KBR Only Contractor Granted Legal Immunity From Harming Soldiers And Civilians: Army Secretary McHugh

A Pentagon deal to grant one of America's largest military contractors immunity from harming soldiers and civilians in Iraq was a unique arrangement, according to Army Secretary John McHugh.

As previously reported in Huffington Post and the Oregonian, taxpayers may be on the hook to compensate more than 150 military veterans who claim that a Halliburton subsidiary knowingly exposed them to cancer-causing chemicals in Iraq.

As part of a lawsuit filed by 26 Oregon National Guard soldiers who claim that they suffered health problems through exposure to hexvalent chromium while patrolling a water treatment plant near Basra in Iraq, it was revealed that contractor Kellogg Brown Root demanded and received legal immunity in return for taking over the $7 billion project in 2003.

In the wake of the disclosure in early August, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) demanded some answers about the deal, including whether other military contractors have been granted similar immunity deals.

On Tuesday, McHugh responded to Blumenauer, explaining that KBR has not asserted its claims under the contract's indemnification clause. And he added that no other Army contract with KBR, which most recently was awarded a $2.8 billion deal from the Pentagon, contains such a deal.

McHugh added that "no other Army contracts awarded since 2001 to other companies for services provided in a contingency operation contain indemnification provisions." McHugh explained that the Army considers the use of such provisions "only in extraordinary circumstances involving unusually hazardous risks."

And McHugh explained that "no congressional notification was provided in connection" with the indemnification provision.

READ the letter from Army Secretary John McHugh:

AR-M550U_20100831_162827

Comments

[grumbles]

01:46 PM on 09/02/2010

........i hope this can be fixed. were these deals legal? you cannot sign your rights away.does this protect against individual lawsuits or class action lawsuits? lots of questions

[Dan W Bright]

04:15 AM on 09/03/2010

as legal as cheny and his boy toys lies.

[thegreatdaveo]

01:43 PM on 09/02/2010

Isn't this the same contractor that fought vigorously against the rights of victims of rapes committed by their own employees?

[onegandolf1]

12:24 PM on 09/02/2010

This had better not be for real. If it is it needs to be reversed.

[wkb2texans]

10:20 AM on 09/02/2010

The sheer ignorance of KBR and events surrounding these events (lawsuits) would be funny if it weren't so tragic. Once again, ideology trumps facts. For those who want to know the facts about these cases (electrocutions, chromium poisioning, the alleged "rape") go to KBR.com and look at their press releases.

The US Army would not be giving KBR new business if they were killing American soldiers. That's ludicrous on it's face. Anyone with any common sense whatsoever, would realize that. What's scary is that the majority of HuffPo's think otherwise ... which may say a lot about their mental state, their politics, and their loyalty to this Country.

[Angry1541]

11:48 AM on 09/02/2010

You're not a very good reader--the article said nothing of killing US soldiers--it however say 'harm'--like the BP oil worker's getting sick type harm.

And, I do believe that the Armed Forces would would (if a contractually obligated) overlook a handful of illnesses to win a war--i.e. agent orange in Vietnam and other such instances.

This is very much in the same vein of friendly fire--except those doing the firing are corporations hired to work on projects in a war zone.

[wkb2texans]

02:01 PM on 09/02/2010

nothing wrong with my reading ... you'll note that several postings here talk about KBR being culpable for the deaths of American soldiers. I was addressing that issue here, too.

[Dan W Bright]

04:16 AM on 09/03/2010

yep

[aonemandog]

12:36 PM on 09/02/2010

You are recommending that readers go to the KBR website for the truth? LOL...THAT is funny!

[AZreb]

08:26 AM on 09/02/2010

A new $2.8 BILLION contract? What in the name of heaven (or hell in this case) is our govenment thinking (or not thinking)?

Bad enough that KBR is responsible for crimes against our military in the past - now another contract for billions by the present administration. Outrage and anger are my feelings on this matter - the continuance of this travesty is totally unacceptable.

[wkb2texans]

10:04 AM on 09/02/2010

On the other hand, the Obama's Administration's awarding of this contract could mean that KBR is not guilty of any crimes against our military ... making your claims slanderous, and potentially liabelous.

[Dan W Bright]

04:17 AM on 09/03/2010

they must have loose libel /slander laws in tejas .

[bobloblaw1]

08:08 AM on 09/04/2010

Not really, just go to Wikipedia and look up Halliburton. Get educated.

[exF14RIO]

11:37 AM on 09/02/2010

AZ, the Military is pretty particular on granting these contracts, and only a few companies can deliver on certain "services"... clearly KBR is one of those. There's no doubt more to this company than is reported in the MSM or HuffPo, (but then what else is new?) and the Govt keeps using them...

[shryock]

07:46 AM on 09/02/2010

KBR......
KBR.......
hmmm...... now why does that sound so familiar?
oh, yes, i remember. that's part of the dick cheney/halliburton chain of businesses that profited from the war. no doubt by sheer coincidence while mr. cheney was vice-president. and he being who he is, no doubt there was no illegal war profiteering going on, don't'cha think?

[rextrek]

10:08 AM on 09/02/2010

besides Electrocuting Soldiers who JUST wanted a shower.

[wkb2texans]

10:08 AM on 09/02/2010

actually, it is sheer coincidence. Each military branch (e.g, Army, Air Force, etc) conducts their own assessments of proposals from defense contractors such as KBR. There are strict rules and processes to ensure there is no undue command influence on the decisions made as to which contractor wins. Competition is based upon an acceptable/compliant technical proposal (how the contractor proposes to do the work the Govt says they want done), past performance (how well the company has done on similary jobs in the past) , and the price the contractor will charge to do the work. I won't bore you with the rest of the details, but suffice it to say that neither Cheney nor Halliburton had any influence on the US Army's choosing KBR to do their work in Iraq.

[b1rd67]

10:57 AM on 09/02/2010

A large precentage of the contracts awarded to KBR during the Iraq war were no-bid contracts. My wife works for the GAO and she has performed audits on the Defense and State Departments and your assertion that contracts are actually awarded fairly and objectively without undue influence from people in positions of pwoer is absolutely false (but it sounds good in a fantasy world). When a report that is critical of these departments is about to be released they will quite often try to have the report classifed to keep the results from the public. I know of a specific case where all of the data in the report was obtained from public sources but they still claimed "National Secutiry" to keep it from from even being read by most of Congress, excepting only a few on certain comittees who have clearance.

[vhartsook]

11:12 AM on 09/02/2010

That's incorrect. Most of these contracts were given out without competing bids.

[mariusvinchi]

06:49 AM on 09/02/2010

What truly disgusts me about this story is that KBR KNEW about the electrical problems and split hairs with soldiers lives by parsing words. Something they would never have done without that get out of jail free card!

[wkb2texans]

10:21 AM on 09/02/2010

not ...

[1differentdrummer]

06:09 AM on 09/02/2010

KBR, then a subsidiary of Halliburton.

[mariusvinchi]

06:45 AM on 09/02/2010

So was the Cheney White House!

[Dreamking]

04:54 AM on 09/02/2010

This is what Bush/Cheney wanted all along: To give mercenaries the same protections as U.S. military forces.

Soon, they'll be able to write a purchase order for an invasion and Congress won't be able to do a damned thing about it.

Of course it may be a moot point. Our recent military follies have drained us of money and soon we'll be bankrupt. Mercenaries are notoriously expensive Blackwater won't be accepting IOU's...

America continues it's slow irrevocable slide to demise of empire....

[ehorth]

02:42 PM on 09/02/2010

Fanned. Thank you for hitting the nail on the head. This is about making war a business and hiring it out. It's about MONEY, not values or morals. The indemnification clause in KBR’s contract means that they take no responsibility for the conduct of its missions, and ultimately dump it on our government. They are mercenaries for money and necessarily do not have the larger objective of our national security and safety in mind. Privateer soldiers are not under the direct supervision and authority of our military, so their personal conduct doesn’t seem to be checked in anyway.

What concerns me is that being guns for hire, there is nothing to stop KBR et al from going to the next highest bidder, if, as you say, we run out of money to keep them working for us. The genie is now out of the bag.

Not many here even question the validity of using business people (no matter how ex-military) to conduct war on behalf of our country. I'm not talking about weapons manufacturers, but corporations set up for the sole purpose of supplying personnel to fight. As you say, we will be writing purchase orders for XYZ missions at very little "cost" to us.

[Dreamking]

03:03 PM on 09/02/2010

Ehorth:

You nailed the second part. Mercenaries work for the highest bidder. If the "enemy" offers them more cash, along with an extradition-free residence in the bargain, they'll turn sides in a heartbeat.

Halliburton and Blackwater have already moved to Dubai so they've begun to build more walls to protect them from U.S. legal action. We are on a very dangerous precipice with our national defense.

[Dan W Bright]

04:21 AM on 09/03/2010

no ious but prince will deal.

[Nichole Boultas]

02:30 AM on 09/02/2010

That's what I was thinking.....and good old Halliburton.

[Anym]

12:09 AM on 09/02/2010

Change anyone?

[MiHi]

12:02 AM on 09/02/2010

Something to think about when that military recruiter gives you the sweet talk into signing up eh, potential cannon-fodder?

[keepemhonest]

11:55 PM on 09/01/2010

It is official. The United States is no longer any beacon on any hill for any to come for peace, property, liberty and especially NOT JUSTICE.

Not one single person in DC seems to give a rats behind about turning the light on the hill back ON!

[Michael Ludin]

11:33 PM on 09/01/2010

Just like the companies that employed the security screeners at airports were given full immunity before anyone said boo, after 9/11.

[nopilikia]

11:21 PM on 09/01/2010

Is this a great country.......or what???? For the wealthy, and big business.

[nopilikia]

11:29 PM on 09/01/2010

OMG.....let's hope KBR didn't do the wiring for Dick Cheney's heart pump.

[keepemhonest]

11:55 PM on 09/01/2010

I am hoping they DID did do the wiring for his pump.