Blackwater's Dark Side?

Keeping up with the Blackwater saga has been one of my favorite hobbies ever since this outfit made it into Iraq.

Published on Sunday, December 13, 2009 by CommonDreams.org
The Blackness of Blackwater
by Christopher Brauchli

How now, you secret, black and midnight hags! - Shakespeare, Macbeth

The good news for Blackwater fans is that things are not as bleak as might at first appear. Blackwater has more lives than the victims of its blunders. Earlier this year, I erroneously suggested that Blackwater might very soon be leaving Iraq since it had been told to leave by the Iraqi government. It turned out that the Iraq government lacked the authority to tell Blackwater what to do. Herewith a brief history.

A congressional report found that Blackwater guards were involved in almost 200 shootings in Iraq between 2005 and 2007. Included among them was a 2007-shooting spree that left 17 Iraqi civilians dead. Following that event Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki demanded that Blackwater leave the country. Believing (mistakenly) that he had the authority to determine whether a given contractor could work in Iraq or not he said: "The Iraqi government is responsible for its citizens, and it cannot be accepted for a security company to carry out a killing." George Bush, who was accustomed to making all the arrangements for the Iraq war, ignored Mr. al-Maliki and extended Blackwater's contract for another year. Bowed, but not defeated, Iraq did not give up trying to rid itself of the Blackwater scourge.

On January 1, 2009 the new Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) between the U.S. and Iraq took effect. That agreement provided that Iraq had the "primary right to exercise jurisdiction over United States contractors and United States contractor employees." On January 28, 2009 Iraq said it would not issue Blackwater a license to continue operating in Iraq. Maj. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, a spokesman for the Iraqi interior ministry said: "Those companies that don't have license, such as Blackwater, should leave Iraq immediately." Alaa Al-Taia, an Interior Ministry official said: "There are many marks against this company, specifically that they have a bad history and have been involved in the killing of so many civilians." Iraq probably thought that would be the end of Blackwater in Iraq. It was wrong.

The Obama administration said Blackwater is a State Department contractor and SOFA only gives Iraq jurisdiction over contractors "who are in Iraq to supply goods, services, and security in Iraq to or on behalf of the United States Forces . . . ." Expounding on that a State Department diplomatic security official said: "The purpose and mission of the Department of State's private security contractors is limited to protection of US diplomats and diplomatic facilities only and is defensive in nature." And so Blackwater continued its work providing "aviation services" in Iraq.

Blackwater worked throughout the spring and early summer and on July 29th its contract was extended by the Obama administration with an agreement to pay it an additional $20 million, bringing the total amount it received for "aviation services" to $187 million and its total for Iraq work to more than $1 billion. The July extension was to end on September 3 when its role was to be assumed by other defense contractors. On September 1 it was learned that its contract would be extended indefinitely to enable the handover of its work to the successor company to proceed more smoothly. When she learned of the extension, Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of Illinois issued a statement saying: "Given the company's history of massive abuses and misconduct, I believe it is inappropriate for the United States government to continue doing business with this firm." One of these days Blackwater will be out of Iraq. It needn't be depressed at the thought of leaving. That's because it has Afghanistan at its disposal and Afghanistan is a gold mine for private contractors.

As of March 2009 there were approximately 70, 000 private contractors working in Afghanistan whereas there were only 48,000 U.S soldiers in that country. According to a Congressional Research Study, the ratio of contractors to soldiers is the highest it's been in any conflict in the history of the United States.

Among the private contractors is, not surprisingly, Blackwater. It provides diplomatic security for State Department people under the name "US Training Center" and does Defense Department work under the name "Paravant LLC. " Paravant has continued the proud tradition established by Blackwater in Iraq of killing civilians. According to the Nation, one of Blackwater's subsidiaries in Afghanistan is under investigation for the shooting of two Afghan civilians in May.
When Congresswoman Schakowsky learned of its contract in Afghanistan she wrote Secretaries Clinton and Gates urging them "not to award further contracts to Xe [Blackwater's new name] and its affiliates and to review all existing contracts with this company." As of this writing she had not received a response. In her concern she was joined by Sonali Kolhatkar, author of Bleeding Afghanistan: Washington, Warlords and the Propaganda of Silence. Commenting on Blackwater's presence in Afghanistan she said: "If they build the same record of killing civilians in Afghanistan that they had in Iraq, it will cement the Afghan resistance even further against the U.S. occupation." She's right. Someone should let the President know.

Christopher Brauchli can be emailed at brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu. For political commentary see his web page at http://humanraceandothersports.com
© Copyrighted 1997-2009
www.commondreams.org

" Cash for Clunklers" Breaks Down..

... and this is going to be somewhat of an embarrassment for the Obama administration.
The " cash for clunkers " program had just gotten started this past Monday, with some $950 million dollars of taxpayer cash and the cash has already been used up! I guess that the government hadn't counted on the program being so popular as it is.
This leaves the Obama team having to search for some more cash in order to keep the program active. Auto dealers have let the government know that the funds are gone and this little problem also has the dealers concerned because they are worried that the funds will not be around in order to complete some of the deals that are already in the works.

Calls to suspend the plan came after auto dealers warned the government
that it was in danger of losing count of how many trades had been made. Since
the program was to run as long as there was money left in the $950 million pool,
dealers have been concerned the fund could run dry before they were
reimbursed for all their deals — which require them to junk the clunker.
The plan offering owners of old cars and trucks $3,500 or $4,500 toward
a new, more-efficient vehicle has proven wildly popular, with 22,782 trades
certified by federal officials since Monday. But the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration told dealers Wednesday that a vast majority of
transactions submitted were being rejected for incomplete or illegible
paperwork.

A survey of 2,000 dealers by the National Automobile Dealers
Association, the results of which were obtained by McClatchy Newspapers,
found about 25,000 deals not yet approved by NHTSA, or about 13 trades per
store. With 23,005 dealers asking to be part of the program, auto dealers
may have already arranged the sale of more than the 250,000 vehicles that federal officials expected the plan to generate. http://www.tampabay.com/incoming/article1023508.ece

Several Michigan lawmakers have vowed to press for more money for the program, which had originally been set for $4 billion. But Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has said she would block additional money unless the program was changed to boost the gains in fuel economy between old and new models.

Maybe the Congress could take back some of the casg given to the big brokerage firms and hand it over to this program. This would be a stimulus that the people of America can live with, seeing that the cash is actually going in at the bottom and then working its way up throughout the economic chain.

Economy

Okay, here's the deal people. I'm at a library on one of their computers. I have a fifteen minute time limit on this thing so there will not be a post today. One more week and my own stuff will be ready to go again. YES!
I'll have a few things tomorrow to say about Obama's health care plan, and it will not be to nice.
Have a great day!!

Obama And The Federal Reserve

Published on Friday, June 19, 2009 by The Nation
Don't Cede More Economic Authority to Unaccountable Fed
by John Nichols

The reviews are in on Barack Obama's plan to address the crisis of Wall Street speculation and casino capitalism that has dramatically increased the gap between working Americans and the rich, created pressure for the deindustrialization of the United States and depression of wages and income for workers and farmers and created a nasty banking crisis.

Though even Obama acknowledges that this is the big one –- the issue that as much as anything led Americans to elect him last fall –- his "financial overhaul plan" did not merit above-the-fold coverage on the front page of The New York Times, the country's "newspaper of record." Two stories from Tehran and one on a poll about health care reform held the top spots. The overhaul merited only a feature suggesting –- correctly -- that there was "only a hint of Roosevelt" in Obama's plan.

In other words, for the great mass of Americans there will be no new "New Deal." To be sure, there's some good stuff here: creation of a new agency to help protect consumers of "financial products" and some stronger transparency requirements, a few more rules regarding banks and mortgage-backed securities. "But," as Times writer Joe Nocera notes, "it's what the plan doesn't do that is most notable." Nocera focuses, appropriately enough, on the failure of the administration to do much about the problem –- for taxpayers and for democracy –- of banks that are "too big to fail."

But the real concern ought not be focused on what this seemingly tepid plan fails to do.

The real concern is what it does.

The plan dramatically increases the authority and reach of the Federal Reserve, an already too powerful and unaccountable institution that will -- to the delight of the administration's "Fed men": Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and administration economic adviser Lawrence Summers -- become what the Wall Street Journal says will be "the nation's most powerful financial overseer."

"The proposal, if passed into law, would represent one of the biggest changes ever in the Fed's role," explains Journal writer Sudeep Reddy. "The central bank would win power to monitor risks across the financial system, and sweeping authority to examine any firm that could threaten financial stability, even if the Fed wouldn't normally supervise the institution. The nation's biggest and most interconnected firms would be subject to heightened oversight by the central bank."

In announcing the plan, President Obama claimed "that lines of responsibility and accountability are clear" with regard to the new authority being placed in the Fed's hands.

That is a ridiculous statement.

The Fed is famously unaccountable and resistant to transparency. Even Geithner acknowledged in his Thursday morning session with the Senate Banking Committee that there is a need to look at reforming the Fed's lax governance structure.

But don't expect Geithner of others in the administration to take a lead when it comes to fixing the Fed, an agency that zealously guards –- for logical reasons, as its track record is one of frequent missteps and failures on an epic scale. As Senate Banking Committee chair Chris Dodd said after reviewing the central bank's significant flaws, "There's not a lot of confidence in the Fed at this point, and I'm stating the obvious."

What should be obvious to everyone is that Congress needs to get a grip on the Fed –- which is structured in a manner so that it faces little or no congressional oversight -- before it allows Obama's proposal to advance.

So says Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, the dissident Democrat who responded to Obama's plan by declaring that: "Before Congress gives the Fed any new authority, we must thoroughly examine the Fed's response to our current economic crisis."

Noted Kucinich:

Since August 2007 the Fed has intervened in the economy in an extraordinary way, as a result ballooning their balance sheet from $847 billion to more than $2 trillion. Yet, we still don't know what the Fed has done or who got the money. That is why I introduced the bipartisan HR 2424, which would grant the GAO the authority to audit the Fed's response to our nation's economic crisis, a response that has dwarfed the $700 billion TARP program by more than 2 to 1.
Before we grant the Fed any new authority, we must demand greater transparency from the Fed; an earnest and open audit of the Federal Reserve's response to the economic crisis would be a significant step in the right direction. We can't continue to let the Fed operate within a black box.

Kucinich has proposed HR 2424, a piece of legislation that would amend United States Code "to authorize reviews by the Comptroller General of the United States of any credit facility established by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or any Federal reserve bank during the current financial crisis, and for other purposes."

Several progressive Democrats and old-right Republicans, including Texas Congressman Ron Paul, have cosponsored Kucinich's measure. Additionally, Paul has proposed H.R. 1207, which would amend the bill "to reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States and the manner in which such audits are reported, and for other purposes."

A majority of House members –- 234, so far, ranging from the most progressive Democrats to the most conservative Republicans -- have signed on as cosponsors of this necessary legislation.

This is one of those issues that makes sense to any honest representative, no matter what the party or what the ideology. Our elected and reasonably accountable federal officials cannot cede more control over the U.S. economy to the unelected and unaccountable Fed without auditing, reviewing and reforming how the Federal Reserve System operates.

© 2009 The Nation
John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor of The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin. A co-founder of the media reform organization Free Press, Nichols is is co-author with Robert W. McChesney of Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy - from The New Press. Nichols' latest book is The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism.

© Copyrighted 1997-2009
www.commondreams.org

Presidential Tracking Poll

According to Friday's Rasmussen polling, President Obama has the approval of 34% of Americans who strongly approve of the way that Obama is performing his duties as President. On the other side of the fence, 33% of Americans strongly disapprove of the way in which Obama is running his show.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 34% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-three percent (33%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of +1. Only once (two weeks ago) has his rating been lower (see trends).

Seventy percent (70%) of Americans say they will not be impacted by the closure of GM and Chrysler dealerships. Only 9% are Very Likely to feel the pain.

According to , President Obama has the approval of 33% of Americans so far as his job performance is concerned.24% of those survayed strongly dissapprove of the President performance at this point in time.

Thirty-one percent (31%) say the President’s economic stimulus package has helped the economy while 27% believe it has hurt. Fifty-two percent (52%) are now worried that the government will do too much while responding to the economic crunch.

Overall, 58% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far. Forty-one percent (41%) disapprove. For more Presidential barometers, see Obama By the Numbers and recent demographic highlights.

How long will the honeymoon last? Obama will stay in good standing with Ameas long as the economy doesn't sink to much farther into a hole. If things work out according to plan, Obama will manage to stay in our good graces.

Obama's Approval Ratings

It would seem that President Obama's approval ratings are holding steady, but, I think that he is suffering among some of the Democrats. We all know that he is among Republicans.
37% of voters approve of his role as President so far as his performance goes. 30% do not like the way that he is running things. I am one of those.
77% of the liberal voters think that Obama is doing a wonderful job, while only 15% of the conservative group think so. In fact, as should be expected, 54% of the conservatives actually disapprove of Obama's performance. I am shocked!

Overall, 57% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far while 43% disapprove. The President’s overall approval rating has stayed between 54% and 58% every day since April 1 and every day but one for the past two months.

You can view the polling results at rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
i'll certainly be glad when I get this link crap fixed!! This shit pisses me off! Have a great day everyone!

4 Of 5 Americans Approve Of Obama's Transition

and those are some pretty impressive numbers!

Eighty-two percent of those questioned in a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday morning approve of the way the Obama is handling his presidential transition. That's up 3 points from when we asked this question at the beginning of December. Fifteen percent of those surveyed disapprove of the way Obama's handling his transition, down 3 points from our last poll.

The 82 percent approval is higher than then President-elect George W. Bush 8 years ago, who had a 65 percent transition approval rating, and Bill Clinton, at 67 percent in 1992.

"Barack Obama is having a better honeymoon with the American public than any incoming president in the past three decades. He's putting up better numbers, usually by double digits, than Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, or either George Bush on every item traditionally measured in transition polls," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

The poll also suggests that the public approves of the President-elect's cabinet nominees, with 56 percent of those questioned saying Obama's appointments have been outstanding or above average, with 32 percent feeling the picks have been average, and 11 percent saying Obama's choices have been below average or poor.

A third say that their impression of Obama has gotten better since the election, with only 8 percent saying their opinion has gotten worse.

Presidents usually start to lose support once they assume office and start making the tough decisions. But with eight in ten currently approving of Obama, he can give away 20 or 30 points, estimates Holland, and still have a majority of the country on his side.

With the mess that Obama will be inheriting from the Bush fiasco, he will need all of the support that he can get.