Never mind the dead civilians. Forget about the stolen guns. Get over the murder arrests, the fraud allegations, and the accusations of guards pumping themselves up with steroids and cocaine. Through a "joint venture," the notorious private-security firm Blackwater has won a piece of a five-year State Department contract worth up to $10 billion, Danger Room has learned.
...
So begins a completely sordid story over at Danger Room, a blog at Wired.com.
It seems September is apparently "Blackwater Month" for the United States government. It was this same month last year, when few (if any) were paying attention, that Blackwater received billions more of our tax dollars through the State Department in a contract provided to them under their new name "Xe".
At the time, I wrote a diary on the subject that received little attention... garnering a whopping six comments (three of them mine), four tips, and two recs.
Year after year, the United States government continued to contract with private security firm (read as "mercenary firm") Blackwater, which has since undergone a name change to "Xe" in but another failed attempt to stymie and blunt criticism. Despite repeated reports (and subsequent testimony verifying the veracity of these reports) of fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, and outright illegality to include the crime of murder, the United States government continues to contract with this private security firm for operations in Iraq. These contracts and operations continue in Iraq despite the fact that the Iraqi government has also revoked the firm’s operating license.
So much for honoring Iraq’s sovereignty, but I digress.
Much to my dismay (and hopefully to the dismay of many others), it is happening all over again.
What’s worse, it seems the company is bending over backwards to avoid the attention by setting up shell company after shell company to disguise their involvement... something Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) took issue with when he caught Blackwater dog Fred Roitz in an outright lie.
Yet, despite all of that, the State Department can’t help but to bend over and oblige them with billions more of our tax dollars.
Blackwater and the State Department tried their best to obscure their renewed relationship. As Danger Room reported Wednesday, Blackwater did not appear on the vendors’ list for Worldwide Protective Services. And the State Department confirms that the company, renamed Xe Services, didn’t actually submit its own independent bid.
Instead, they used a blandly named cut-out, "International Development Solutions," to retain a toehold into State’s lucrative security business. No one who looks at the official announcement of the contract award would have any idea that firm is connected to Blackwater.
What will it take for these murderers for profit to lose out on a contract worth billions of our tax dollars? Apparently, there is nothing they can do to lose out on the billions in profits.
Not fraud.
Not waste.
Not abuse.
Not mismanagement.
Not thievery.
Not arms smuggling under the name of South Park characters.
And, no, not even murder.
The most unfortunate part about this is something I mentioned a year ago:
While it is true that many of the continuing contracts are carry-overs from the previous administration, it is also true that these contracts have been increased and extended under the Obama administration.
Meet the new boss?
And, as I also mentioned in that diary a year ago this month:
While it comes as a disappointment, it does not come as a surprise.
As a presidential candidate, Obama refused to sign on to a bill proposed by Senator Bernie Sanders (Stop Outsourcing Security Act) that, no longer than six months after its passage, would’ve seen to it that security services in theater would be provided by federal government employees only.
At the time of that proposal, then-Senator Obama refused to sign on as a co-sponsor. However, his opponent, then-Senator Hillary Clinton joined Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
That was enough to at least provide a glimmer of hope that perhaps, as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton might push back against a move such as this.
However, given the two new contracts in as many years, it is beginning to look more like she was simply using it as a wedge issue between herself and Senator Obama at the time.
I spoke with Scahill about the coincidental timing. "For over a week I tried to get Hillary Clinton’s campaign and Senate staff to issue a policy statement reflecting her position on her potential future use of PMCs in Iraq if she won the presidency. Silence. Then, the day after my story comes out revealing that Obama will not "rule out" using them, all of a sudden Hillary Clinton becomes the most important political figure in the US to call for a "ban" on Blackwater et al." Scahill said. "Where was her call for a ban after [Blackwater's controversial shooting of civilians at] Nisour Square?"
Maybe somewhere underneath the Oval Office drapery measurements?
How else to explain her making a statement like this...
"These private security contractors have been reckless and have compromised our mission in Iraq. The time to show these contractors the door is long past due. We need to stop filling the coffers of contractors in Iraq, and make sure that armed personnel in Iraq are fully accountable to the U.S. government and follow the chain of command."
--Senator Hillary Clinton
...only to completely and entirely renege on her pledge when finding herself in a stronger position to actually do something about it?
Not once, but twice... in two years.
I am not comforted in the least by these decisions. They lend themselves to being interpreted as little more than a desire to keep on keeping on with business as usual.
And for Blackwater pigs, business is booming.
"The time to show these contractors the door is long past due."
--Hillary Clinton, February 28, 2008
Well said, Madame Secretary.
Now, given your position, what will you do about it? Other than nothing...