Blackwater caught smuggling assault rifles and silencers into Iraq

[ck4829]

A federal grand jury in North Carolina is investigating allegations the controversial private security firm Blackwater illegally shipped assault weapons and silencers to Iraq, hidden in large sacks of dog food, ABCNews.com has learned.

The investigation of the alleged dog food smuggling scheme began last year after two Blackwater employees were caught trying to sell stolen weapons in North Carolina. The two, Kenneth Cashwell and William "Max" Grumiaux pleaded guilty in February and became government witnesses, according to court documents.

Two other former employees tell ABCNews.com they also witnessed the dog food smuggling operation. They say the weapons were actually hidden inside large sacks of dog food, packaged at company headquarters in North Carolina and sent to Iraq for the company's 20 bomb-sniffing dogs.

Larger items, including M-4 assault weapons, were secreted on shipping pallets surrounded by stacks of dog food bags, the former employees said. The entire pallet would be wrapped in cellophane shrink wrap, the former employees said, making it less likely US Customs inspectors would look too closely.

Last year, a US Department of Commerce inspector at JFK airport in New York discovered an unlicensed two-way radio hidden in a dog food sack being shipped by Blackwater to Iraq, according to people familiar with the incident.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6254508&page=1

[Hubert Flottz]

1. I wonder how they shipped the missing 9 billion dollars back home?

[Dennis Donovan]

2. Likely for locals, who in turn shoot at our soldiers...

Recommended...:grr:

[Fumesucker]

3. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out

That "the locals" hate Blackwater mercs far worse than they hate actual US troops.

Keep in mind it was strung up mercs that originally precipitated the Fallujah clusterfuck.

[Dennis Donovan]

4. Okay, so they're selling weapons to those who will then shoot at THEM.

Either way, it sucks.

[1776Forever]

7. Do you really think Blackwater "cared" about their people? Read this...

Truth drowned by Blackwater…
Posted on June 11, 2007 by Jim Booth

http://scholarsandrogues.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/truth-drowned-by-blackwater/

George Bush’s private army Blackwater Security Consulting, the firm contracted with providing security services to civilian contractors in Iraq (among other services) is showing its admiration of Dick “Keep what you’re doing secret at any cost” Cheney:

The families of four American security contractors who were burned, beaten, dragged through the streets of Fallujah and their decapitated bodies hung from a bridge over the Euphrates River on March 31, 2004, are reaching out to the American public to help protect themselves against the very company their loved ones were serving when killed, Blackwater Security Consulting. After Blackwater lost a series of appeals all the away to the U.S. Supreme Court, Blackwater has now changed its tactics and is suing the dead men’s estates for $10 million to silence the families and keep them out of court.

Following these gruesome deaths which were broadcast on worldwide television, the surviving family members looked to Blackwater for answers as to how and why their loved ones died. Blackwater not only refused to give the grieving families any information, but also callously stated that they would need to sue Blackwater to get it. Left with no alternative, in January 2005, the families filed suit against Blackwater, which is owned by the wealthy and politically-connected Erik Prince.

(snip)

Why would Blackwater take such a clearly bullying and punitive action against families who only wanted to know the truth about how and why their loved ones died? One word - secrecy:

After filing its suit against the dead men’s estates, Blackwater demanded that its claim and the families’ existing lawsuit be handled in a private arbitration. By suing the families in arbitration, Blackwater has attempted to move the examination of their wrongful conduct outside of the eye of the public and away from a jury.

Why the need for such secrecy? What is it that Blackwater has to hide? Here’s a suggestion:

The families claim that Blackwater is attempting to cover up its incompetence, its cutting of corners in favor of higher profits, and its over billing to the government. Due to lack of accountability and oversight, Blackwater’s private army has been able to obtain huge profits from the government, utilizing contacts established through Erik Prince’s relationships with high-ranking government officials such as Cofer Black and Joseph Schmitz.

This, of course, leads us back to where we started - to the real object of Blackwater’s attacks:

By filing suit, Blackwater is trying to wipe out the families’ ability to discover the truth about Blackwater’s involvement in the deaths of these four Americans and to silence them from any public comment. In February, the families testified before Congress.

However, Blackwater’s lawsuit now seeks to gag the family members from even speaking about the incident or about Blackwater’s involvement in the deaths. This is a direct attack to their free speech rights under the First Amendment.

(snip)

As always, it’s just about $#@#$ money.

.........

I think Blackwater et. al don't give a crap about any of their people, and that it truly is all about the $#@#$ money!

[NNN0LHI]

5. unlicensed two-way radio?

I never knew there was such a thing as an "unlicensed" two-way radio.

Don

[1776Forever]

9. I had never heard of it either - here is a link - FCC started this in 2000 it seems...

MURS: Unlicensed VHF

http://www.buytwowayradios.com/blog/2008/09/murs_unlicensed_vhf.aspx

Do you need a high powered two way radio, but don't want to deal with the hassle of licensing? MURS may be the answer, particularly if you plan to use the radio outdoors where VHF frequencies are most effective.

The Multi-Use Radio Service (MURS) is a two-way radio service consisting of five frequencies in the VHF spectrum. Established by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the fall of 2000, MURS is a radio service allowing for "licensed by use" operation, meaning that a FFC issued license is not necessary to operate a MURS transmitter. The FCC formally defines MURS as "a private, two-way, short distance voice or data communications service for personal or business activities of the general public". There are some limitations to MURS: radio power is limited to 2 watts, MURS stations may not be connected to the public telephone network, radio repeaters are not permitted, and the highest point of any MURS antenna must not be more than 60 feet above the ground or 20 feet above the highest point of the structure on which it is mounted.

[NNN0LHI]

10. Thanks but I still don't see where the radio has to be licenced unless I am missing something?

The part about "licensed by use" means you are licenced just by using one.

Don

In general:

MURS permits the use of a variety of emission modes, but the most common is analog voice using FM modulation. Data communications are permitted, but the FCC prohibits image transmissions. <95.401>

Very narrow bandwidth transmissions (maximum 11.25 KHz channel bandwidth, with +/- 2.5 KHz deviation) are permissible on all five MURS channels. The older +/- 5 KHz deviation signals (with a maximum 20 KHz channel bandwidth) are also permitted (but not required) on the two upper channels (in the 154 MHz band). <95.631>

The FCC prohibits continuous transmissions in any mode except by "grandfathered" (former Part 90) business-type licensees. <95.631(j)>

The maximum permissible Transmitter Power Output (TPO) is 2 Watts. There is no limit on antenna gain. <95.639(h)>

MURS is intended for short-range local communications. Antenna height is limited to 20 feet above structure or 60 feet above ground, whichever is the greater. <95.1315>

Repeaters (stations that retransmit simultaneously) and store-and-forward packet stations are not allowed. <95.1311>

No license is needed. MURS is available for unlicensed business or personal use as described in this discussion. <95.1301>

Radios suitable for use on the MURS channels are now available from dozens of different manufacturers, and are sold by several online companies and by consumers electronics store chains.

[1776Forever]

12. Found this on licesning - may help us understand it more...

http://www.buytwowayradios.com/Info/GMRS-FCC-Licensing.aspx

Do I have to get a license if I live outside of the United States?

You only need a FCC GMRS license if you are using the GMRS frequencies within the United States.

I need a radio, but I don't want to pay for a license. What can I do?

Almost all GMRS radios also support FRS frequencies, which can be used without a license. Channels 8-14 on a typical 22 channel consumer radio reserved exclusively for FRS. These channels can be used license-free, but are limited to a half watt of transmit power and will have limited range.

..........

I don't know enough about these 2-ways to know if they can be traced if they are licensed and if they were used in Iraq if they could have been traced. It doesn't say anything about use of these out side the United States. I think the question was why were these sent in the dog food in the first place? Just made it seem more suspicious that something was fishy about it.

[NNN0LHI]

13. I am going to take a guess here and say the radios may have been "opened up?"

By opened up I mean they may have been converted to operate on more frequencies than they are supposed be which is probably a very easy modification.

Might even be capable of transmitting on our military allocated frequencies would be my last guess?

Don

[1776Forever]

14. Very good deduction - hadn't thought of that one - makes a lot of sense.

Wonder if we will ever hear any more about them? I would like to know the real story. Thanks!

[machI]

6. Blackwater - Bush's private mercenary military. They are still operating out side of the law

The folks at Blackwater are so arrogant the just put guns on a shipping pallet, cover them with sacks of dog food, and ship them to Iraq.

My question would be, how did they get the machine guns and silencers in the first place? The BATF&E restricts sales of assault rifles to the Government, and the last time I checked, Blackwater was a civilian contractor.

[Tesla]

8. I hope the next group coming in charge and try every one of these companies

That Dick and * have their hands in.

[1776Forever]

11. Obama did "go after" Blackwater as reported in this article & his letter to Secretary Rice...

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/10/obama_goes_after_blackwater.html

Obama goes after Blackwater
Posted October 3, 2007 3:03 PM

by John McCormick

IOWA CITY –Sen. Barack Obama charged today that a private security firm operating in Iraq has acted "with reckless disregard to Iraqi life," as he called his proposals to better monitor such contractors the toughest reforms offered by any candidate in the presidential race.

Although Obama has previously mentioned Blackwater USA, the Illinois Democrat drew greater attention to the firm's actions in an extended discussion on the University of Iowa's campus.

"Most contractors act as if the law doesn't apply to them," he said. "Under my plan, if contractors break the law, they will be prosecuted."

In announcing his "Security Contractor Accountability Plan," Obama said he would like to see greater transparency on contractor hiring and costs.

"I've proposed tougher government reforms than any other candidate in this race – reforms that would eliminate the kind of no-bid contracts that this administration has given to Blackwater," he said.

A new congressional report suggested Blackwater employees engaged in nearly 200 shootings in Iraq since 2005, with a vast majority cases being shootings from moving vehicles.

Obama said he would create an entire FBI unit that would be charged with investigating such incidents.

"Given the attention these scandals have generated we can no longer plead ignorance," Obama said.

..........

This is the letter posted on Obama Senate website about this to Secretary Rice:

http://obama.senate.gov/press/071030-obama_demands_a_2/

Obama Demands Answers on Blackwater Immunity Deal
Tuesday, October 30, 2007

WASHINGTON, DC - Today, United States Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) sent the following letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice demanding answers on reports that State Department officials offered Blackwater guards immunity from prosecution, which may hinder a criminal investigation into the September shooting that killed at least 17 Iraqis.

Obama has introduced legislation in the Senate to make private security contractors in Iraq subject to federal criminal law; this bill has already passed the House. Obama has also called for the head of Blackwater to testify before the Senate. In February, Obama introduced comprehensive legislation to increase oversight on private security contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan; part of his legislation requiring reporting to Congress on the role of contractors passed the Senate last month.

Below is a copy of the letter:

Dear Secretary Rice:

I am deeply troubled by news reports that the State Department promised guards employed by Blackwater USA immunity from prosecution as part of the Department's initial investigation into the September 16 shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians.

The seriousness of this incident - and its effect on the American military's reputation in Iraq - necessitates the prosecution of the appropriate Blackwater personnel if they are found to have committed crimes. However, a full investigation and prosecution will be difficult when all of the Blackwater guards - both in the vehicle convoy involved in the shooting and the helicopters above - were apparently given immunity by investigators from the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, an arm of the State Department. According to a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation said, "Once you give immunity, you can't take it away."

Although this matter has now been turned over from the State Department to the FBI, prosecutors will have to prove that any evidence they use in bringing charges against Blackwater guards was uncovered independently without using the guards' statements to Bureau of Diplomatic Security investigators. As any prosecutor knows, this is not impossible, but it is extremely difficult.

Because the decision to give immunity to Blackwater guards was a serious one and may potentially jeopardize any prosecution of those involved, I ask that you respond to the following questions:

1) Were you aware of the decision to provide immunity to Blackwater guards? If not, who made this decision?

2) Was the FBI or the Justice Department consulted before immunity was provided to Blackwater guards?

3) Do you agree with the decision to provide immunity to Blackwater guards?

I ask you to provide responses to these questions by November 6, 2007. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama
United States Senator