Blackwater Behaving Badly

Wednesday, June 25th, 2008

You’d think a corporation with such a shady reputation would be more conscious of public relations. Then again, when your biggest client is the government, maybe PR isn’t all that important.

First, Blackwater has found a way around federal restrictions on private ownership of automatic weapons by buying 17 AK-47s and 17 Bushmasters XM15 E2S rifles, then giving them to a local sheriff’s department–but on the condition that the guns be stored at Blackwater facilities, and can be used by Blackwater employees.

Second, the company is attempting to duck a lawsuit by the widows of three U.S. soldiers killed while traveling on a plane operated by a Blackwater subsidiary in Afghanistan. Blackwater is arguing that the lawsuit should be governed by Shari’a law, which doesn’t allow for lawsuits against companies for the actions of their employees.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

13 Responses to “Blackwater Behaving Badly”

  1. #1 |  Mike | 

    Now I’m curious what sharia law is in this area. It doesn’t allow a company to be sued, but is perhaps the employee that approved the flight plan eligable for some barbaric punishment? And heaven forbid if that supervisor was a woman.

  2. #2 |  MassHole | 

    Under Sharia Law, Eric Prince is an infidel. Off with his head!

  3. #3 |  Joe | 

    Islamic Tort Reform. Yay! Shouldn’t the person responsible for the harm be punished by Islamic Law?

    This is such BS. I hope the ct rejects the argument.

  4. #4 |  Mike H | 

    Hell, Blackwater would get off scot-free citing Murphy’s Law.

    These mercenaries have more legal kevlar surrounding them than any US troops will ever enjoy.

  5. #5 |  Brian Moore | 

    That second one sounds almost too outlandish. If shari’a law governs their cases in Afghanistan, it seems like they might “get off” in this case, but it would result in very bad results for them in nearly every other case. And who would’ve thought that shari’a law had such cop outs to corporate interests? :)

    And the first is a bit weird too. If only Blackwater employees can use them, how do the sheriff’s departments utilize them? You can’t just have private people come along on SWAT team raids with automatic weapons to “help”? Right? Please?

  6. #6 |  MacK | 

    I’m thinking of buying a couple grenade launchers, maybe some bazookas, and a M60A1 tank for my local cops.
    I’m just going to keep them at my house, so I can train, practice, and whatever else I can think of with them.

    I know what you are thinking, but in truth the cops can come, and use them for training also, so I do not see a problem with it.

    I am curious as to why that sheriff thought he needed to have a SWAT team. Sounds about like Mayberry to me. Barney must have been itching to load that bullet I guess.

  7. #7 |  UCrawford | 

    Blackwater is arguing that the lawsuit should be governed by Shari’a law, which doesn’t allow for lawsuits against companies for the actions of their employees

    By that reasoning then the Blackwater employees who the CID and FBI said faked a convoy attack in Iraq to cover for shooting civilians should be turned over to the Iraqi criminal courts to stand trial.

  8. #8 |  matt | 

    you gotta love the double standard. when blackwater’s mercenaries killed some iraqi civilians in iraq, only US law could apply. but now that they are being sued for negligence for something that occurred in afghanistan, only afghani law applies. i guess prince thinks he gets to pick and choose what legal systems should apply to blackwater’s major screw ups, depending on what would be the best outcome. i hope he gets slammed in court.

  9. #9 |  jwh | 

    Matt: Actually, the issue in Iraq was that the contractors were neither subject to Iraqi nor US laws. That is a very different situation than what you are describing…..and also very different from the implications for the recent Supreme Court ruling. One significant implication of THAT ruling is that US law extends to military installations on foreign soil (which had not been so prior to that ruling). Military installations are not “US territory” in the same sense as Embassy compounds.

    Criminal actions on foreign soil are subject to the laws of that country, even if those laws aren’t “constitutional” in our interpretation of them.

  10. #10 |  Phelps | 

    Blackwater only has to do this because of the stupid “post-1986 production” laws. Corporations can have all the pre-86 weapons they want as long as they pay the $200 tax.

  11. #11 |  HtownGuy | 

    Blackwater only has to do this because of the stupid “post-1986 production” laws. Corporations can have all the pre-86 weapons they want as long as they pay the $200 tax.

    Those anti-rights gun laws should be repealed.

    Just because Blackwater is a tool of the state however, doesn’t mean this private company should get to avoid our statist laws. That type of corporate preference would be um, fascist.

  12. #12 |  Stephen | 

    ATF raids Blackwater…

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,372343,00.html

  13. #13 |  The Agitator » Blog Archive » Lunch Links | 

    […] follow-up to this story: The feds have raided […]

Leave a Reply