Blackwater looks to expand domestic role...

[eyrei]

There are lots of international multi-billion dollar security companies many times the size of Blackwater operating in the US and around the world. Yes they have helicopters too and their "military hardware" are weapons that private citizens and corporations can own. So why is it that Blackwater is the big bad evil company. Answer: Their involvement in Iraq.

(Still waiting for the "Blackwater confiscated guns in New Orleans" source)

Considering they have recently been accused of killing civilians by firing indiscriminantly they aren't just 'involved'...they are a potential threat to the people they say they will help, and I hope the entire operation is disbanded once they are forced from Iraq.

Granted no wrongdoing has been proven in that case, but note the word potential in the above paragraph.

Regardless, we are in a sad state if our government's disaster response is so bad we have to hire mercenaries.

 

[Ecofarm]

Let the market decide. Invisible hands don't kill people, people kill people.

 

[.Shane.]

Every time you see armed security guards the mall or a celebrity walking down the red carpet surrounded by bodyguards packing heat you see part of that industry.

Good, let them provide security for celebrities and keep them the hell out of the roles that govt. should provide.

 

[eyrei]

Let the market decide. Invisible hands don't kill people, people kill people.

Right...and these are people that kill people for a living.

 

[Ecofarm]

What about all of the public security already provided by private companies?

It's up to your elected officials to determine who gets hired for government work. Every local government already hires security firms for a variety of "public" work. If you do not want your local government hiring them, then make your position known and vote them out of office if they refuse to agree.

This thread is not about private security being used in a public capacity. That is old news and there is really nothing to debate, unless, of course, your position is that all current government contracts to private security should be outlawed... That's a debate in and of itself.

As far as the "Blackwater Bash Fest '07" goes, I think there has been a COMPLETE lack of support for accusations made. Further, the rationale presented for hysterical opposition to the company being allowed to prosper domestically have been biased at best, and conspiracy theory at worst.

You're not talking to a bunch of saffron robed monks here. There is no reason to fear paramilitary, beyond the reach of the law, government thugs. If a Blackwater employee (who is subject to every law I am) commits a crime in the US, I am confident that he or she will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Look, I enjoy a good "SKY FALLING!" as much as the next guy, but arguments that Blackwater is poised to become the brownshirts of US neo-cons is just not rational.

 

[Little Raven]

This thread is not about private security being used in a public capacity.

This thread is about the potential for private security to be used in a public capacity - namely, disaster relief. If you want to talk about something else, make a new thread.

That is old news and there is really nothing to debate, unless, of course, your position is that all current government contracts to private security should be outlawed...

And this is nonsense. One can believe there is a place in society for private security without believing that place is replacing the National Guard.

 

[JollyRoger]

As far as the Blackwater Bash Fest goes, I think there has been a COMPLETE lack of support for accusations made. Further, the rationale presented for hysterical opposition to the company being allowed to prosper domestically have been biased at best, and conspiracy theory at worst.

Do you make free market decisions based on the reputation of a potential seller or provider of services? The invisible hand does have a middle finger after all.

 

[eyrei]

What about all of the public security already provided by private companies?

It's up to your elected officials to determine who gets hired for government work. Every local government already hires security firms for a variety of "public" work. If you do not want your local government hiring them, then make your position known and vote them out of office if they refuse to agree.

This thread is not about private security being used in a public capacity. That is old news and there is really nothing to debate, unless, of course, your position is that all current government contracts to private security should be outlawed... That's a debate in and of itself.

As far as the Blackwater Bash Fest goes, I think there has been a COMPLETE lack of support for accusations made. Further, the rationale presented for hysterical opposition to the company being allowed to prosper domestically have been biased at best, and conspiracy theory at worst.

I'm not talking about domestic security firms...I'm talking about Blackwater.

And there was enough evidence that the Iraqi government suspended their operations with support from the State Department for several days, and Robert Gates has sent people to investigate further.

This is no conspiracy theory.

 

[Ecofarm]

Do you make free market decisions based on the reputation of a potential seller or provider of services? The invisible hand does have a middle finger after all.

For the free market to work, decisions must be made by informed consumers.

This is no conspiracy theory.

The conspiracy theory I was referring to was that:

1) Blackwater employees are allowed to carry military hardware (or "whatever they want") in the US.
False.

2) Blackwater employees are beyond prosecution because "people on the same side will not arrest each other".
False

2a) Blackwater employees disarmed citizens during Katrina.
False.

3) Blackwater will be able to shield employees from prosecution by transfering them to other places.
False.

4) Blackwater itself is beyond prosecution, even by Congress itself.
False.


If those 4 claims do not amount to conspiracy theory, then could you please provide a rational explaination of how those things could be true?

Do you have anything to add other than disjointed remarks about the free market?

I believe I have added a complete rebuttal to every point put forth by the OP.

 

[eyrei]

For the free market to work, decisions must be made by informed consumers.

Do you have anything to add other than disjointed remarks about the free market?

 

[Bugfatty300]

There seems to be some confusions at to whether or not Blackwater employees were actually confiscating guns. I can cite blog posts but no media.

Confusion = Myth. It never happened IMHO. If they had taken guns from private citizens it would have made news. Especially considering how illegal and controversial it was for even the police to be doing it.

Really? Care to cite? What do they do? Where have they operated? What's their track record?

Some examples:

Wackenhut Corporation: Largest international private security company based the US with over 400,000 employees. Their work includes providing security for Area 51 and other sensitive US bases. They've even run their own prisons in the past.

Aegis Defense Services: Currently largest private security force in Iraq. History includes intervention in New Guinea and various African countries.

AirScan: US Clients include NASA, US DoD, US DoI. Their international work includes counter-insurgency operations in Africa and South America.

 

[Little Raven]

Bugfatty: I'm waiting for your cites on their disaster relief efforts on US soil. That IS what the initial post was about, after all.

 

[eyrei]

Bugfatty: I'm waiting for your cites on their disaster relief efforts on US soil. That IS what the initial post was about, after all.

Apparently, we (the US government) are supposed to hire them to intimidate us during a disaster because they do it so well in war zones. It amazes me that anyone would see this as a good idea.

 

[Ecofarm]

Their job is not to intimidate anyone. It is to provide security. Do you have proof otherwise, or are you just making wild accusations?

 

[eyrei]

For the free market to work, decisions must be made by informed consumers.



The conspiracy theory I was referring to was that:

1) Blackwater employees are allowed to carry military hardware (or "whatever they want") in the US.
False.

2) Blackwater employees are beyond prosecution because "people on the same side will not arrest each other".
False

2a) Blackwater employees disarmed citizens during Katrina.
False.

3) Blackwater will be able to shield employees from prosecution by transfering them to other places.
False.

4) Blackwater itself is beyond prosecution, even by Congress itself.
False.


If those 4 claims do not amount to conspiracy theory, then could you please provide a rational explaination of how those things could be true?



I believe I have added a complete rebuttal to every point put forth by the OP.

I'm not interested in prosecuting Blackwater employees after they flip-out and kill someone. I'm interested in it never happening to begin with, and them having to operate within US law is hardly comforting. And I never made any of the claims you are labeling as conspiracy theories...

 

[Ecofarm]

You might not have made those claims, but someone else did (the OP). And those were argued as reasons why we should not allow Blackwater to operate in the US. Disputing those claims was in direct reply to the OP.

I'm not interested in prosecuting Blackwater employees after they flip-out and kill someone. I'm interested in it never happening to begin with, and them having to operate within US law is hardly comforting. And I never made any of the claims you are labeling as conspiracy theories...

Having to operate within the US law is the only comfort we have with police. It's the only comfort we have with National Guardsmen. Are you saying that extra laws should apply to private individuals who are hired for security? Maybe... What sort of extra laws? It might be reasonable to require some additional stuff from private security firms that respond to disaster aid...

 

[Bugfatty300]

Apparently, we (the US government) are supposed to hire them to intimidate us during a disaster because they do it so well in war zones. It amazes me that anyone would see this as a good idea.

Private Security companies exist because their are not enough police, soldiers and governmental support. Post Katrina New Orleans and and post Bush Iraq with out a doubt proved this.

 

[Little Raven]

1) Blackwater employees are allowed to carry military hardware (or "whatever they want") in the US.

You haven't explained a mechanism for enforcing this. Saying "it will work like it always does" isn't an answer, because it's never been done on the scale Blackwater is proposing. In this country, that is. And I don't think examples from other countries will exactly bolster your case.

3) Blackwater will be able to shield employees from prosecution by transfering them to other places.
False.

Again, you saying it does not make it so. Explain a mechanism by which Blackwater would be prevented from doing this.

4) Blackwater itself is beyond prosecution, even by Congress itself.
False.

Please point to successful prosecutions of Blackwater or Blackwater personnel.

I believe I have added a complete rebuttal to every point put forth by the OP.

Wow. You consider 25% a passing grade? No wonder our schools are failing.

 

[Little Raven]

Private Security companies exist because their are not enough police, soldiers and governmental support.

But why is the answer to hire private security companies, rather than expanding the National Guard?

After all, Guardsmen are much cheaper.

 

[Ecofarm]

Look, just because you say they will be able to avoid prosecution, does not place the burdden on me - to prove that they are accountable to US law.

Perhaps you have an example of a Blackwater employee breaking the law in the US and not being prosecuted. Perhaps you have proof of a Blackwater employee being assisted in fleeing the federal government. Until you do, I think it is only fair to assume that they are not super-natural law-exempt people. Why do I have to prove that US law applies to them? Shouldn't you need to prove that it does not? Requiring me to prove the status quo is rediculous.

Guardsmen are not necessarily "cheaper". We have to pay for their training, we have to subsidize their life insurance and all of the other benefits afforded a reservist. Further, we have to gaurentee that they can return to their previous job after being activated, putting strain on the private market. You cannot just compare base-pay and say "hey, guardsmen are cheap". Preparing a guard unit is expensive; when they are actually activated, the cost to the government, the guardsman's employer, and the guardsman's family are high. If they are never activated, all of the training, etc is wasted money. Are you arguing that the government does things cheaper than the private market? Because that is obviously not true.