BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
- Like Jay-Z + the Beatles, But Worse
- Update: Help for Homeless Children
- Bush Era, Revised -- and with More Barbeque
- The Tax Woman Cometh
- Paging Mr. Stanford: Antigua Called
- Who Are You Calling Partisan?
- Update: IRS Won't Use Private Debt Collectors
- But Is It Art?
- PMA Scandal a Sore Point for Dems in 2010?
- Down in Flames
- A New Mystery for RNC Chief
- PMA Clients Were Big Givers
- Raided Lobby Firm Still a Force on Capitol Hill
- Stanford Update: Another $143 Mil Found
- Cheney, Hooked on Controversy
TOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- Cheney
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- IRS
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- PMA
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Stanford
- Steele
- Terror
- Troopergate
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
« Previous | Main | Next »
State Department Official Resigns in Wake of Blackwater Criticism
October 24, 2007 1:03 PM
The assistant secretary of state, who oversaw diplomatic security, submitted his resignation in the wake of a report critical of his handling of Blackwater security contractors, according to the State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.
McCormack confirmed Ambassador Richard Griffin had told his staff earlier today he would be submitting his resignation to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, as the Blotter previously reported.
"Secretary Rice is grateful to Ambassador Griffin for his record of long exemplary service to the nation," McCormack said. "He has distinguished himself during a 36-year career with the U.S. government, serving in some of the most sensitive and demanding posts."
THE BLOTTER RECOMMENDS
- Photos 1st Photos of Blackwater Sept. 16 Incident
- Blotter Dem: Blackwater Dodged Millions in Taxes
- Blotter Blackwater: Shoot First, Face Questions Later, Committee Says
- Blotter Exclusive: First Images of Controversial Blackwater Incident
- Blotter Report: Private Military Contractors Hurt War Effort
- Blotter Congress Wants Testimony From Blackwater Boss
- Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.
Griffin's resignation follows the release yesterday of a State Department review that found serious problems with the operations of the Diplomatic Security Service, which Griffin oversaw, including lax oversight of private security contractors, including Blackwater USA.
The review panel found the Diplomatic Security Service did not have enough agents and needed better Arabic language skills and cultural awareness.
The panel was appointed by Secretary Rice to review "the State Department's handling of security practices in Iraq," following a Sept. 16, 2007 incident involving Blackwater security guards in which 17 Iraqi civilians died.
The panel's key finding states "prompt measures should be taken to strengthen the coordination, oversight and accountability aspects of the State Department's security practices in Iraq in order to reduce the likelihood that future incidents will occur that adversely affect the overall U.S. mission in Iraq," the panel of outside experts concluded.
Earlier this month, Griffin faced tough questions from House Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., about State Department failures to investigate shootings of Iraqi civilians by Blackwater security guards.
Read Ambassador Griffin's letter of resignation.
This post has been updated.
Do you have a tip for Brian Ross and the Investigative Team?
October 24, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (37)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
They should call them what they are - mercenaries. Soldiers who have no discipline or code that we unleashed in Iraq. Keep up with this story... there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.
Posted by: DaveM | Oct 24, 2007 1:21:28 PM
Wow.... He's resigning first?
Don't memebers of this administration at least wait around until they get the "Medal of Freedom" and then they resign to be with their family?
Posted by: Roy | Oct 24, 2007 1:28:49 PM
Call em what they are - mercenaries; soldiers without the discipline and code of our military. And because we don't have enough troops to do the job, we hire this "army for pay" and unleash them on the civilians in Iraq. No wonder they hate us.
Posted by: DaveM | Oct 24, 2007 1:36:37 PM
Another sacrificial lamb. Go in peace.
Posted by: dena | Oct 24, 2007 1:42:51 PM
money money money... who has the money???
Posted by: marvoman | Oct 24, 2007 2:39:31 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if he resurfaces as a director of said security company
Posted by: Chris | Oct 24, 2007 3:08:08 PM
You would resign to if you had his job.
After allowing all this happen and then having to cover yourself from all those kick-backs, you would retire too.
He has the money...
(Pink Floyd)
Posted by: Watcher | Oct 24, 2007 3:13:05 PM
Griffin is yet one more war monger to bite the dust. When's the Chief War Criminal, Cheney gonna resign?
Posted by: Mossad | Oct 24, 2007 3:17:43 PM
Smith's glad to go. Most of w's goons are looking for any way out of this deultory administration and their $2.4 trillion war mongering.
Posted by: wordvarc | Oct 24, 2007 3:24:49 PM
Mercenaries? Soldiers without the discipline and code of our military? Oh come on.... at least have some sense of what you are talking about before jumping on the band wagon. Most contractors carrying weapons in Iraq are former/retired US or Western military, and are subjected to more stringent rules for the use of force than the military. I despise how so many uninformed people suddenly act like they are experts when they are too lazy to get out of their living rooms and even bother to serve their military, let alone go to a war zone in any capacity! Of all the people who have posted such comments, how many have ever left the US, let alone gone to Iraq? You better pack a change of shorts... it's not a place for the weak and lazy!
Posted by: John | Oct 24, 2007 3:28:38 PM
What...you think these guys operate in a Sunday School environment? Bad guys don't wear uniforms. They fire from positions that are in and among innocent people. Those who criticise...you think you are so righteous? Have you ever walked in harms way? If not, you are spewing crap that you have no clue about. Been there. Done that. These guys protect our diplomats. In another year or so, they'll be protecting Democrats. You think the Demo's will have a bunch of sissy-boys protecting them? When it comes to the REAL world, they'll employ tough men who are man enough to make tough decisions...like killing bad guys who hide behind children. And yes, innocent people will die sometimes.
Posted by: Mike | Oct 24, 2007 3:29:57 PM
What a shame! Your heart really has to go out to this guy. I wonder what his futute plans are: A nice cushy job with Blackwater? A stint as a Cheney advisor? Or maybe just a long leisurely trip to his offshore bank account.
Posted by: Rick | Oct 24, 2007 3:40:32 PM
Who really cares what happens to this
guy??? The real question is when are they
going to get the real crooks Bush and
Cheney and put them up for WAR CRIMES.
Posted by: Joe | Oct 24, 2007 4:15:06 PM
My comment is addressed to DaveM, John and Mike.
First DaveM
You believe they have no honor, but just because black water did what they did does not mean other security details are of the same ilk.
Yet I really do like the other piece of your statement. Looking deeper into the situation, I always believe in studying a situation. I think whatever comes out of this will be for the better. Things get broken and then must be refined. Yet I would also like to see the compared costs of running these military contracts and our own military and see why we hire out our services. Some have acted like their own experts and stated their is not enough soldiers in Iraq. Well lets look into that as well. If not during war time maybe after it when we can set our own pace and not at the cost of our troops.
John.
It appears that you are more angry at people having an opinion that differs from yours then you are with the facts that have been brought forth through investigation by our country as well as theirs. Most of your argument seems to lack merit and attacks peoples functions instead of the misconduct of people that are meant to protect.
I am not a surgeon, yet I believe a surgeon should be held accountable for his actions... but since I am not one, I have no right to state an evident opinion about their behavior when they accidentally lopped off the wrong leg? This seems to be your argument.
That seems dis genuine.
Mike
You have a fair argument at first. The enemy does hide among civilians in order to create more turmoil and frustrations. Yet from an extensive report, it does not appear that Black Water was within its right to kill targets. An overwhelming amount of witnesses said no one fired at them, there was no activity to suggest that they were under fire.
Then you relate it to political party? What does have to do with the situation? I mean are you that blinded by political issues and your own that you bring that into the argument that was never related to blue or red. Just because people oppose something does not mean they are liberals or conservatives. Bringing in personal scathing attacks does not seem like an intelligent debate. unless that was your intent...
Posted by: JR | Oct 24, 2007 4:19:04 PM
Spare me the macho B.S.!! We are spending billions in Iraq for this made up war. These guys are bilking us and behaving like idiots.
Posted by: stephen | Oct 24, 2007 4:31:48 PM
How many of you armchair quarterbacks have ever protected our diplomats. You notice none of our diplomats have been killed or injured while being protected by Blackwater.
Posted by: Jim | Oct 24, 2007 5:26:55 PM
The biggest problem with this whole issue is the idea that civilian casualties are ever acceptable. If a terrorist hides behind a child its not ok to shoot the kid and blame it on the terrorist. Being in a life-threatening situation does not justify killing civilians and blaming it on the terrorists. Bombing civilian homes is not ok just because a bad guy shoots from inside it. Instead of "carefully" shooting at "possible" terrorists in the area and hoping not to kill civilians, we should change our approach to fighting them. Killing civilians should NEVER be acceptable, it is immoral and criminal.
Posted by: Jimmy | Oct 24, 2007 6:05:44 PM
All those in favor of sending the pro war bigots to Iraq, say yeah! They are just cowards. If they had a ounce of courage they would be in Iraq, but they are afraid.
Posted by: Steve | Oct 24, 2007 7:36:15 PM
In a year he'll be pitching his tell-all book on all the talk shows. We may get a little peek into what went on, if only by seeing what the government forces him to omit from its pages.
Posted by: Rick_VT | Oct 24, 2007 8:18:07 PM
What a bunch of bs. You will NEVER have a code or honor to live by as you sit in your shopping mall world and visit war zones via CNN. Don't worry that while you and even soldiers sleep well at night, us "mercenaries" are out protecting the lives of people in Iraq that the military WILL PROTECT. So who is to do it?
Posted by: Frank | Oct 24, 2007 9:58:20 PM
Post a comment
