MATTHEWGOODONLINE

The war in Iraq is the most privatized conflict in American history. Some 180,000 civilians and paramilitaries work for firms contracted by the US government, a sum larger than that of the US military presence in the country.

From Halliburton to Blackwater, the use of contractors has become so prevalent in Iraq that without them the US military would face significant setbacks. The billions spent have come out of taxpayer’s pockets, and on many occasions have been used to employ companies that, not four years ago, didn’t even exist and possessed absolutely no experience in their supposed fields of expertise. That, in and of itself, should have the American public, given the current downswing in their economy, up in arms.

As an example of just how lax the government’s oversight of certain contractors is, the case of a polygamist sect that is in the midst of a massive child abuse scandal provides context…

“American taxpayers have unwittingly helped finance a polygamist sect that is now the focus of a massive child abuse investigation in West Texas, with a business tied to the group receiving a nearly $1 million loan from the federal government and $1.2 million in military contracts.

The ability of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or FLDS, to operate and grow is largely dependent on huge contributions from its members and revenue from the businesses they control, according to a former accountant for the church, and government officials in Utah and Arizona, where the sect is primarily based.

One of those businesses, NewEra Manufacturing in Las Vegas, has been awarded more than $1.2 million in federal government contracts, with most of the money coming in recent years from the Defense Department for wheel and brake components for military aircraft.

A large portion of the awards were preferential no-bid or “sole source” contracts because of the company’s classification as a small business, according to online databases that track federal government appropriations.

NewEra, previously known as Western Precision Inc. and located in Hildale, Utah, also received a $900,000 loan in 2005 from the federal Small Business Administration, the data show.

The president and chief executive of the company is John. C. Wayman, identified as an FLDS leader and a close associate to Warren Jeffs, the sect’s “prophet,” who was convicted last year as an accomplice to rape for arranging the marriage of a 14-year-old girl to her 19-year-old cousin.

When Jeffs, who was one of the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives, was arrested in the summer of 2006, he was driving Wayman’s late-model red Cadillac Escalade, government officials say.

Wayman did not return phone calls seeking comment.

On NewEra’s Web site Wayman says the company is “an honorable and valuable asset to our country” in helping build military and commercial airplanes that carry people throughout the world. He does not mention its ties to the FLDS.

Steve Barlow, human resources manager for NewEra, said last week that it would be inappropriate to comment, “Given everything that’s going on. I could only give you the company motto: ‘Good parts on time.’.”

Despite the fact that it’s being investigated for the conduct of its employees, specifically regarding the Nisour Square massacre in which 17 Iraqi civilians were killed, and tax violations, the US State Department has extended Blackwater USA’s contract in Iraq for another year.

If that’s not enough to enrage your average American, perhaps the fact that, according to a Congressional estimate, Blackwater has received some $1.25 billion dollars in federal contracts since 2000 is. That is, if the average American even hears about it.

Blackwater is, for all intents and purposes, the State Department’s de facto military arm in Iraq. Like all US personnel in Iraq, Blackwater employees enjoy legal immunity and cannot be held or tried by Iraqi authorities in conjunction with crimes perpetrated against Iraqis in their own country. Despite a host of first hand accounts provided by witnesses regarding the Nisour Square massacre that completely contradict Blackwater’s versions of events that day, the company has not seriously been held accountable for what occurred. In fact, Iraqi demands that the company be removed from the country altogether have been completely ignored.

The hypocrisy is overwhelming when one looks at past precedents regarding war crimes that the United States has itself prosecuted. In the five years that the United States has occupied Iraq, not one single instance of criminality has been legally treated as a war crime. Murder, rape, and abuse – yes. But none of them have ever been termed war crimes, including what transpired at Abu Ghraib. That’s what happens when you have the luxury of investigating your own and deny the nation in which such crimes are committed any legal recourse whatsoever.

It’ll be a long warm stretch of weather here in the great city of Toronto. If you’re like me this isn’t a hangover post because of the mid-week festivities - so I hope I can capture your attention for at least a few paragraphs.

Nobody asked me - but when did blame become a major part of the Canadian tactic in foreign policy?

You know what Canada is beginning to remind me of - George Foreman after his loss to Ali in the Rumble In The Jungle.

(Stay with me it’s early…)

After Foreman, who had an 80’s Mike Tyson-esque invincibility about him lost to Muhammad who regained the Heavyweight title for the 2nd time, a long string of excuses occurred. He’s still giving every excuse save the fact that he was beaten by one of the greatest fighters ever.

The ring was too big, too small
His corner gave bad advice.
His water was tainted.
His shoe laces were too tight.

Now the Canadian politicians trying to explain our extended role in Afghanistan:

The war on terror.
Fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here.
Bringing democracy to the region.
More assistance required from NATO allies.
Everything is Pakistan’s fault.
And Peter Mackay’s most recent finger pointing after his trip to Afghanistan with media darling CDS Rick Hillier:

It’s Iran.

If you follow the States’ talking points for it’s military occupations overseas you’ll notice a very similar string of reasons (save for WMD’s and the Taliban-Saddam tag-team).

While it can’t be dismissed that the US is our ally and that when America sneezes Canada will catch a cold - on foreign policy I remember a time when we did at least sometimes march to the beat of our own drum.

How does Mackay know that we should look to Iran? Canada doesn’t have it’s own intelligence agency like the CIA or MI6.

When blame fell to Pakistan it was ignored that they lost ten times as many soldiers hunting Taliban supporters in the North West of the country.

When blame fell to NATO allies it was ignored that Germany and France had larger contingents in Afghanistan than Canada.

Now, instead of looking eastward at the Pakistani border, MacKay is telling us the enemy is coming from the west - and bringing weapons. We need to stop this flow of military hardware if we are to be successful in Kandahar, runs MacKay’s logic.

The problem with this naively simple theory is that there is no need to bring munitions into Afghanistan. After three decades of continual warfare, wherein bordering states and global superpowers poured weaponry into their factional proxies, there remains an almost limitless supply of hidden munitions caches.

Iran provides a great deal of support to the Afghan economy and a war with them would cause many of those refugees from Afghan in Iran to return. The hardship and economical strain on an already weak Afghan infrastructure would further prolong any progress in the country.

It only makes sense that Karzai would advise against an action to its neighbor.

From a strategic point of view does Canada want to start picking fights with another country?

Both nation’s have strained military forces already. Majority of the western (and mostly stabilized) Herat province is ethnic Persian. Do we really need to be in a conflict in another portion of the country when the south is not yet secure?

Here’s a consideration via Scott Taylor:

To be fair to MacKay, foreign fighters operating in Afghanistan are a major obstacle to NATO’s potential success and eventual withdrawal. However, these are not the idealistic Muslim jihadists, but the roughly 20,000 Western mercenaries employed as private security contractors. Unlicensed and unregistered, these yabobs operate completely outside both Afghan law and coalition forces’ military discipline. Any violence committed by these Rambo wannabes negatively impacts the reputation of legitimate coalition special forces and combat troops.

Local Afghans do not differentiate between private security, U.S. coalition or NATO forces, they simply lump the responsibility for the killers of their families at the hands of the “foreigners.”

If MacKay is serious about plotting a new course for our mission he would be wise to quit reiterating American-generated “blame Iran” rhetoric and start challenging the uncontrolled use of so-called private security mercenaries in Afghanistan.

If we start by eliminating the “foreign fighters” under our own control, maybe we can break the circle of violence.

Amen.

Who/what do you blame for the extended ops overseas?

Who do I blame for the troubles and delayed operation in Afghanistan?

I’m gonna go with GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs, John Ferguson.

Prove me wrong Peter. Because much like a team with a horrible losing record but a proud history, changing strategy seems to be the last thing on anyone’s mind.

As Marcellus tells Butch in Pulp Fiction:

“The night of the fight, you may feel a slight sting. That’s pride fucking with you. Fuck pride. Pride only hurts, it never helps. “

Rumble Young Country Rumble.

Lastly my thoughts and prayers to the family and friends of Canada’s most recent loss overseas: GUNNER Jonathan Dion of 5ieme RALC, Valcartier Quebec.

The Army has lost a lot of Artillery soldiers in this conflict, 2 officers from my old Regiment, 1 RCHA. Some of my infantry buds used to tease the gunners for being distanced from the front line and therefore safe from danger.

This conflict proves that conventional rules don’t apply.

Have a great weekend, wherever you are, enjoy it.

Now Playing:
itunes: Natural Beauty Neil Young
Movie:The Kite Runner/No Country For Old Men
DVD: The Office Season 3

Home. Finally.

Unpacked, doing laundry, walked the dogs, clean bed linens. Put Leopard on my iMac, went and got some milk, packed the fridge full of left over beer, water, and Coke from the tour.

A few things of interest. According to the FBI investigation into the Nisour Square massacre…

“Federal agents investigating the Sept. 16 episode in which Blackwater security personnel shot and killed 17 Iraqi civilians have found that at least 14 of the shootings were unjustified and violated deadly-force rules in effect for security contractors in Iraq, according to civilian and military officials briefed on the case.

The F.B.I. investigation into the shootings in Baghdad is still under way, but the findings, which indicate that the company’s employees recklessly used lethal force, are already under review by the Justice Department.

Prosecutors have yet to decide whether to seek indictments, and some officials have expressed pessimism that adequate criminal laws exist to enable them to charge any Blackwater employee with criminal wrongdoing. Spokesmen for the Justice Department and the F.B.I. declined to discuss the matter.

The case could be one of the first thorny issues to be decided by Michael B. Mukasey, who was sworn in as attorney general last week. He may be faced with a decision to turn down a prosecution on legal grounds at a time when a furor has erupted in Congress about the administration’s failure to hold security contractors accountable for their misdeeds.”

I’m going to hold with my initial opinion – I don’t think anyone involved in the incident that day will be brought to justice. Then again, given the sensitive nature of the subject and the Iraqi government’s position on the legal status of foreign contractors, it can’t be entirely ruled out. But it should be noted that if legal action is taken, the State Department will also be scrutinized, something that I simply can’t see happening.

Also of interest is an article in today’s Jerusalem Post…

“The newly formed Genocide Prevention Task Force indicated Tuesday night that it will not be examining whether Israel has committed genocide in the West Bank and Gaza despite earlier statements that it would be addressing the subject.

The task force of prominent former US officials was announced at a press conference earlier Tuesday and will be working over the next year to help the American government best respond to and prevent genocide.

Though one of the co-chairs, former US Defense Secretary William Cohen, originally said that the situation in the West Bank and Gaza would be considered, the task force later clarified that such an inquiry would be beyond the scope of the panel.

“Its task is not to determine which situations, past or present, including the West Bank and Gaza, constitute genocide, but to develop policy recommendations that enable the United States to prevent future genocides from occurring,” Cohen, along with co-chair Madeleine Albright, said in a statement issued Tuesday night.”

Never you mind the present. It’s the future of genocide we’re interested in.

I wrote, some weeks ago, that nothing would come of the criminal behaviour that Blackwater has been guilty of in Iraq. I stand by that statement, despite various investigations into criminality, predominantly to do with the events on September 16th of this year at Nisoor Square in Western Baghdad.

Witnesses of that event claim that Blackwater personnel did not come under fire, but rather opened fire without provocation. They are, believe it or not, in the majority as far as witnesses go. Unfortunately, they’re Iraqis, and thus somehow not as believable as, for example, Blackwater representatives that deny any wrong doing. And who, at the end of the day, is the Western public going to believe? Iraqis or Blackwater’s prim and proper all-American president?

The event hasn’t hurt Blackwater’s contractual relationship with the government either, having recently secured a $92 million dollar contract with the Pentagon to operate flights in Central Asia and a portion of a $15 billion dollar contract to help fight the ‘war on drugs’.

The ugly truth is that despite what happened at Nisoor Square that day, or on a variety of other occasions that could certainly be deemed criminal, Blackwater will be protected by The State Department because the State Department’s chief goal in this affair is to protect itself. It doesn’t matter if the Iraqi government passes legislation ending the immunity from prosecution of foreign security contractors, nor does it matter that the military is now in control of supervising all State Department security convoys in Iraq. Like the Abu Ghraib scandal, those ultimately responsible for oversight with regards to Blackwater’s conduct will never be properly scrutinized. And it’s not as if the conduct of Blackwater hadn’t been brought to the State Department’s attention by the Iraqi government in the past either. Not surprisingly, on those occasions, absolutely nothing was done, which only helped expand the company’s reckless parameters.

It is easy for us to claim that the rule of law now exists in Iraq, having been hammered over the head that the country has been gifted democracy, but the reality is that it is entirely ambiguous in its application, and certainly does not have the power to reach into the realm of dealing with foreigners that are guilty of war crimes. Going in, the United States took steps to protect themselves, the most important being their refusal to adhere to the scrutiny of the International Criminal Court. Had they not, then the President down to those guilty of the Nisoor Sqauare massacre could very well be tried for war crimes. Unfortunately, we don’t live in that world, we live in this one – the one in which nations that profess to promote justice and transparency are, themselves, anything but just or transparent. Such is the reality of nations that knowingly have the ability to exercise their own set of specific rules precisely because they cannot be confronted. Justice, liberty, and a host of other terms are merely warm remembrances used to placate societies that desperately want to believe that such principles actually still endure. A Greek orator once remarked - “the theatre never was what it was”. The same is true of those principles on which we lean for comfort and a sense of lasting right. We are not only not what we once were, but we never were to begin with. And until we come to terms with that, then government by and for the people will never truly exist, let alone justice being done to those among us that are guilty of crimes against others deemed of less worth.

Every so often someone speaks a little truth to power and pulls the crimson velvet curtain from the Kabuki Theater that passes itself off as United States foreign policy. The recently elected president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, has done just that. Correa has proclaimed that the United States may renew their lease of Eloy Alfaro Air Force Base in Ecuador on one condition… that Ecuador be allowed to open a military base in Miami…

I’m quite sure that friendly and generous proposition brought down the house at the U.S. Departments of State and Defense…

That Correa sure has some huevos grande, no…?

However, I think he really might have something here, after all anyone who publicly refers to our current president as a “dimwit” must possess a keen sense of judgment. Imagine the precedence this would set… just think of the exciting new investment opportunities from abroad…

Japan could build a naval base in San Francisco, Germany could put a Luftwaffe base smack dab in the middle of Milwaukee, China could test nukes in the Nevada desert… Central Americans could train death squads in Georgia (ummmm… hold it a second, don’t they already do that…?), and in a classic case of imitation being the highest form of flattery, Cuba could have their very own medieval prison in Florida. Seeing as how we are rapidly selling off our country’s resources and infrastructure to anyone holding our increasingly worthless currency, permanent military occupation of the United States might just be the solution to the concerns of our foreign investors… after all, they’d just be looking after their “interests.”

With foreign military occupation keeping order, multinational corporations could come here, privatize our natural resources and employ us en masse… they could pay us slave wages while ignoring environmental and health concerns… (”Get back to work peasant, be thankful you even have a job,” they’d indignantly huff between cigar puffs and cognac sips…) Hell, they could even put some fat, lazy American children to work… And if any of us complain or get out of line or form a union, it’s a bullet to the back of the head or, if we are lucky, a life of abject poverty in some corrugated aluminum shantytown with raw sewage flowing in the streets…

Yum.

How did I not see the incredible positives of being occupied by a foreign military until now?

Surely the need exists for a foreign entity to establish a military presence within our borders… to ensure we follow the Constitution, hold fair and honest elections, abide by habeas corpus, and govern via rule of law… since apparently we cannot seem to handle these tasks ourselves. We could show all the foreign news agencies our purple thumbs to prove we’ve just voted…

If the need arises, perhaps some other nation could set up a secret prison within our borders in order to torture whomever they deem to be a “person of interest,” you know… since we no longer recognize that irrelevant dusty relic known as the Geneva Convention…

Here is an idea… why not have some other country just dream up several off the wall accusations based upon thin “evidence,” whip their populace into a bloodthirsty fury and then invade our shores, overthrow our leaders, convict them in a kangaroo court, and then start a sectarian war… just think of the money they could make by arming all sides to the teeth…

No, you say? Not a good idea?

Why doesn’t Iran ask the IAEA to have a look into our nuclear program? After all, ours is the only nation inhumane enough to have actually used one of the damned things…

Here is some fat to chew on… While England, Russia, China, Italy and France also have military bases outside their territory, the United States is responsible for 95% of foreign bases on earth. According to U.S. government figures, the U.S. military maintains some 737 bases in 130 countries, although many estimate the actual number to be closer to 1,000. In short, we have our greasy mitts all over the place…

In all our self righteousness and arrogance, rarely do we American citizens consider what it is to see a foreign tank on our street, a foreign fighter in our skies, a foreign ship in our harbor…

My personal epiphany arrived over 20 years ago when I was a soldier stationed in Italy… My Italian Socialist girlfriend let me know in no uncertain terms that I was not in her country to protect her, but to protect my country’s interests… I can only imagine the idiotic bovine expression that must have been on my face when she said that, because up until that point I was a Reagan warrior and I had NO IDEA what she was talking about…

Moooo….

Ecuador wants military base in Miami
Mon Oct 22, 2007 By Phil Stewart
NAPLES (Reuters) - Ecuador’s leftist President Rafael Correa said Washington must let him open a military base in Miami if the United States wants to keep using an air base on Ecuador’s Pacific coast.

“So, then the other South American countries don’t have good relations with the United States because they don’t have military bases? That doesn’t make any sense.”

From the New York Times…

“Fresh accounts of the Blackwater shooting last month, given by three rooftop witnesses and by American soldiers who arrived shortly after the gunfire ended, cast new doubt Friday on statements by Blackwater guards that they were responding to armed insurgents when Iraqi investigators say 17 Iraqis were killed at a Baghdad intersection.

The three witnesses, Kurds on a rooftop overlooking the scene, said they had observed no gunfire that could have provoked the shooting by Blackwater guards. American soldiers who arrived minutes later found shell casings from guns used normally by American contractors, as well as by the American military.

The Kurdish witnesses are important because they had the advantage of an unobstructed view and because, collectively, they observed the shooting at Nisour Square from start to finish, free from the terror and confusion that might have clouded accounts of witnesses at street level. Moreover, because they are pro-American, their accounts have a credibility not always extended to Iraqi Arabs, who have been more hostile to the American presence.

Their statements, made in interviews with The New York Times, appeared to challenge a State Department account that a Blackwater vehicle had been disabled in the shooting and had to be towed away. Since those initial accounts, Blackwater and the State Department have consistently refused to comment on the substance of the case.

The Kurdish witnesses said that they saw no one firing at the guards at any time during the event, an observation corroborated by the forensic evidence of the shell casings. Two of the witnesses also said all the Blackwater vehicles involved in the shooting drove away under their own power.

The Kurds, who work for a political party whose building looks directly down on the square, said they had looked for any evidence that the American security guards were responding to an attack, but found none.

“I call it a massacre,” said Omar H. Waso, one of the witnesses and a senior official at the party, which is called the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. “It is illegal. They used the law of the jungle.”

Many of the American soldiers were similarly appalled. While Blackwater has said its guards were attacked by automatic gunfire, the soldiers did not find any casings from the sort of guns typically used by insurgents or by Iraqi security forces, according to an American military official briefed on the findings of the unit that arrived at the scene about 20 minutes after the Blackwater convoy left. That analysis of forensic evidence at the scene was first reported Friday by The Washington Post.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak about the matter, added that soldiers had found clear evidence that the Blackwater guards were not been threatened and also opened fire on civilians who had tried to flee. “The cartridges and casings we found were all associated with coalition forces and contractors,” the official said. “The only brass we found where somebody fired weapons were ones from contractors.”

The case has angered many in the military who believe that the conduct of the security guards makes the troops’ jobs harder. “If our people had done this,” another American military official said, “they would be court-martialed.”

The shooting, on Sept. 16, and the deaths of two Iraqi women in a shooting by a different security company on Tuesday, have provoked anger at politically potent levels of Iraqi society. In the holy cities of Karbala and Najaf, officials affiliated with Iraq’s most revered Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, called for sanctions against the companies.

In Karbala, a spokesman for the ayatollah inveighed against “the cheapening of Iraqi blood” and called for Parliament to take action. In a legacy of orders handed down during post-invasion American rule here, Western contractors essentially have immunity to Iraqi law.

None of the roughly two dozen witnesses previously interviewed by Iraqi investigators said that they saw or heard anyone but the Blackwater guards fire during the shooting, which Iraq says killed 17 and wounded 27. Still, because nearly all of those witnesses were in the field of fire, their accounts could conceivably have been skewed by the terror and confusion of the moment.

The Kurdish witnesses on the rooftop said they had not been interviewed by Iraqi investigators. They said they had been visited by American investigators, but had not been fully interviewed.”

It will never happen. It doesn’t matter if they’re private contractors or not, they’re still Americans, and that carries more weight than the deliverance of justice, even in a country to which the rule of law was supposedly delivered…

“Iraqi authorities want the U.S. government to sever all contracts in Iraq with Blackwater USA within six months. They also want the firm to pay $8 million in compensation to families of each of the 17 people killed when its guards sprayed a traffic circle with heavy machine gun fire last month.

The demands - part of an Iraqi government report examined by The Associated Press - also called on U.S. authorities to hand over the Blackwater security agents involved in the Sept. 16 shootings to face possible trial in Iraqi courts.

The tone of the Iraqi report appears to signal further strains between the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the White House over the deaths in Nisoor Square - which have prompted a series of U.S. and Iraqi probes and raised questions over the use of private security contractors to guard U.S. diplomats and other officials.”

Deep pockets the US certainly has, and I am certain that financial reparations will be made by the State Department – which ultimately means that US taxpayers will flip the bill for Blackwater’s actions that day. But they’ll not be tried in any Iraqi court, of that I can assure you. Nor will the State Department sever ties with Blackwater until an investigation is completed that clears the State Department of any complicity with regards to the actions of Blackwater during their time in Iraq. To sever ties, which would see Blackwater lose its largest contracts, as The Pentagon would certainly have to follow suit, would be to risk the divulgence of any impugning information that Blackwater might have with regards to State Department or Pentagon complicity. At the very least, it would result in a civil law suit against the government for contractual breach, which would also result in the divulgence of information.

Seeking Haditha Reference Materials

I was recently contacted by a US Marine that pointed out that those tried for murder in connection with the Haditha massacre have all be cleared of wrong doing. I, personally, have not come across anything about this, though having been on tour I must admit that my daily access to information is limited. I do not doubt the Marine’s email whatsoever, but I would appreciate it if readers could email me as many different articles concerning this matter as possible. I would very much appreciate it.

I remember saying that to Matt on the phone about a year ago.

Think about it. Under what conditions is the premise, that is the title of this post, moot?

Read it again. Out loud if necessary. Because it is a nigh undeniable truth.

We will win every fire fight.

So what? (more…)

More Blackwater developments. According to an unnamed senior US military official…

“Blackwater security guards involved in a Baghdad shootout last month that left up to 17 Iraqi civilians dead were “obviously wrong,” a senior US military official was reported as saying.

The unnamed official told the Washington Post newspaper that the US military reports from the scene of the September 16 incident suggested the US private security firm was to blame for the deaths, and that its employees in Iraq were trigger-happy.

“It was obviously excessive, it was obviously wrong,” the official told the newspaper.

“The civilians that were fired upon, they didn’t have any weapons to fire back at them. And none of the IP (Iraqi police) or any of the local security forces fired back at them,” he said.

In reports after the incident, Blackwater executives insisted their teams had come under fire in Baghdad’s Nisour Square.

But according to US military officials cited in the Congress report, Blackwater’s teams, contracted to protect US State Department diplomats and other officials in Iraq, behaved like impervious “cowboys” in Iraq.

“They tend to overreact to a lot of things,” the US military official told the Washington Post. “When it comes to shooting and firing, they tend to shoot quicker than others,” he said.

The official added that Blackwater has resisted sharing information with the US military on the incident, and prevented military officials from contacting company managers in Baghdad.”

The Guardian is reporting that the Iraqi government has received the report of Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul-Qader al-Obeidi which calls for those involved to be prosecuted in Iraq and the families of those affected to be compensated…

“The official Iraqi investigation into last month’s Blackwater shooting has been submitted to the government and recommends the security guards face trial in Iraqi courts, and that the company pay compensation to the victims, an Iraqi government minister told The Associated Press on Thursday.

The three-member panel, led by Defense Minister Abdul-Qader al-Obeidi, finished its work earlier this week and submitted the report and recommendations to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Tuesday, the government minister told AP on condition he not be identified by name.

The minister said the report was issued under the signatures of al-Obeidi, Maj. Gen. Tariq al-Baldawi, the deputy minister of national security; and Maj. Gen. Hussein Ali Kamal, the deputy interior minister for intelligence and security affairs.

The cabinet minister said the report determined that 13 Iraqi civilians - not 11 as originally reported - were killed when Blackwater USA guards sprayed western Baghdad’s Nisoor Square with gunfire Sept. 16. The investigation maintained, as Iraqi authorities have throughout, that the Blackwater guards had not been fired on when they unleashed the fusillade. It said no shots were fired at Blackwater personnel throughout.”

Of course, no matter what the Iraqi government wants to do, those employees of Blackwater that were responsible will never see the inside of an Iraqi courtroom. In fact, I’ll wager that they’ll never see the inside of an American courtroom either.

Unfortunately, that’s the reality of war crimes. When you’re on the side writing the rules they’re never labeled as such.