professor of international law at the Naval War College and a former Air Force lawyer. 'It is a war crime to kill civilians unlawfully in an armed conflict,' he said."

The guards "operate under immunity from Iraqi law -- immunity was granted in 2004 by U.S. officials -- and in a murky status with respect to American laws. . . .

"But some international law experts think Iraq could use international treaties to try contractors for killing civilians."

Barnes writes with great understatement: "Unresolved questions are likely to touch off new criticism of Bush's conduct of the unpopular Iraq war, especially given the broad definition of unlawful combatants the president has used in justifying his detention policies at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba."

washingtonpostdotcom