Feds investigating Blackwater’s silencer exports.
By on Nov 1st, 2007 at 5:42 pm
Feds investigating Blackwater’s silencer exports.
Federal agents are currently “investigating allegations that the Blackwater USA security firm illegally exported dozens” of firearms sound suppressors — commonly known as silencers — “to Iraq and other countries for use by company operatives.” Experts who spoke to NBC News “say it is not clear why Blackwater guards would need them for missions such as personal protection of diplomats.” Blackwater is currently facing other investigations for murder, tax evasion and small arms smuggling.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Shouldn’t that headline be “…Blackwater’s silencer exports”? I have no idea whether importing them into Iraq is legal or not, but I suspect it’s illegal to export them without license.
November 1st, 2007 at 5:49 pmWho knows, maybe Blackwater is doing some contract killing on the side. Maybe some of the ethnic cleansing is being carried out by these guys for an extra thou here and there–they are mercs y’know.
November 1st, 2007 at 5:49 pm“Blackwater USA security firm illegally exported dozens†of firearms sound suppressors — commonly known as silencers…” – - Well yeah, what would yoo expect if you need to do a LOT of muzzling.
November 1st, 2007 at 5:51 pm“Well yeah, what would yoo expect if you need to do a LOT of muzzling.” — Yoo. Of course I meant John Yoo. (cough).
November 1st, 2007 at 5:52 pmThis is so easy to answer it’s sad you have to ask the question. These weapons are for assassinations on countries that the White House wants to kill. The White House has been watching to much of the TV show 24 and Jack Bauer. Chavez said the US plan was to kill World Leaders the White House wanted eliminated. Don’t forget the shots made at the Iran Presidents car. Bush/Cheney have hired these killers to assassinate the World Leaders who don’t follow their orders. We have no CIA covert agents anymore because Dick Cheney leaked the Iran CIA covert agents name to the press. The good news for the Middle East is their spies are in place and giving our information to them. Israel is just sitting back watching and taking the US for all they can get. Notice no soldier from Israel has been sent to Iraq/Afghanistan to help the US. But Israel did a great job of making fools of the US by getting NUKES and Billions of taxpayers dollars. Now Israel wants the US to illegally invade Iran for them. Israel was wise to get the Christian Churches to back the play and the Pastors got paid big bucks for they work.
November 1st, 2007 at 5:57 pmIf our Congress isn’t going to do anything about this, maybe the UN or the World Courtwill wake up. At the very least it would draw attention to the blatant war profiteering and looting going on in Iraq.
The world has witnessed mugging and murder.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:00 pmJust one more bit of evidence this admin is little more than an organized crime family.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:04 pmJust one more bit of evidence this admin is little more than an organized crime family.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — November 1, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
They are much less that an organized crime family. They are, increasingly, a disorganized crime family. While this should, eventually, work to our advantage; it makes them doubly dangerous. Competent criminals rarely have to hurt people. These bozos could destroy the world through “mistakes” or “miscommunication”.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:10 pmOff topic, sort of. I wonder what other weapons are being secretly shipped around the world?
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/10776
November 1st, 2007 at 6:11 pmJust one more bit of evidence this admin is little more than an organized crime family.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Well, maybe a dis-organized crime family anyway.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:14 pmWell, maybe a dis-organized crime family anyway.
Comment by StratRat — November 1, 2007 @ 6:14 pm
Ha! Ha! I beat you to it.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:15 pmLet the light shine on Erik Prince of Darkness and Blackwater.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:18 pmobvioulsy its time to give them another big fat juicy contract.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:24 pmI can tell you why they’d need silencers. To take care of inconvenient issues like Pat Tillman.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:30 pmfirearms sound suppressors — commonly known as silencers
They only need these if they are breaking the law and murdering people, oh wait, they are above the law, forgot, carry on.
Buck Fush
November 1st, 2007 at 6:32 pmLet the light shine on Erik Prince of Darkness and Blackwater.
Comment by Roket — November 1, 2007 @ 6:18 pm
You mean Jeb Bush’s brother inlaw. Let’s not let people forget it’s all in the family.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:32 pmThis does not include the two missing Iraqi aircraft, does it?
November 1st, 2007 at 6:36 pmDamn Shayne, that hurt. It is “convinient” that Tillman’s murder gets quietly shoved under the rug. Like so many of the treasonous crimes these bastards have done.
Makes me wish I believed in Hell, for Bush’s sake.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:37 pmAnd why do they need silencers if they are just guarding diplomats?
Silencers are for killing and avoiding detection while killing.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:40 pmIn my limited knowledge of guns, why would a military need silencers? Are they in the business of whacking people, and making a quick getaway?
November 1st, 2007 at 6:40 pmThis gives added meaning to the well-known reputation of the Bush Crime Family.
In my limited knowledge of guns, why would a military need silencers? Are they in the business of whacking people, and making a quick getaway?
This gives added meaning to the well-known reputation of the Bush Crime Family.
Comment by Marie — November 1, 2007 @ 6:40 pm
#
Actually, the military routinely uses silencers on MOUT operations (Military Operations in Urban Terrain) to help avoid hearing loss, and improve communication between soldiers. Shoot, move, and communicate need to flow as a single action.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:43 pmMy concern is why Blackwater is doing this, in this manner. There are legal channels for moving class III weapons and equipment overseas. There are no good reasons for circumventing that system.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:45 pmnanlichi, when dicussing Bushco it’s always safe to assume the worst.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:47 pmActually, the military routinely uses silencers on MOUT operations (Military Operations in Urban Terrain) to help avoid hearing loss, and improve communication between soldiers. Shoot, move, and communicate need to flow as a single action.
Comment by Chris L — November 1, 2007 @ 6:43 pm
Special Ops ( Rangers, SEALs, etc ) uses silencers in alot of missions, especially the “under the radar” type.
But why does a mercenary group whose purpose for being in Iraq is guard duty need silencers?
November 1st, 2007 at 6:54 pmIt just gets scarier every day. Yet the reich wingers march in lockstep with their vaunted leader.
Bush has all the class and comportment of Kim Jong-il.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:55 pmBut why does a mercenary group whose purpose for being in Iraq is guard duty need silencers?
Comment by Wayne — November 1, 2007 @ 6:54 pm
The answer is they don’t.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:56 pmPrince will be found guilty of all charges, then fined $250,000 and his sentence if any will be commuted because he has been punished enough. Per The Decider
November 1st, 2007 at 6:57 pmBut why does a mercenary group whose purpose for being in Iraq is guard duty need silencers?
Comment by Wayne — November 1, 2007 @ 6:54 pm
#
Because they routinely work alongside Rangers, SEALs, etc. One of Blackwater’s first foreign ops was accompanying SEALs on a Spec-Ops mission in Afghanistan. Like I said earlier, I have no problem with Blackwater having these types of weapons. The problem is that there is a legal channel for this and there is no reason for them to circumvent it.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:59 pmBecause they routinely work alongside Rangers, SEALs, etc. One of Blackwater’s first foreign ops was accompanying SEALs on a Spec-Ops mission in Afghanistan.
Comment by Chris L — November 1, 2007 @ 6:59 pm
This is what I don’t understand. Why is a mercenary group doing the job of Special Ops?
When I served that was unheard of and mercs were generally looked upon with scorn. I never did a mission with mercs.
this is totally Fcked up IMHO.
November 1st, 2007 at 7:05 pmthis is totally Fcked up IMHO.
Comment by Wayne — November 1, 2007 @ 7:05 pm
#
Agreed. Many soldiers feel the same way, especially when Blackwater routinely outsources to foreign personnel.
November 1st, 2007 at 7:07 pmWondering if Blackwater was anywhere close to where Tillman was shot now…….
November 1st, 2007 at 7:07 pmPlease note: these silencers have been exported to Iraq and “other countries” for their operatives. WHAT other countries, and what are they doing WHERE? In Iraq at least, armed Blackwater employees’ role IS not a combat one, but protection of DOD and State Dept. employees. Something else is up here. Assassinations?
November 1st, 2007 at 7:08 pmPlease note: these silencers have been exported to Iraq and “other countries†for their operatives. WHAT other countries, and what are they doing WHERE?
Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 1, 2007 @ 7:08 pm
#
Blackwater personnel accompany US Spec-Ops in Special Operations Low Intensity Conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and the Philippines.
November 1st, 2007 at 7:11 pmComment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 1, 2007 @ 7:08 pm
You nailed it. “Silenced” weapons, especially a “full mod” including low powered ammunition, serve exactly one purpose. Covert assassination.
“Special” forces may use them to knock off a guard but they have, virtually, no use in a combat situation. Most are completely useless at more that a few feet.
Also, if I’m not mistaken, mere possession of a silenced weapon in a war zone can be considered a hanging offense. It’s right up there with poison and “dum-dum” bullets. If these weapons are being carried by “private citizens” it is a violation of international law.
November 1st, 2007 at 7:16 pmPlacing on Tin Foil Beanie:
When you are the privatized Bush Admin Death Squad you need those kind of things.
November 1st, 2007 at 9:40 pmWTF?!?! For the love of all that’s sacred…what legitimate reason could Blackwater possibly have to be sending silencers to their personnel in Iraq? To the best of my knowledge, the primary motive for using a silencer is to lessen the likelihood that other people in the vicinity will hear the shot and thus lessen the likelihood that the person who fired the shot will get caught — because using a silencer generally suggests a offensive and/or pre-emptive intent rather than a defensive and/or responsive one. Why would someone who’s working a protection detail need one? Does the Secret Service typically use them? as far as I’m aware, no. The FBI? No. The police? No. Security guards? No. So why would Blackwater personnel need them — especially if, as Blackwater claims (especially in the wake of that rather nasty incident recently in which civilians died) that they only fire in defense? Firing in defense is not what silencers are for — or if they are, it’s only in the most abstract and indirect sense (firing pre-emptively to kill someone who you believe poses a threat to you in some way but who hasn’t actually taken aim at you yet).
November 1st, 2007 at 10:33 pm>Who knows, maybe Blackwater is doing some contract killing on the side.
They were. Do you really think the Blackwater that got Bar-B-Q’ed in Falluja was “delivering supplies”? Blackwater was also at Abu-Gharib, according thie old laws they could put a plunger up an old lady’s @ss in iraq and no criminal charges could be brought against them. Our government just hands them a paycheck and winks and says “don’t be too rough on these detainess, ok.. just get us some info”?
November 2nd, 2007 at 3:18 amYou must admit, those “suicides” we keep hearing about will be much harder to detect if they’re a little more *quiet*.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:34 amOmerta – The code of silence
Not really a rule of law that we cherish here in the USA, but a bond among thugs that our President will defend until death . . . not his . . . ours.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:40 amCJ – truly, that is a terrible accusation.
Substantiate it.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:54 amOh Kilo,
You dunderhead . . . the only reason that silencers would be necessary would be to dull the thud.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
What’s another dead Iraqi? . . . or for that matter, an American in the wrong place (Iraq) at the wrong time?
Immunity? or better yet, just a complete lack of oversight . . . what a shame that you can’t blind . . . but right, you can.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:31 amGuy names himself after a quantity of cocaine and wants to impress you with his patriotic machismo creds.
He’s a toon.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:49 amDunder,
Coke is measured by the kilo. . . but you know that.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:57 amAlso, thank you so much for implying that I am a lyricacist (sp?) of REM caliber. Michael Stipe might not be pleased . . . but, gotta say, works for me!
November 2nd, 2007 at 7:02 amGenius? How did marijuana ever become part of this conversation?
You a pot head too?
Might want to watch that multi-drug brew. . . .could cause brain fry.
November 2nd, 2007 at 7:08 am>BTW here is a letter from the VP of Blackwater stating that the company >has never provided any service of any kind at Abu Ghraib,
oh… a letter from someone in the company.. gosh..now there an unbiased source.. is that anything like the letter from blackwater owner erik prince stating that his men didnt open fire on innocent iraqis until they were shot at, even though both a us military investigation and an iraqi investigation determined that no one was firing during the massacre except blackwater? hahahaahah. is that what you call evidence?
hey, dude, i think ive seen a legal opinion from alberto gonzales that says wiretapping american citizens without a warrant is legal, does that mean it is?
>CJ – truly, that is a terrible accusation.
>
>Substantiate it.
If I do will you idiots apoligize and admit you’re defending a bunch of scumbags and thugs?
I substaniate and cite pretty much everything I say here and that doesnt stop you @sshats from yammering…. if I substantiate it, what will you do then?
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:20 am>As he mentions, you are unlikely to find a US company operating with any >more government oversight.
Is that why their actions in Iraq largely fall into a black hole which makes them outside the jurisdiction of any Us laws and immune from Iraqi laws?
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:21 amKilo are you disputing my allegation that private contractor (mercenies) were used to interrogate prisoners in Abu-Gharib or are you merely disputing those contractors were blackwater?
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:32 am>Do you want to cut to the chase and admit you can’t and that you just >made that up ?
Do you want to tell me what you’re going to do if I show you evidence? Will you shut the f@ck up?
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:42 amActually I know what you;ll do, you’ll do like micheal and claim its liberal slander. So I’m trying to find as unbiased a source as possible to throw in your face.
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:43 amAnd care to explain to me why you think a letter from a corporate executive denying wrongdoing is “evidence” of ANYTHING?
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:45 amDo you know anyting about libel laws moron? If you did, you’d know no company that’s trying desparately to keep its activities secret it going to subject itself to cross-examination to try to proving the both the falsity of what i said, and the fact I knowingly and wantonly said it.
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:50 am>You’ve just told us that you can’t substantiate your claim,
where did I say that?
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:52 am>Most of them manage to do it without endangering the existence of the >host website they use though.
Sites aren’t even liable for thier users alleged wrongdoing unless they know and actively participate in that wrongdoing idiot.
Thats very well established law.
When is the last time you saw the RIAA trying to sue AOL for its users downloading mp3s illegally? Learn a modicum of law before you spout off bullshi1te. Im sure blackwater is keeping itself perfectly busy countersuing family members of the dead empoyees for 10 million dollars for having the audactity to try and hold them accoutable.
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:56 amI posted some cites above moron. I’m looking for more.
I say that companies who have things to hide, like blackwater is trying to hide its massacre of innocent iraqis, isnt going to subject itself to cross examination on a spurious claim. do tell me, educate me on what is necessary to prove a libel claim dear scholar?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:00 amAnd I asked you why a letter from the same group of people who lied about thier contractors opening fire on innocent civilians should have any evidentiary value? Care to answer.
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:01 am>You’ve said it in every subsequent post.
quote me exactly.
did you miss the stuff I posted from Hersh and Schahill?
and why dont you answer any of my questions? I’m starting to feel as if this conversation is a little one sided. Do you have any idea what is nessary to prove a libel claim, or what sort of information you’d have to put forward to prosecute such a claim? or what sort of cross examination you’d be subject to?
you’re idiotic implication that a website could be sued for something posted in its comment section shows you had an extremely poor grasp of the legal system..
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:10 amRepost:
And I asked you why a letter from the same group of people who lied about thier contractors opening fire on innocent civilians should have any evidentiary value?
Care to answer?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:13 amuhm whats the first 3 words of post # 63?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:14 amweird.. when i logged off, it didnt show my post with the huge quotes….
here are links without the gigantic quotes.. how the heck is ace able to post those big long things?
http://www.counterpunch.org/lando05042004.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/maass06022006.html
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:20 amfor some reason it strangely apparently my long quote from these two cites got vanished from all eyes but mine…. if you want to debate the merit of these cites, lets dance mercenary-hugger….but please do answer some of my questions as well
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:21 amquote from scahill from the above : “They are alleged to have been involved in the torture at Abu Ghraib. “
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:23 amfollow the links moron. i just asked you what you’d do if i substantiated.
you think you know everything that went on in abu-gharib?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:24 am” According to Seymour Hersh, in the current edition of the New Yorker, one of the recommendations of the officer who investigated the military’s prison system in Iraq, Major General Antonio Taguba, was not just that one of the MI brigade commanders be reprimanded, but that also two civilian contractors be sanctioned. One of them, Steven Stephanowicz, was to be dismissed from his army job and denied his security clearance for lying to the investigators and allowing or ordering military policemen to employ techniques that equated to physical abuse.
“
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:24 amwhy wont you answer my question about the letter? why do you think it has any evidentiary value?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:25 am>I asked you to substantiate your claim.
do does micheal. when someone does, he calls it liberbal slander, even if its a site that quoted by dick cheney. i say that since you people refuse to acknowledge any information that doesnt suit your world view, theres not a whole lot of point in spending alot of time trying to back up claims…
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:27 am>The word “Blackwater†doesn’t appear in the first article.
Blackwater isnt a military contractor in iraq that does more than bodyguard?
> which doesn’t refer to Blackwater’s involvement.
then whose involvement does it refer to?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:36 amand why wont you answer any of my questions?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:36 amthe entire scahill article is about blackwater you idiot, what other company does he even mention in his interview
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:37 amjesus christ where were all your questions when we were going to war based on an alchoholic drug addict named curveball? your selective demands for irrefutable proof are laughable…
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:42 amwhat part of “mercenaries where hired to interrogate prisoners at abugharib” and Schahill’s “They are alleged to have been involved in the torture at Abu Ghraib.”
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:44 amif Schahill wasnt referring to Blackwater, who was he referring to…
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:44 amcongratualtions on you not knowing what a case of libel is, and pretending you have to have ironclad proof of things before you believe them…
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:45 amwhat part of “mercenaries where hired to interrogate prisoners at abugharib†and Schahill’s “They are alleged to have been involved in the torture at Abu Ghraib.†did I make up?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:45 am>It’s merely the only authoritative statement
as athoritative as princes claim that his men didnt fire on iraqis unprovoked.
its not authotitative at all, its an unsubstantiated and refuted denial from an interested party.
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:47 amif Schahill wasnt referring to Blackwater, who was he referring to??
care to answer?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:48 am>Like I said, if that’s the best you can do (two articles, neither of which >suggest a link or even mention Blackwater and Abu Ghraib in the same >paragraph)
“They” referred to blackwater, idiot. If it didnt refer to blackwater, who did it refer to?
> then we’re done here. Liar.
ooh like i give a sh1t whether some lowlife like you who worships george “we know where the weapons are” bush thinks im a liar. if you can’t see Schahill is referring to Blackwater in his entire discussion, your an idiot. who is he talking about if not blackwater?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:52 amKilo has anyone whose policies you support ever made any ubsubstantiated claims?
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:55 amha I see i hit a nerve with your precious little group of mercenary scumbags. pretty darn funny. can’t wait till more proof of thier numerous abuses and warcrimes surfaces so i can laugh at you for defending them..
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:57 am>Who gives a toss.
thanks for not answering the question moron. funny how you can simply continue to make conclusory statements about what the statement doesnt say, without making any assertions about what it does say..
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:58 amtell me, Kilo, since you know so much about which civilian contractors did the torturing at abu gharib, can you name one of the other companies that was implicated?
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:13 ami hate to burst your bubble d1pshit but there was more than one company’s employees accused of torture at abu-gharib,since you seem to have some secret knowledge of the place, maybe you can name some of the other companies that were involved.. maybe then we can get an answer about who you think scahill was referring to?
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:16 amI may be repeating common knowledge, but Prince of Darkness is married to the daughter of the founder of Amway and is brother-in-law to the guy who ran for Governor of Michigan and got his head handed to him by the smart people of that state. And much of the initial money to start the Blackwater business came from that family. An ultra right-wing religious bunch and a scary group of individuals.
So, anyone buying or selling Amway sh!t should be aware who you are supporting.
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:27 am>The first referred to CACI’s well known involvement at Abu Ghraib
Did it say CACI was the only company involved, or only that one individual who had been punished was from that company?
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:35 am> Blackwater, which he doesn’t claim he is?
again, what other contractors is he disscussing in his peice? the entire rest of the peice is about blackwater, so its pretty apparent hes using “contractor†and “blackwater†interchangeably in the interview
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:36 amis it any more wrong of me lump blackwater in with every other group of blood merchants in iraq the same way your hero Dumbya calls everyone in iraq who doesnt like us “terrorists� yes or no? can you answer a single question I put to you?
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:39 amjesus this new troll-guard system of selectively hiding posts by non-banned posters blows.. not like this idiot Kilo will answer any questions i ask about his deep need for ironclad proof of things anyway, but half the d@mn things i asked I had to repeat, break up, or redact… bullsh!te
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:46 amKilo, the joke of a lawyer who thinks he has any knowledge of what a “libelous claim” is.
November 2nd, 2007 at 11:00 amcome on Kilo please tell us one of the other mercenary companies implicated in the abu gharib scandal, there was more than one, maybe you can help me figure out who scahill was referring to, i dont think only 3 guesses will do it…
November 2nd, 2007 at 11:09 am>As he mentions, you are unlikely to find a US company operating with any >more government oversight.
Except a company, who , say , could actually be prosecuted under United States laws. I’d say having your employees operate in places where they are immune from criminal prosecution is a pretty substantial lack of oversight..
November 2nd, 2007 at 11:41 amyeah go jerk off to your Guns and Ammo magazine kilo, you go live in your fantasy world of WMD and mushroom clouds where blackwater shoots civilians and smuggles weapons to terrorists but has too much integrity to torture. we’ll continue to exist here in everyday reality..
November 2nd, 2007 at 11:53 amOK kids, you’ve managed to range far afield of the issue here. Is that deliberate? Is it really your intention to obfuscate the real issue with this sordid little tale? Do you need to be reminded what the real issue is here?
The real issue here is the allegation that BW is illegally exporting silencers to Iraq and other countries.
Thus the real question is: If there is a legitimate reason for Blackwater’s mercenaries to have and use so called “silencers” in Iraq, what is that legitimate use; and if there is a legitimate use, WHY is it necessary for them to be smuggling them into the country? If they have a legitimate use, why are they not bringing them in legally through appropriate channels? Why the subterfuge? Why risk the possibility of suspicion when some diplomat turns up dead? Why risk the possibility of suspicion when some Iraqi politician turns up dead? Why risk the possibility of suspicion when one of the anti American mullahs turns up dead? Why risk the possibility of suspicion when some journalist with an unpopular to the administration bias turns up dead? Why risk the possibility of suspicion when some agent of the government investigating the possibility of BW wrongdoing turns up dead? Is this just a manifestation of the sort of mentality which demands secrecy even where openness would be more reasonable and effective, or is there a more sinister reason for going around the regulations? Given the evidence of BW’s past involvment in extra legal activities, and its coverup of illegal activities on the part of its employees it is not unreasonable to assume the worst, and since it is unlikely that any honest answers are forthcoming assuming the worst seems less like tin foil hat conspiracy theory and more like common sense. The question of BW’s involvment in other possible lawbreaking should not even enter the equation at this point and those who deflect from the REAL issue (the smuggling itself) should themselves be looked on with suspicion, especially when they actively seek to change the subject.
So, kilo, what legitimate use would BW have for silencers in Iraq (and other countries), and why could they not have transported said silencers via legitimate channels? No bloviating, no changing the subject, no personal attacks, no going off on a tangent, just a reasonably stated answer to the pertinent questions:
1) What legitimate use? and 2) Why not legally?
November 2nd, 2007 at 12:11 pmyeah, sorry, mea culpa for my part in that diversion…
good luck getting kilo to debate.. hes a longstanding troll here, his “debate” style usually consists of vauge, unweildy ,cumbersome bowel movement like statements that boil down to something like “i didnt say what you said i said” or “you didnt say what you said you said”.
playing devils advocate for a moment in regards to your discussion, all I can say is “ok, these are just allegations at this point”..however, since blackwater cannot currently be prosecuted for crimes it commits in iraq, there is unfortuately, no current way to adjudicate whether these allegations are indicitave of actual guilt..
November 2nd, 2007 at 12:22 pmNO, no, no, no CJ. The fact (dubious) that BW cannot be prosecuted for criminal activity related to their activities in Iraq has no bearing on the question of what legitimate use they might have for the restricted items in question, nor on the question of why if those items have a legitimate use within the context of their contractual obligations in Iraq they couldn’t access such items through legal channels.
As a side issue, it would be interesting to know what “other countries” they exported banned weapons to, and whether they have the same blanket immunity in those jurisdictions as well. It would also be interesting to know whether, given that BW hires from other countries and claims that its employees are actually sub-contractors, individual BW employees could be brought to justice as individuals in their home jurisdictions. It would be an interesting legal question whether BWs blanket immunity cover sub-contractors. Prince can’t have it both ways. If they can be prosecuted as individuals, BWs labor pool may just dry up right quickly. If Prince must call them employees to protect them from prosecution and retain their services, he’s going to be facing a hefty tax bill and maybe even some jail time. That of course brings in issues related to the DoJ and its willigness to prosecute Bush friends, and the possibilty of future pardons all round. While the interesting issues raised by the ultimate interconnectedness of all things are interesting in and of themselves, however, they wander considerably far from the main topic and the two most pertinent questions related to it.
November 2nd, 2007 at 12:43 pm>If any of these raving conspiracy theory kooks
you mean those people who think people other than arabs engage in conspiracies?
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:06 pmThere is no legitimate use, any non-defensive actions of blackwater in a war zone brings them under the united states own defintion of enemy combatants, because A) they dont wear uniforms and B) are not bound by any code of military justice. These two things they lack, per the united states own logic, is 2 of the requirements necessary for one to be called a lawful combatant.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:09 pmKilo, our resident blackwater apologist. Gonna laugh at your Guns and Ammo jerking self when these dudes start going to jail, losing lawsuits, and generally getting exposed for the human waste they are..
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:11 pm>How does a company purchasing a weapon mod and using that in >another country constitute that company “exporting†it ?
dunno maybe with your brilliant mind you can dazzle us with the same legal acumen that let you figure out what a “libelous statement” was..
> First of all silencers are absolutely harmless items.
>Unless of course you attach them to the barrel of a weapon.
hahahaha! using that same logic, bullets are pretty harmless too, unless you put them in a gun…or a fire!
man, Kilo the Keyboard Kommando.. gosh, such a shame you’re so busy being tied down by us liberal loons, you could be bravely fighting for our freedom if only be just had to audacity to keep quiet…
dude, we all know the crux of what you believe.. Blackwater is a group of deeply honest, patriot boyscouts who can do no wrong..
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:29 pm>You simply don’t have the brains to respond to what’s written do you.
I’m sorry whats your educational pedigree again?
Funny I asked you about a dozen different questions you didnt answer. I asked you if it was as wrong of me to lump blackwater in with all the other mercenary scum like your hero dumbya lumps everyone who doesnt like us in iraq into the “terrorist” category? You didnt answer. I asked you if you ever supported any politicians who made wholly unsubstantiated allegations and you didnt answer.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:31 pm>that says it’s alledged a contractor
contractorS. more than one, moron. more than one company. care to venture the name of one of the others implicated in abu other than CACI?
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:42 pmlike i said, before, Kunto, please substitute every instance where i have previously said “blackwater” with “blackwater and other mercenary scum”… unless you are now asserting no mercenaries were involved in abu-gharib interrogations, my minor correction should settle your nitpicking…
i lump all scum who profit off death in the same category as blackwater, just like your hero dumbya lumps every person in iraq who doesnt like us into the category of “terrorist”.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:46 pm>Yeah. Because you only asked it to avoid defending your lie.
No, I just explained that I lump Blackwater in with all mercenary scum, because they are all the same. I just generalize. Its not a lie, its just in my mind, they pretty much are all the same group of scumbags.
>And if you ask me something else as pointless and ridiculous as “do you >know of a politician who liesâ€
its not pointless. its asking you if you hold people you support to the same standard of substantiatiating their allegations as you do the people you dislike. and the answer is, you dont. because your a hipocrite
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:51 pm>> care to venture the name of one of the others implicated in abu other than CACI?
>No, and you can’t either.
Wrong moron, I can. Titan Corp. Add another contractor to the list of Abu criminals….
http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport/2006/overview.html
whoops. could there be more? care to specualte?
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:53 pmCoke head Kilo.
Last nigth, it appeared you were hittin on Bartlebee. today, you’ve set your sight on Choc. Jesus. The two of you seem to have an agreed smoothie.
Can’t you see that you two are having a singular conversation . . . get a motel.
November 3rd, 2007 at 3:40 pmToe tappin on ThinkProgress. Ugh.
November 3rd, 2007 at 3:44 pmYeah, Kilo, you may be as gay as my fluffy feet may fly . . .but there’s nothing wrong with that. . .
just add a comment with substance.
November 3rd, 2007 at 3:49 pm