U.S. INVESTIGATOR SAYS BLACKWATER THREATENED HIM WITH DEATH TO HALT STATE DEPT PROBE IN IRAQ
East County News Service Photo, left: Carl Meyer, leader of successful “stop Blackwater” effort in Potrero at a 2008 victory celebration July 6, 2014 (San Diego’s East County)–Blackwater, the private military contractor that has sparked considerably controversy through the years, is back in the headlines.Many East County residents recall the successful battle waged by residents in rural Potrero to prevent Blackwater from building a paramilitary training camp in San Diego’s backcountry. Potrero residents held a recall election and removed all five planning group members who voted for the Blackwater facility and staged a march through adjacent federal forest lands that would be threatened by the project, drawing international attention before Blackwater ultimately withdrew its plans. Now, the New York Times reports that around that same time back in 2007, Blackwater blocked a State Department inquiry into allegations of violence against civilians in Iraq by the company’s personnel. The investigation was halted after Blackwater’s top manager in Iraq threatened that he “could kill” the government’s chief investigator—and that “no one could or would do anything about it” according to State Department reports, the New York Times article states. U.S. embassy officials backed Blackwater, telling the State Department personnel to leave the country because they had disrupted the embassy’s relationship with the security contractor, the documents reveal. Blackwater had been hired to protect U.S. diplomats, though they have been likened by critics to mercenary soldiers trained to kill. The chief investigator returned to Washington D.C., where he wrote a scathing report to the State Department documenting misconduct including negligence by Blackwater employees, and warned that lax oversight of the company could lead to liability since the company considered itself “above the law.” Just a few weeks later, Blackwater guards shot and killed 17 civilians in Baghdad’s Nisour Square, inflaming resentment among Iraqis over the U.S. military presence. Four Blackwater guards involved in those shootings are now set to stand trial, though charges against five other guards in a prior case were dismissed in 2009. There have been serious ramifications from this failure to rein in these and other abuses linked to Blackwater, which has also been blamed for an incident that fueled the bloody siege of Fallujah. That incident occurred after Blackwater guards defied orders to remain within a protected zone, traveling outside to fetch pots and pans for a military officer. They were seized by insurgents and killed, their bodies hung off a bridge, triggering the siege of Fallujah in retaliation. The shootings in Bagdhad were a key reason why Iraq’s newly formed government later refused to approve a treaty allowing U.S. troops to stay in the county with immunity from prosecution after 2011. The 17 victims of those shootings included a 9-year-old boy. Blackwater first claimed they fired back in self defense, but U.S. officials who investigated found zero evidence of any insurgents at the scene and federal prosecutors accused Blackwater’s convoy of shooting without cause into the crowd using machine guns and grenade launchers. Blackwater’s founder, Erik Prince, claimed he was never told about the death threat reportedly made by a Blackwater representative against the Chief Investigator for the U.S. State Department, the New York Times reports. Blackwater forced its workers to sign a military-type oath to battle the war on terror. Prince sold the company in 2010. Blackwater later went through several name changes, most recently emerging as Constellis Holdings after merging with Triple Canopy, a rival private military security contractor. There were more troubling allegations. One investigation found Blackwater guards carried weapons that they hadn’t been certified to carry, or authorized to use. Allegations of boozing and womanizing surfaced, as well as concerns that Blackwater overbilled the federal government, failed to properly maintain vehicles and scrimped on the size of its security detail protecting U.S. diplomats. The company was also accused of filthy living conditions for its workers. The threat against Chief U.S. inspector Jean Richter was reportedly made by Daniel Carroll, Blackwater’s project manager in Iraq during a meeting in August 2007 over complaints that included cleanliness and food quality served up at Blackwater’s compound. Richter wrote in his report to the State Department that Caroll, a former Navy Seal, stated that “he could kill me at that very moment and no one could or would do anything about it as we were in Iraq.” He said he was “alarmed” by the threat. Richter’s statement was confirmed by a witness. All three men declined to speak with the Times for its article. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State at that time under President George W. Bush, appointed a panel to investigate the Nisour Square shootings and recommend reforms – but strangely, the panel’s members never interviewed Richter or the witness about the threats. Yet a state department official later told reporters that many people had been interviewed and found no indications of concern about Blackwater’s conduct before the Nisour shootings. Martin Eder (photo, right), founder of Activist San Diego, which owns KNSJ radio, was a leader in the bipartisan opposition to Blackwater’s efforts to set up a training camp in Potrero. East County Magazine editor and radio show host Miriam Raftery was the primary reporter covering the Blackwater saga in Potrero with a series of investigative reports. Leon Thompson was instrumental in gaining support of the Courage Campaign, a statewide organization, to bolster community organizing efforts. Potrero Planning Group member Jan Hedlun sounded the initial alarm alerting the community that planners had voted to approve the Blackwater facility, while Carl Meyer launched the recall effort and successfully ran to become the new Potrero Planning Group chair as head of an anti-Blackwater slate. These efforts helped draw international media attention to the issue at the very time when Blackwater was fast gaining notoriety in Iraq. An interesting outcome of this story is that Raftery formed East County Magazine in 2008 after encountering censorship by other local media on the controversies involving Blackwater—with one local paper refusing to run any more Blackwater stories just weeks
U.S. SUPREME COURT RULES WOMEN WORKERS CAN BE DENIED COVERAGE FOR BIRTH CONTROL IN FAMILY-OWNED BUSINESSES
5 Catholic justices issue ruling, raising question over lack of religious diversity on the high court By Miriam Raftery July 6, 2014 (Washington D.C.)–The Supreme Court decision last week in the Hobby Lobby case is drawing strong reactions across the nation and here in San Diego County—and raising questions over whether the Supreme Court lacks adequate religious diversity. By a 5-4 vote, the justices extended rights to family-held corporations formerly reserved only for individuals, churches and religious nonprofits. The Court’s majority struck down a key provision of Obamacare, ruling that small, family-held corporations do not have to provide their employees with coverage for forms of birth control that conflict with the owners’ religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby is craft supply store chain owned by evangelical Christians, while Conestoga Wood Specialties is a Pennsylvania cabinet making company owned by Mennonites. The decision means that workers lose the right to insurance coverage for certain forms of birth control such as IUDs, if they work for a family-owned company that objects on religious grounds. It also means that rape victims at such companies would not be able to buy the morning-after pill unless they can afford to pay for it themselves. Reverend Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called the decision a “dangerous precedent.” But Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, leader of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, hailed the ruling as a “great day for religious freedom for family businesses.” All five justices who voted in the majority had two things in common: They are all men, and they are all Catholic. The four justices who voted against the ruling included all three of the high courts women, as well as Justice Stephen Breyer. Justice Samuel Alito, in the majority opinion, claims that the Obama administration’s healthcare rules in effect told plaintiffs that their religious views were “flawed.” But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in a blistering dissent, says the case is not about the plausibility of a religious claim. Instead, she writes, it is about “whether accommodating that claim risks depriving others of rights accorded them under the laws of the United States.” California’s Attorney General, Kamala Harris, issued a statement along with 13 other state attorney generals criticizing the decision. She states that the decision “opens a perilous loophole that may enable private, for-profit companies to challenge other common-sense laws—including those that protect against discrimination—based on the religious beliefs of their shareholders.” Just how far could the ruling extend? There are religions that don’t believe in blood transfusions or surgeries. Could such employers refuse to provide coverage for these life-saving procedures? If a company is owned by a devote Muslim or Orthodox Jew who believes pork is unclean, could they deny a heart patient coverage for implanting a heart valve from a pig? Could other laws besides healthcare that currently protect workers be at risk, too, if an employer claims a religious exemption? The ruling did restrict religious exemptions to family-run businesses (where five or fewer people control 50 percent or more of the company). But that leaves a lot of corporations that now can claim religious freedoms for the first time ever in our nation’s history. In the past, religious exemptions to laws were allowed only for individual people, churches, and religious nonprofits such as church-run schools. Locally, some elected officials are speaking out. Democratic Congressman Scott Peters calls the decision “outrageous given the large percentage of women who use birth control pills to treat serious ailments from endometriosis to post-chemotherapy hormone replacement.” He adds that it is in “everyone’s interest for women to have access to affordable, safe preventative care.” Speaker of the House Toni Atkins, a San Diego Democrat and top woman leader in the state Legislature, said the Supreme Court “sacrificed justice and freedom” by ruling that “private business owners could impose their religious beliefs on their employees and deny women their constitutionally recognized right to comprehensive reproductive healthcare.” She believes the decision goes against Americans’ belief in the right of everyone to be treated fairly and equally in the workplace.” San Diego’s Republican leaders have thus far been silent publicly on the Hobby Lobby ruling. But at the national level, prominent republicans have lined up in support of the decision. The top Republican in Congress, House Speaker John Boehner, hailed the high court’s ruling as a win for “religious freedom”, a a victory against “big government” and what he views as a crossing of Constitutional lines by the administration. The decision casts a spotlight on the conservative makeup of the court. The ruling comes on the heels of another recent case that gave broader rights to protesters outside abortion clinics. The court’s liberal justice are aging, thus the next President is expected to make one or more key appointments that will tip the balance of power in the nation’s highest court. If Republicans win the White House in the next election and a new president appoints just one more conservative justice, the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision would likely be overturned, making abortions illegal. Roe vs. Wade gave women the right to abortion in the third trimester for any reason, in the second trimester if a physician approves, such as where amniocentesis shows a serious birth defect, and in the third trimester only in dire circumstances such as when the mother’s life is at risk. Democrats say the decision reflects a “war on women” waged by Republican lawmakers who have introduced bills in states across the nation and in Congress that would drastically restrict rights that women’s groups fought hard to win. For example, Congressman Duncan Hunter, who represents San Diego and much of East County, introduced a bill shortly after his election that would have outlawed all abortions with no exceptions – not even for women whose lives were in danger, nor for rape victims or children who became pregnant through incest. The balance of power in the Senate could also determine who will win appointment to the
PHOTO OF THE WEEK: 4TH OF JULY IN EL CAJON
July 6, 2014 (El Cajon) – Randy Jordan snapped this photo of the fireworks final at El Cajon’s 4th of July celebration in Granite Hills/Kennedy Park.
READER’S EDITORIAL: STOP THE UNFAIR SAN ONOFRE SETTLEMENT
By Ray Lutz, Citizens Oversight Projects July 5, 2014 (El Cajon)– Please take a look at this video presentation I created to be presented to the CPUC. http://youtu.be/2umrwqLz_MI The proponents of the $3.3 billion settlement proposal have met with the CPUC commissioners and their advisors in private meetings. They would not allow me to make this power-point presentation at the recent public meeting. However, we are allowed to have private meetings of the same length as those granted to the proponents. Instead of going up to SF and meeting privately, I decided it was a better course of action to create this video presentation that makes our case as clearly as possible, PLUS it allows you to follow along and hopefully spread the word. You may have heard that the settlement represents a $1.4 billion rebate to consumers. The reality is that it is an unprecedented money grab of $3.3 billion, about $2.8 billion more than it should be, or a $4.2 billion savings from their original request. The audacity of these corporations is always startling. Please call your legislator and let them know they need to start an investigation into the CPUC’s handling of this! Use this tool to get contact information: http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/ (Video is about 33 minutes) The opinions in this editorial reflect the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of East County Magazine. To submit an editorial for consideration, contact editor@eastcountymagazine.org.