Pentagon Issues Blackwater New $92 Million Contract
Pentagon Issues Blackwater New $92 Million Contract
Earlier this month, Blackwater USA was involved in the fatal shooting of 11 Iraqi civilians. While the Iraqi government swiftly condemned the contractor, the Bush administration has continued to back Blackwater’s story that it was “defensive fire.”
Last Thursday, Gen. Peter Pace told reporters, “Blackwater has been a contractor in the past with the department and could certainly be in the future.” The next day, that future was already here. The Pentagon had issued a new list of contracts, including one worth $92 million to Presidential Airways, the “aviation unit of parent company Blackwater.” From the release:
Presidential Airways, Inc., an aviation Worldwide Services company (d/b/a Blackwater Aviation), Moyock, N.C., is being awarded an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) type contract for $92,000,000.00. The contractor is to provide all fixed-wing aircraft, personnel, equipment, tools, material, maintenance and supervision necessary to perform passenger, cargo and combi Short Take-Off and Landing air transportation services between locations in the Area of Responsibility of Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan and Uzbekistan. This contract was competitively procured and two timely offers were received. The performance period is from 1 Oct. 2007 to 30 September 2011.
Government officials have repeatedly ignored Blackwater’s transgressions. Senior Iraqi officials “repeatedly complained to U.S. officials” about Blackwater’s “alleged involvement in the deaths of numerous Iraqis, but the Americans took little action to regulate the private security firm.”
Next week. Rep. David Price (D-NC) plans to introduce legislation “to extend the reach of U.S. civil courts to include security contractors in Iraq.”
- Comments
- 63
U.S. coordinates with Gulf nations on possible air strikes.
U.S. coordinates with Gulf nations on possible air strikes.
“The American air force is working with military leaders from the Gulf to train and prepare Arab air forces for a possible war with Iran, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.”
UPDATE: “John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations, told Tory delegates today that efforts by the UK and the EU to negotiate with Iran had failed and that he saw no alternative to a pre-emptive strike on suspected nuclear facilities in the country.”
The ‘Restore Patriotism to University Campuses Act’:
The ‘Restore Patriotism to University Campuses Act’:
The name of Rep. Duncan Hunter’s (R-CA) bill to cut off all federal funds to Columbia University because of the Ahmadinejad speech.
Hersh: Bush’s Case For Hitting Iran Has ‘Shifted,’ Now Focused On ‘Surgical Strikes’ To ‘Sell’ It
Hersh: Bush’s Case For Hitting Iran Has ‘Shifted,’ Now Focused On ‘Surgical Strikes’ To ‘Sell’ It
Seymour Hersh, The New Yorker’s Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative journalist, writes in a new article entitled “Shifting Targets” that there has been “a significant increase in the tempo of attack planning” for war with Iran inside the Bush administration.
Most significantly, Hersh — who has been warning for months that the administration is seriously plotting for war with Iran — reports the administration has switched its rationale for war. The focus has shifted from a broad bombing attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities to “surgical” strikes again Revolutionary Guard Corps facilities in Tehran and elsewhere.
On CNN’s Late Edition this morning, Hersh said the administration has adopted what it views as a rationale that can win over the public and international allies, while accomplishing its key objective of initiating a military conflict:
You can sell [this approach]. It’s more logical. You can say to people, the American people, we’re only hitting those people that we think are trying to hit our boys and the coalition forces. And so that seems to be more sensible. Because the White House thinks they can actually pitch this, this would actually work. In other words, you can do a bombing and not have the world scream at us and also get the British on board.
Watch it:
In his article, Hersh writes, “This summer, the White House, pushed by the office of Vice-President Dick Cheney, requested that the Joint Chiefs of Staff redraw long-standing plans for a possible attack on Iran,” emphasizing the shift in rationale. The “shifting emphasis” is “gathering support among generals and admirals in the Pentagon.”
Hersh also reveals:
During a secure videoconference that took place early this summer, the President told Ryan Crocker, the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, that he was thinking of hitting Iranian targets across the border and that the British “were on board.” At that point, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice interjected that there was a need to proceed carefully, because of the ongoing diplomatic track. Bush ended by instructing Crocker to tell Iran to stop interfering in Iraq or it would face American retribution.
The White House has even prepared a “Clinton did it too” defense for attacking Iran, according to Hersh. “If Democrats objected, the Administration could say, “Bill Clinton did the same thing; he conducted limited strikes in Afghanistan, the Sudan, and in Baghdad to protect American lives.”
Bush’s EPA pursuing fewer polluters.
Bush’s EPA pursuing fewer polluters.
Under the Bush administration, the EPA’s “pursuit of criminal cases against polluters” was “down nearly 70 percent between fiscal years 2002 and 2006, compared with a four-year period in the late 1990s.” The number of investigators in the Criminal Investigation Division is also down, with many “sometimes are diverted to other duties, such as service on EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson’s eight-person security detail.”
‘Surge.’
‘Surge.’
Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, “acknowledged today that violence had increased since Sunni Arab militants declared an offensive during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. ‘Certainly Al Qaeda has had its Ramadan surge,’ Petraeus said.”
Kristol’s Dark Humor: Bush’s ‘Heartless Assault On Our Children’ Is ‘A Good Idea’
Kristol’s Dark Humor: Bush’s ‘Heartless Assault On Our Children’ Is ‘A Good Idea’
On Fox News Sunday this morning, NPR’s Mara Liasson said that President Bush’s expected veto of an expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which passed both the House and Senate on a strong bipartisan basis, will be seen as “a heartless blow against children.”
Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, who supports Bush’s veto, laughingly joked:
First of all, whenever I hear anything described as a heartless assault on our children, I tend to think it’s a good idea. I’m happy that the President’s willing to do something bad for the kids.
Kristol then disparaged yesterday’s Democratic Radio Address, delivered by a 12-year-old boy named Graeme Frost who had received care under the SCHIP program, calling it “pathetic.” “You really wonder how stupid they think the American people are,” concluded Kristol. Watch it:
NPR’s Juan Williams rebutted Kristol’s callous approach to children’s health care. “When you have 3.7 million uninsured children in America, you know you have a crisis,” said Williams. He then ripped Kristol’s disparagement of the Democratic Radio Address as hypocritical because conservatives “use soldiers and everything else to bolster their arguments”:
WILLIAMS: I’m surprised to hear you say, “Oh, how dare you use a child.” What do Republicans do except use soldiers and everything else to bolster their arguments.
KRISTOL: Soldiers aren’t children.
WILLIAMS: Oh come on. Yeah, use uniforms and everything else. And in fact, put on — politicians get in uniforms and get on ships to talk about “missions accomplished.” C’mon.
The expansion of SCHIP that Bush is threatening to veto would extend coverage to 4 million children who would otherwise be uninsured.
McCain suggests religious litmus test for President.
McCain suggests religious litmus test for President.
“I admire the Islam. There’s a lot of good principles in it,” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said. “But I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles, personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith.” He added, “I think the number one issue people should make [in the] selection of the President of the United States is, ‘Will this person carry on in the Judeo Christian principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?’” The U.S. Constitution disagrees.
UPDATE: McCain attempts to clarify his remarks: “McCain contacted Beliefnet after the interview to clarify his remarks: ‘I would vote for a Muslim if he or she was the candidate best able to lead the country and defend our political values.’” Former Bush White House aide David Kuo, now a BeliefNet contributor, said McCain was “pandering to what he thinks the Christian conservative community wants to hear” and predicted he “will have a lot of explaining to do about this interview.”
Thomas: ‘Left-wing zealots’ worse than the KKK.
Thomas: ‘Left-wing zealots’ worse than the KKK.
In his new book, My Grandfather’s Son, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas writes that “he had grown up fearing the Ku Klux Klan’s lynch mobs but ‘my worst fears had come to pass not in Georgia, but in Washington, D.C., where I was being pursued not by bigots in white robes but by left-wing zealots draped in flowing sanctimony.’”
Freedom Watch’s next target: Iran.
Freedom Watch’s next target: Iran.
The New York Times reports that next month, the White House-front group Freedom’s Watch “will sponsor a private forum of 20 experts on radical Islam that is expected to make the case that Iran poses a direct threat to the security of the United States”:
Although the group declined to identify the experts, several were invited from the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington research group with close ties to the White House. Some institute scholars have advocated a more confrontational policy to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, including keeping military action as an option. [...]
“If Hitler’s warnings were heeded when he wrote ‘Mein Kampf,’ he could have been stopped,” said Bradley Blakeman, 49, the president of Freedom’s Watch and a former deputy assistant to Mr. Bush. “Ahmadinejad is giving all the same kind of warning signs to us, and the region — he wants the destruction of the United States and the destruction of Israel.”
AP falsely spins Limbaugh’s ‘phony soldiers’ line.
AP falsely spins Limbaugh’s ‘phony soldiers’ line.
In the Associated Press’ write up of Rush Limbaugh’s controversial “phony soldiers” comment, the wire service misrepresents the context of the Limbaugh’s gaffe in such a way that it falsifies the meaning of his comments. Greg Sargent explains:
In the AP’s telling, Limbaugh first mentioned the specific phony soldier, and then “followed” with a reference to “phony soldiers.” This description, of course, makes Limbaugh’s pushback sound completely reasonable: Limbaugh established the specific context — a discussion of MacBeth — before using the controversial phrase.
But this is not what Limbaugh’s transcript says at all, of course. Indeed, not even Limbaugh himself is arguing this. Rather, Limbaugh’s transcript shows that the mention of MacBeth came long after his initial reference to phony soldiers. He hadn’t established this context first at all. This is just a pathetic error.
Fox analyst: ‘generals are betraying our soldiers.’
Fox analyst: ‘generals are betraying our soldiers.’
In an opinion column posted on Foxnews.com, Fox News analyst Col. David Hunt, a frequent guest on The O’Reilly Factor, declares that “Our generals are betraying our soldiers … again.” Hunt claims that “our generals put their careers over their men’s lives” and that “we should be putting these generals on trial.” Glenn Greenwald wonders if Hunt’s “attack on the honesty and integrity…of members of the United States Armed Forces” will be denounced on the Senate floor.
Boehner: Using Children For Political Messaging Is ‘Beyond The Pale,’ Unless I Do It
Boehner: Using Children For Political Messaging Is ‘Beyond The Pale,’ Unless I Do It
This week’s Democratic Radio Address will be delivered by a 12-year-old boy named Graeme Frost. Graeme was in a severe car accident three years ago, and received care under the SCHIP program.
In his address, Graeme will tell the story of how he “was in a coma for a week and couldn’t eat or stand up or even talk at first.” But, using coverage provided under SCHIP, Graeme received treatment that allowed him to return to school and begin to lead a normal life again.
A spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) sharply criticized Graeme’s appearance:
To use an innocent young child as a human shield and misrepresent the position of the president of the United States is, frankly, beyond the pale.
If there’s one thing Boehner just won’t tolerate, it’s politicians employing children for political purposes…
The SCHIP bill sent to Bush for authorization would provide essential medical care for four million children like Graeme Frost. Yet John Boehner seems more interested in playing partisan games than in supporting expansion of a program that is “widely regarded as one of the country’s greatest social policy successes.”
Counterterrorism Analyst Raises Doubts About Alleged Death Of Top Al Qaeda Leader
Counterterrorism Analyst Raises Doubts About Alleged Death Of Top Al Qaeda Leader
Yesterday, the U.S. military announced that it had recently killed Abu Usama al-Tunisi, billed as “one of the most senior leaders of al Qaeda in Iraq.”
ThinkProgress noted yesterday that there was evidence to suggest al-Tunisi may have been killed a year ago. An online posted published in May 2006 by al Qaeda supporters hailed the “martyrdom” of al-Tunisi. A translation of the martyrdom message was posted online by terrorism analyst Evan Kohlmann in July 2006.
We left open the possibility that “there could have been two different Abu Usama al-Tunisis.” Writing on the Counterterrorism Blog, Kohlmann has weighed in to try to resolve the discrepancy:
Is it possible that there are two separate Abu Usama al-Tunisis serving as commanders for Al-Qaida in Iraq? Perhaps… but the likelihood of this incredible coincidence rapidly plummets when one considers that both of these men have been identically described as the commander of Al-Qaida’s Aeisha Brigade and active in the area of al-Yusifiya.
Indeed, the military announcement yesterday and the “martyrdom” announcement one year ago relate the same background information about al-Tunisi. Kohlmann continues:
If we put aside this theory, we are left with quite limited possibilities. It would seem that either Al-Qaida supporters were engaged in a deliberate misinformation campaign on their own password-protected chat forums, or else the U.S. military has potentially been the victim of questionable intelligence.
It should be further noted that Al-Qaida has prided itself in the past on providing accurate and timely information concerning the “martyrdom” of its military commanders. When former Al-Qaida commander Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in a U.S. airstrike in mid-2006, the same Al-Hesbah Network [the network that reported al-Tunisi's death] was one of the first sources to correctly confirm the news of his death on behalf of Al-Qaida.
Given all the reasons Kohlmann suggests for doubting the military’s claims, there should have been a responsibility on the part of journalists to double-check this story before reporting it. However, today’s mentions of al-Tunisi in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Associated Press fail to resolve — much less mention — this important discrepancy.
UPDATE: After doubts were raised about the recent death of al-Tunisi, counterterrorism analyst Evan Kohlmann wrote of confirmation that Tunisi did in fact die in a raid recently.
Ted Stevens’ $84 million ‘ferry to nowhere.’
Ted Stevens’ $84 million ‘ferry to nowhere.’
“Following on the heels of Senator Ted Stevens’ failed ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ project is an $84 million ferry to allow 40 people to save a 2-hour plus drive.” The USA Today writes that Stevens is pushing for a high-speed ferry that will connect Anchorage to Port MacKenzie, following “the same route as one of the two ‘bridges to nowhere.’”
Huckabee rips Bush’s foreign policy approach.
Huckabee rips Bush’s foreign policy approach.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) ripped into the President Bush’s national security record, “delivering a bold and potentially risky speech that could establish the former Arkansas governor as the maverick among top Republican candidates and test his party’s loyalty to President Bush.” Huckabee specifically rejected Bush’s approach to dealing with Iran:
“When we first invaded Afghanistan, Iran helped, especially in dealings with their ally, the Northern Alliance,” he said. “They wanted to join us in fighting al Qaida. …The CIA and State Department supported a partnership. Some in the White House and beyond did not. And when President Bush included Iran in the axis of evil, everything went downhill pretty fast.” [...]
“The administration has quite properly said it will not take the military option off the table. But if we don’t put some other options on the table, eventually the military option becomes the only viable one. Right now we’re proceeding down only one track,” he said.
Right-Wing New York Sun Declares: ‘Attack On Iran Said To Be Imminent’
Right-Wing New York Sun Declares: ‘Attack On Iran Said To Be Imminent’
The New York Sun, a reliable neoconservative outlet that has advocated for a Dick Cheney presidential campaign, declares today: “Attack on Iran Said To Be Imminent.” The article’s lead states:
In a sign that U.N. Security Council-based diplomacy is losing steam, a number of sources are reporting that a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities may be imminent. France and America also are pushing for tighter economic sanctions against Tehran, without U.N. approval.
Yesterday’s edition of Le Canard Enchaîné, a French weekly known for its investigative journalism, reported details of an alleged Israeli-American plan to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. The frontpage headline read: “A report sent to the Elysée — Putin tells Tehran: They’re going to bomb you!”
Ironically, the right-wing clamor for war is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. Here’s why:
– The success of the right-wing’s push for military action hinges on establishing that the U.N. Security Council can’t stop Iran’s nuclear program. As the Sun notes, the U.S. and French are already considering an effort to proceed “without U.N. approval,” in essence forming a “coalition of the willing” that ignores the U.N. (It wouldn’t be the first time.)
– Russia and China, both members of the permanent five, have rebuffed efforts to increase sanctions on Iran, fearing that they “will be exploited to support a U.S. policy of regime change or military action.”
– That fear, precipitated by right-wing rhetoric, then inhibits the U.N.’s ability to agree on sanctions that could be used “to increase the pressure on Tehran to comply with the Security Council’s demand to suspend uranium enrichment.” The failure to instill a new sanctions regime then allows the administration to push for confrontation.
Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said this week: “Definitely what we are seeing is a confrontation in the making.”
And if the Bush administration can’t establish the need to go to war based on the threat of a nuclear Iran, it appears appears ready to claim that Iran’s cross-border activity in Iraq may justify military action. On that front, Congress — not wanting to appear weak — is facilitating the administration’s case.
Glenn Greenwald writes the “virtual refusal of senior military officials to permit a war with Iran” may be all that stands in the Bush administration’s way.
UPDATE: The AP writes today, “In a setback for the United States, Iran won a two-month reprieve from new U.N. sanctions over its nuclear program on Friday. The Bush administration and its European allies ceded to Russian and Chinese demands to give Tehran more time to address international concerns. … The decision marks another blow for Washington in its diplomatic struggle to toughen existing U.N. sanctions on Iran.”
Udall to introduce ‘Rush’ resolution on Monday.
Udall to introduce ‘Rush’ resolution on Monday.
On Monday, Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO) will introduce a resolution condemning Rush Limbaugh’s comments that troops who support withdrawal from Iraq are “phony soldiers.” In a dear colleague letter, Udall says the resolution will honor “all Americans serving in the Armed Forces” while “condemning” Limbaugh’s “unwarranted attack.”
Giuliani invokes 9/11 to excuse cell phone gaffe.
Giuliani invokes 9/11 to excuse cell phone gaffe.
During a speech to the National Rifle Association last week, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani interrupted his prepared remarks to take an impromptu phone call from his wife, Judith. In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network recently, Giuliani invoked 9/11 to explain and excuse his rude moment during the speech:
“And quite honestly, since Sept. 11, most of the time when we get on a plane, we talk to each other and just reaffirm the fact that we love each other,” he said.
“Sometimes if I’m in the middle of a very, very sensitive meeting, I don’t take the call right then; I wait. But I thought it would be kind of nice if I took it at that point, and I’d done that before in engagements, and I didn’t realize it would create any kind of controversy,” he said.
Do Rush’s Senate Friends Still Think ‘There’s Nothing Inflammatory About Anything’ He Says?
Do Rush’s Senate Friends Still Think ‘There’s Nothing Inflammatory About Anything’ He Says?
Last week, 72 senators voted to condemn an ad by MoveOn.org with a resolution repudiating “any effort to attack the honor and integrity” of “all members of the United States Armed Forces.”
On the Senate floor and in the press, Sen. John Cornyn, who introduced the bill, was vitriolic in his rhetoric towards the ad, calling it a “a despicable political attack” that “crossed a historic line of decency.” He was joined in raucous condemnation by his Senate colleagues:
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY): “This amendment gives our colleagues a chance to distance themselves from these despicable tactics, distance themselves from the notion that some group has them on a leash.”
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT): “It is MoveOn that is the disgrace. And I think it is important that the entire Congress publicly repudiate these absurd charges.”
During the September 26 edition of his radio show, right-wing standard bearer Rush Limbaugh claimed that service members who support U.S. withdrawal from Iraq are actually “phony soldiers.” On the House floor last night, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) asked if those “who showed so much outrage towards MoveOn.org…will hold Rush Limbaugh to the same standard?”
There is a particular onus for Cornyn, McConnell and Hatch to put themselves on the record regarding Limbaugh, considering the fond relationship they’ve had with him in the past:
- “It dawned on me that Daschle’s probably never listened to Rush Limbaugh. I mean, there’s nothing particularly inflammatory about anything Rush Limbaugh says,” said McConnell in 2002. [Fox News Sunday 11/24/02]
- In 2002, Limbaugh headlined a fundraiser for Cornyn “where he predictably lambasted Democrats and liberals and helped raise almost $200,000″ for the soon-to-be Senator. “We need a Republican senate,” Limbaugh said at the event. [San Antonio Express-News 9/22/02]
- “I thank my father in heaven every day for people like you, Rush Limbaugh and others,” Hatch told Hannity in 2002 [Newhouse News Service 11/21/02]
Several Democratic members of Congress have already denounced Limbaugh’s comments and the White House is distancing itself from him. But Rush is refusing to apologize.
Will Cornyn, McConnell and Hatch step up and hold their friend Rush to the same standard they laid out in their “Sense of the Senate” resolution?
UPDATE: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is calling on Limbaugh to apologize, telling Time.com’s Ana Marie Cox that “it reflects very poorly on him” and “he would be well advised to retract it and apologize.”
UPDATE II: Mitt Romney’s camp has now weighed in on Limbaugh’s comment, saying that “Romney would disagree with the negative characterization of those men and women who serve with honor and distinction in the United States Military.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll