Blackwater USA ... Security Firm or Mercenaries?

Blackwater USA is a private security firm, based in North Carolina. It was started by an ex Navy Seal, who envisioned a World-Class training facility for those in the security business ... but it has evolved into so much more. Since 9/11/01, the small firm has grown by leaps and bounds and now "hires-out" small armies. There are currently about 1,000 Blackwater USA contractors (operatives) in Iraq. They also have a data-base of 6,000 more professionals for when they are needed. The contract to provide security services in Iraq earns the company $800,000,000.00 a year. Contractors are normally paid from $100,000.00 to $250,000.00 a year depending on specialty. The prime contract is to provide security for the US State department. They provide this service extremely well (though no one can convince me they do a better job than the US Marines).

Late last week a convoy protected by Blackwater contractors was fired upon. Blackwater contractors returned fire, killing several of the attackers ... at least that is the company version of things. Iraqi police say that the people killed were innocent civilians, and the Iraqi government has ordered the company out of Iraq.

My take on this is that the folks killed were probably neither "innocent" nor "civilians". But in either case, Blackwater USA and the dozens of other private security firms need to go. These contractors (mercenaries) run around in various uniforms of their own liking, armed to the teeth (trying to be Johnny Rambo), and don't really answer to the military chain of command. What laws of war do they follow? Who do they answer to ... a CEO?

A Military Force is a Government responsibility ... not a corporate one.

Sphere: Related Content

Who Is Michael Mukasey?

The President has nominated Michael Mukasey to replace Alberto Gonzales at Attorney General and the political in-fighting has begun ... but opposition to this appointment is coming from the right, not the left as is common.

A little background on Michael Mukasey first. He was nominated by President Reagan as a federal judge in 1987. Since that time he has served for 18 years (including 6 years as Chief Judge of the Southern District of New York). Among his cases that you may be familiar with are the trials of Omar Abdul Rahman (the blind shiek) and El Sayid Nosair. These terrorists were convicted for their parts in the planning of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and plots to bomb the United Nations and other New York landmarks. Judge Mukasey sentanced them to life in prison. He also ruled in the case of Jose Padilla (the American gang-banger that turned al-Qaeda) and ruled that he could be held as an enemy combatant, but that he must be given access to his lawyer. Mukasey also spoke and wrote in defense of the Patriot Act.

Here is what might be turning Republicans against him. In 2003, Sen Chuck Schummer (D-NY) included him in a list of 5 other judges that would have no problems being confirmed by Democrats. Rep Schummer also suggested him as a replacement for Gonzales on "Meet The Press" back in March. I think that Republican opposition to Mukasey is probably just a knee-jerk reaction to Shummer's support. Shummer has been a thorn in the GOP's side for so long that the thinking is probably if Chuck likes him, it must be bad.

From what I can see from the research I have done is that Michael Mukasey was a law and order type judge that issued his verdicts fairly and with common sense. We could do a lot worse than having Judge Mukasey as our 81st Attorney General (we already have).

Sphere: Related Content

Mullah's Dilemma

Okay ... has everyone stopped snickering at the cartoon yet? C'mon, get it out of your systems ... the rest of this post is serious.

A very important subject has been left out of the debate on Iraq, by the very people who purport to strongly defend human rights. That's right the Democrats have overlooked the situation in the Middle East in respect to women's rights. Even Hillary Clinton, the first viable female candidate for President of the United States has remained mum on this subject (sorry Shirley Chisholm ... you were the first, but you were a long way from being viable).

In most middle-eastern countries women are denied basic human rights. They are treated like cattle, bought and sold for the highest dowry. Men can have multiple wives, but the thought of a woman having multiple husbands ... or of even having sex outside of marriage can bring grave penalties. Honor killings are not only practiced but encouraged (the youngest son is usually the one to put the woman to death). Women must be covered head to toe in order to leave the house. Though I have never worn one, these "burkhas" look to be terribly uncomfortable and hot. When they leave the house, women must be accompanied by a male member of the family. In some societies, women are not allowed to work or attend school past a certain age. When they travel by car, they must ride in the back seat. It is possible to see a man driving a car, alone in the front seat, while his four wives are stuffed in the back. When out in public, women are segregated from men in restaurants, theaters and even while attending mosque. Women legally have no say in how to raise their own children, where to live, or the household finances. All this and we haven't even started on the right to vote or run for office.

As long as Islamic fundamentalists are in charge of nations, or even villages or towns in those nations ... the plight of women will never improve. As a secondary result of the US occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, women are experiencing more freedom than they ever had (it is a bigger difference in Afghanistan than in Iraq).

It is my sincere hope that during this period of greater freedom for women, Islamic men will come to recognize the value of women ... and not in just how many cows or chickens they may be worth. These women need to take advantage of this chance to get an education and a good job and especially to vote and run for office.

Hillary needs to be in front of this issue and start praising the changes in Iraq and Afghanistan instead of just jumping on the Democratic bandwagon of everything in Iraq is bad. The rest of her colleagues in the Democratic Party need to get behind this as well, and if they don't, the GOP needs to start hammering it till they do. Folks, this is a no-brainer ... can't we decide to get behind at least this one thing?

Sphere: Related Content

Was This The Iraqi Patrick Henry?

Funeral services were held today for Abdul Sattar Abu Risha. The 37-yr old leader of the Al Bu Risha tribe was killed in a bomb attack near his home by al-Qaeda. What makes this man any different than the thousands that are murdered by al-Qaeda every year? Why the reference to Patrick Henry in the title? Well let's get a little background on this man.

In September of 2006, angered by the killings of his father and two of his brothers, Abu Risha approached US military forces in Anbar with a proposition. In exchange for weapons, his tribe would:

a) halt action against US and Iraqi forces

b) pledge to fight al-Qaeda in Iraq

c) attempt to draw tribal militias into the Iraqi security forces (ISF)

Abu Risha was able to gather 25 tribes into his group, which he named the Anbar Awakening Council. These forces have been credited for wiping al-Qaeda out of the Anbar capital of Ramadi as well as forcing many al-Qaeda out of Anbar province. This council has sworn to continue fighting al-Qaeda to avenge his death. Abu Risha was a fiery orator with a knack of swaying opinion and inspiring people to fight for peace in Anbar. Sort of reminds me of a similar man in 1776 who said, "Give me Liberty or give me Death".

Whether Abu Risha will be remembered in the Iraqi history books the way we remember Patrick Henry is up for grabs right now ... after all, the victors write the history books. But if more Iraqi patriots stand up like Abu Risha did, victory should be assured. So when you hear people talk about the Iraqi people not fighting for themselves, you can remember this example, as well as the thousands of government workers who were killed for cooperating with US forces and the fledgling Iraqi government.

Sphere: Related Content

The Next Russian President?

Russian President Vladamir Putin dissolved the government and named a little known government official, Victor Alexeyevich Zubkov as the new Prime Minister. This is what Boris Yeltsin did back in 1999, when he named Putin as the new Prime Minister and then as his successor.

But just who is Victor Zubkov? Google failed me, Yahoo failed me, so I had to go to Russian on-line newspapers for the picture and I hope I got the right one.

Victor Zubkov is 66 years old and was a member of the Communist party. This should not be held against him as anyone who wanted to get ahead in government service had to become a member. He served an 18 month stint in the Red Army in 1966 and 1967. He was the head of the Russian IRS in St Petersburg from 1993 through 1998, and in 1999 he served as a Finance Minister investigating money laundering and other financial crimes. While doing so, he rose to the position of Cabinet Minister till he was appointed Prime Minister this morning.

An interesting note is that his son-in-law is Defense Minister Anatoliy Serdyukov, so he would probably have the backing of the military. In the Russian Quid Pro Quo society, this would also mean that the military would have a greater say in the government.

These are indeed interesting times.

Sphere: Related Content

Too Depressed To Blog

O beautiful for patriot dream

That sees beyond the years

Thine alabaster cities gleam,

Undimmed by human tears!

America! America!

God mend thine every flaw,

Confirm thy soul in self control,

Thy liberty in law.

Sphere: Related Content

We Don't Need This Bull

This was the advertisement that MoveOn.Org ran in the New York Times today. MoveOn.Org is funded by multi-billionaire George Soros.

I have a hard time stomaching an ad like this. This ad states that the General (a man that by all accounts is an honorable man, trying his best to make the most of a bad situation ... because his country asked him to) is "cooking the books" for the administration. This ad basically accuses the General of being a liar.

Besides the anger I automatically feel whenever a member of the US Military is attacked, it is compounded by the fact that this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. In 2002 George Soros was convicted of insider trading in France. Unlike Martha Stewart he got no jail time. In 1992, George Soros is credited with breaking the Bank of England by selling short on about 10 billion English pound sterling. This caused Great Britain to have to de-value the pound (causing harm to both Great Britain and many ordinary British investors and retirees), this netted him about 1.1 billion dollars in profit.

I let a lot of stuff that MoveOn.Org spews go by. But when they start personally attacking the people that give us the freedom to say stupid things it is too much.

Sphere: Related Content