I thought the problem was that they got the contract without bidding. Do we know if there is a Bush/Cheney connection?
It's bad from every angle. I don't know about a bush/cheney connection, but there are many, many other folks in the US government and related advisors that need to be looked at when discussing that sort of thing.
I wouldn't think so, bunge. Scroll up and read my opposition to it. I know I don't speak for the AI Right Wing Brigade, but as a highly-visible, oft-quoted and much-loved prominent member of it, my opinion on the matter probably carries much weight among those here who share in your question (AND, as I said, goes a long way toward explaining my horrid "there is right and wrong in the world" stance that so shocks many here).
But seriously: personally I'm not crazy about this contract and this particular outfit.
You answer is pretty clearly in there. I think at one point it's summed up as the "company's culture ."
On another note:
Quote:
What you have here is a Lord of the Flies mentality. Basically you've got a bunch of strong men who are raping and manipulating young girls who have been kidnapped from their homes. Who's the bad guy? Is it the guy who buys the girl to give her freedom, the one who kidnaps her and sells her or the one who liberates her and ends up having sex with her? And what does it mean when the U.S. steps up and says, 'We don't have any jurisdiction'? That's absurd.
Here's another interesting quote:
Quote:
DynCorp leadership was 100 percent in bed with the mafia over there. I didn't get any results from talking to DynCorp officials, so I went to Army CID and I drove around with them, pointing out everyone's houses who owned women and weapons.
In short, it's company-wide, which is not surprising.
I think he should probably have stronger legislation and a system of checks for US use of mercenaries, not to mention how their contracts are rewarded.
DynCorp provides support services to the US military. DynCorp also does the Pentagon's dirty work - ie: performs operations for which Congress will not allow US military personnel to be used.
(DynCorp) are subject to neither US law nor the military code of conduct. They don't count under congressional limits on troop commitments, and they aren't obliged to talk to the media. The government needn't even discuss the details of the agreements: The Pentagon and State Department aren't required to reveal to Congress contracts that are smaller than $50 million, and many of DynCorp's are.
Comments
Originally posted by torifile
I thought the problem was that they got the contract without bidding. Do we know if there is a Bush/Cheney connection?
It's bad from every angle. I don't know about a bush/cheney connection, but there are many, many other folks in the US government and related advisors that need to be looked at when discussing that sort of thing.
Thanks in advance for the clarification.
But seriously: personally I'm not crazy about this contract and this particular outfit.
Does that help with your question?
Originally posted by alcimedes
so are they problem causers still there or not?
BTW: that's an interestingly benign label you place on a culture of rape and sexual slavery.
Didn't you read the whole article?
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm/i...id/163052.html
You answer is pretty clearly in there. I think at one point it's summed up as the "company's culture ."
On another note:
What you have here is a Lord of the Flies mentality. Basically you've got a bunch of strong men who are raping and manipulating young girls who have been kidnapped from their homes. Who's the bad guy? Is it the guy who buys the girl to give her freedom, the one who kidnaps her and sells her or the one who liberates her and ends up having sex with her? And what does it mean when the U.S. steps up and says, 'We don't have any jurisdiction'? That's absurd.
Here's another interesting quote:
DynCorp leadership was 100 percent in bed with the mafia over there. I didn't get any results from talking to DynCorp officials, so I went to Army CID and I drove around with them, pointing out everyone's houses who owned women and weapons.
In short, it's company-wide, which is not surprising.
I think he should probably have stronger legislation and a system of checks for US use of mercenaries, not to mention how their contracts are rewarded.
From a recent article in Wired:
(DynCorp) are subject to neither US law nor the military code of conduct. They don't count under congressional limits on troop commitments, and they aren't obliged to talk to the media. The government needn't even discuss the details of the agreements: The Pentagon and State Department aren't required to reveal to Congress contracts that are smaller than $50 million, and many of DynCorp's are.
SUNSHINE IN IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION
There has been an unseemly tendency in the Bush Administration
to award contracts for Iraq reconstruction on a sole-source
basis, i.e. without a competitive bidding process. The
contracts themselves are occasionally classified.
To correct this offensive practice Sen. Ron Wyden, along with
Senators Collins, Clinton, Byrd and Lieberman, introduced the
"Sunshine in Iraq Reconstruction Contracting Act" (S. 876).
"Contracts to rebuild Iraq should be awarded in the sunshine--
not behind a smokescreen," said Sen. Wyden. He explained the
problem with "closed-door contracting," and described his
proposed solution, in an April 10 floor speech introducing the
bill. See:
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/s876.html
from the Federation of American Scientists Secrecy News e.mail newsletter.
Seriously, glad someone is looking out for this stuff and (might) have some sway in the matter.