Blackwater USA: Armed & Dangerous

August 30th, 2007 by SHAUN MULLEN, TMV Columnist

null

It seems right out of a shoot-’em-up Hollywood thriller: A shadowy private American security company led by a messianic right winger by the name of Erik Prince who has close connections to the White House and Pentagon hires out his own air force to put down civil unrest at home and insurgencies abroad.

Well, it’s not a movie, but all too real.

There is an Erik Prince and he heads Blackwater USA, which touts itself as “The most comprehensive professional military, law enforcement, security, peacekeeping and stability operations company in the world” with a mission “To support security, peace, freedom, and democracy everywhere.”

Blackwater is no stranger to readers of my own blog. I’ve written extensively about what are politely called private soldiers — but in reality are mercenaries — in Iraq.

Many of Blackwater’s operatives there are former Army Special Forces troopers and Navy SEALS who get paid fat salaries and out-of-this-world bennies to guard prisoners, protect convoys, stand sentry and do security overflights in their armed-to-the-teeth black helicopters. Oh, and keep their mouths shut.

Four of those mercenaries, you might recall, were killed by a mob in Fallujah in March 2004 and their bodies hung from the trestles of a bridge.

Their widows sued Blackwater. They claimed that the Dark Prince, in an effort to increase his profit margins, failed to provide the armored vehicles, weapons, maps and necessary lead time in which the four men could have familiarized themselves with the area.

Incredibly — that is until you understand Blackwater’s modus operandi — the Dark Prince’s response was to take a page from the Dick Cheney playbook and claim that Blackwater is above the law.

When that ludicrous argument failed to pass muster with the courts, Blackwater countersued the men’s estates for $10 million to try to silence the widows and keep them out of court.

Did I mention that the Dark Prince is well connected?

Please click here to read more.

This entry was posted on Thursday, August 30th, 2007 at 3:56 am and is filed under Bush Administration, Legal Matters, Military Affairs, Religious Right, George W. Bush, Iraq. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

10 responses about “Blackwater USA: Armed & Dangerous”

  1. sootytern said:

    There was a documentary on NPR this year (a repeat from last year, I believe) that was about a mercenary company employed by Sierra Leon to rid their country of rebels. The company was very successful in doing so; however, the United Nations with the active concurrence off the US and Europe objected strenuously. The mercenaries were replaced by a great many more UN troops who were then overrun by the rebels. A pretty sorry affair all in all.

    My immediate point here is that the US is now employing mercenaries to assist our military in pacifying rebels/insurgents (or whatever you want to call them). Quite a turn around from past policy. I guess whatever we do is good and whatever anyone else does is bad. Hypocracy!

    In addition to apparently being beyond the law in the US, Blackwater and other mercenary groups are beyond the law in Iraq. They can do almost anything they please without being held responsible.

  2. Shaun Mullen said:

    sootytern:

    In addition to apparently being beyond the law in the US, Blackwater and other mercenary groups are beyond the law in Iraq. They can do almost anything they please without being held responsible.

    This was in essence Blackwater’s argument in the lawsuit filed by the widows.

    When it comes to misconduct by mercenaries in Iraq, such cases technically are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. attorney in the district where the company is headquartered. What do you think the likelihood is of a U.S. attorney in, say, North Carolina, dispatching investigators to Iraq?

  3. domajot said:

    I’ve been concerned about the role of mercenaries (and contractors) for years.
    Ultimately, their activities should be the responsibility of the US government. In reality, our authorities seem only too glad to pass tasks pn to these groups while wiping their hands clean of any responsibility at all.

  4. doxy said:

    “Jeremy Scahill, author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, ”

    I HIGHLY recommend this book. I just finished it last week and it really should be on Must Read lists for anyone interested in what’s going on in Iraq (and in the US).

  5. Rudi said:

    What is ironic is that Cheney’s initial plan to prizatise the military was to farm things out to the private sector to do things more efficiently and cheaper. In fact, the opposite is now true, the cost of Blackwater mercenaries is much higher than actual Special Forces. The armed forces is now giving six figure resigning bonuses to SF and $20K bonuses to new recruits. The multilayer subcontracting of food and laundry services isn’t saving alot either.

    But is really troubling is the effort of this administration(Cheney and Bremer CPA) to make contractors outside the law. It’s this gray area that led to torture in Iraq ans Gitmo.

  6. Rudi said:

    Dug up the name of one of the two contractors detained and abused in Iraq. This was two US citizens who were abused.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/world/middleeast/18justice.html?ex=1324098000&en=e8d1cabad3afa06b&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

    The fluorescent lights in his cell were never turned off, he said. At most hours, heavy metal or country music blared in the corridor. He said he was rousted at random times without explanation and made to stand in his cell. Even lying down, he said, he was kept from covering his face to block out the light, noise and cold. And when he was released after 97 days he was exhausted, depressed and scared.

    Detainee 200343 was among thousands of people who have been held and released by the American military in Iraq, and his account of his ordeal has provided one of the few detailed views of the Pentagon’s detention operations since the abuse scandals at Abu Ghraib. Yet in many respects his case is unusual.

    The detainee was Donald Vance, a 29-year-old Navy veteran from Chicago who went to Iraq as a security contractor. He wound up as a whistle-blower, passing information to the F.B.I. about suspicious activities at the Iraqi security firm where he worked, including what he said was possible illegal weapons trading.

    How does Frank Gaffney explain this…

  7. Sam said:

    You’ve got some really nice points to make Shaun, but when you start nicknaming the CEO “Dark Prince” you really lose me. The guy sounds like a jerk but there are many such grps around and the US military has been using them for support operations of all kinds for awhile. Is there anything in particular they have been doing thats illegal, anything we should be concerned about?

  8. egrubs said:

    Just read between Shaun’s lines. It helps. He seemingly can’t resist a hyperbolic play on words, especially when it connotes something more powerful.

    Parse for the facts at your own enjoyment, or your own peril.

  9. hanginjohnny said:

    Isn’t the formation of a private army Unconstitutional on US soil?
    These guys are mercenaries, oh I’m sorry, private security….
    When it comes down to it, will they choose a paycheck over patriotism? They are not subject to military code- though many, I am sure understand it having been ex military.

    The fact that those “employees” died in Fallujah was because the Dark Prince cut corners and did not give them rear guard support.
    More $ to the bottom line.

    Our troops cannot trust these people- push comes to shove they will cut and run rather than watch someones back- it’s the mercenary way.

  10. sdb said:

    Actually, the formation and or use of mercenaries is not at all unconstitutional. There are actually international laws which govern their use and activities. Mercenaries have been vital to virtually every U.S. conflict dating back to this country’s war for independence. They have always been a part of how we, and virtually every society dating back to the Roman Empire, wage war. To ask if our modern day elite warriors will choose a paycheck over patriotism is an admission of a lack of understanding of the highly motivated, brave, and patriotic members that comprise our special forces community. I honestly do not intend to be condescending or disrespectful, just insightful. Admittedly, many operators are adrenalin junkies, however that does not make their work any less important, just, or patriotic.

    I am also curious about the facts that a rear guard detachment was dispensed of to save money. Blackwater get paid per man hour so it is in their financial interest to post as many in a detail as possible. Also the team leader of any detail, outlines the mission in a briefing once a warning order has been issued. Like military ops, the team leader is responsible for all assignments and hardware. They do not cut corners because it is their life on the line. They absolutely will not compromise that just to fatten Erik Prince’s wallet. As far as trust among operators, ask any in the SF community, these private operators endure the same if not worse operating conditions, and are selfless in combat, operating with the same sense of urgency and brotherhood, as those actively serving in the military. They have shown the same bravery and selflessness to save journalists (whom many of these operators despise) even at their own peril. Such acts are well documented, not well publicized.

    It is also important to note why these private operators are so necessary and successful: they are not above the law, they just are not bound by the same bureaucracy and logistics as our military. They are however, just as accountable. They conduct their operations with efficiency, autonomy, and fluid professionalism. They may leave theater when they want and are replaced by other capable operators. They work side-by side with numerous government agencies, and are not lawless bandits.

    I post this even the day that the Iraqi Ministry has announced it is revoking Blackwater’s license.

    My understanding is that a State Department motorcade came under fire and that the ensuing gun battle, which lasted more than 20 minutes, left some civilians dead and injured. This does not bare the hallmarks of a retaliatory strike or another Mai Lai Massacre. What it indicates is that it is almost impossible to tell friend from foe. It also confirms why we want to fight the enemy on their streets, not on U.S. soil. I think people have been so awe struck by the precision capability of today’s military (the video of the precision guided smart munitions penetrating the 18” vent / shaft on CNN during the first Gulf War comes to mind) , have lead Americans to believe we can wage a perfect war. Unfortunately, war is not perfect, nor is it a science. War is motivated process which uses strategy and execution to affect a desired outcome. Smart weapons are but a tool to assist in the execution of the strategy. But when the bullets start to fly, training takes over and we must rely on the experience and professional reactions of those entrusted to maintain security.

    The State Department is aware of the incident and it is under investigation, however, even though the Iraqi Ministry announced the suspension of their operating license, my understanding is that, as of this writing, no formal notice has been issued to our State Department by the Iraqi government. The Interior Ministry spokesman may have jumped the gun a little here. I think they will find that it is virtually impossible to replace Blackwater because of the security vacuum it will absolutely cause. Too many of the Iraqi Ministry heads are protected by Blackwater, as are U.S. and allied envoys and dignitaries, as well as other important and strategic installations. Depending on the actual circumstances, BW will likely be either vindicated or receive a fine. I am confident that Erik Prince and Gary Jackson have taken contractual measures to ensure that Blackwater is insulated from incidents such as wrongful death, friendly fire, or collateral damage due to negligence. They are not immune to malicious intent.

    The downside to this episode, other than the loss of innocent life if that proves to be the case, is that it will embolden the enemy, and may result in stricter rules of engagement by PMC’s. This would be catastrophic to the security effort because many private operators will leave theater (justifiably) because of the bureaucratic handcuffs which would undermine their ability to operate and defend themselves. Others will just operate in even greater jeopardy with their hands tied. The enemy will also craft their attacks to take advantage of the new vulnerability this would cause among PMC’s.

    By the same token, I may be wrong and political pressures of an election year may prove too much for the spineless, and those tasked to protect, may yield to the anti-war sentiment, and let patriotic blood spill in the name of elected offices. Neither political party is immune to this.

    BW hires and holds its operators to the highest standards. They are all former special operators who are exceptionally well trained and know how and when to apply force. They are not prone to mistakes, either tactical or emotion, during battle. They are professionals and they are the best. I hope the inevitable witch hunt reveals these brave patriots acted prudently, professionally, and responsibly. In the event they acted with malice, the individuals should be prosecuted, as with the military, but BW should only minimally be held to account for the actions of rogues.

    Look, I have an opinion, not an agenda. And I truly respect all those intelligent and well thought out opinions, even if they differ from mine. We just disagree. I only offer this blog to those who are interested in an insightful yet different perspective.

    Just my opinion for what it is worth.

    May God bless those who protect us.

Ai. Oops. Sorry ’bout That »

By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.