Home » Blog » Freedom Isn't Free...And Neither Are Contractors
Blog for America
Freedom Isn't Free...And Neither Are Contractors
(Cross-posted from progressivefuture.org): This is the first installment of a five-part blog series sharing the experiences of Rachel, an Iraq War veteran who was a firsthand witness to many cases of contractor abuse against the troops.
It seems that, each day, I wake up and read a new way in which private contractors are taking advantage of our troops in Iraq. New reports surface that illuminate the greed and corruption of these private companies, hired through multi-billion dollar contracts to support the health and security of American soldiers. These services are too important to be performed without oversight and accountability for the devastating results that occur. From electrocutions due to faulty wiring and the provision of contaminated water, to rape, arbitrary shootings of Iraqi civilians, and tax evasion, the stories pile up with such a magnitude of horror, it is truly conscience-stirring for even the most jaded among us.
And yet, so many of these stories remained buried in the mainstream press. It saddens me that so many of these soldiers have received disgusting and hazardous treatment while defending our country, and are unable to make their voices heard. So when Rachel, a formerly deployed soldier who was stationed at Camp Ramadi, offered to tell me about her experiences with the contractors in Iraq, I wanted to share her testimony with all supporters and members of, Progressive Future, in an exclusive five-part blog series. Each day this week, I will post a new entry sharing another aspect of Rachel's story. I met Rachel in a discussion forum about KBR's provision of contaminated water to the troops, and she was incredibly articulate and forthcoming regarding her experiences in Iraq. One of the first issues into which Rachel shared some revealing insight was the disparities in both employment packages and living conditions between the troops and the private contractors:
What led to your decision to serve in Iraq? I convinced my parents to allow me to join the Army when I was 17 years old in 2002. There was no specific reason for joining, although a significant part of it was curiosity. Ultimately, this decision to join led to my involuntary transfer into a reserve unit preparing to deploy to Iraq in 2004.
I was deployed in December 2004. The first few months we were stationed near Tikrit. The rest of my time, I was stationed at Camp Ar Ramadi until we returned home in December 2005.
What sorts of private contractors did you encounter/work with in Iraq and what services did they provide?
I encountered private contractors nearly everywhere that I went in both Kuwait and Iraq. Services provided to us in included: laundry, food and water; dumpsters and porta-johns were usually emptied daily, fitness and recreation centers with free internet service [were provided, as were] phones to use with phone cards. Civilians, usually from other countries, staffed the facilities and were typically managed by Americans.
The only difficulty I had interacting with the KBR civilians particularly was when the American [employees] told us how much they were paid. They always "felt bad" saying their salary was as high as it was, but they usually did, creating a strong resentment that our pay was so low in comparison. I am a heavy construction equipment operator and often came across civilians making 6-digit salaries for doing the same work as my platoon. The mayor cell [a unit in charge of facilities and infrastructure] on FOB Cobra, a smaller base, told us that they had been waiting a while for KBR to make their way there with equipment. They estimated that the work that took us less than a day to complete in our time off would have taken civilians an estimated six weeks. We were also floored by the outrageous estimate and compared it to the cost for our work; for my entire year of work, I made about $25,000; KBR wanted $40,000 to dig ditches [for six weeks] to help with the rain and level a parking lot.
KBR [also] took care of our generators. Our generator mechanics weren’t allowed to fix the generators if they went down because they belonged to KBR. So our generator mechanic [was sent to work in the supply department.] If any contractors were there performing jobs the military didn’t have trained personnel to do, I didn’t see them. Many soldiers even received bonuses for choosing their jobs, only to be retrained and replaced by KBR.
Generally, the civilians employed were personable and friendly with the soldiers and seemed like good people doing their part to cash in on the war. But looking back, my fondest memories of good service were not with civilians, but with those in the military who hadn’t yet had their jobs snatched up by civilians on smaller bases.
Rachel says it all in the first sentence of that last paragraph. Even good people, when placed in a context where capitalizing on the war rather than the well-being of the troops is the main objective, will fall prey to corruption, especially if the lack of basic accountability measures ensures they will get away with it.
What is interesting is the domino effect that has been happening ever since the Bush Administration started this war without providing enough resources for us to succeed. The sub-par payment given to our troops, combined with the reports trickling back to the public about poor treatment and inadequate resources, has done nothing to encourage more young people to enlist. I wonder if the administration took the billions upon billions of dollars provided to contractors and applied it to improving the pay packages and benefits for our troops, would this boost recruitment, thus allowing the use of contractors to be scaled back?
The bottom line is, by funneling resources to the contractors, instead of to the troops, the Pentagon is actually undermining the security of our forces. The Bush administration is the first to use the premise of security to defend its policies, but at Progressive Future, we don't think that the Pentagon's actions represent the true meaning of security. Security does not mean brute force with no accountability, it means ensuring the safety of the men and women who sign up to defend our country. It means making sure any U.S. presence overseas is held accountable for the things that people do in our name. It means cleaning up our international reputation so that the United States can be a valuable member of the global community. You can help Progressive Future send the Pentagon a message that the majority of Americans don't feel the use of private contractors in Iraq makes our country safer; many have already done so by signing our Call for Consequences.
Stay tuned tomorrow for Part II of this five-part series, where Rachel will share her firsthand account of the KBR dirty water scandal.
Show: Expand All Reply
- Green Meetings are First, Too!
By Denise in San Mateo County on May 12, 2008 7:07 PM EDT
- Next president might be gentler on pot clubs
By Denise in San Mateo County on May 12, 2008 7:12 PM EDTThe presidential candidates haven't discussed the issue in speeches or debates, but medical marijuana advocates regularly questioned them in Iowa and New Hampshire. The most sweeping changes were proposed by second-tier candidates - Democrats Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich and Chris Dodd and Republican Ron Paul called for repealing federal criminal penalties for marijuana - but of the remaining contenders, Obama has been the friendliest to advocates of medical marijuana.
At a November appearance in Audubon, Iowa, Obama recalled that his mother had died of cancer and said he saw no difference between doctor-prescribed morphine and marijuana as pain relievers. He said he would be open to allowing medical use of marijuana, if scientists and doctors concluded it was effective, but only under "strict guidelines," because he was "concerned about folks just kind of growing their own and saying it's for medicinal purposes."
Obama went a step further in an interview in March with the Mail Tribune newspaper in Medford, Ore. While still expressing qualms about patients growing their own supply or getting it from "mom-and-pop stores," he said it is "entirely appropriate" for a state to legalize the medical use of marijuana, "with the same controls as other drugs prescribed by doctors."
In response to recent questions from The Chronicle about medical marijuana, Obama's campaign - the only one of the three contenders to reply - endorsed a hands-off federal policy.
"Voters and legislators in the states - from California to Nevada to Maine - have decided to provide their residents suffering from chronic diseases and serious illnesses like AIDS and cancer with medical marijuana to relieve their pain and suffering," said campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt.
"Obama supports the rights of states and local governments to make this choice - though he believes medical marijuana should be subject to (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) regulation like other drugs," LaBolt said. He said the FDA should consider how marijuana is regulated under federal law, while leaving states free to chart their own course.
Obama would end DEA raids
LaBolt also said Obama would end U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration raids on medical marijuana suppliers in states with their own laws.
Those raids have been the focus of Hillary Clinton's comments on the issue. At a July campaign event in Manchester, N.H., she told a medical marijuana advocate that she would end the federal raids, according to Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana, which recorded the exchange.
But the candidate was less absolute in a more recent interview with the Willamette Week newspaper in Hillsboro, Ore.
"I don't think it's a good use of federal law enforcement resources to be going after people who are supplying marijuana for medicinal purposes," Clinton said in the April 5 interview. But when asked whether she would stop the raids, she replied, "What we should do is prioritize what the DEA should be doing, and that would not be a high priority. There's a lot of other, more important work that needs to be done."
Clinton has also said she opposes repealing criminal penalties for marijuana, but told advocates in October that the government should conduct more research "into what, if any, medical benefits it has."
McCain has taken a variety of positions, according to comments recorded by medical marijuana advocates.
At an April 2007 campaign kickoff event, when asked if he would end federal raids, he said, "I would let states decide that issue." But less than two months later, he said he would not end the raids. Then, in November, he promised a man who described himself as a seriously ill marijuana patient that he would "do everything in my power" to make sure the man was never arrested for using the drug.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/12/MNKK10FD53.DTL
The legalization of pot possession, medical or otherwise is a legitimate issue, and could easily happen but the legalized SMOKING of marijuana would very quickly sabotage such progress for years to come.
People should be free to use marijuana, but if using it means polluting the air with it, that everyone breathes, legalization won't last long.
One person's food is another one's poison. And one person's medicine is another person's poison. The air belongs to everyone, and if other people have to breathe even a hint of other people's marijuana. It would stop legalization in its tracks.
Personally, I have anaphlyic reaction to even small residues of pot smoke in a room or in the air, long after its been smoked.
It has nothing to do with my MCS. I had that reaction years before that started, and in my younger days, I did enjoy Mexican green often.
I don't envision crowds of people when self medicating that would be hampered by any smoke. It's a private thing and should be kept so.
- The vapor caused by burning of cannabis is very difficult to control and contain.
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 8:35 PM EDTBreathing the vapor is a delivery system. There are other ways to deliver it that do not invade the common air space.
If it is legal and there are no legal regulations, people in high-density housing situations who smoke it will not keep their windows closed. It will seep through wall to adjacent apartments. There will be life and death issues related to these rights to non-exposure. Wind carries it very far horizontally. I know that from dealing with my own triggers of other things.
Then there is the issue of second hand smoke breathed by minors and/or those not prescribed (in the case of medical marijuana.)
There is no better way to repeal the legalization of marijuana than to ignore or downplay the effect of its smoke.
if people all over the globe congregated in large groups and smoked P*T:)!!!....really, I still believe that!
Oops sorry about that. Much more at the unclickable link but I know we are not a lazy bunch here, so copy and paste away :)
- The number of people killed by a 7.9-magnitude earthquake in China
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 8:14 PM EDT
First, I am most sympathetic to your plight with MCS. Perhaps even a bit of empathy is in order as I have many increasingly severe sensitivities to chemicals, scents, food additives, etc. ~ started when I was 10 and and began escalating about 15 years ago. In fact, a headache is trying hard to start up simply from walking down the long cleaner/bug spray/scented door hangers hallway to my mailbox.
My dream is that one day we'll stop scenting everything ~ think about it ~ we scent ourseves as a nation coming and going... soaps, shampoos, laundry detergents, room fresheners, pot pourri, candles, febreeze, cat litter, doggy poop pick-up bags, diapers, feminine products, perfume/cologne, dryer sheets, cleaning products, pesticides... at the end of the day what did we mean to smell like? fresh mountain air, jasmine, lemon, or what? Total overload IMO and my physical self agrees.
As for medical marijuana. But don't smoke it? NO - we can't dictate how someone else with a medical problem takes their medication. Like Denise says, it's a private thing, edibles and vaporizers are options, but smoking for medicinal purposes is, too.
I wholeheartedly support the legalization of marijuana in general, medical marijuana at the least.
didcn't mean to imply smoking pot for non-medicinal purposes isn't ok :-)
- Of course it's OK and it happens now even though it's been illegal since 1937. I wonder how many documented cases are out there of others having a near fatal anaphalactic episode due to inhaled second hand cannabis - any facts out there Fred? Would that
By Denise in San Mateo County on May 12, 2008 8:52 PM EDT
- NO - we can't dictate how someone else with a medical problem takes their medication.
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 8:42 PM EDTBut likewise, neither can you impose your medication to be inhaled unwillingly by others. Such medication would need to occur either very far from populated areas, or in highly contained environments with special air purifying treatment before that air is returned to common areas.
I support legalization and/or decriminalization of pot, for any reason, but with much regulation to respect the others, to prevent others from exposure to it.
Anyone against such regulation is a hypocrite, if they believe industry and corporations need regulation of toxins, chemicals, and medicine, but pot should be free and unregulated.
- Things more important to society as a whole - unclogged court system, jails that are not overcrowded so real criminals get out sooner, oh and the quality of life for those with OTHER diseases, like cancer and AIDS. No eppie pen works for them, unfortunat
By Denise in San Mateo County on May 12, 2008 8:54 PM EDTIf you don't want pot to be legal, or to put it another way, if you want legalization to fail
...ignore what I say. That is the fastest way for legalization tp be repealed and that legacy of failure, along with the horror stories, will last for generations.
But legalization with a great deal of regulation (and insulation of the presence of marijuana use from the general public) has a great chance of success.
- Fred, quite frankly, I typically do ignore what you say until you get self absorbed and go off on a tangent like tonight.
By Denise in San Mateo County on May 12, 2008 9:12 PM EDTSMOKE POT....H/T The immortal Beatles:)
Societies ills are tamed by prioritization of what affects and helps MOST of the population.
I barf when I smell perfume and aftershave and that is totally legal. And on a plane it sucks. So I try to move to a new seat through the proper channels - a flight attendant and discreetly, at that.
I know the world does not revolve around me.
I am liberal but to a degree.
If it comes down to legalization with no restriction or no legalization at all, I am afraid I would have to side with those against legalization.
There is tremendous intellectual dishonesty to say chemicals and scents that cause cancer should be banned but if pot bothers a few people, well that's their problem.
Thank goodness carbon monoxide is odorless or we'd all quit driving our cars, or only do it in sparsely populated areas.
has the advantage of not only being odorless, but also not causing anxiety attacks or rapid heartbeat, acute claustraphobia, etc.
If you told the press Obama was for legalization and free smoking of pot. I would accuse you of trying to sabotage his election.
one can't expect the world to stop revolving or to revolve around oneself. I suspect this may sound harsh but say it in all kindness. I really believe those with extreme issues need to take measures such as removing to 'far from populated areas' for themselves rather than expect the entire world to accomodate them. In other words, to reiterate my 'life is not binary' ~ not serving peanuts on airplanes is reasonable, banning people from smoking in their own homes is not.
- banning people from smoking in their own homes is not.
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:08 PM EDTNow you sound like a right winger complaining about what they cannot do on their own property
If it effects the health and well being of others, it is now what you do with the common air space is not your own business anymore. It is not your air alone.
Eating peanuts in your own home is your own business, but if what you put into the air invades others homes, it is no longer a private thing.
- I think you need to chill Fred - right winger indeed.
By Denise in San Mateo County on May 12, 2008 9:10 PM EDTJust telling it like it is. Just because the truth I tell hurts, doesn't mean I'm out of line.
- You need to apologize to Thankful. Then you'll be almost cool. That was a nasty thing to say - about ANYONE here.
By Denise in San Mateo County on May 12, 2008 9:16 PM EDT
- It is wrong for you insinuate such things about my character - don't get person -stay on subject
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:21 PM EDTI like thankful.
She may not realize it, but what she said was very similar in principle to the liebertarian/right wing argument against environmental and species regulation on private property.
well, being called right-winger is one thing, libertarian is another. I may take issue with *that*! lol, just kidding :-)
You have your views and I have mine.
Namaste
Nah, it would be nice to not be called a right-winger, but no apology is necesary. Fred is speaking from his perspective. I don't take it personally.
- I did not intend to call you a right winger - that would be rediculous
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:34 PM EDTI only wanted to point out the parallels in your reasoning to libertarians. We are often blind to our own mistakes.
When I did smoke pot, I rented a storefront. My landlord lived upstairs. He asked me not to smoke pot because his wife was asthmatic and that was one of the worst triggers.
I smoked anyway. He was very upset. His wife had an attack and he came down and asked me if I smoke it. I admitted.
As I look back,I realize I was wrong. He was right.
- You see things differently when the shoe is on the other foot
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:35 PM EDTchill is good advice
By the way, to remind anyone that might have missed it, the story about presidential candidates and medicinal cannabis came from a newspaper story that I linked to.
Sabotage Obama's candidacy? Fred just exactly what is affecting your reading abilities tonight? I don't even have a joint lit up - and the wind is blowing south, not north, up to Oregon. Heck Humboldt County must really make you crazy on a bad windy day. Willamette Valley, too :)
- Nothing I've posted on the subject is unreasonable or insulting to anyone
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:25 PM EDTBut not common cliche among liberals and progressive. I dare to mention the elephant in the living that may make me look like an elephant.
I suggest you cool off - not me.
- Just because pot is in the domain of the liberal and progressive
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:16 PM EDTdoes not mean it is an innocuous substance. It needs regulation and control just like any other pollutant or medicine, especially one that is airborne and contaminate great amounts of air.
- Fresno Bee - Scientists plan to bury CO2 in Kern County
By Susan Rowe on May 12, 2008 9:19 PM EDTScientists plan to pump 1 million tons of greenhouse gas more than a mile beneath a Kern County power plant in one of the nation's largest experiments to slow global warming.
The power plant's exhaust will go directly into a 7,000-foot-deep well. No climate-warming carbon dioxide or anything else will get into the air. There won't be a smokestack.
It's a "double positive" because it will prevent the release of both greenhouse gas and ozone-making pollution, said James Boyd, vice chairman of the California Energy Commission, which is leading the experiment. <!-- no related content to display -->
"This is extremely relevant in the San Joaquin Valley, where air quality is such a big issue," he said.
The four-year experiment, scheduled to begin in 2011, received a $65 million Department of Energy grant last week. Federal officials have funded a half-dozen such efforts nationally to capture carbon dioxide and trap it below ground.
The Kern project, 18 miles north of Bakersfield, attracted federal money partly because it involves a power plant that uses aerospace technology to produce electricity and very little air pollution. The power plant is privately owned by Clean Energy Systems Inc. of Rancho Cordova.
But geology is the main reason to pour money into this project. Nature has demonstrated over millions of years that oil and natural gas stay put in the rock formations below the Valley floor.
Scientists say the same would be true for carbon dioxide, or CO2. The experiment is meant to confirm their belief. ...lots more: http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/590882.html
- I'm not sure why all this nonsense shows up. It wasn't visible when I posted the story.
By Susan Rowe on May 12, 2008 9:34 PM EDT<!--/STORYHEADLINE--><!--STORYBODY-->
OK I've had my fun - gotta go scrounge up dinner.
Thankful if you're starting back to Chitown soon, safe travels. I have to go finish packing, and say a prayer I don't get to sit next to Mr. GQ with too much Polo after shave on :)
Maybe bbl
- have fun - don't forget the designated smoker
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:28 PM EDT
- My sympathies - but do enjoy the night - my condition makes social life a kind of masochism, so I don't do it anymore...
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:49 PM EDTthanks Denise ~ wishing unscented travels on ya :-) It'll be a week or two til it's Duncan (yo yo) time again.
I might smoke it once in a while. Just for nostalgia's sake, of course. And the occasional post-menstrual cramp...if the statute of limitations doesn't run out.
only an occasional contact high for me for umpteen years now, but maybe one day ~ for nostalgia's sake :-)
- Note - not once did Fred ask me about MY medical situation and why I self medicate. Nope just jumped right in with his own personal issue.
By Denise in San Mateo County on May 12, 2008 9:29 PM EDTperspective
- Assumptons - the mother of all misconceptions - Never said there was anything wrong with people using it
By Fred from Oregon on May 12, 2008 9:42 PM EDTAnd there is compassion in my heart for those who feel it helps them. You really should tell me of your personal connection to the issue. It is not incumbent upon me to ask, and no fault of mine if I don't ask.
But neither does it change the principle of the fact that relief for the suffering of some does imply the rights of others to be violated.
You can have your relief, without the convenience of disregard for others' pain and suffering.
Howdy sunlight :-) Not sure how you derived this conclusion from the conversation? I sure haven't found any ultimate answers nor wish to outcast anyone. As for smokers dying before accruing long term costs to society - empysema and lung cancer can take many years to kill - my dad had the first spot on his lung nearly 30 years ago and just went on oxygen a few weeks ago. Health care costs for these diseases, especially the final stages cost us billions.
- Howard Dean is first!
By Thankful2Thankful4Dean on May 12, 2008 7:02 PM EDT