 | FBI Deputizes Private Contractors with Extraordinary Powers, Including "Shoot to Kill" |
Showing posts with label contractors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label contractors. Show all posts
08/02/2008
FBI lets contractors 'shoot to Kill' - uk next?
15/11/2007
Can Government Control and oversee mercenaries
Will private contractors be supervised adequately as st athan?
Worth reading this story
IRAQ Blackwater Buzz
The State Department has been facing rough times lately, with its lax oversight of government contractors under scrutiny, diplomatic dissatisfaction over forced postings to Iraq, and a behemoth embassy in Iraq that is expected to cost $144 more than projected. The official who is supposed to be rooting out this "waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement" at the agency, Inspector General (IG) Howard Krongard, is instead fending off allegations that he has politicized the agency and blocked investigations. As House Oversight Committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) noted in a September letter, it appears that Krongard's "foremost mission is to support the Bush Administration, especially with respect to Iraq and Afghanistan," rather than "act as an independent and objective check."INSPECTING THE INSPECTOR GENERAL: Krongard yesterday appeared before the House Oversight Committee to defend himself against allegations that, among others, he stalled investigators from cooperating with a Justice Department probe waste relating to the new U.S. embassy in Iraq and refused to send "any investigators" into Iraq or Afghanistan to "pursue investigations into wasteful spending or procurement fraud." In late September, Waxman also found that Krongard's senior staff "attempted to coerce" State Department employees from cooperating with Congress's investigation, threatening them with their "jobs and careers." Even a report by the committee's Republican staff found "substantial support" that Krongard would regularly "belittle employees" or treat them harshly. "Several witnesses observed that the IG had a poor regard for government workers," the report concluded. The FBI is also investigating Krongard and the American Foreign Service Association has called for his ouster.AN 'UGLY' REALITY: One of the most serious charges against Krongard is that he impeded an investigation into whether Blackwater USA employees illegally smuggled weapons into Iraq that were then sold on the black market. In a Sept. 18 letter, Waxman revealed that Krongard had ordered his employees to "IMMEDIATELY" stop cooperating with federal investigators. Krongard has denied this allegation, but yesterday's hearing revealed that he has a conflict-of-interest with the contractor: his brother, Alvin "Buzzy" Krongard sits on Blackwater USA's advisory board. At first, Krongard vehemently rebuffed the charge, calling it an "ugly rumor." "It couldn't possibly have affected anything I've done, because I don't believe it," he said. Yet during a break in the proceedings, Krongard called his brother and confirmed that the "ugly rumor" was in fact true, and promised to recuse himself from any Blackwater investigations: "I learned that he had been at the advisory board meeting yesterday. I had not been aware of that." Krongard claimed that the last time he talked to his brother -- "about six weeks ago" -- Buzzy had not been on Blackwater's board. But TPMmuckraker.com's Spencer Ackerman yesterday spoke with Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell, who said Buzzy was invited to join the board in late July and "accepted soon after," raising doubts about Krongard's timeline. In fact, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) presented a Sept. 5 e-mail at yesterday's hearing, in which Blackwater wrote to Buzzy to "thank you for accepting the invitation to be a member." Buzzy also told Ackerman that about two or three weeks ago, he told his brother he would be joining the advisory board.
FUTURE CONTRACTING: Blackwater is a State Department contractor and has received hundreds of millions of dollars of work from the government. The Bush administration has repeatedly rushed to the defense of Blackwater after the deadly September shootout that killed 17 Iraqi civilians, even promising legal immunity to the company's guards. But an FBI investigation concluded yesterday that the employees' shootings were "unjustified under State Department rules for the private guards," although charges remain uncertain. Despite these troubles, Blackwater is likely to continue its association with the State Department, which is why Krongard's conflict-of-interest is so troubling. Just weeks after the September shooting, the State Department awarded the firm a new $92 million contract. Blackwater is also "one of five military contractors competing for as much as $15 billion over five years to help fight a narcotics trade that the government says finances terrorist groups."
Worth reading this story
IRAQ Blackwater Buzz
The State Department has been facing rough times lately, with its lax oversight of government contractors under scrutiny, diplomatic dissatisfaction over forced postings to Iraq, and a behemoth embassy in Iraq that is expected to cost $144 more than projected. The official who is supposed to be rooting out this "waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement" at the agency, Inspector General (IG) Howard Krongard, is instead fending off allegations that he has politicized the agency and blocked investigations. As House Oversight Committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) noted in a September letter, it appears that Krongard's "foremost mission is to support the Bush Administration, especially with respect to Iraq and Afghanistan," rather than "act as an independent and objective check."INSPECTING THE INSPECTOR GENERAL: Krongard yesterday appeared before the House Oversight Committee to defend himself against allegations that, among others, he stalled investigators from cooperating with a Justice Department probe waste relating to the new U.S. embassy in Iraq and refused to send "any investigators" into Iraq or Afghanistan to "pursue investigations into wasteful spending or procurement fraud." In late September, Waxman also found that Krongard's senior staff "attempted to coerce" State Department employees from cooperating with Congress's investigation, threatening them with their "jobs and careers." Even a report by the committee's Republican staff found "substantial support" that Krongard would regularly "belittle employees" or treat them harshly. "Several witnesses observed that the IG had a poor regard for government workers," the report concluded. The FBI is also investigating Krongard and the American Foreign Service Association has called for his ouster.AN 'UGLY' REALITY: One of the most serious charges against Krongard is that he impeded an investigation into whether Blackwater USA employees illegally smuggled weapons into Iraq that were then sold on the black market. In a Sept. 18 letter, Waxman revealed that Krongard had ordered his employees to "IMMEDIATELY" stop cooperating with federal investigators. Krongard has denied this allegation, but yesterday's hearing revealed that he has a conflict-of-interest with the contractor: his brother, Alvin "Buzzy" Krongard sits on Blackwater USA's advisory board. At first, Krongard vehemently rebuffed the charge, calling it an "ugly rumor." "It couldn't possibly have affected anything I've done, because I don't believe it," he said. Yet during a break in the proceedings, Krongard called his brother and confirmed that the "ugly rumor" was in fact true, and promised to recuse himself from any Blackwater investigations: "I learned that he had been at the advisory board meeting yesterday. I had not been aware of that." Krongard claimed that the last time he talked to his brother -- "about six weeks ago" -- Buzzy had not been on Blackwater's board. But TPMmuckraker.com's Spencer Ackerman yesterday spoke with Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell, who said Buzzy was invited to join the board in late July and "accepted soon after," raising doubts about Krongard's timeline. In fact, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) presented a Sept. 5 e-mail at yesterday's hearing, in which Blackwater wrote to Buzzy to "thank you for accepting the invitation to be a member." Buzzy also told Ackerman that about two or three weeks ago, he told his brother he would be joining the advisory board.
FUTURE CONTRACTING: Blackwater is a State Department contractor and has received hundreds of millions of dollars of work from the government. The Bush administration has repeatedly rushed to the defense of Blackwater after the deadly September shootout that killed 17 Iraqi civilians, even promising legal immunity to the company's guards. But an FBI investigation concluded yesterday that the employees' shootings were "unjustified under State Department rules for the private guards," although charges remain uncertain. Despite these troubles, Blackwater is likely to continue its association with the State Department, which is why Krongard's conflict-of-interest is so troubling. Just weeks after the September shooting, the State Department awarded the firm a new $92 million contract. Blackwater is also "one of five military contractors competing for as much as $15 billion over five years to help fight a narcotics trade that the government says finances terrorist groups."
03/10/2007
Serco
UK: Pentagon Warns British Contractors by David Gow, Guardian (London)March 27th, 2004
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11252
Insisting that the selection process was transparent and fair, Mr Nash said UK firms, including Amec, Foster Wheeler and Serco, had so far won $ 1.6bn of orders - although Parsons alone has won a share of $ 4.6bn of work.SERCO
Serco history ..do you remember this story?
Serco - Save the Children UK Silenced on Iraq
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=9230
by Kevin Maguire, Guardian (London)November 28th, 2003
One of Britain's most high-profile charities was ordered to end criticism of military action in Iraq by its powerful US wing to avoid jeopardizing financial support from Washington and corporate donors, a Ginvestigation has discovered.
Internal emails reveal how Save the Children UK came under enormous pressure after it accused coalition forces of breaching the Geneva convention by blocking humanitarian aid.
Senior figures at Save the Children US, based in Westport, Connecticut, demanded the withdrawal of the criticism and an effective veto on any future statements blaming the invasion for the plight of Iraqi civilians suffering malnourishment and shortages of medical supplies.
Uncovered documents expose tensions within an alliance that describes itself as "the world's largest independent global organization for children" but which is heavily reliant on governments and big business for cash.
Save the Children UK, which had an income of 122m in 2002-03, boasts the Queen as patron and Princess Anne as president, plus a phalanx of the great and the good lending their titles and time. The tensions over potential donor influence are not limited to the Iraq crisis. Other internal emails and documents disclose how Save the Children UK was nervous about the reaction of a major donor company, Serco, which makes huge profits from outsourcing, when the charity prepared to criticize the impact of privatization on children.
The row over Iraq erupted in April when the London statement said coalition forces had gone back on an earlier agreement to allow a relief plane, packed with emergency food and medical supplies for 40,000 people, to land in northern Iraq.
Rob MacGillivray, the UK wing's emergency program manager, released a statement which stated that the "lack of cooperation from the coalition forces is a breach of the Geneva conventions and its protocols, but more importantly the time now being wasted is costing children their lives".
Within hours of the statement appearing, the US wing was demanding its withdrawal. Emails sent to staff in Britain by Dianne Sherman, associate vice-president for public affairs and communications in Connecticut, headed "Save/UK criticizes US military", expressed dismay and censured the UK operation.
Ms Sherman said the Americans were "really astonished at today's release, which went out without our prior knowledge, that attacks the US military".
Her email went on: "This is undermining all the great work we've done, much of it in collaboration with you. We'll have to see the consequences of how this plays out - including affecting our future funding from the government."
A number of less controversial "joint messages" were proposed by Ms Sherman, none of which criticized any aspect of the invasion or occupation. She instead wanted the UK and US groups to point out that humanitarian organizations were still not permitted access to most of Iraq, that delays harmed children and, on a positive note, that relief work was under way in Umm Qasr, Masul and northern Iraq.
"Safe, secure conditions must be created immediately to allow humanitarians to bring in essential supplies and expertise to the people of Iraq," was her alternative version.
Accounts published by Save the Children US highlight its vulnerability to political pressure from a Republican White House with "government grants and contracts" generating some 60%, nearly 71m, of its 119m operating support and revenue. The proportion is also high in the UK, where 60.1m - 49% - of the organization's income is "grants and gifts in kind from institutional donors", including the government.
Ms Sherman copied her broadside to US executives including Ann van Dusen, the executive vice-president, Rudy von Bernuth, vice-president and managing director of its children in emergencies section, and Andrea Williamson-Hughes, corporate secretary.
When she discovered the London statement had been posted on the UK organization's website, Ms Sherman also demanded the deletion of US press officer Nicole Amoroso's name as a contact, adding in a second email: "I would also strongly suggest that the press release be removed until we have agreed upon language of the release."
A well-placed source in the UK operation said "all hell let loose" over the US intervention, with telephone calls "flying across the Atlantic" and a series of high-level meetings called to discuss the crisis.
The removal of the US press officer's name was agreed to placate Connecticut but the source confirmed the Americans were also assured they would be sent all future UK statements on Iraq before they were issued.
According to the source, the UK wing toned down later statements to avoid offending the US side of the operation. A statement issued in London on April 25, for example, was cleared in advance with the US, the source said.
Headed "The war is not over for the children of Iraq", it made no mention let alone criticism of coalition forces. The looting of some hospitals was highlighted but not the widespread criticism at the time that troops were standing by and doing nothing.
Save the Children US concentrates on fundraising and is said by London insiders to be anxious to curb campaigning by the UK arm.
Ms Sherman was unavailable for comment until next week, her office said.
But in a statement to the Guardian, Save the Children UK said it had not retracted the release at the heart of the row but had removed the name of Ms Amoroso, saying it had been an error not to consult her.
Subsequent statements, it added, reflected the fact that the situation "had moved on" as medical supplies had landed in Jordan to be moved to Baghdad. "We do not agree news releases issued in Save the Children UK's name with Save the Children US or any other member of the International Save the Children Alliance," the London statement said. "Wherever possible we do share Save the Children UK news releases before they are issued with other alliance members working in the same area. If any changes are suggested by other alliance members to Save the Children releases, they are made or not at our discretion."
The tensions over potential donor influence are not limited to the Iraq crisis. Other internal emails and documents disclose how Save the Children UK was nervous about the reaction of a major donor company, Serco, which makes huge profits from outsourcing, when the charity prepared to criticize the impact of privatisation on children.
A number of staff were aghast in the summer of 2002 when a chapter critical of private finance initiatives, written for a report published ahead of the Johannesburg sustainable development summit, was deleted by senior figures in the charity just before it was printed.
There is nothing in the documents to suggest that Serco exerted any pressure, but according to the emails, the charity's staff were anxious not to upset it. One email copied widely in the organization admitted "underlying tensions" existed between the corporate fundraising unit and campaigners arguing that PFIs in basic services did not benefit children.
Another warned that criticism of PFIs by the charity was "naturally making some of our corporate sponsors edgy", and the director general, Mike Aaronson, wanted a full briefing ahead of a meeting with a big private donor.
As the internal debate raged, fundraiser Helen Barnes warned she was in a "tricky position" with Serco, which ran hospitals, prisons and schools for the government. Although about to cease being a corporate member, the firm, she said, "is still keen to support us" as she argued against portraying it as a company operating solely for profit.
"Serco takes its social responsibilities very seriously and invests in the communities in which it operates," Ms Barnes said.
Serco, which is heavily involved in the defense sector, raised a total of 626,500 for the charity, as well as naming its yacht Save the Children in the BT Global Challenge race three years ago. The charity's statement yesterday said: "At no point [in] the relationship did Serco attempt to influence Save the Children UK policy on any issue." It continued: "We were able to edit most of the report to meet the required standard but one chapter required further work before it could be approved for publication. Because time was short we decided to drop this chapter to allow the rest of the report to be published in time for the conference."
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11252
Insisting that the selection process was transparent and fair, Mr Nash said UK firms, including Amec, Foster Wheeler and Serco, had so far won $ 1.6bn of orders - although Parsons alone has won a share of $ 4.6bn of work.SERCO
Serco history ..do you remember this story?
Serco - Save the Children UK Silenced on Iraq
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=9230
by Kevin Maguire, Guardian (London)November 28th, 2003
One of Britain's most high-profile charities was ordered to end criticism of military action in Iraq by its powerful US wing to avoid jeopardizing financial support from Washington and corporate donors, a Ginvestigation has discovered.
Internal emails reveal how Save the Children UK came under enormous pressure after it accused coalition forces of breaching the Geneva convention by blocking humanitarian aid.
Senior figures at Save the Children US, based in Westport, Connecticut, demanded the withdrawal of the criticism and an effective veto on any future statements blaming the invasion for the plight of Iraqi civilians suffering malnourishment and shortages of medical supplies.
Uncovered documents expose tensions within an alliance that describes itself as "the world's largest independent global organization for children" but which is heavily reliant on governments and big business for cash.
Save the Children UK, which had an income of 122m in 2002-03, boasts the Queen as patron and Princess Anne as president, plus a phalanx of the great and the good lending their titles and time. The tensions over potential donor influence are not limited to the Iraq crisis. Other internal emails and documents disclose how Save the Children UK was nervous about the reaction of a major donor company, Serco, which makes huge profits from outsourcing, when the charity prepared to criticize the impact of privatization on children.
The row over Iraq erupted in April when the London statement said coalition forces had gone back on an earlier agreement to allow a relief plane, packed with emergency food and medical supplies for 40,000 people, to land in northern Iraq.
Rob MacGillivray, the UK wing's emergency program manager, released a statement which stated that the "lack of cooperation from the coalition forces is a breach of the Geneva conventions and its protocols, but more importantly the time now being wasted is costing children their lives".
Within hours of the statement appearing, the US wing was demanding its withdrawal. Emails sent to staff in Britain by Dianne Sherman, associate vice-president for public affairs and communications in Connecticut, headed "Save/UK criticizes US military", expressed dismay and censured the UK operation.
Ms Sherman said the Americans were "really astonished at today's release, which went out without our prior knowledge, that attacks the US military".
Her email went on: "This is undermining all the great work we've done, much of it in collaboration with you. We'll have to see the consequences of how this plays out - including affecting our future funding from the government."
A number of less controversial "joint messages" were proposed by Ms Sherman, none of which criticized any aspect of the invasion or occupation. She instead wanted the UK and US groups to point out that humanitarian organizations were still not permitted access to most of Iraq, that delays harmed children and, on a positive note, that relief work was under way in Umm Qasr, Masul and northern Iraq.
"Safe, secure conditions must be created immediately to allow humanitarians to bring in essential supplies and expertise to the people of Iraq," was her alternative version.
Accounts published by Save the Children US highlight its vulnerability to political pressure from a Republican White House with "government grants and contracts" generating some 60%, nearly 71m, of its 119m operating support and revenue. The proportion is also high in the UK, where 60.1m - 49% - of the organization's income is "grants and gifts in kind from institutional donors", including the government.
Ms Sherman copied her broadside to US executives including Ann van Dusen, the executive vice-president, Rudy von Bernuth, vice-president and managing director of its children in emergencies section, and Andrea Williamson-Hughes, corporate secretary.
When she discovered the London statement had been posted on the UK organization's website, Ms Sherman also demanded the deletion of US press officer Nicole Amoroso's name as a contact, adding in a second email: "I would also strongly suggest that the press release be removed until we have agreed upon language of the release."
A well-placed source in the UK operation said "all hell let loose" over the US intervention, with telephone calls "flying across the Atlantic" and a series of high-level meetings called to discuss the crisis.
The removal of the US press officer's name was agreed to placate Connecticut but the source confirmed the Americans were also assured they would be sent all future UK statements on Iraq before they were issued.
According to the source, the UK wing toned down later statements to avoid offending the US side of the operation. A statement issued in London on April 25, for example, was cleared in advance with the US, the source said.
Headed "The war is not over for the children of Iraq", it made no mention let alone criticism of coalition forces. The looting of some hospitals was highlighted but not the widespread criticism at the time that troops were standing by and doing nothing.
Save the Children US concentrates on fundraising and is said by London insiders to be anxious to curb campaigning by the UK arm.
Ms Sherman was unavailable for comment until next week, her office said.
But in a statement to the Guardian, Save the Children UK said it had not retracted the release at the heart of the row but had removed the name of Ms Amoroso, saying it had been an error not to consult her.
Subsequent statements, it added, reflected the fact that the situation "had moved on" as medical supplies had landed in Jordan to be moved to Baghdad. "We do not agree news releases issued in Save the Children UK's name with Save the Children US or any other member of the International Save the Children Alliance," the London statement said. "Wherever possible we do share Save the Children UK news releases before they are issued with other alliance members working in the same area. If any changes are suggested by other alliance members to Save the Children releases, they are made or not at our discretion."
The tensions over potential donor influence are not limited to the Iraq crisis. Other internal emails and documents disclose how Save the Children UK was nervous about the reaction of a major donor company, Serco, which makes huge profits from outsourcing, when the charity prepared to criticize the impact of privatisation on children.
A number of staff were aghast in the summer of 2002 when a chapter critical of private finance initiatives, written for a report published ahead of the Johannesburg sustainable development summit, was deleted by senior figures in the charity just before it was printed.
There is nothing in the documents to suggest that Serco exerted any pressure, but according to the emails, the charity's staff were anxious not to upset it. One email copied widely in the organization admitted "underlying tensions" existed between the corporate fundraising unit and campaigners arguing that PFIs in basic services did not benefit children.
Another warned that criticism of PFIs by the charity was "naturally making some of our corporate sponsors edgy", and the director general, Mike Aaronson, wanted a full briefing ahead of a meeting with a big private donor.
As the internal debate raged, fundraiser Helen Barnes warned she was in a "tricky position" with Serco, which ran hospitals, prisons and schools for the government. Although about to cease being a corporate member, the firm, she said, "is still keen to support us" as she argued against portraying it as a company operating solely for profit.
"Serco takes its social responsibilities very seriously and invests in the communities in which it operates," Ms Barnes said.
Serco, which is heavily involved in the defense sector, raised a total of 626,500 for the charity, as well as naming its yacht Save the Children in the BT Global Challenge race three years ago. The charity's statement yesterday said: "At no point [in] the relationship did Serco attempt to influence Save the Children UK policy on any issue." It continued: "We were able to edit most of the report to meet the required standard but one chapter required further work before it could be approved for publication. Because time was short we decided to drop this chapter to allow the rest of the report to be published in time for the conference."
30/09/2007
Raytheon Selected to Consolidate U.S. Army Training Worldwide
Raytheon Selected for Experience and Solutions to Consolidate U.S. Army Training Worldwide..help.....they're coming to Wales!
The U.S. Army has selected the Warrior Training Alliance (WTA) led by Raytheon Company, in collaboration with Computer Sciences Corporation, to improve readiness and effectiveness of soldiers through the consolidation of its live, virtual and constructive training support contracts. The contract carries an estimated total program value of $11.2 billion over a 10-year period.
“The WTA team is already in place at 93 percent of the Army’s training sites and is proven in performance,” said Richard R. Yuse, a Raytheon vice president and Raytheon Technical Services Company LLC president. “The alliance is ready and will ensure training continuity to provide smooth contract transition.”
The WTA will provide integrated turnkey, lifecycle training services and support worldwide. Work performed by the WTA will include: support for training exercises and operations; maintenance for all training and range systems; curriculum development and instruction (e.g. brain washing) management oversight and administration for
and supply support for all government-owned property and material.
“We offer innovative and demonstrated support solutions,” said A. Michael Edwards, WTA vice president and program manager. “We provide a hub for seamless training support integration that uses effective communication and information technologies and cost-efficiencies for soldier readiness anytime, anywhere.”
The WTA is an alliance of member companies dedicated to providing integrated training support to the warfighter. WTA has proven, current and relevant experience across all training environments and a comprehensive approach to delivering integrated support for the live, virtual and constructive environments.
Live training is conducted in a physical environment such as a firing range or maneuver area. - where will this be - St Athan or Brecon Beacons or a street near you??
Virtual training takes place using simulators to create realistic training experiences.
Constructive training uses computer models and game-like simulations.
 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
