There is No "Z" in Blackwater
"B" is so yesterday -- Bush, Bechtel and Blackwater. Bechtel has already moved to the Middle East, Bush has retreated to retreated to Texas bunker. Blackwater, however, isn't backing down. Far more sensibly, it is changing its name to Xe -- as in "Z" -- which is how the company would now like to be known. Please note that there is no "M" in "Xe", so hopefully you won't think of words like mercenary, murder or mercantile either. In fact, management would like you to refer to their US operations as "US Training Center." That certainly sounds friendly.
The Bard famously asked, "What's in a name..." That question was rather brilliantly answered by Philip Morris when it changed its name to Altria and describing itself as a company, "...which owns and develops financially disciplined businesses that are leaders in responsibly providing adult tobacco consumers with superior branded products." That sounds far better than the leading the purveyor of beer and lung cancer causing products like Marlboros.
And just as Philip Morris did not change its ways voluntarily, I think that it is safe to assume that Blackwater will not either. This is a private company that has grown rich on taxpayer dollars but has spent most of the past seven years not having to obey any law -- Iraqi, American or military. In other words, Blackwater is used to being a non-state actor that answers to no one. Presumably, if you are reared on that culture, it is hard to subject yourself to the law. You can change your name until the cows come home, but the company's character will not change.
Mercenaries are a fact of life, as is marketing. Changing your name does not change what you have done, but changing the Commander In Chief can lead to new restrictions. So instead of pondering new names, consider some oldies but goodies, like the Constitutions or the Geneva Convention.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Mercenaries are a fact of life, as is marketing."
NO - incorrect.
Mercenaries became prevalent during IRAN-CONTRA - retired military funded by BUSH41 as the CIA CHIEF, and funded with DRUG MONEY, yada yada...
It was developed into a SHADOW MILITARY by the very people that need to be delivered gift-wrapped, to the Hague.
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_28.htm
I can forsee a conflict of U.S. Citizen status should a soldier of fortune find himself fighting for a foreign financier who's interests are in conflict with U.S. Foreign policy. Firing on and or engaging combat with U.N. Troops or U.S. Allies could get your a trial for treason.
Unless of course your Dick Cheney or Scooter Libby then you can do whatever you want and a corrupt U.S. Department of Justice applauds your treasonous acts in time of war.
What would stop Blackwater from having their way with the American public? Whose orders would they march on? Perhaps the orders of those who have accumulated the funds to employ them and have demonstrated a lack of morals or a disrespect for the law of the land?
Just asking?
I'm going to guess that those who profited from the last administration's penchant for private war are perfectly content to sit on their piles of money and hope that they are ignored. With so many pressing threats, they are most likely correct in assuming that they merely need to keep their heads down until the Republicans return to power and the good times start all over again.
they fight for wall street.
The Wall Street government may need to send mercenaries to some countries to keep the rabble from rising up and taking back their human rights. So, they'll still be off fighting for resources.
Then when the utterly contemptible servants of Wall Street regain control of the government, the mighty armies of Xe will once again stand proud alongside the U.S. military.
They might attack, and kill, far too many Americans. But they wouldn't get very far, because first the military wouldn't stand for it. Second, the veterans wouldn't stand for it. Third, the rightwingnutjobs who love them now wouldn't like them very much were they to attack us, so they wouldn't stand for it. and Fourth the gun owners who aren't rightwingnutjobs wouldn't stand for it!
Gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling all over that an immensely wealthy, religious fundamentalist family has its own private army, answerable only to themselves. What could possibly go wrong?
The important thing to remember is that they hear voices and see visions that give them infallible direction. Once you understand that I'm speaking of a direct connection to the divine – and not auditory or visual hallucinations – I'm sure that you will agree that it is all fine.
Private armies of mercenaries should be against the law. We already have a military.
We do, but our appetite is large and the available number of ground forces so small. If you want to make the numbers work without resorting to a draft, than these things are necessary. Of course, you could reasonably argue that we should learn to live within our military means, at least when we are on the offense. And I would agree.
"Blackwater is used to being a non-state actor that answers to know one."
First, that should read "...answers to NO one..."
Second, isn't that the very definition of a terrorist group???
Thank you for the correction. I have ADHD, really and truly, so proofreading has never been my strength. On the other hand, I am able to make inferences which are clear enough to be understood by those with better editing skills than my own. That should count for something.
Thus the reason that I wasn't asking what you said, cause I could easily figure it out. And my point still stands that they are the very definition of terrorists (except for the whole Muslim thingy....)
...only when it applies to someone whose beliefs are different,and are not in the best interest of our "NATIONAL SECURITY". Since they're on "our" side,that makes them the "friendlies"-allegedly-and they can be forgiven their transgressions...
Has this organization amassed so much power that they are beyond serious(as in the Hague,perhaps?) investigations into their actions? Looks like Cheney still wields SERIOUS political clout.
They should be sent packing. Maybe Qatar would take them? Interestingly, their founder is the scion of a wealthy christian evangelical family--another superb display of the republican's family values ideology.
I dare not comment on religious values, but I will say that I have always found in fascinating that Americans are so much more comfortable with violence than nudity or sex.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
