Exclusive: First Images of Controversial Blackwater Incident

September 28, 2007 3:54 PM

From The Blotter:

Blackwater_070928_main ABC News has obtained the first images of the controversial Sept. 16 shooting incident involving Blackwater security forces.

The still images, taken at 11:50 that morning, show the car bomb explosion near a financial compound in western Baghdad that precipitated the incident.

A State Department official was visiting the compound when the bomb went off about 25 yards from the entrance. Immediately after the explosion, Blackwater is said to have called for reinforcements. In later images, two convoys of Blackwater security forces are seen arriving at the compound 10 minutes later to escort the official.

Click Here for the Blackwater Slideshow.

As the two convoys escorting a State Department motorcade leave at 12:05 p.m., the third vehicle in the second convoy was attacked, according to Blackwater's version of events included in a sensitive but unclassified State Department report obtained by ABC News: "A white LN sedan had approached the motorcade at a high rate of speed from the south. The gunners [Blackwater forces] used hand and arm signals to stop the vehicle, then threw water bottles to get the driver’s attention. Local pedestrians also attempted to wave down the vehicle, but the vehicle continued at a high rate of speed. The gunners then engaged the vehicle with M4s [rifle] and later M240B [machine gun]."

The Blackwater account of the incident also describes the activities of Iraqi policemen (IPs) in the incident.

"An IP then ran to the vehicle, peered inside, then began to push the vehicle towards the motorcade. The gunners then engaged the vehicle again, and the IP ran away."

According to the account, Iraqi policemen started shooting from a shack and a tree line south of the convoys and an insurgent in civilian clothes started firing on the convoy from a dirt mound.

Click Here to Register to Receive Blotter Alerts.

In sworn statements given to State Department investigators and obtained by ABC News, Blackwater guards provide detailed accounts of the incident. At least four of them reported firing their weapons at the white sedan which approached the convoy.

"I turned and engaged the car with approximately 20 to 30 rounds from my M4 rifle. After I no longer felt the threat to my life, I turned back to cover my sector," wrote one guard.

Blackwater guards also reported coming under fire from gunmen dressed in civilian clothes and Iraqi police. When one of the men in civilian clothes fired in a guards' direction, he reported, "I fired one shot from my SR25 at the closest threat.  He went down and did not fire anymore."   

One guard reported observing the driver of another white sedan pulling his vehicle into the convoy, prompting the guard to fire his weapon at the roof of the car.

"The driver exited the vehicle and produced a small device in his hand and held it out in the direction of his vehicle. I perceived this device to be a trigger for an explosive device.  Fearing for my life and the lives of my team members, I fired several well aimed rounds center mass at the threat," he said.

As the Blackwater vehicle injured in the attack was being towed away, one guard reported coming under fire from a red bus, returning fire and warning civilians to take cover.

"As we were going over the curb, I noticed several civilians and I was motioning, and screaming that they get down and find cover," he said.

Other photos obtained by ABC News depict the level of damage caused by the vehicle explosion.

Included in the State Department report is a photo depicting the alleged damage to the Blackwater vehicle.

"During the encounter, numerous small arms rounds impacted the Command vehicle, including at least one round that ricocheted off of the ground and into the radiator, rendering the vehicle immobilized," according to the report.

Blackwater's account of the incident is very different from the description provided by the Iraqi Interior Ministry. According to the Iraqi account, Blackwater guards halted traffic and fired on a white sedan that failed to slow down as it approached their convoy. That car erupted in flames, killing the driver and a woman and Blackwater guards continued to fire their weapons as people fled the scene. According to the ministry, Blackwater guards killed a total of 11 people and wounded 12.

Blackwater has been involved in a series of other incidents over the year, and the Iraqi government has asked for the company to be banned in the country. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has asked for a "full and complete" review of the incident, along with four other incidents involving Blackwater guards killing civilians.

A Blackwater spokeswoman said, "We can't provide a comment except to say this is an ongoing investigation."

A State Department spokesman told ABC News, "Look, you know, I am sure that at a certain point, once the investigation is concluded, we can deal with all those questions. But I'm not trying to rule anything in. I'm not trying to rule anything out. I'm telling you that we have an investigation that is ongoing."

This post has been updated.

Marcus Baram contributed to this report.

Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.

To Blotter Homepage

September 28, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (53)

User Comments

Blackwater was in the right to protect the State Department official. That is their job.. There could of been ballistic taken to see who killed who.. but what I know of insurgents why will dress in civilian cloths.. and they would shoot anyone and blame US troops. .. Those IP's are just lucky they weren't all killed.. Then again that would of opened a bigger can of worms.. Therefore they were allowed to live..
THANK YOU BLACKWATER FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK IN IRAQ!!!and around the world..

Posted by: MeanBiker | Sep 28, 2007 5:20:49 PM

The trouble with any (and all) reports endorsed by the Bush administration is that it habitually Big Lies, and has from day one. I certainly don't believe a single word of this State Department account. Frankly, why journalists at Disney/ABC continue to credit those people is inexplicable. It makes them ("you") all look silly.

Posted by: JW Lynch | Sep 28, 2007 5:22:31 PM

why did it take so long for this mis-information...i mean information to come out? was someone cooking the books?

Posted by: annonymous | Sep 28, 2007 5:40:08 PM

More deception. If this is the incident why not show the video clip - not pick and choose to suit Blackwater's version. I am presently looking for the video that these images are actually from - not the Blackwater incident. I've seen them before. Unless the video clip is seen in its entirety then these images are what is called in law enforcement as planted evidence.

Posted by: Paul | Sep 28, 2007 5:56:12 PM

blackwater and other companies like it will be the end of this country. they need to be held accountable and they need to be OUT of new orleans. its a disgrace. i dont blame the individual workers, many of whom are from depressed areas created by the same people who support/create a blackwater.

look at their board of directors. look at their lead counsel. abc stop carrying bush's water.

Posted by: dexxjones | Sep 28, 2007 5:56:22 PM

MeanBiker
No need to thank them, you are paying them handsomely. I just hope they save some $$ for their PTSD treatment after they come home and are kicked to the curb like some day laborer. More good policy.

Posted by: Freshwrestler | Sep 28, 2007 6:04:29 PM

Of course ABC has these exclusive images. They had the exclusive images of the fake Moon Landing too. Nice job helping the government get out of another tight spot - this time with 007s running around murdering the innocent people of Iraq. Innocent has already been proven by the FBI. If only Disney World would report the facts as they come in instead of making the news the soap opera of the day. The FBI named Saudi Arabia as the financiers of 9/11 and they also had the majority of hijackers . The real kicker is a rich Saudi national and personal friends of the Bush family was also named by all levels of the US government as the mastermind - Osama bin Laden. That makes them the country that attacked the US on 9/11. This exclusive report comes as no surprise. The credits should read - "This faked report has been paid for by the US government - courtesy of Disney Production Studios - ABC"

Posted by: Paul W Kincaid | Sep 28, 2007 6:15:19 PM

These pictures really don't cover the shoot out. I don't think there was any question about there being a bomb, but that event was several minutes and about a mile away from the scene of the shoot out. ABC purporting these pictures to be of the incident is misleading because one is left with the impression that the entire controversy revolves around the bombing. There is only one picture in the set which show's the scene of the actual shootout, and that is an aerial photo which shows the locations of various vehicles, but no detal about the scene what so ever.

I do smell a rat here actually. They are saying 'look at these scenes of massive destruction, none of which is Blackwaters fault, but all of which are (said to be of) the scene of the controversy, and you can understand why the Blackwater guys were shooting everything up. Heck, by looking at the scene of the bomb, you might even tend to blame the blast for some of the deaths. But this is really a bait and switch. I want to see the pictures of the actual shoot out...

Posted by: Ken | Sep 28, 2007 6:17:36 PM

Its pretty obvious from the size of the initial blasts that the only people who would be there would either be the target of the blast ( US convoy ) or enemy combatants. Don't tell me that innocent civilians pushing baby carriages were simply walking by that bomb scene. You got to be a fool to think everyone innocent didn't run as far away as possible.

Posted by: NortonPete | Sep 28, 2007 6:19:42 PM

Good old haters are always around to blind the peeps and propel the lies forward.

He takes the Blackwater account as fact, despite how many times they've swindled and lied so far, and applauds them for their accounts version. Problem is, if their account is completely wrong, hateful glee at the death of "insurgents" and the fleeing of the "IPs"

It is sad to see how American citizens have been so dumbed down. You're almost like children, so naive and so scared.

Posted by: chris | Sep 28, 2007 6:27:32 PM

Look we all know just how dangerous it is in Iraq, I for one back our troops there, even if I disagree with our president, however If these men believed they were in danger who are we to say they werent, we are not there, and I trust the Iraqi government about as much as I trust ours.

Posted by: Elizabeth | Sep 28, 2007 6:47:13 PM

Blackwater will stay right where they are. They are the ones who protect the politicans when they come to town. They want these guys to exercise the utmost caution. In this case they did what they had to do. If you hesitate you are dead. You sensitive types need to spend some time in the bush before you criticize guys who have been there.

Posted by: gary | Sep 28, 2007 6:48:53 PM

Who thought for a moment that urban warfare was going to be easy ? Americans have gotten too spoiled by the use of high tech devices, stealth, smart bombs and cruise missiles. This fight involves non-uniformed civilian combatants. I realize everyone wants to see team jerseys and mascots...but this isn't that kind of altercation.

Posted by: Doug | Sep 28, 2007 7:21:30 PM

Spent 16 months in Iraq, 12 of which was in the IZ in Baghdad. Had Blackwater all around and speak from experience. They are generally out of control!!! I have little use for them or their tactics. Loose canons and Rambo wanna beez.... In my opinion, the Iraqi's are lying as well to gain world pity for their plight under US control. Boths sides were at fault, I am almost sure.... Don't like them. Don't want them around. Whenever they show up, so does some kind of trouble... There are 3 types of water in the Utilities business: White water or clear water and
thats what you drink: Gray water and thats from your laudry or your sink. Then there is Black water and that is sewage. I think the name fits them very well!!!!!!

Posted by: MLS | Sep 28, 2007 7:37:36 PM

If Iraq thinks Blackwater is so bad then why does Blackwater to this day still protect their prime minister and not use their own troops? The pictures prove what has been said all along, they reacted to insurgent threats and not open fire on civilians.

Posted by: RANDY | Sep 28, 2007 9:35:00 PM

"It's all a Blackwater Conspiracy", screams the leftist nutroots. Where did ABC get the video? Probably from the insurgents filming the event for thier next propaganda DVD!!!!!!

Posted by: JJM | Sep 28, 2007 10:14:13 PM

where is the tape that the iraqi claims to have? I'm positive it will not be greeted with the same cynicism/distrust as these department of state images, especially if it shows blackwater doing something wrong.

Posted by: MJ | Sep 28, 2007 10:53:30 PM

the vehicle that is alleged to show damage from this incident looks very different from the third vehicle in the second convoy that is alleged to have been attacked.

Posted by: Wim Prange | Sep 28, 2007 11:07:16 PM

The video can't be very kind to Blackwater or we would've seen it by now. Blackwater needs to go out of business and this job should go back to the Marines who are accountable to us. Thanks for your post, MLS. I don't doubt you for a minute.

Posted by: A2 | Sep 28, 2007 11:19:10 PM

I have spoken with several soldiers who have seen blackwater usa in action and they have all agreed they are making matters far more dangerous in iraq for our military personnel. These p.m.c. mercs are the true terrorists of the region. They do not value peace and do not value the safety of american soldiers. They do how ever value agitating the indigenous population with racist slurs and goon behavior. They create more enemies then they protect against. But considering the war in itself is illegal and the government reason for going is to serve the imperialist agenda

Posted by: stephen | Sep 29, 2007 12:41:19 AM

Some of the training I received in the military was driving and protecting Senior Officers and Senior Civilian employees overseas.

The rules of engagement were pretty simple:

1. Protect the passenger by any means necessary, including lethal force.

2. Distance them from the incident area immediately, by any means necessary and without stopping.

3. If stopped, lay down a 180 degree field of fire to suppress the threat and evacuate the passenger to the backup vehicle.

4. If rushed by a crowd, do not stop until you have enough bodies piled up to lose traction and then refer to rule three.

My trainers were retired Secret Service agents and these are the rules they follow every day when in motion.

This is the reality folks when it comes to protecting someones life and your own. Blackwater was following standard SOP and successfully extracted their client from harms way.

The unwritten rule is: Do what you have to do and let God sort out the bad guys.

Posted by: Guardian | Sep 29, 2007 4:44:22 AM

OK, when have we ever seen car bomb video footage before? And was this video hand-picked by the State?

And we're supposed to take special interest in the bullet dents of a vehicle in a war zone? How do we know it is from this particular instance?

And the ABC's coverage only shows the car bomb. What about when blackwater opened fire?

Will ABC get other video from other sources? Does ABC want to be the propaganda machine of the State?

Posted by: JRT | Sep 29, 2007 4:58:11 AM

The only people more full of BS than the Iraqi govt and the US govt are the people on this board. We should be ashamed that our govt supports and pays mercenaries to do our fighting for us. This goes about as low as the terrorists. In 2004 during the election cycle GWB told the world the Iraqi military would be fully trained, armed, and ready to take control by Sept. 2005. What ever happened to that? Why does it take so long to train their military to protect themselves? It all seems a little to self serving to me. We are still there for a reason and in my heart I believe it has to do with the lack of oil production.

Posted by: DK | Sep 29, 2007 5:07:33 AM

THis is shameless.

As others have noted, these pictures have nothing to do with the attack that resulted in civilian deaths. The aerial photo isn't even from that day...it just a picture of where the vehicles supposedly were on the square. Nor does the caption of the picture of the armored vehicle -- which puports to show "damage" from "small arms fire" even claim that the damage was sustained in the square at the relevant time.

Posted by: paul_lukasiak | Sep 29, 2007 8:33:45 AM

guardian's right; put yourself even 200 yards from this blast. whatch'a gonna do? Who you gonna call? Okay, the civvie's aren't as trained or as disciplined as the soldiers, but don't you want the soldiers home? If that's your option, then the mercs are gonna stay and provide detail for the suits...

Posted by: Jazz | Sep 29, 2007 9:48:33 AM

These pictures are proof positive that Blackwater did nothing wrong. The reality of war is that civilians unfortunately get killed. In this case it seems obvious that the 20 civilians were either NOT civilians or were killed by the roadside bomb itself.

The Dems need to either shut up, get with the program, or move to another country.

The people of Blackwater are heros and are doing a very difficult job in a very difficult place. They deserve our praise.

The scorn of the Dems on the brave men of Blackwater is a badge of courage.

Posted by: David Bradley | Sep 29, 2007 10:17:44 AM

Terrorist are waging a propaganda war, our main stream media and the Liberals have fallen for it and are compelled to past it on to the rest of the world. it this war has a out come that will dissolve global terrorism, it won't be because the left and media had anything to do with it....

Posted by: Freddie | Sep 29, 2007 10:29:22 AM

Is this a joke? One lousy photo of what could have happened anywhere at anytime.
Where is the video? And, how did the first blog post just happen to be pro-Blackwater?

Posted by: powmadeak47 | Sep 29, 2007 10:32:15 AM

you wing nut really have me laughing at all you "bush lied" "blackwater lied" bullcrap

someone spell out exactly what the lie was...tell me exactly what bush lied about...what did black water lie about?

senerio: a cop gets infomation that a drug dealer is dealing inside a specific house but while the cop is geting his team together and the nessesary warrents the dealer flushes the drugs down the toilet...oh no! they didnt find any drugs,,,does that mean the cop lied? or better yet the drug dealer slipped the drugs to one of his nieghbors.

at least 18 UN resolutions telling irag "you better stop and prove to us you have stopped or else"

how many warnings do ou have to give before someone should do something?

would you give a drunk driver 18 warnings before you locked him up?

Posted by: you lefties are nuts | Sep 29, 2007 11:28:15 AM

Been there, done that. BW is completely out of control. We stayed away from known BWs.

Pictures show little. State department dude should have stayed in his well-protected bunker for the duration. Next time, the freedom fighters will likely be better prepared, perhaps mining the road.

BTW, white car was approaching at oblique angle, at high speed against the convoy traffic flow? Why was that a threat? That is total hogwash. Whitewash!

Iraq PM uses BW because he is a puppet of our govt, duh!

Posted by: IntelVet | Sep 29, 2007 11:28:47 AM

Blackwater is only carrying out Bush and Cheney's policy to reduce the population of Iraq, so it will be convenient to turn Iraq into another Saudi Arabia. One must realize that George Bush has turned the United States into a very sick, sadistic country.

Posted by: US Citizen | Sep 29, 2007 1:23:38 PM

There are lies and then damn lies...regardless of what transpired, governments lie and kill with impunity while the "peasants" are either forced into the lies or killed. Also, the Geneva Convention will not protect mercenaries.

Posted by: Eddie | Sep 29, 2007 1:33:41 PM

Civilian vehicles interferring with a line of civilian vehicles (blackwater vehicles are NOT military). Iraqi policemen firing a "civilians" (Blackwater are NOT military) that are firing at their civilians.

Posted by: TekBoss | Sep 29, 2007 2:39:01 PM

Why is it we have Blackwater anyway? Why are they serving the function of military personnel and/or secret service? Oh, that's right, Iraq was the great privatization experiment. Everything was to be privatized, then brought back to the States. What's going to happen when these mercenaries return to the U.S.? Why is it now o.k. to have corporate militia's on American soil? (North Caroline, San Diego bases for Blackwater) This is absolutely nuts.

Posted by: J. Webster | Sep 29, 2007 5:34:08 PM

The reason we have Blackwater over there in Iraq is, basically, two fold.

1. With the cuts in the military in the 90's. We don't have the personnel like we use to.

2. The civilian agencies operating in Iraq don't want to compromise or relinquish control of their security to the military. They would much rather come and go as they please and not be confined by supposed limitations by the military.

I'd much rather have the military do the job and not have guns-for-hire over there. But the reality dictates otherwise, hopefully not for long.


KoS

Posted by: KoS | Sep 29, 2007 7:05:55 PM

THIS INFORMATION IS NOT TRUE.

PLEASE FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THIS.

DO NOT ALLOW MORE INNOCENT IRAQIS DIE
BECAUSE OF THIS RELIGIOUS GROUP WITH AN AGENDA.

JIMMY

YES I KNOW IT IS NOT NICE TO YELL.

IT IS ALSO NOT NICE TO KILL.

Posted by: Jimmy Galecki | Sep 30, 2007 1:57:35 AM

When serving military who have seen Blackwater in action are prepared to label them racist goons causing more threat to the troops I am prepared to believe them. Blackwater should be disbanded as a murderous institution.

Blackwater is seeking employment in the United States. They were employed after Katrina. At that time there were a lot of phony claims about criminal activity. These claims were probably a large factor in Blackwater getting that employment. They now seek to be retained to 'help' after natural disasters or to provide 'security' to hotel chains. Any state or organization which employs them should be boycotted.

Posted by: Jane | Sep 30, 2007 10:35:10 AM

Nice touch, ABC, adding the "exclusive" images of the explosion, which was miles away and 15 minutes before the actual shootout, and the damage it caused - which has absolutely no bearing on the shooting incident - right before showing the Blackwater convoys. There are no images or video of the actual shootout that the mercenaries engaged in to "save their lives." If those mercenaries are so spooked by every white sedan, Iraqi policeman, civilians who might be disguised insurgents that they see then they clearly don't belong in our country.

Nice spin, ABC. You're doing a good job for the U.S. government and good "journalism."

Posted by: Zeyad | Sep 30, 2007 6:54:19 PM

If there are police raiding the crack house next door, does a civilian have the right to kill the crack house's occupants?
No, because only the police are authorized to use such force.

Since when is it legal for civilian businesses to engage in warfare? Blackwater should receive the same due process as I would if I went to another country and started killing people. Even if they claim self defense, they should claim it in a legal process.

Just ignoring the shootings establishes a dangerous precedent for American businesses to start killing people to serve their profit agenda.

Posted by: brianbwb | Oct 1, 2007 1:32:34 AM

Sorry ABC... I am not buying the bush lies being peddled here in this story. The entire Blackwater boondoggle needs to be shut down, in fact all mercenary contracts need to be canceled, and return the job of war to the experts in the military.

Just more proof that privatizing government is a complete and total bust, as it only creates more costly failure than the socialist military we used to have could ever have created.

These criminals will have their day in court...

Posted by: Connecticut Man1 | Oct 1, 2007 7:32:24 PM

These are not "our boys". These are mercenaries. They are there for money, not country. They have not been held responsible for their actions in the past, and they will not be held responsible now.

Is the Bush administration - who always support the troops - telling the world that US soldiers aren't good enough to protect State department personnel?

Why would the Bush administration - who always support the troops - refuse to raise the pay for US armed forces personnel, try to cut their benefits, not fully fund the VA, and allow conditions at military hospitals degrade the way they did at Walter Reed? But they'll pay mercenaries 2 or 3 or 4 times what a soldier gets, sometimes to do the same jobs?

Kickbacks, baby, kickbacks. The GOP, who like to call themselves the party of "fiscal responsibility", have no problem wasting BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars, so long as the money goes to their friends. The same friends who then turn around and "donate" back to the campaign funds and PACs of their GOP sponser.

Now we see what they *really* meant by "trickle-down economics".

Posted by: Court Jester | Oct 2, 2007 11:45:47 AM

We are supposed to beleive the following, "An IP then ran to the vehicle, peered inside, then began to push the vehicle towards the motorcade. The gunners then engaged the vehicle again, and the IP ran away."?!? Oh yeah, the cop was gonna push the maybe-a-car-bomb yards & yards to its 'target', and then set it off somehow - get real!

The Iraqi cop has been telling another tale, and his is much much more beleivable.

ABC News should be ashamed of itself for seeding confusion about the attack before the incident, versus the incident in the traffic circle - yes they are related, but no they are not the same thing (laws of physics, time & space, that kind of thing).

Posted by: Michael Murphy | Oct 2, 2007 4:11:29 PM

Great article. What I find troublesome is that no one is talking about the Iraqi Police firing at us. There are numerous incidents where Iraqi Police and Army have turned coat and fired on US personnel. Why is that only glossed over and why isn't our newspapers and government emphasizing that? What a lot of these folks don't understand is that you really don't know who your friends or enemies are until you are fired upon.

Posted by: James C | Oct 5, 2007 4:26:50 PM

James, if these modern-day Hessians were in Chicago gunning down civilians in the streets, don't you think American cops would be returning fire?

Posted by: bita | Oct 10, 2007 10:29:31 AM

Attention critics and conspiracy proponents:
1. Band together and form your own world security corporation.
2. Catch the next plane to the middle east and provide protection for all American Interests and personnel.
3. When Bombs are exploding and guns are firing be sure all your personnel only shoot known proven terrorists..(they are clearly marked on their UPC Label..aren't they?)
4. Hurry back home to receive the NOBEL Prize as soon as you have secured world peace.
5. Good Luck with that!

Posted by: GOD Fearing Man | Oct 11, 2007 9:35:55 AM

Attention fearful guy:

How about just not invading and occupying other people's countries?

That neatly avoids the need to turn into the world's Imperial Stormtroopers, and with the money we save we could become energy independent.

I hear a trillion dollars can buy a lot of engineering R&D. But at this point nothing will buy back the good name our country had only six years ago.

Posted by: God bites man | Oct 13, 2007 2:13:39 PM

I SUPPOSE WE NEED SOME RAMBOS-IF PROVOKED-(Courageous people)-AND we NEED THESE POEPLE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCE TO PROTECT OUR MEN AND also INNOCENT IRAQUIs MAINLY WOMEN , CHIDREN, plus visitors--people who want to help them--people with a conscience.

However these companies should be more co-ordinated in their planification when trying to solve the problems but not act like Rambos with no conscience.

Wasn't their men that were butchered and hung all over the places though? What a cruel sight for their parents to remember-- and that --some just to pay their mortgage.

You'd swear we were in Before the Middle Ages.

Let the Government of USA create more interesting and well renumerated jobs. Some of thee people are not well trained and plainly going to their death withoug compensation of any sort for their family and material losses. We seem to have a russian mentality here-men are not important--what No jobs for when they come back?

Posted by: CLAUDETTEDUMONT | Oct 24, 2007 1:30:27 AM

"Blackwater needs to go out of business and this job should go back to the Marines who are accountable to us." Posted by "A2"

As a Former Marine, I will be the first to say this: what do you know about the mission of the Marine Corps?

The mission of protecting diplomats and officials (not just the American ones) is not the mission of our Armed Forces. The PSCs you all love to condemn have been outsourced by a very undermanned DOS. They are vital to the diplomatic mission in Iraq, regardless of your opinion. And to all the armchairs here, have you been to Iraq? Of course not. You all display your complete lack of understanding of the Arab culture.

And Guardian, while your post was one of the most sensible ones here, it could be an OPSEC issue to reveal this info on this board. People here will NEVER have a clue what happens in the sandbox. But keep trying!

Posted by: John | Oct 26, 2007 5:40:29 AM

ClaudetteDumont:

What makes you think all security contractors are Rambo with no conscience? Do you know any? Only criminals have that kind of mentality, and the government will not allow criminals to be hired on to these jobs. Check out the websites of these companies and look at the requirements.

Yes, all come over for the money. Wouldn't you do something a bit risky for a short time to make a huge improvement in your family's life?
As far as remuneration and compensation, the US requires all DOD contracts to fall under the DBA. Research it. The Defense Base Act. And after they come home, they can easily go to another country and conduct security operations. The pay is commensurate with the experience of the individual and the danger of the location. Do some homework.

Posted by: I_Research_Before_I_Speak | Oct 26, 2007 6:32:09 AM

"...in fact all mercenary contracts need to be canceled, and return the job of war to the experts in the military..." posted by Connecticut Man1

Your opinion is flawed and based upon ignorance in the current state of our military.

If ALL the contracts are canceled, be prepared to grab a rifle, buddy. It is going to take a lot more soldiers to replace the SUPPORT positions contractors take over here. Do you really need a soldier in Iraq risking his life to wash laundry, or to be someone's secretary, or repair roads, or drive supply trucks? You idea is ludicrous.

Posted by: I_Research_Before_I_Speak | Oct 26, 2007 6:40:26 AM

And to all of you nuts who demand pictures and video of the shoot, you will not get them from a responsible person or organization as they will violate the privacy and security of all individuals involved in that incident. Even worse, such "evidence" will only catastrophically endanger future operations in this country due to the intelligence gleaned from it. The bad guys will be that much better prepared to predict the reactions of not only these "mercenaries", but also the soldiers who are doing the same mission for their senior enlisted, and other officers. The military has a term addressing this notion: OPSEC. Stop crying conspiracy and let the big boys do their job.

Posted by: I_Research_Before_I_Speak | Oct 26, 2007 6:44:55 AM

CAN I HEAR A AMEN....

Posted by: whisper | Mar 23, 2008 8:57:58 AM

I think they are doing an excellent job at what they are doing.They are simply doing their job. That is to protect. They protect themselves and the lives of others just as anybody in law enforcemnt or active military would. So are you ###### because an officer or soldier shoots back when they are fired on? In the world we live in today and the way some people are in the world today i think would be furious if it was their family that was in danger and nobody was there. Bullet holes dont just grow and appear on the sides of an Armored Personnel Carrier (APC).

Posted by: Brian | Apr 27, 2008 6:40:02 PM

Post a comment