Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Going Out of Business: How Much Longer Will Iraq Be for Sale?

Posted by ZP Heller, Brave New Films at 2:57 PM on June 19, 2008.


Congress could end interrogation for profit.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Video in your
mailbox!

 

"Interrogation for Profit." That was the title of the lead Op-Ed in last Thursday's New York Times. It's a phrase straight of Brave New Films' documentary Iraq for Sale, and an issue we've been calling attention to for the last few years. But while it's gratifying to see a growing dialogue about how the Bush administration has shirked all accountability regarding the detainment and interrogation of Iraqi prisoners by hiring mercenary private contractors, this fight is far from over.

It is true, as the Op-Ed pointed out, that Congress is finally pushing to prohibit private contractors and limit the use of security guards in combat areas. According to CQ, the House has already passed such a ban and the Senate is set to consider its own version, which has been tacked onto a $612.5 billion defense authorization bill. Not surprisingly, however, President Bush is already threatening to veto, using the age-old boilerplate that banning private interrogators "would unduly limit the United States' ability to obtain intelligence needed to protect Americans from attack."

Protect Americans from attack? Once again, Bush is painting himself as our concerned father, though by now he's become an abusive parent. By suggesting that only the father can safeguard his children (us) from the supposedly imminent threat of terrorism, Bush is preying on our collective vulnerabilities in a post-9/11 world. For the last seven years, this has been Bush's chief line of defense, and it's a diabolically clever one because it has enabled his administration to run this war with zero accountability.

For what would happen if Congress were successful in banning or even limiting the use of private contractors? It would effectively mark the beginning of an end to the Bush administration and its shadow army of over 180,000 private contractors working for the U.S. in Iraq. It would mean that when there is another incident like last September's shooting in Nisour Square--in which Blackwater guards were accused of brutally killing 17 Iraqi civilians without any provocation--the Bush administration wouldn't be able to pour hundreds of millions more into "protective services" contracts for Blackwater and other companies. Perhaps this legislation would even open up the floodgates, signaling the corporate press to examine the Bush administration's reliance on contractors and facilitating the prosecution of contractors charged with lethal conduct.

This legislation could also mean accountability for those contractors who have profited enormously from the outsourcing of intelligence gathering. Our government wouldn't be able to continue outsourcing 70 percent of its intelligence budget. That colossal number, according to Tim Shorrock, author of Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Intelligence Outsourcing, is equivalent to over $42 billion a year that our governments hands over to a "'secret army' of corporate vendors." These are profiteers like CACI International, whose interrogators faced no repercussions when they were accused of abusing Abu Ghraib prisoners with attacks dogs. Instead, the government awarded CACI a three-year $156 million contract to provide more army intelligence training and information technology support.

Proponents of the Congressional legislation to ban contractors are correct in pointing out that this war and the interrogation of Iraqi prisoners ought to be the responsibility of highly-trained military personnel, not poorly-prepared contractors whose only goal is to make profits. And while Bush will likely veto this bill, hopefully Congress will listen to Iraq for Sale, NY Times Op-Eds, and the bologsphere, and remain undaunted in its pursuit of oversight. At the very least, here's hoping these calls for accountability can drown out future admonitions from our abusive father.

Digg!

Tagged as: iraq war, war profiteers, caci, george bush, blackwater, iraq for sale

ZP Heller is the editorial director of Brave New Films. He has written for The American Prospect, AlterNet, The Philadelphia Inquirer, and The Huffington Post, covering everything from politics to pop culture.


McCain-Palin Rally Attendees Say Incredible, Ridiculous Things
File this one under the "give 'em enough rope" column.
Post by Seth Colter Walls. October 10, 2008.
Donna Brazile: "I'm Not Going to the Back of the Bus!"
An impassioned speech on racial politics from last week's New Yorker festival.
Post by ZP Heller. October 10, 2008.
John Cusack Tackles War Profiteers Today on Meet the Bloggers
Today at 1pm ET/10am PT.
Post by ZP Heller. October 10, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
JUST A REMINDER
Posted by: master09 on Jun 20, 2008 1:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well America look as though you have lost your republic and the "chickens have come home to roost"; who was it that said we have created a republic see if you can keep it and if we give up our freedom for security we deserve neither. I don’t know about you but when I think about all of the young people that have died so that these criminals could make money this country should be ashame; but what really make me sick is that so many Americans are going to vote for a republican and finally destroy what little future we have left. This is no idle chit-chat the republicans are people that believe in absolute power and they will continue to use America and any other country for that matter to meet their needs and wants.Republicians are truely a criminal class Iam willing to bet that 99 -100 % of Halibution,kbr,blackwater.oil excutive,wall street,investment bankers to name few will vote republicians. One other thing they want us to belive that obama lack experience, if experience counts for so much why is this country in such a fucked up shape what happened to all those highly educated experience experts; to busy stuffing their bank accounts I bet; Experience without sound judgement = iraq,nuf said?
There is doubt that GWB is a moron and he is president of these united states; did someone forgot to check his experience card? One thing I will say for GWB he did beat John McCain for the republician nomintion in 2004. So after GWB fisrt term and with all of his experience what did he do, he went to war and bankrupt the GODDAM COUNTRY; am I making any sense here?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If the Bush administration is the abuser
Posted by: Lauren on Jun 23, 2008 9:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Then big media is the mother pimp, selling her own children to whom ever pays her bills.

Why did my congress woman repeatedly vote FOR this? Her job is over sight. Every vote is for the purpose of over sight. She votes to pay for this, I want to know WHY.

The media refuses to talk about it.


Like a woman delivering her own children to be abused, don't talk about it. Sick, sick, sick. I say talk about it.

Say NO!

It needs to be on TV.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New York Times
Posted by: Lauren on Jun 23, 2008 9:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Has this in the linked editorial last week, I didn't read it until now, but I saw them talk about on TV. Thanks for the link. An extract -

The White House, of course, is threatening a veto, citing its all-purpose plaint that the interrogator ban would hobble the nation’s “ability to obtain intelligence needed to protect Americans from attack.” In leading the House to passage of the ban, Representative David Price, Democrat of North Carolina, laid bare the folly of using for-profit gunslingers to undertake the highly sensitive task of handling and questioning detainees.

Anyone interested in protecting America, Mr. Price pointed out, must see the wisdom of using interrogators “who are well trained, who fall within a clear chain of command and who have a sworn loyalty to the United States” — not to some corporate bottom line.


And they don't ask any questions about impeachment? Why not? Zero news stories. Why not? The issue JUMPS off the page.

I would call that a conspiracy to cover an awful lot of criminal behavior up. It is because they are in on it together, committing these crimes.

Look what they have done already. What are they going to do next? Blow something up to scare us. Mail anthrax to the more intrepid reporters?

It is time to impeach. The definition of impeach is to speak out against, isn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]