Mass Killing & Big Buck$ in Iraq

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Mass Killing & Big Buck$ in Iraq

Postby AlicetheCurious » Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:59 pm

Wow, it's amazing. Now the corporate interests in Iraq are being enforced by corporate armies. <br><br>Amazingly, the people who are supposed to represent Britain's taxpayers are not only pretending that this is all to 'defend democracy etc., etc., but are actually stiffing those same taxpayers with the enormous bill...<br><br>Of course, the citizens of Iraq are getting murdered and their country is being bombed, so the British (and the Americans) are relatively lucky, paying money that could go to education, health care and environmental protection, being lied to and losing their civil rights, just so a bunch of billionaires can make even more money and amass more power...<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Blair accused of trying to 'privatise' war in Iraq</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br><br>By Kim Sengupta<br> <br>Published: 30 October 2006 <br><br>The Government has been accused of reneging on pledges to control private security companies operating in Iraq because it wants to "privatise the war" as part of its exit strategy. <br><br>The Government has not only failed to bring in legislation promised four years ago, but has actively encouraged security firms in Iraq by giving them multimillion -pound contracts to take over duties which could have been performed by British forces, says the report published today by the charity War on Want. <br><br>Humanitarian groups, MPs and international lawyers have called for tighter controls on "mercenaries". <br><br>...War on Want's campaigns director, John Hilary, said: "There are genuine worries that the Government is trying to privatise the Iraq conflict. The occupation of Iraq has allowed British mercenaries to reap huge profits. But <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>the Government has failed to enact laws to punish their human rights abuses, including firing on Iraqi civilians.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br><br>"How can Tony Blair hope to restore peace and security in Iraq while <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>allowing mercenary armies to operate completely outside the law</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->?" <br><br>The study charts how <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>the result has been boom times for security firms with the industry making $100bn a year (£53bn), mainly from Iraq and Afghanistan, with British firms among some of the top earners. Just one firm, Aegis Defence Services, run by Col Tim Spicer, who was formerly enmeshed in the controversy over supplying arms to Sierra Leone, has increased its turnover from £554,000 before the war began in 2003 to £62m last year.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br> <br>While British troop levels in Iraq currently stand at 7,200 - with plans to halve this number in the next six months - there are almost 21,000 British private security guards, part of an international force of 48,000 described by US senators as the "largest private army in the world". <br><br>The report, Corporate Mercenaries: The threat of private military and security companies, comes on the same day the British security industry holds its first annual conference in London, and also on the deadline given by the US General George Casey to improve security in Iraq. On Friday a National Audit Office report is expected to warn that Britain's armed forces are failing to recruit and retain sufficient soldiers to deliver the " required military capability". <br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>In Iraq, all non-Iraqi military personnel and private military contractors were made immune from prosecution under the Coalition Provisional Authority's Order 17 for acts performed within terms of their contract by Paul Bremer, the American head of the CPA in June 2004</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. <br><br>It is unclear whether that has changed since the inauguration of the new Iraqi government. But, while British and American soldiers have faced courts martial over alleged crimes carried out in Iraq, not one security contractor has been prosecuted at home or in Iraq despite a significant number of allegations of abuse. <br><br>...<br>Security business <br><br><br>* Aegis Defence Services (UK) <br><br>The biggest British winner in Iraq, it increased its turnover from £554,000 in 2003 to £62m in 2005. The company, run by Lt-Col Tim Spicer, was awarded a contract worth $293m (£154m) by the CPA in Iraq. <br><br>* ARMORGROUP (UK) <br><br>The company's turnover has increased from $71m in 2001 to $233m in 2005. The Foreign Office and Department for International Development have awarded it contracts in Kabul, Baghdad and Basra. <br><br>* Control Risk Group (UK) <br><br>Turnover rose from £47m in 2003 to £80m in 2004. In Iraq it has been employed by the Pentagon, the CPA, the Office of Reconstruction and Development and USAID. It also provides guards for British government staff in Iraq. <br><br>* Erinys International (UK/South Africa) <br><br>Formed in 2003 with a contract of $100m from the CPA to guard oil sites and pipelines in Iraq. Led by a former political adviser to ex-Angolan opposition leader Jonas Savimbi. <br><br>* Blackwater (US) <br><br>Provided security guards and helicopters for the former CPA head, Paul Bremer, and the former US ambassador, John Negroponte. <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1940825.ece">news.independent.co.uk/wo...940825.ece</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i></i>
AlicetheCurious
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:45 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Mass Killing & Big Buck$ in Iraq

Postby Byrne » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:47 pm

Blair is at risk of suffering a Government defeat today, over a Commons Debate motion by SNP Leader Alex Salmond to <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>demand a full inquiry into all the circumstances surrounding the Iraq conflict</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> (i.e. including the fact of no WMD discovered & the 2nd UN Resolution that was then wasn't required etc.)<br><br>See <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6101452.stm">news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_po...101452.stm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Tony Blair's spokesman <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>has insisted to concede such an investigation now, or to defeat the government, would send out a message of weakness to terrorists and insurgents in Iraq and undermine British troops in the country</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->.<br><br>However, I agree with SNP Leader Alex Salmond, when he says: <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>What would demoralise soldiers in the field is the belief that the government have put us in a bloody quagmire, and have no idea whatsoever how to get out of it</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <br><br>More info : <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6096098.stm">news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_po...096098.stm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Byrne
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Mass Killing & Big Buck$ in Iraq

Postby AlicetheCurious » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:21 am

I'm not holding my breath...This 'inquiry' is headed straight for the Memory Hole, along with all the other inquiries, investigations, lawsuits, 'explosive' revelations, scandals, etc.<br><br>At this point, nothing less than a full-scale nationwide strike could shake these bad apples from the tree. How likely is that? <p></p><i></i>
AlicetheCurious
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:45 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Mass Killing & Big Buck$ in Iraq

Postby Gouda » Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:03 am

Another bold step in the creeping capitalization of war and security. For the best return on your dollar, we provide training of local kaos mercenaries and security for: fragile troops, pipelines, bases, refineries, and gargantuan holy roman embassies. Kick back, let us take of it. <br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Security firms 'abusing Iraqis'</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6097372.stm">news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6097372.stm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Private security firms operating in Iraq are committing human rights abuses, a charity has claimed.<br><br>A report by War on Want says no prosecutions have been brought despite hundreds of complaints of abuse.<br><br>And the charity is calling on the government to introduce legislation to ban private security in war zones.<br><br>Lt Col Tim Spicer, whose <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Aegis security</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> firm operates in Iraq, said they worked under "very strict rules" and could be prosecuted if they did anything wrong.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>'Huge profits'</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>War on Want claims UK ministers are increasingly using private security firms with a total of 48,000 employees in Iraq - six to every British soldier.<br><br>John Hilary, the group's campaigns and policy director, said the Iraq war "has allowed British mercenaries to reap huge profits".<br><br>"But the government has failed to enact laws to punish their human rights abuses, including firing on Iraqi civilians.<br><br>"How can Tony Blair hope to restore peace and security in Iraq while allowing mercenary armies to operate completely outside the law?<br><br>"We call on the government to introduce tough legislation as a matter of urgency to ban the use of mercenaries in these conflict situations."<br><br>The report is published on the opening day of the first annual conference of the British Association of Private Security Companies in London.<br><br>Dispel myths<br><br>Col Spicer said it was "completely inaccurate" to suggest that security firms operated outside the law.<br><br>He said: "If a British or US citizen - or a citizen of any other country - committed an offence, it is perfectly possible for the government of that country to implement a prosecution against them."<br><br>But he said he supported proper regulation of the industry because it would "dispel a lot of the myths and make the situation much clearer".<br><br>"It would add clarity to what people can and can't do and where they stand with regard to the law."<br><br>Earlier this year the US army launched an inquiry after a video posted on the internet showed an Aegis Defence Services contractor firing at civilian cars in Iraq.<br><br>But it said no charges should follow and an investigation by Aegis found that the incident was within the rules on the use of force by civilian personnel. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Security firm cleared by US army</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/5080970.stm">news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/5080970.stm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>A British security firm has welcomed the outcome of a US army investigation clearing it of criminal offences. <br><br>The US military launched an inquiry after a video showing an <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Aegis Defence Services</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> contractor firing at civilian cars in Iraq was shown on the internet.<br><br>Ageis, which has a Pentagon contract in Iraq said to be worth £157m, said the film had been edited to mislead. <br><br>(...)<br><br>Aegis said its own investigation, which was handed to the US Army's Criminal Investigation Division, had found that the incident shown on the film was within the rules on the use of force by civilian personnel.<br><br>(...)<br><br>The company says its rules of engagement "allow for a structured escalation of force to include opening fire on civilian vehicles under certain circumstances".<br><br>(...)<br><br>Aegis head, Colonel Tim Spicer, said that it was "regrettable" that the contractor who filmed the event had "brought into question the high standards of behaviour achieved by our team in Iraq".<br><br>Its remit includes the protection of civilians and soldiers travelling in Iraq. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> Protection of soldiers? Interesting. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Gouda
 
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 1:53 am
Location: a circular mould
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Mass Killing & Big Buck$ in Iraq

Postby AlicetheCurious » Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:49 am

Yeah, Gouda, I'm waiting for the announcement of the new multi-billion$ no-bid contracts for security firms to protect the private security personnel who are protecting the soldiers in Iraq (and Afghanistan too, why not?). Of course, the soldiers in Iraq are protecting the interests of the private corporations who are gnawing on Iraq's flesh and bones.<br><br>It's all very confusing, but bottom line is that big buck$$$ are diverted into the pockets of US corporations, who then use some of the loot to corrupt and control the US government, effectively making it an agent of those corporate interests. <br><br>All paid for by the American suckers. <p></p><i></i>
AlicetheCurious
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:45 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Mass Killing & Big Buck$ in Iraq

Postby Gouda » Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:04 am

A grim smile. <br><br>Just a comment about all these "no bid" contracts. I'd say that even "fair bidding" for such contracts (which would be a Democrat-type "reform") would be equally abhorrent. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Gouda
 
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 1:53 am
Location: a circular mould
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to Iraq

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest