Skip to comments.From Abu Ghraib To Kabul, Blackwater Members Are Drunk (propaganda)
Posted on 09/07/2009 6:43:33 AM PDT by BCW
An American newspaper has revealed a new scandal committed by Blackwater (actually it was Armor Group - foreign 3rd world personnel) security guards protecting the American Embassy in the Afghan capital city of Kabul. The newspaper published a report titled This is what our children are doing abroad. The report said, They are drinking vodka and peeing on themselves like animals. They intentionally run outside naked and then pour vodka over each others asses.
The newspaper wondered, What makes the Pentagon deal with these special companies that cause harm and kill in a criminal way? The newspaper noted, Their gay members act in a bad manner at a time when the Pentagon leadership and the Commander in Afghanistan (General McChrystal) are talking about a new strategy to win hearts and minds.
The newspaper emphasized, These companies are very frightening because they are working without any set standards or laws, and especially because they are working in combat zones.
The newspaper pointed out that, yesterday the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) Institute, an independent project to supervise (US) government work, has exposed a report about the dangerous and perverted behavior of Blackwater Companys security guards, a company that committed many massacres in Iraq.
The newspaper pointed out that the POGO Institute immediately sent a letter to the US State Department informing the Department about these guards behavior. The newspaper called the guards scumbag mercenaries. The report pointed out that Hillary Clinton must be made aware of this perverted behavior of the guards that the Pentagon is paying $180 million dollars to guard the (Kabul) Embassy.
this is no lie - moslems can't tell the truth about anything...and yet they want us all to convert to their way of life...
From what I heard, it was not Blackwater. The name of the contractor was Wackenhutt. The same group the State of Florida fired to provide security at the freeway rest areas.
also, I believe I read the partiers were not US personnel.
Well who hasn't done that once in awhile?
Wackenhutt provides Security Guards for malls. If they are providing security in Kabul, we are in trouble.
Yea, I knew that I stumbled across them someplace outside of a war zone. No disrespect to the people who have a job in service of their livlihoods but sometimes we have to go by Harry Callahan’s words; A man has to know his limitations.
“I’d rather be around drunk Blackwater operatives than any evilcrat.”
Are you sure about that? Did you see the pictures?
It looked like a street party in San Francisco.
In the case of ArmorGroup, unlike
US Embassy Employees Fired in Kabul, Afghanistan: ArmorGroup Terminates 14 After Reports of Inappropriate Behavior
Date: September 4, 2009
Blackwater, it’s a UK-based security company, so the UK government should also have been monitoring them and making sure they adhere to international standards of behavior.
ArmorGroup meanwhile has also announced they are replacing their senior management team at the embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan immediately. If the pressure keeps mounting though from watchdog groups and private citizens, it’s likely the US government will be replacing ArmorGroup at the US embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. And maybe this time, the US government can keep watch too?
Why does this just seem like another weekend in San francesspoll?
That was not my experience with the Blackwater guys. They saved my bacon more than once in Iraq.
I saw a Wackenhutt recruiter at a EMS/Fire Expo. I thought they only provided paramedics and firefighters to military bases.
If I were younger, I would have considered going over because the pay is good and you get much needed experence.
Thak you for the update.
Any idea of the nationality of the perps?
Based on a thousand years of European history, and the current economic climate, there is a big future for Xe (Blackwater), if they play their cards right. They could become as significant a player in US foreign policy as the French Foreign Legion (FFL) is to the France.
To start with, the idea of large, standing armies is pretty much a 20th Century idea. It began in earnest with the Napoleonic wars of the 19th Century, when Napoleon was able to assemble a Grand Armee of about 1m citizens, as a “mass army”, but not a professional one, in addition to his professional army.
This overcame the long use of mercenary armies, who were much cheaper, and didn’t cost a nation much in terms of its own blood. Even small countries that could scrape together the funds could be militarily powerful.
Then in the last half of the 19th Century, technology forced the major powers to create powerful draftee armies, which were all in place by the time of the first World War.
However, even the largest and most powerful of modern armies can only be committed with political will and the willingness to expend a *lot* of money. And this deprives their foreign policy of the ability to intervene in small, but extended missions in unpleasant places, with their own sons.
France is unique in having preserved its FFL, but the FFL has proven to be very useful in tasks that the regular French army would not. And this is the value to the US as well.
To start with, there are some strong advantages to the US having a “foreign legion”, if we can follow the French example.
One ground rule is that these mercenaries will need to be off US soil. Likely on a Caribbean island. This benefits both us and them, because they remain a semi-private organization, not a government entity. Being offshore, they can recruit non-American citizens from around the world, but would keep US officers.
And the US doesn’t have to worry about them making trouble in the US, also because their transportation and logistical support would come from the US military.
The biggest advantage is that they can be deployed with a simple contract to places the US military doesn’t want to go, and at far less cost. If we already had them, for example, they would have been excellent peacekeepers in both the Rwandan genocide, and the current unpleasantness in Darfur, Sudan.
They can also be attached to NATO forces, put under foreign or even UN command, with US permission, but cannot be obliged to do things they don’t want to do. That is, they neither have to sign the contract, nor stay in a contract that requires them to do something they don’t want to do.
And the money saved is substantial. As light infantry, most of the expense is in their wages, not technology. They mostly carry small arms, and most of what they do is not active combat, but “place holding” missions, protecting civilians from brigands, keeping humanitarian aid from being looted, as body and security guards for VIPs, and providing security and military technology advice to friendly nations.
As such, they cost only a fraction of the cost of US military personnel, doing tasks our military personnel don’t want to do, and most importantly, freeing up our military personnel to do the important missions.
They weren’t Blackwater so you are way off base.
What part of "They weren't Blackwater employees...they were Armor Group employees!
Also, there were no Blackwater personnel involved at Abu Ghraib.
Finally, there no "Blackwater" personnel any more....
This all sounds pretty well though out....Except for one small problem (which a visit to the Moyock facility would make very clear)....Xe doesn’t train, or send in-country, mercenary armies...