If They'd Only Investigated Themselves as Much as They Investigate Blackwater. . .

If the new administration had investigated its own appointees as well as its partisans have been investigating Blackwater, perhaps our new president would have avoided some of the big tax-cheat scandals in his cabinet picks.

Amy Ridenour of the National Center for Public Policy Research in Washington takes note:

Remember the ultra-mini Blackwater tax scandal of 2007? In it, liberal Senators Barack Obama, John Kerry and Dick Durbin kicked up a fuss because Blackwater treated security guards it employed in Iraq as independent contractors (making them responsible for paying their own taxes) rather than as employees whose income and payroll taxes were deducted from their paychecks.

Obama and Durbin sent a letter to Bush Administration Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson complaining that misclassification of employees as independent contractors contributes to the 'tax gap' (that is, the difference between the amount of taxes legally owned to the federal government versus the amount collected), and seeking a full investigation into Blackwater.

Fast forward 15 months. After sticking behind a Treasury Secretary nominee with 'tax gap' problems of his own, Barack Obama is pushing for an HHS Secretary, Tom Daschle, who somehow managed to leave $83,333 in consulting income off his 2007 tax return, deducted $14,963 in non-existent charitable contributions from his 2007 tax return, and accepted $73,031 worth of car and driver services in 2005, $89,129 worth in 2006 and $93,096 worth in 2007 without it occurring to him over three solid years that these benefits are taxable income.

And then there's the unresolved question of possible tax liability for luxury travel paid for by others. Of the Daschle nomination, John Kerry is saying 'there is a completely understandable, absolutely acceptable and rational explanation for what happened here.' (Blackwater had a stronger case than does Daschle, but never mind.)

For his part, Dick Durbin is assuring the country, 'If all you knew about Tom Daschle was that he used to be a Senator, and he made a mistake and had to pay over $100,000 in back taxes, you have a right to be skeptical, even cynical. But if you know Tom Daschle, you know better.' Where is the concern for the 'tax gap' now?>

The bottom line, of course, is that our leaders should not tolerate tax cheats. At the same time, the public should no tolerate politicians who use the tax laws as political weapons against people and companies they don't like. Blackwater's practice of hiring contractors is entirely lawful and ethical, but certain politicians wanted to beat up the company anyway. Those same politicians' excuses for Daschle and other obvious tax cheats shows how insincere they are. They have destroyed any credibility they might have had in criticizing Blackwater, and hopefully we've heard the last of them on this subject.

Kerry's Words Suddenly Matter

Senator John Kerry's doing a lot of new posturing against Blackwater, saying the State Department should not renew its contract to provide high-end personal protection services to US officials - including visiting senators and congressmen - in Iraq.

“The era of Blackwater must finally end. The incoming Obama administration can proceed with the knowledge that even the Bush administration acknowledges that outsourcing overseas security to private firms like Blackwater is a mistake,” Kerry says.

Kerry's words matter now, because the Massachusetts senator is replacing Vice President-Elect Joe Biden as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which authorizes the money for the State Department to pay Blackwater.

Amnesty International: Truth or Propaganda?

Is Amnesty International still interested in the truth about human rights, or has it become so politicized that we can safely ignore it?

It's a legitimate question, because Amnesty has subverted itself by jumping to conclusions formed by others with a political agenda, rather than getting to the truth. Amnesty used to be at the cutting edge. Now it's out of date, the tail of the dog, fat and lazy and politicized.

As we see in the entry below, Amnesty has been so out of touch on the Blackwater/Nisoor Square controversy that it didn't even know that the federal government is readying to prosecute guards for the September 16, 2007 incident.

Further into Amnesty's Nisoor anniversary "report," we find that the foundation really wants to put Blackwater out of business - an agenda set by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-Cal.) and moonbat writer Jeremy Scahill of The Nation.

Here's what Amnesty says in its "report": "Amnesty International USA has demanded that the State Department suspend contracts with contractors like Blackwater until it is clear that proper vetting mechanisms are in place to prevent further abuses."

Does Amnesty even know what the vetting mechanisms are? It gives no indication (they are amply documented among the more than 350 entries on this blog).

Waxman and Scahill can't seem to get much support from among fellow Blackwater critics. Scahill pointedly asked Senator Jim Webb (D-Va.) and Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) if they would endorse pulling Blackwater's contracts, and both said no. Both said Blackwater should compete for contracts. Even Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has privately said, as US News and World Report revealed, that he thinks Blackwater is "getting a bad rap."

But in Amnesty's case, it shouldn't matter what the politicians say. The organization made a good name for itself by sticking to facts and not jumping to politicized conclusions. That was the old Amnesty International. The new Amnesty isn't worth listening to any more.

(Graphic courtesy of thedissidentfrogman.com)

Key Support for Blackwater In Senate

Sources: Obama quote reported in July 25, 2008 US News & World Report: Webb and Kerry quotes elicited and made possible by Jeremy Scahill, DemocracyNow! website.

Senator Kerry Says He's OK with Blackwater

Senator John Kerry has joined Senator Jim Webb in rebuffing calls for the US to ban Blackwater. Like Webb, Kerry is a sharp critic of Blackwater - but says that the company should be allowed to compete for contracts.

Kerry's comment further isolates House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, who is the only senior member of Congress to say he wants to force Blackwater out of the government contracting business.

The Massachusetts senator indicates he has no problem with Blackwater's security services in Iraq, as long as the company operates under the same rules as everyone else.

Anti-Blackwater gadfly Jeremy Scahill posed questions to congressmen and senators at the Democratic National Convention to elicit comments against the firm. Here's the transcript as copied from the DemocracyNow! website:

JEREMY SCAHILL: Senator Kerry, should Blackwater be banned? Senator Kerry, you’ve been aggressive on Blackwater recently. Do you think they should be banned?
SEN. JOHN KERRY: I’m not having a press conference right now. I’ve got to get to an airport, because I have to go to a funeral.
JEREMY SCAHILL: Just answer the one question. I know you know about this.
SEN. JOHN KERRY: I need to—I need—I’m not doing this right know. That’s all.
JEREMY SCAHILL: It’s a simple yes or no. Do you think they should be banned—Blackwater, the mercenary company—from operating in Iraq?
SEN. JOHN KERRY: No, I don’t think they should be banned. I think they need to operate under rules that apply to the military and everybody else.
JEREMY SCAHILL: But it’s OK if Senator Obama continues to use them, if he wins the presidency?
SEN. JOHN KERRY: You guys, I’m not—this is not the moment.

Wanting It Both Ways: Senators Critical of Blackwater Want Assurances It Will Continue Serving

Senators who have been critical of Blackwater are now concerned that it might quit the security business in Iraq, and want assurances that the company will continue.

They've been beating the stuffing out of the company, accusing it of all kinds of wrongdoing. But then, when the company's leaders say that the security contracts aren't worth all the heat from Congress and the media, the senators worry that Blackwater might actually leave them high and dry.

They add, with a twist, that recent news reports suggesting that the North Carolina-based company might get out of the diplomatic security business are all the more reason for the State Department not to be so dependent on private contractors.

The Federal Times reports,

Given these intentions, the senators want to know whether State has been assured Blackwater will fulfill its recently renewed multimillion-dollar security contract. They also want to know what the department plans to do to shore up its Diplomatic Security Service and lessen its reliance on private security contractors.

They cite recent news reports that quote State officials as saying the other two private security contractors providing services under State’s Worldwide Personnel Protective Services contract would be unable to take on Blackwater’s work if the company pulled out.

Senators Bob Casey (D-Penn.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) co-signed a letter of concerns to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Commentators look at motives for attacking Blackwater

Fox News commentators discuss the motives of Congressman Waxman, and senators like John Kerry, for attacking Blackwater. Excerpts of the October 31 discussion between Brit Hume and Charles Krauthammer follow:

KRAUTHAMMER: One of three things happened [at the September 16 Nisoor Square incident]. Either there was shooting, in which case the response of the guards was appropriate. There was not, but they imagined or thought or had the impression that they were under attack, in which case it is a tragic error, it requires discipline, but not locking them away. And the third option is that these are psychopaths who are itching to kill civilians wantonly while running protection for Americans in convoys.

The way that Democrats have attacked these guards and this operations implies—I think it seems as if they are assuming that third option, and acting accordingly.

Look, this is a proxy way of attacking the U.S military. The Democrats learned 30 years ago that if you attack American soldiers in war the way that John Kerry did 30 years ago, you suffer politically for 30 years and more. And nobody does that in this war.

But these contractors, who are called "mercenaries," are fair game. And it is a way to actually do that.

I would call them honorable Americans earning a living in a way that is helping a war effort, and at high risk to themselves.

HUME: They are protecting the hindquarters of members of Congress who visit over there all the time, not one of whom has had a hair on his or her head harmed.

KRAUTHAMMER: That is absolutely right.

HUME: They have, however, lost some 30 of their own.

KRAUTHAMMER: I think 30 of their own have died.

Kerry swiftboats Blackwater

Senator John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat who accused American troops of deliberate atrocities in Vietnam and of "terrorising" the women and children of Iraq, is now going after Blackwater.

He's using his chairmanship of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship to follow up Congressman Henry Waxman's accusations that Blackwater violalted tax laws by paying its contractors as contractors and not as employees.

A muckraking blog has posted what it reports to be the letter Kerry sent to Blackwater CEO Erik Prince that echoes Waxman and requests documents from the security provider. The letter was apparently leaked from Kerry's office, as it appeared on the blog the same day it was dated, on October 26.

In a CBS "Face the Nation" interview two years ago, Kerry echoed his infamous 1971 Jane Fonda-style accusations, accusing American troops in Iraq of "going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs."