Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 10/09/2007 View Mon 10/08/2007 View Sun 10/07/2007 View Sat 10/06/2007 View Fri 10/05/2007 View Thu 10/04/2007 View Wed 10/03/2007
1
2007-10-09 Iraq
Iraq orders Blackwater out
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by anonymous5089 2007-10-09 08:12|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11134 views ]  Top
 File under: Iraqi Insurgency 

#1 The Iraqi government said Blackwater guards have killed 38 Iraqi civilians and wounded nearly 50 other since 2003.

And how many Iraqi citizens have killed Blackwater personnel or have you forgot? It was Americans that had to clean that problem up without much help from those quacking now.
Posted by Procopius2k 2007-10-09 08:40||   2007-10-09 08:40|| Front Page Top

#2 I want a pony.
Posted by Mark E. 2007-10-09 09:05||   2007-10-09 09:05|| Front Page Top

#3 Pushback from Maliki for our arrest of Iranian agents, I suspect.
Posted by lotp 2007-10-09 09:06||   2007-10-09 09:06|| Front Page Top

#4 Or for local consumption.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-10-09 09:32||   2007-10-09 09:32|| Front Page Top

#5 Blackwater has had plenty of time to justify its conduct in this situation but has failed to do so. Too bad for Blackwater. Now -- better late than never -- the company better fire the guilty people and hire or promote new people to establish much better guidance and supervision.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 10:51||   2007-10-09 10:51|| Front Page Top

#6 Like the Marines at Hadithia, Mike? Read the bit about how it was a choreographed setup?

Not that the clever, adaptable 'insurgents' could figure out how to manipulate the US media.... Again.
Posted by Bobby 2007-10-09 11:24||   2007-10-09 11:24|| Front Page Top

#7 Ignoring threats is fatal. Blackwater employees who ignore threats get strung from Fallujah bridges.

"If you approach the car chanting, you will be shot"

Not just a rule of engagement, also a nice bumper sticker...
Posted by flash91 2007-10-09 11:39||   2007-10-09 11:39|| Front Page Top

#8 so whose relative and insurgent was killed by the Blackwater defensive action?
Posted by 3dc 2007-10-09 11:45||   2007-10-09 11:45|| Front Page Top

#9 If any of you guys own Blackwater stock, you better quit fooling around here on Rantburg and run to your broker and sell it all right now. Your stock will be worthless in a few days.

The US Government is not going to support Blackwater about this event, so the company is going down.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 11:53||   2007-10-09 11:53|| Front Page Top

#10 Mike - I am not talking support or no support. I do want to know what your problem is.

This from a person who knew a lot of the movement folks back in the day and still thinks they are geo-political imbeciles.
Posted by 3dc 2007-10-09 11:59||   2007-10-09 11:59|| Front Page Top

#11 No you don't want to know what's wrong with Spike, trust me on this.
Posted by Jake Rubenstein (deceased) 2007-10-09 12:36||   2007-10-09 12:36|| Front Page Top

#12 Sylwester you are an idiot.

I know guys that work for them and I've subbed for BW. Iraq is profitable, but its not the only place they have work.

This is political payback pure and simple. Had those been Sunnis instead of Malikis' Shia gunbuddies, there'd have been nary a peep.

And on top of that, the Iraqi "witnesses" seem to be very very uniform when it comes to affiliation, and story.

But the bottom line is the SOFA agreement prety much prevents Maliki from extraditing any contractor for this sort of action.

I hope Nouri enjoys his new guards, instead of BW, who will probably get him killed. Because they will be locals, not any contractors. I know some in EODT (best "contracting" company in the world - class act eodt.com) and others will not do business with Maliki and his government now that its looking like he is becoming nothing more than a Shia Iranian puppet.
Posted by OldSpook 2007-10-09 12:42||   2007-10-09 12:42|| Front Page Top

#13 .... the SOFA agreement prety much prevents Maliki from extraditing any contractor for this sort of action.

I expect that the Iraqi Government will be successful in excluding Blackwater from any future work in Iraq. I expect that the US Government will not support Blackwater on this issue. We will see whether I am correct.

It's my impression that Blackwater in general was a very good company, but this event was a monumental blunder that the company failed to resolve effectively. The company needed to investigate ruthlessly, report the facts convincingly, roll a lot heads immediately, compensate the victims' family satisfactorily and publicly announce corrective measures.

Now the company will pay a very expensive price for these failures. The company might collapse to a very small version of its present size.

There are other US security companies that will be ready to step in and pick up the ball.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 12:56||   2007-10-09 12:56|| Front Page Top

#14 Pushback from Maliki for our arrest of Iranian agents, I suspect.

Had those been Sunnis instead of Malikis' Shia gunbuddies, there'd have been nary a peep.

others will not do business with Maliki and his government now that its looking like he is becoming nothing more than a Shia Iranian puppet.

Does anyone really believe that Maliki is still on our side? Or even on Iraq's side for that matter? I hope Maliki's compromised personal security detail finds a way to off his worthless ass. Maliki is emblematic of how mistaken we were to prop up any sort of provisional government in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Both nations should have been held under American military rule until their radical factions were neutralized. Instead, the radicals have embedded themselves into the respective country's political systems (think Sadr) and this has—not only resulted in dead American soldiers but—delayed any real migration away from Islamic theocracy in the MME (Muslim Middle East).

Elimination of all Islamic theocracy needs to be America's primary goal in fighting the Global War on Terrorism. This is still not the case and represents a fundamental flaw in our wartime strategy.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-10-09 13:01||   2007-10-09 13:01|| Front Page Top

#15 until their radical factions were neutralized.

Seems like an optimistic assumption to me given the death cult religion that prevails there.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-10-09 13:06||   2007-10-09 13:06|| Front Page Top

#16 Seems like an optimistic assumption to me given the death cult religion that prevails there.

Agreed, NS. I'm just trying to frame this in a way where it can be discussed and analysed. Far better that we imposed military rule for decades than allowed these turds to implement shari'a law.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-10-09 13:32||   2007-10-09 13:32|| Front Page Top

#17 Mike I don't doubt that Bush will cave - he's consistently been an idiot on matters of this sort, especially when State has grabbed him by the ear and it towing him around like a little kid.

But the bottom line is 2 things: first, contractors are the only reliable safe non-political there for security. And second, he "contractor" environment is not a large one. You know each other. And knowing how BW is getting jobbed, Maliki will have a very difficult time hiring anyone. And those he hires will want him at arms length, doing only training, so as to not be the next in line for goat award from Maliki's next Iranian induced tantrum.

Hey Nouri, good luck getting and vetting your PSD. You'll be catching a bullet or a bomb sooner or later because everyone over there has a grudge to play EXCEPT the US and the contractors, and Maliki cannot be seen with US Troops personally guarding him.

If I were BW, I'd cut it quick. Keep only those directly helping the US military and civil populace. Pull *ALL* PSD's from VIPs, and all security for the Iraqi Government, immediate, no warning or transition. Guaranteed Maliki and many others are attacked quickly, especially if the locals get wind of the contractors leaving in a hurry - and that they are not interested in fighting, and only the family stooges are left on guard.

Come to think of it Maliki catching a bomb would help a lot- get rid of an Iranian stooge, allow for new elections, and provide a martyr.
Posted by OldSpook 2007-10-09 15:27||   2007-10-09 15:27|| Front Page Top

#18 Sounds like a nice plan Spook. Worthy of the old CIA.
Faster Malkie goes, the better I think. He is proving to be worse than worthless. More of a Iranian profiteer.
Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader  2007-10-09 15:33||   2007-10-09 15:33|| Front Page Top

#19 If I were BW, I'd cut it quick. Keep only those directly helping the US military and civil populace. Pull *ALL* PSD's from VIPs, and all security for the Iraqi Government, immediate, no warning or transition. Guaranteed Maliki and many others are attacked quickly, especially if the locals get wind of the contractors leaving in a hurry - and that they are not interested in fighting, and only the family stooges are left on guard.

Word, 'Spook. Dead Maliki = Good for Iraq. Fewer Americans dead.

Come to think of it Maliki catching a bomb would help a lot- get rid of an Iranian stooge, allow for new elections, and provide a martyr.

So, you're sayin' that there is an upside to this whole snafu?
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-10-09 15:37||   2007-10-09 15:37|| Front Page Top

#20 ...but this event was a monumental blunder that the company failed to resolve effectively...

You know this...how?
Posted by Crusader 2007-10-09 15:48||   2007-10-09 15:48|| Front Page Top

#21 Blackwater is still private I believe, financed by a seal officer that inherited over a billion dollars from his Dad's business. There is no stock price to effect, and not much in the way of shareholders to answer to. So, a collapse is unlikely. Legal headaches could get expensive if it comes to that, and future contracts may dwindle, but as a private company they can resize/right-size without a lot of drama (not many whiny union types on the payroll there).

We should all go to their web site and buy t-shirts to support the company :-)
Posted by Beau 2007-10-09 15:58||   2007-10-09 15:58|| Front Page Top

#22 knowing how BW is getting jobbed, Maliki will have a very difficult time hiring anyone. And those he hires will want him at arms length, doing only training, so as to not be the next in line for goat award from Maliki's next Iranian induced tantrum.

You know much more about this than I do, Old Spook, but I assume other contractors will be glad to step in and take over Blackwater's contracts.

I think also it's fair to say that a tantrum is being thrown by Blackwater, which should have taken responsibility more constructively in this incident.

I understand that these tragedies do happen in the stressfull and violent situation where Blackwater operates. Nevertheless, the information that has come into the public realm so far indicates that the Blackwater guys acted recklessly in this incident.

And, as I said above, plenty of time has passed for Blackwater to explain itself, and the explanation has not been compelling.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 15:58||   2007-10-09 15:58|| Front Page Top

#23 How do we deconstruct the word assume, class?
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-10-09 16:01||   2007-10-09 16:01|| Front Page Top

#24 If I were BW, I'd cut it quick. Keep only those directly helping the US military and civil populace. Pull *ALL* PSD's from VIPs, and all security for the Iraqi Government, immediate, no warning or transition.

If Blackwater decides to throw a little tantrum like this, then it's own situation will be even worse. Blackwater ought to consider adopting an attitude that indicates some contriteness and cooperation.

It's failure to do so is why it is getting kicked out of the country, with the US Government's acquiescence. If Blackwater continues to demonstrate a self-righteously defiant attitude all the way out, then I would predict it won't enjoy much success in future contract bids.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 16:12||   2007-10-09 16:12|| Front Page Top

#25 Re #20 (Crusader): You know this...how?

I know enough to know that Blackwater is about to lose all its business in Iraq.

In the coming months, as the Blackwater skeleton staff is packing all its Iraq documentation into boxes for storage in its historical archive, the company's leadership ought to spend some time pondering whether it should have managed its response to this incident more effectively.

When things go wrong, investigate the problems and try to fix them. Try to make things right, as best you can. If that had been Blackwater's attitude, then the company might have survived this incident.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 16:26||   2007-10-09 16:26|| Front Page Top

#26 In short, you're angry at Blackwater because they're not CONFESS!ing to your satisfaction or the satisfaction of a rather corrupt government.

(ANd yes, they have a corruption problem; if they didn't they wouldn't HAVE to hire guys from America (Blackwater) or Peru (Triple Canopy) or South Africa (whatever their current Executive Options-equivalent is) to be bodyguards).
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-09 16:31||   2007-10-09 16:31|| Front Page Top

#27 Let's see Maliki show as much confidence in his own damn country as he showed (until two weeks ago) in Blackwater by getting a regular army unit to guard his ass.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-09 16:34||   2007-10-09 16:34|| Front Page Top

#28 A regular _IRAQI_ army unit, that is.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-09 16:40||   2007-10-09 16:40|| Front Page Top

#29 In short, you're angry at Blackwater because they're not CONFESS!ing to your satisfaction or the satisfaction of a rather corrupt government.

I'm not angry at Blackwater. The company was doing important work in an extremely difficults situation.

Because the company responded to this incident ineffectively, however, this work will be taken over by some other, similar company. And the work will go on, and the other company will profit.

The Iraqi Government has not said that it does not want private companies providing this service. Rather, the Iraqi Government has said only that it does not Blackwater in particular to provide the service.

If you want to imagine that Blackwater's exclusion from this important service has nothing to do with Blackwater's performance, then go ahead and enjoy your fantasy.

Go ahead and buy Blackwater stock if you think it's such a great company with such a promising future.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 16:49||   2007-10-09 16:49|| Front Page Top

#30 The Iraqi Government has not said that it does not want private companies providing this service. Rather, the Iraqi Government has said only that it does not Blackwater in particular to provide the service.

Oh, of course not, you support the Iraqi government in its quest to find a new set of suckers to sell out six months down the road after the next firefight.

Here's a hint: where is whatever company they're going to hire going to find "fall guys" willing to die to save Maliki if Maliki's going to criminally charge them after the firefight?

You seem to have this image in your head, that the management/stockholders of Blackwater will be chastised for not "confessing" to your/Maliki's satisfaction but everyone else will continue Business As Usual, as if the soldiers and bodyguards provided are just Sacks of Potatoes to be rented at X dollars an hour.

If they were, they could find those potatoes in the Iraqi army.

Haven't you ever asked yourself, why haven't they?
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-09 17:02||   2007-10-09 17:02|| Front Page Top

#31 I know enough to know that Blackwater is about to lose all its business in Iraq.


Companies with principles often forfeit business rather than cave in the face of blackmail.
Posted by Crusader 2007-10-09 17:18||   2007-10-09 17:18|| Front Page Top

#32 Is there any place where the security video from the police station or other source is available? because until then all I have as proof of guilt is what Maliki claimed the very next day. Perhaps Representative Murtha (D-Mike) would like to weigh in on this and present some evidence other than the highly suspicious 'many people with very similar stories' claim. I can sit here and come up with a way to prompt an incident with just some dedicated scary looking dudes loaded with blanks and some mortars exploding off camera to prompt a response. Would it not be reasonable for Blackwater to await the findings of an investigation before they apologize for something they did or did not do.

To me, it is more reasonable that this is a way to give Blackwater heat, put them up on the law block for a financial hit, and perhaps remove effective security for some target(s) of opportunity who would have to hire local or stay in a known location; catch someone out of their castle and destroy their bodyguard in one move.

As for perspective, how did Sadr's militia respond when told to stop killing Iraqis? This is not a bunch of rampaging lunatics looking for blood else they would not have responded to the call to cease operations with such quickness and inquirery.
Posted by swksvolFF 2007-10-09 17:20||   2007-10-09 17:20|| Front Page Top

#33 Interesting to read the comments of Mike and Old Spook here.

Mike: in a normal business environment, what you propose is the correct course of action. It's another way to paraphrase Marshall Field: give the lady what she wants. If the customer is unhappy, you fix the problem quickly and offer an appropriate apology.

Iraq is not a normal business environment, and I think Old Spook makes the situation pretty clear.

BW was caught in a situation they can't really fix. I don't know if their people 'over-reacted' or not. I'm not sure who could judge that other than other profesisonal security/military people. The rest of us are just Monday morning quarterbacks.

But I suspect OS is right about one thing: it's a small community of people who really, really know how to provide security to an important person in a hostile environment. And if one company says, frankly, screw it, we don't need the aggrevation, I'm not sure another company will come in and scoop up the contract. If Mr. Maliki sends BW home, he may end up depending on cousin Mahmoud to provide security. I can guess the over/under on that one.

Mr. Maliki (whom I do NOT wish harm to) ought to consider his options. I don't think they're all that good. But if I were him and staying alive were a prime consideration, I'd find a way to save some face and keep BW around.
Posted by Steve White">Steve White  2007-10-09 17:22||   2007-10-09 17:22|| Front Page Top

#34 I suspect he will choose Basij as guards from his buddy in Iran.
Posted by 3dc 2007-10-09 17:50||   2007-10-09 17:50|| Front Page Top

#35 Re #33 (Steve White): And if one company says, frankly, screw it, we don't need the aggrevation, I'm not sure another company will come in and scoop up the contract.

When the US Government opens the bidding for a new company to take over Blackwater's contracts, I would advise everyone to stand far away from the door. There will be such a stampede of bidders through the door that anybody standing nearby might be crushed underfoot. So many bidders' feet will trample over you, that you might eventually be buried in an envelope instead of a coffin.

Blackwater soon will be forgotten, as other security companies rise to wealth and success.

Blackwater will be remembered only in management-school textbooks, in the lessons about how not to manage crises and about the severe consequences for even successful companies that handle crises ineffectively.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 17:50||   2007-10-09 17:50|| Front Page Top

#36 But if I were him and staying alive were a prime consideration, I'd find a way to save some face and keep BW around.

Fortunately for Western interests this is one of those moments when the usual monumental towering Muslim Pride™ works in our favor. No way is he going to back down on this golden opportunity to smear America. In the process, Maliki has painted himself into a neat little coffin corner. By so desperately wanting to tar the enemies of his Iranian puppetmasters, he is leaving himself buns-up naked in the snow and it just couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-10-09 17:56||   2007-10-09 17:56|| Front Page Top

#37 Where is this stampede of companies going to get the _people_? The Army Fairy?
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-09 17:59||   2007-10-09 17:59|| Front Page Top

#38 Mike, have you ever been to Iraq? I have. There is no "stampede of companies" who want to do security work there. Blackwater was and is doing a DAMN FINE job, and they protected my ass while I was in theater, I can assure you.

The entire thing is a political railroading, consisting of half-truths and downright lies. These guys were some of the bravest and most dedicated folks I met there. You have no idea the threats they face every day. Dozens of their employees have been killed or wounded protecting American contractors (such as me) while NOT ONE of the people they are protecting has suffered the same fate.

If someone makes up a smear campaign against you, while all the time you've been busting your ass to do your job in a dedicated and professional manner, just how are you supposed to take it? Admit wrongdoing when there is none? Bullshit.

The left is indeed famous for coming to conclusions based on false information, but I don't recall that being SOP on the Burg.
Posted by mcsegeek1 2007-10-09 18:19||   2007-10-09 18:19|| Front Page Top

#39 Interesting to hear personal commentary from the other side of OldSpook's equation. I'm glad Blackwater kept you safe over there, mcsegeek1.
Posted by trailing wife 2007-10-09 18:38||   2007-10-09 18:38|| Front Page Top

#40 Thx TW....:-)
Posted by mcsegeek1 2007-10-09 18:41||   2007-10-09 18:41|| Front Page Top

#41 The Army Fairy?

Don't ask - don't tell.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-10-09 18:47||   2007-10-09 18:47|| Front Page Top

#42 #38 (mcsegeek1) just how are you supposed to take it? Admit wrongdoing when there is none?

In that incident, 17 Iraqis were killed and some more were wounded.

Were they all terrorists? Was even one of them a terrorist?

Were they all shot by terrorists shooting from a grassy knoll? Was even one of them shot by terrorists shooting from a grassy knoll.

The publicly available information indicates that not one of the shot Iraqis was a terrorist and that all of them were shot by Blackwater employees.

Since the incident, Blackwater has had plenty of time to explain itself -- to explain why its employees shot so many innocent Iraqi civilians. Blackwater has not explained itself.

Blackwater's time is up. If Blackwater had any chance (maybe there was no chance at all) to survive as a company, it had to respond effectively. Blackwater had to investigate the matter ruthlessly, let the chips fall where they may, roll the heads of the shooters, compensate the victims and publicly announce corrective actions.

Instead, Blackwater mumbled some vague yarns about some terrorists shooting from roofs, about some terrorists dressed as Iraqi policemen.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 19:04||   2007-10-09 19:04|| Front Page Top

#43 Were they all shot by terrorists shooting from a grassy knoll? Was even one of them shot by terrorists shooting from a grassy knoll.

Mike, please, don't dilute your arguments like that. All you do is piss people off even more. Will you at least concede how the terrorists' routine use of civilian garb intentioanlly facilitates this exact sort of negative outcome and that they do it explicitly to their advantage? I refuse to believe that you are not cognizant of this one central feature of asymmetrical warfare.

You had the decency to withdraw your inaccurate characterizations of me in yesterday's "torture" thread, please continue to participate in that sort of spirit of intellectual honesty now.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-10-09 19:17||   2007-10-09 19:17|| Front Page Top

#44 terrorists dressed as Iraqi policemen

Further, I trust that you are aware of how thoroughly compromised the Iraqi police force actually is. If so, why would you so readily dismiss this very likely possibility?
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-10-09 19:20||   2007-10-09 19:20|| Front Page Top

#45 heh - no UN gobbledygook any more, now that Oil For Favorite Corrupt UN officials has checked out, one-world-boy? Now, it's that eeeevil BW? And Spike accusing someone else of tantrums is precious.

To get to the facts, BW provides a necessary service under harsh conditions and little margin for error. They are paid handsomely, and should be punished if they indiscriminately shot up an innocent local populace (I remain unconvinced). You, Spike, have no real evidence of that, yet you accuse and slur and predict stock-drops in a privately held company. Genius. I now remember why I disliked you so much and how you earned every bit of it. It'll only take a couple more MS days and you'll be back trolling your JFK threads somewhere else. Loser
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2007-10-09 19:44||   2007-10-09 19:44|| Front Page Top

#46 The publicly available information indicates that not one of the shot Iraqis was a terrorist and that all of them were shot by Blackwater employees.

Since the incident, Blackwater has had plenty of time to explain itself -- to explain why its employees shot so many innocent Iraqi civilians. Blackwater has not explained itself.

Interesting rhetoric, there. We can now replace the non-question of "have you stopped beating your wife" with "why do you beat your wife?"
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-09 19:48||   2007-10-09 19:48|| Front Page Top

#47 Don't you mean OSS, Darth?
Posted by gromgoru 2007-10-09 19:53||   2007-10-09 19:53|| Front Page Top

#48 No you don't want to know what's wrong with Spike, trust me on this.

Posted by Jake Rubenstein (deceased)

This is definitely the Snark of the Day winner. LOL
Posted by lotp 2007-10-09 19:58||   2007-10-09 19:58|| Front Page Top

#49 agreed, Snark O the Day, and on the mark
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2007-10-09 20:07||   2007-10-09 20:07|| Front Page Top

#50 Okay, Mike Murtha Sylwester, you've run another thread up toward infinity. How? By assuming Blackwater guilty before trial. But you're not alone -- the Iraqis are demanding $8 million per family before trial.

Ironically, you staunchly defended your precious U.N. officials when it was clear they were dirty. I guess Americans don't get the benefit of the doubt. It was innocent until proven guilty for Kofi, Kojo and their gang, but Americans on the firing line get the full Murtha treatment.

/spit
Posted by Darrell 2007-10-09 20:13||   2007-10-09 20:13|| Front Page Top

#51 /spit?

don't waste the effort! That's what they™ want, a conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids... "
!
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2007-10-09 20:23||   2007-10-09 20:23|| Front Page Top

#52 Mike S, said:
"Were they all shot by terrorists shooting from a grassy knoll? Was even one of them shot by terrorists shooting from a grassy knoll.

Mike, Mike, Mikey.... your stuck on stupid with the boring question. The more interesting one is who wasn't on the grassy knoll. Who didn't want him dead.. Instead you waste time accidentally linking millions of separate plots together into some grand unified theory nobody gives a rats ass about..

I suppose you spend time thinking about Princess Diana too? Who cares? She's in the ground so long the worms are done. Done I say done!

And you still waste your brain cells on the past... why its all quantum anyway... I might not even have happened at all. Just like "the king" living on that other planet and missing the viaduct demolition of earth.. I mean like Arthur Dent saw it so I must be true. Just like that horrible genetically engineered beef in the restaurant at the end of the universe that keeps trying to get you to eat a prime piece of him...

I mean like fer shure... I'm a going to eat a piece of him.... even if the Nordic Gods are present and eating hearty....

Now back to Ted, no.... no.. it was John... at the knoll - no it was the the penguin.... a baby Gates in a Penguin suit killing John to make that Finnish guy guilty...

No? So why have you wasted your life studying a fucking knoll next to a book depositary.

What the hell is a book depositary? Is it a mating between a bank and a library? Oh dear... I've lost my "Hitchhikers Guide" so I can't look it up and my towel is not close enough....

Whatever....
Can I offer you some tea? Its the answer to big oil.
Posted by 3dc 2007-10-09 20:37||   2007-10-09 20:37|| Front Page Top

#53 Re #45 (Frank G) It'll only take a couple more MS days and you'll be back trolling your JFK threads somewhere else.

That's Rantburg's way of dealing with people like me who argue against the rabble here.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 21:02||   2007-10-09 21:02|| Front Page Top

#54 Rabble rabble rabble.
Posted by Phinater Thraviger 2007-10-09 21:15||   2007-10-09 21:15|| Front Page Top

#55 That's Rantburg's way of dealing with people like me who argue against the rabble here.

Gee, I better be more careful.
Posted by gromgoru 2007-10-09 21:15||   2007-10-09 21:15|| Front Page Top

#56 Re #50 (Darrell): By assuming Blackwater guilty before trial.

There will not be a trial, so the decision will be made administratively.

The Iraq Government now has announced its administrative decision, and the US Government subsequently will comply. Blackwater is leaving Iraq forever and immediately will be replaced by other security firms.

Where are Blackwater's explanation and justification for shooting so many people in this incident? Why were 17 people shot to death? Why were many others shot and wounded?

We all welcome Blackwater's side of the story. I myself do no want to see an American company and its many brave guards subjected to false accusations.

The US Government appreciates the good work that Blackwater has done, protecting many US Government officials from constant terrorist threats and attacks. The US Government will defend Blackwater against unjustified accusations, but apparently the accusations are justified.

Apparently there is no basis for anyone to defend Blackwater. There is no basis for even Blackwater to defend itself. There is no good explanation and no good justification to tell the world.

It's just a tragic story of panic and reckless shooting, with wanton disregard for human life. And then the story ends with the company leadership's failure to respond effectively and save the company itself from quick collapse.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 21:19||   2007-10-09 21:19|| Front Page Top

#57 In that incident, 17 Iraqis were killed and some more were wounded.

Were they all terrorists? Was even one of them a terrorist?

Were they all shot by terrorists shooting from a grassy knoll? Was even one of them shot by terrorists shooting from a grassy knoll.

The publicly available information indicates that not one of the shot Iraqis was a terrorist and that all of them were shot by Blackwater employees.

Since the incident, Blackwater has had plenty of time to explain itself -- to explain why its employees shot so many innocent Iraqi civilians. Blackwater has not explained itself.


-If you substituted the word "Marines" for "blackwater employees" and "the Marine Corps" for "Blackwater" you'd sound just like John Murtha about Haditha.....but don't let that stop you.
Posted by Broadhead6 2007-10-09 21:21||   2007-10-09 21:21|| Front Page Top

#58 same, same, BH6 - the anti-American animus shines thru. Whatever these people did wrong, in MS's world, they were American first. That cannot be forgiven
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2007-10-09 21:24||   2007-10-09 21:24|| Front Page Top

#59 When the US Government opens the bidding for a new company to take over Blackwater's contracts, I would advise everyone to stand far away from the door.

You willing to stake your posting privileges on that?

In fact, are you willing to provide links, references, and cite quotes in return for keeping your posting privileges?

Given your past track record at Rantburg and your postings elsewhere on the internet, if you said the sky was blue, I'd stand outside for thirty minutes to check.

Put up, or shut up.
Posted by Pappy 2007-10-09 21:24||   2007-10-09 21:24|| Front Page Top

#60 Frank, yep, 'tis irritating to see the frothy mouth and glazed eyes.

We did some counter IED training w/some BW guys -they came down to Lejeune when I was there. All former mil, professional, & knew their stuff. I think about that & combine it w/what my observations of the ME were w/twice having the pleasure to be in the kitty litter box -- thus, I am highly skeptical of any claims as to a my lai type massacre. Maybe BW fumbled the PR campaign w/congress at their hearing but I have a hard time swallowing that they went ape shit and clipped a bunch of "innocent iraqis". Too much hollywood for my tastes coupled w/the motives of those that have something to gain.
Posted by Broadhead6 2007-10-09 21:33||   2007-10-09 21:33|| Front Page Top

#61 Pappy, you're asking the serpent to walk on its feet.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-10-09 21:33||   2007-10-09 21:33|| Front Page Top

#62 Ima agreed Pappy and BH6 - always have been. BW walks a fine line, and when Iraqi "officials" are eagerly quoted by the MSM and anti-Americans like Spike, I cringe at the razors' edge they must deal with. It's one thing for a loser pork-laden congressman from PA to denounce our soldiers, who will take up the BW defense? I will, against scumbags like "our" Spike and his ilk.
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2007-10-09 21:42||   2007-10-09 21:42|| Front Page Top

#63 That's Rantburg's way of dealing with people like me who argue against the rabble here.

What do you mean? I argue against the rabble all the time, they don't moderate me.

(Oh, unless I use words like f..k or s..t...)

Admit it, you're living for the chance that you might be moderated so you can run around yelling "Help! I'm being oppressed!"
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-09 22:04||   2007-10-09 22:04|| Front Page Top

#64 That's Rantburg's way of dealing with people like me who argue against the rabble here

Umm ... no. Mike, you're fucking up so hard as to make yourself irrelevant. Total bullshit. You wouldn't even be reading my post right now if Fred wasn't one of the most fair-minded individuals on the entire net.

You want proof? I'll give it to you.

Over three years ago I made a commitment to make a donation to Rantburg. Untoward circumstances prohibited me from following through with the commitment I made. Did Fred stop me from posting? NO HE DID NOT. Fred has been incredibly gracious in allowing me to post wholly opposite positions at this site even though it was only recently that I managed to make some sort of substantial financial contribution. You have no idea of how incredibly grateful I am that this site's owner was decent enough to allow me complete and total access despite my lack of financial contribution. Fred will soon be receiving some of the very finest coffee in the entire world because I feel so intensely grateful about his incredible decency regarding having a chance to participate here. Mike, that you have been banned should speak volumes to you. Notice how many others accuse me of being a troll? Count yourself DAMN fortunate that you've been readmitted at this site.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-10-09 22:06||   2007-10-09 22:06|| Front Page Top

#65 Rantburg's way of dealing with people like me who argue against the rabble here

Mike, I did not resort to name calling in challenging your opinion. I simply pointed out that I've been there, that you haven't, and that you only think you know what's going on there. This opinion's impeachable source? The MSM.

"Rabble"? How so? A derogatory term for the common man, inferring that you are not common? How so? Here's an idea: How about PROVING your allegations through hard evidence or through personal observation rather than dropping meaningless names on well-intentioned people? Just a suggestion.

Waiting for the next disparaging remark in 5....4....3....2....1....
Posted by mcsegeek1 2007-10-09 22:50||   2007-10-09 22:50|| Front Page Top

#66 Hokay, last whack (I think): Mike S, you make a few claims here of which I'm skeptical, to say the least:

1) the BW guys started spraying innocents without provocation. That's an allegation, not proven. Now mind, a few might be innocents -- remember our terrorist buddies like to hide behind women and children while shooting at the good guys. But all the deaders as innocents? I think we know enough how the terrs operate, and how our guys (whether military or BW) operate, to know that likely isn't true.

2) After BW leaves, there will be a stampede for the contract. I doubt it: I think Old Spook is more on the mark. There aren't that many professional security companies that provide this kind of service in that kind of environment. BW is one of the better ones. I rather doubt that multiple other companies will go after the contract, but we'll see soon enough, won't we.

3) you're about to be moderated for speaking against the 'rabble'. First, who you calling 'rabble'? And while it's possible for you to be moderated, it won't be for arguing against others here. That happens all the time, and people who argue well, with wit, facts and verve, do just fine.

People who are a pain in the ass, on the other hand, just might get moderated. By me.
Posted by Steve White">Steve White  2007-10-09 22:52||   2007-10-09 22:52|| Front Page Top

#67 Re #66 (Steve White):

The future will tell what the US Government has concluded and will do in this matter.

And the future will tell whether the US Government has extraordinary problems finding companies willing to bid on Blackwater's former contracts for business in Iraq.

Then we will see who is right.

The "rabble" are the people here who launch constant personal and vulgar attacks on people with whom they disagree.
Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-10-09 23:16||   2007-10-09 23:16|| Front Page Top

#68 Oh, I'm sure they'll find _companies_ willing to bid.

It's just that those companies will be finding their personnell to be suddenly more expensive.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-09 23:21||   2007-10-09 23:21|| Front Page Top

23:57 Zenster
23:56 Zenster
23:55 Zenster
23:49 Zenster
23:47 Zenster
23:40 Zenster
23:39 JosephMendiola
23:35 Zenster
23:32 JosephMendiola
23:26 Xenophon
23:22 Zenster
23:21 Abdominal Snowman
23:18 JosephMendiola
23:17 Zenster
23:16 Mike Sylwester
23:16 JosephMendiola
23:09 wxjames
23:09 mcsegeek1
23:09 JosephMendiola
23:03 trailing wife
23:03 Zenster
23:02 JosephMendiola
23:02 wxjames
23:01 Frank G
Merry-Go-Blog










Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com