Showing posts with label New York Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York Times. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Small Town Supports Blackwater Guard

The town of Dickens, Texas is located in a vast swath of openness between Lubbock, Wichita Falls and Abilene. At the 2000 census it reported a population of 332. This town might not make the evening news too often, but it's standing by one of its native sons, Blackwater contractor Paul Slough.

Last September, while part of a Blackwater diplomatic security convoy, Slough and his companions came under fire at Nisoor Square in Baghdad. Some in the liberal media have called the Blackwater guards murderers for returning the enemy fire. But the folks of Dickens would never make such a claim.

"Most of Dickens considers Slough a patriot and a hero," writes Lubbock Online. "We are all very proud of him," said Dickens County Sheriff Ken Brendle. "That boy was always a leader. He's not a murderer."

"We're proud of PJ," said Andy Zarate, whose son Michael was good friends with Slough during high school. "We stand behind him 100 percent."

Slough played football, was active in Future Farmers of America and served on the student council while at Patton Springs High. After graduating from high school he joined the Army, participated in several deployments - including to Boznia - and was honorably discharged. He then served in Iraq with the Texas National Guard. Having completed his military service, Slough joined Blackwater's security operations.

Paul Slough is the only member of the Blackwater convoy to have his name released to the public. All the documents released by the FBI, other government entities and Blackwater have referred to the participants in the events by anonymous numbers. But the New York Times felt the need to leak Turret Gunner Number 3's identity. So now Slough, having come under the physical fire of insurgents, is now coming under the metaphorical fire of anti-war elements.

Tookie Cash, who recently retired as Dickens County clerk and knew Slough when he was growing up, said, "It's a shame. Our boys are putting their lives on the line and this is what they get in return."

Monday, May 19, 2008

Entrepreneurial Culture Keeps Blackwater Growing

TradingMarkets.Com carried a very balanced and interesting article on Blackwater, discussing the company's history and ethos. “Blackwater is thriving because of its aggressive and entrepreneurial business culture and a strong network of… connections,” they write. “The company has hired extensively from the top levels of the CIA, Defense Department and State Department, and named the former No. 2 official at the CIA to its Board of Advisors.” Looking back to the early days of the company, they explain:

Blackwater Lodge and Training Center was the brainchild of Al Clark, a Navy SEAL and instructor. Dissatisfied with the Navy's rented training grounds, Clark told colleagues he would open his own when he left the service. Clark hooked up with Erik Prince, a young Navy SEAL who shared his interest in training.... When the two broke ground on Blackwater Lodge and Training Center in Currituck and Camden counties in northeast North Carolina in 1997, the timing was good. The military had closed and consolidated bases after the Cold War and neglected training facilities. Blackwater built the largest shooting facility in the country, with indoor ranges, mock urban landscapes, a 1,200-yard firing range, driving tracks and a lake for naval training. Blackwater boasted it could design any sort of training a client might want. The location was excellent, within four hours of the Pentagon in Washington, and Fort Bragg and Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. The country's biggest naval base in Norfolk, Va., was less than an hour away.

But Blackwater's service really began after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the launching of the Global War on Terror:

The CIA was stretched thin in the aftermath of Sept. 11 and the invasion of Afghanistan. Blackwater landed a… contract to provide security at CIA stations in Afghanistan…. The contract was not a big one; it called for 16 Blackwater security personnel, plus dozens of Afghan guards hired locally.... In August 2003, Blackwater won a… contract to guard Paul Bremer, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority and probably the top assassination target of insurgents. The contract called for helicopters to fly Bremer around Iraq. Blackwater was well positioned for that; the company had bought a Florida aviation company four months earlier.

Blackwater's patriotism and business acumen converge when it comes to identifying new threats to the United States and pouncing on them. “They are very good and very savvy at identifying market needs and pushing hard to enter into those markets, even before clients have recognized the need,” Peter Singer, an expert on private military contractors said.

For all the controversy, Blackwater has an unblemished record on its main task in Iraq: None of the diplomats in the company's care have been killed or wounded. Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy recently told The New York Times that the diplomats could not function in Iraq without Blackwater: “If the contractors were removed, we would have to leave Iraq.”

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Iranian Press Condemns Blackwater - Oh No!

The Associated Press isn't the only one abandoning journalistic integrity when it comes to reporting on Blackwater. In fact, AP in very good company: the Iranian state-controlled media.

Iran's Press TV describes Blackwater's operations at Nisoor Square on 17 September last year as "an unprovoked shooting spree." Well I'm glad the Iranians have sorted out this difficult matter for us, a matter the FBI is still investigating. (Though Time magazine has reported that a variety of evidence supports Blackwater's account of events.)

The Iranians' journalism is almost laughable; one doesn't expect much more from the mouthpiece of a terrorist-sponsoring theocratic autocracy. But when the Associated Press (along with Reuters, the New York Times and others) use the same sort of non-nonsensically biased language, it's a cause for concern. It's time for more accountability in American journalism.

Friday, April 4, 2008

"Experts" Get It Wrong, VP Gets It Right

Reuters reported yesterday on a conference at New York University School of Law titled "Privatizing Defense: Blackwater, Contractors and American Security." Comparing the comments of various participants with the actual course of events is striking.

With regards to the deaths of 17 Iraqis in a shootout with Blackwater last September, Reuters cited the New York Times as reporting that "an FBI investigation... found at least 14 of the shootings were unjustified." Reuters cites Jeremy Scahill, author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, as going even further, claiming that a military investigation concluded all the deaths were the result of "unjustified and unprovoked fire."

In fact, the FBI's investigation, which began quite late, is still underway. Likewise, no military investigation has been concluded. So in spite of all their alleged journalistic training, Reuters jumps to conclusions, engaging in little more than rumor-mongering.

Who's account most closely matches the actual state of the investigation? Blackwater Vice President Marty Strong's. "Irrespective of The New York Times or any other newspaper saying they think they know what's going on, the FBI is going to complete an official investigation, not one done by the seat of the pants.... At that time we're going to find out exactly what they found out."

On nothing more than their own authority, Reuters reports that Blackwater has "operated with impunity." This runs contrary to the government's own affirmation only a few days ago that Blackwater and other private security contractors are accountable to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and has been unmistakably since 2006.

The suggestion from Scahill and others was that Blackwater's behavior has been irresponsible and unjustified. Though the quotation comes from elsewhere, these experts could easily have been the ones to ask Who drives against traffic in a traffic circle? The answer, quite simply, is the State Department and its contract, which stipulates the aggressive tactics that have made Blackwater famous. (Then again, who ever wrote a news article about all the quite missions going according to plan?)

In light of these trying circumstances, Marty Strong's explanation to the conference was as good as any: "I spent nine months in Iraq, it's a very difficult place."

Friday, November 2, 2007

Blackwater publicist describes getting hosed by New York Times

Here's a great example of how some hostile media outlets twist the facts about Blackwater. Mark Corallo, a former Department of Justice spokesman who did some PR work for Blackwater, gave a lengthy interview to the New York Times. On November 1, the Times ran a story quoting Corallo as speaking in derogatory terms about the company. The reporter pulled a lone quote out of context and ignored all the positive information, Corallo says in a lengthy piece published by National Review Online. The full text appears below:

I woke up Thursday morning, checked the Blackberry, and found an e-mail from a television-producer friend asking about comments attributed to me by the New York Times about Blackwater USA. Remembering my lengthy conversation with a reporter about the security firm, I expected a thank-you call from my former clients. Then I read the story.

I’m not naïve and I’m no rookie in dealing with the media. But when one spends 40 minutes on the phone with a highly respected reporter, singing the praises of a company that does heroic service to our country, one expects those comments to be reflected in the story.When the Times’s John Broder called me about Blackwater, he wanted to know what I made of the company’s recent public-relations push.

My response was that it was long overdue: For far too long, the State Department gagged Blackwater, barring them from defending themselves from unfair attacks in the media and by liberal congressman trying to score political points with the MoveOn.org crowd. I explained that the men of Blackwater were true patriots, heroes who volunteered to go into harm’s way to protect the lives of American diplomats and elected officials, some of whom were attacking the very company that kept them safe overseas. Yet because the antiwar Left (most vocally supported by liberal Democrats in the House and Senate) wanted to score political points, they constantly accused Blackwater of being unaccountable and above the law. Nothing, I said, was further from the truth, and these so-called legislators should be ashamed of themselves for being ignorant of the statutes governing the conduct of security contractors overseas.

I went on at length about the vision and commitment of Blackwater’s founder and owner Erik Prince. Instead of spending the rest of his life relaxing on the interest from a sizeable inheritance, Prince decided to become a Navy Seal. While serving on active duty he realized that the Navy lacked the facilities to conduct the kind of training that would make our soldiers, sailors, and Marines even more proficient and skilled war fighters. When he left active service, he created Blackwater USA and dedicated his life to making America even safer.

I told Broder stories of bravery from Blackwater employees in Iraq, who suffered injury and death to save the lives of the American civilians in their care. I told him about the standards to which Blackwater holds its employees — standards that exceed those of our armed forces. I told him of their dedication to the rule of law and the Constitution.I told him of a cable from a State Department employee who literally watched Blackwater heroes die while rescuing her from enemy attack in Baghdad — how she owed her life to them and would never be able to repay them. I then told him that when Blackwater was being dragged before Henry Waxman’s oversight committee back in February in a blatant effort to help a civil lawsuit, the State Department would not allow them to even quote from that diplomat’s message in order to describe what Blackwater is really about.

I told Broder that our uniformed military are not trained to do personnel security missions — that it would be too costly and a waste of their time and talents. I reminded him that for every soldier deployed forward, it takes eleven support personnel behind them. Blackwater can support 50 security professionals with one support employee back in the States. I told him that for all the talk about the high cost of security contractors, the cost of having our soldiers do the job would be three or four times higher to the taxpayer. I told Broder that I stopped representing Blackwater for a number of reasons, chief among them my inability to help them under the State Department’s gag order. I told him of sitting in a meeting with the State Department’s contracting officer, who told the company’s representatives that if they so much as popped their heads up in the media, he would ruin them.

I did say that — as would be true of just about any corporation — there were some inside Prince’s organization (but not Prince or his senior team) who were unsophisticated in the ways of Washington and didn’t understand or particularly like the congressional-oversight process. I did say that there were a couple of guys who had a “cowboy mentality.” But those comments were in the context of the company’s image — a necessary one for business purposes. Let’s face it, nobody is going to hire a bunch of wimps or trust their lives to guys who aren’t willing to act with speed and determination under fire. So the cowboy tag was a double-edged sword. At the end of my conversation with Mr. Broder, he said that “after this story, the company ought to send you a check.” I told him I didn’t want money from Blackwater. I was just glad that I could finally tell their story, defend them, take a few hard whacks at the elected officials and bureaucrats who were so ungrateful to these brave men who were protecting them from an enemy that draws no distinction between uniformed military and civilians. I’m pretty sure that Dennis Kucinich would not have appreciated the things I said about his ignorant ranting, his uninformed accusations, his general idiocy.

A million people will tell me that I shouldn’t be surprised that the New York Times mischaracterized my comments and omitted 99.9 percent of what I said because it didn’t fit the story the Times wanted to tell. They’ll tell me that I should have expected it and that I should never have trusted a reporter from the country’s leading left-wing newspaper. But I did expect more, and still do.

I’m not holding my breath for a retraction, but I am sorry I ever spoke to the New York Times about Blackwater. Blackwater is a great company that protects Americans in hostile environments. They haven’t lost a single one of the Americans in their care, despite suffering over 30 deaths and countless injuries. They are maligned daily for doing exactly what their government has asked them to do, and they do it better than anyone else in the business. And their main client — the U.S. State Department — refuses to tell the real stories of the real people who owe their lives to these heroes. I’m glad that Blackwater has decided to defend itself, even if it means losing contracts. I’m betting the State Department bureaucrat who threatened to ruin them can’t wait to “review” their contracts — another reason why one of the biggest outrages here is the inability to fire incompetent, abusive career civil servants. So today I’m again left wondering why Erik Prince doesn’t just fold up the tents and head to the beach. I know the answer — same reasons why guys who have seen combat over and over go back and face the fire. Those are reasons that the liberals and the media cannot comprehend.

— Mark Corallo, a consultant with Corallo Comstock, Inc., is a former DOJ spokesman who represented Blackwater in private practice in 2006.

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

The government failed to devise and implement accountability laws. So who's to blame?

When President Clinton and a Republican Congress decided to slash the size of the US military in the 1990s and rely on private contractors to take up the slack, they neglected to update the laws to make all contractors accountable.

President Bush and a Republican Congress failed to fix the problem. Now that the Democrats are in control of both houses on Capitol Hill, whom do they blame?

They don't blame those who make and enforce the nation's laws. Instead, they blame the contractors. The New York Times highlights the legal uncertainties in a "news analysis."

Sunday, October 7, 2007

New York Times unusually positive about Blackwater owner

Not all New York Times coverage of the Blackwater controversy has been hopelessly skewed. In a profile of Blackwater CEO Erik Prince, James Risen strikes a rather balanced tone that has been atypical of the Times' general reporting on the company. Here's how Risen begins in his piece published October 8:

"Erik D. Prince, the crew-cut, square-jawed founder of Blackwater USA, the security contractor now at the center of a political storm in both Washington and Baghdad, is a man seemingly born to play a leading role in the private sector side of the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"He is both a former member of the Navy Seals and the scion of a fabulously wealthy, deeply religious family that is enmeshed in Republican Party politics. As a result, the 38-year-old Mr. Prince stands at the nexus between American Special Operations, which has played such a critical role in the war operations, and the nation’s political and business elite, who have won enormous government contracts as war operations have increasingly been outsourced. . . .

"Unlike many other young men who inherit great wealth, Mr. Prince also struck out on his own and joined the Navy Seals at a time when few other men of his economic class were willing to serve in the military. After his father died and left him a fortune, Mr. Prince’s experience in Special Operations led him to found Blackwater, and he has made a point of hiring other former members of the Navy Seals, including some who now play prominent management roles.

"But now that Blackwater is under scrutiny for its involvement in the Sept. 16 shootings of as many as 17 Iraqis in downtown Baghdad, some critics are questioning whether Mr. Prince’s political connections have propelled the company’s sudden
rise." (Risen then quotes from a Blackwater critic from The Nation, who praises Prince for his military vision but faults him for his politics.)

"Yet supporters say the image of Mr. Prince as a Republican carpetbagger and war profiteer is nothing more than an inaccurate cartoon. 'Republican connections have nothing to do with Blackwater,' said Chris Taylor, a former Blackwater vice president.

"'In the senior positions at Blackwater, there are Democrats,' he added. 'If Erik is a conservative, I never heard anybody say that you have to be a conservative to be here. People need to know just how exceptional a guy he is. He’s very generous, and greatly respected in the company.'"

Robert Young Pelton, a Blackwater critic who is one of the few to have interviewed Prince at length, says "it would be wrong to assume that Mr. Prince’s political
connections account for his success," in Risen's words.

"'It is a mistake to characterize him as his father, or by the right-wing groups his father supported,' Mr. Pelton said. 'Politically, I think he is more of a libertarian. He hates government sloth, even as his company gets most of its business from the government.'"

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Toughest guard duty in Iraq

The New York Times is faulting Blackwater USA for reportedly firing weapons in Iraq at more than twice the rate of other private security providers.

Way down the article, in the 13th paragraph, reporters John M. Broder and James Risen finally tell the reader why: "Blackwater operates in the most violent parts of Iraq and guards the most prominent American diplomats, which some American government officials say explains why it is involved in more shootings than its competitors. The shootings included in the reports include all cases in which weapons are fired, including those meant as warning shots. Others add that Blackwater’s aggressive posture in guarding diplomats reflects the wishes of its client, the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security."

State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack tells the Times that of 1,800 Blackwater escort missions this year, there have been "only a very small fraction, very small fraction, that have been involved in any use of force."

So what's the scandal, then?