Blackwater Outtakes

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


When Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and his staff briefed reporters Tuesday on their six-month investigation into Blackwater subsidiary Paravant, ahead of a hearing on the topic scheduled for this morning, the chairman of the armed services committee was asked whether the findings of the probe had given him any ideas about strengthening the contracting “procedures” currently in place. His response didn’t make it into my story, but it’s worth sharing:

What you need is oversight and hopefully this hearing is going to lead to dramatically better oversight, as well as much more care with who we contract with, looking at backgrounds of contractors before we contract with them, so I would say that the deterrent effect will be forthcoming. I don’t see that we need new rules. What we need is an implementation of contract terms. And much more care as to who we contract with.

I’m pretty sure I wasn’t the only reporter in the room whose ears perked up when Levin mentioned that additional regulations are unnecessary. After all, he’d just spent more than ten minutes detailing a colossal oversight lapse, in which military officials not only failed to investigate Paravant after one contractor accidentially shot another in the head, but were apparently unaware such an episode had even been reported to them. And here I thought Levin was building his case for a raft of new regs.

In this case, Levin’s committee stepped in to provide oversight that was apparently almost nonexistent on the ground. But I’m not convinced today’s hearing is going to have the deterrent effect Levin hopes it will. After all, numerous hearings, congressional investigations, and exposés haven’t done much to prevent contractors from engaging in shocking misconduct. As for Blackwater (or Xe as it’s know known), the company has weathered so many serious scandals that it could easily make it through this one unphased and mostly unscathed.

It goes without saying that contract terms need to be better enforced and that the private sector personnel representing the US overseas need to be selected with utmost care—but after repeated failures on both of these fronts something’s gotta give, no?

On Monday, the office of Iraq IG Stuart Bowen released a plan that would overhaul wartime contracting by consolidating the management, funding, and oversight of contractors within a single agency, called the US Office for Contingency Operations (or USOCO). I asked Levin what he thought of Bowen’s plan in light of the oversight lapses his committee had identified. “It seems reasonable to me,” he responded.

If Levin thinks the idea has merit, Bowen could surely use his backing for the plan, which will require congressional legislation. As it stands, State and the Pentagon have already registered their objections.

Coincidentally, as Levin’s committee convenes its hearing on Paravant at 9:30 a.m., Bowen will simultaneously be pitching his plan to the House Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight. He may want to reference Levin’s Paravant investigation to make his case.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate