ONE MAN'S CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE ILLEGAL MERCENARIES IN IRAQ

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

WASHINGTON POST - A federal judge yesterday ordered the military to
temporarily refrain from awarding the largest security contract in Iraq.
The order followed an unusual series of events set off when a U.S. Army
veteran filed a protest against the government practice of hiring what
he calls mercenaries, according to sources familiar with the matter. The
contract, worth about $475 million, calls for a private company to
provide intelligence services to the U.S. Army and security for the Army
Corps of Engineers on reconstruction work in Iraq. The case, which is
being heard by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, puts on trial one of
the most controversial and least understood aspects of the Iraq war: the
outsourcing of military security to an estimated 20,000 armed
contractors who operate with little oversight. . .

Brian X. Scott, a 53 - year - old Colorado man, filed the complaint in
early April. He argues that the military's use of private security
contractors is "against America's core values" and violates an 1893 law
that prohibits the government from hiring quasi - military forces.
Scott's challenge set off a domino effect, prompting the Government
Accountability Office to dismiss protests brought by two major private
security contractors the Army had removed as potential bidders - -
Erinys Iraq, a British firm, and Blackwater USA of North Carolina. . .
In his court protest, Scott relied on the Anti - Pinkerton Act, which
Congress passed more than a century ago to thwart businesses that had
hired mercenaries to disrupt labor groups.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp -
dyn/content/article/2007/06/01/AR2007060102261.html

MICHAEL DE YOUANNA, COLORADO SPRINGS INDEPENDENT, 2006 - Brian X.
Scott, armed with reams of paper to battle federal policy, says private
security contractors have become rampant in Iraq, with little public
debate. . . "The use of these contractors is bad for the country," he
says. "It's bad for the Army. We're disconnecting the citizen part from
the solider part. These security contractors are really mercenaries for
hire.". . .

Last spring, when Scott saw listings for two contracts that required
private security, he posed as a contractor and submitted bids. . . One
contract solicited private guards for cargo transports. The other called
for guards at gates and gun towers at Camp Victory, a U.S. base in
Baghdad. "Just the fact that the private security guards are placed
where there could be an attack - that is a combat role and not allowed,"
Scott says. "They're replacing troops with mercenaries.". . .

The contractors, who earn hundreds of dollars more a day than troops,
have become essential in Iraq, he says. "You can't take a crap without
them," Pelton says. . .

In March, the News & Observer in Raleigh, N.C., provided a rare overview
of incidents involving security contractors. Reviewing 400 voluntary
incident reports spanning nine months of 2004 - 2005, the newspaper
found that contractors shot at 61 vehicles. Yet in just seven instances
were Iraqis clearly attacking. In most cases, contractors drove away.
None were prosecuted.

http://csindy.com/csindy/2006 - 09 - 07/news4.html

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||