May 22, 2013
Kabul Contractor Parties Aren’t the Half of It
Posted on Sep 3, 2009
Much of the furor over the conduct of private embassy guards in Kabul appears preoccupied with what one whistle-blower describes as the “gay shit” rather than the exploitation of young Afghan women or the deteriorating security situation at the embassy. The latter, after all, was the major focus of the complaint that blew this story open.
As one of the whistle-blowing guards so eloquently put it in an e-mail, “no, they are not jamming guys in the ass per say [sic], but they are showing poor judgenment [sic].”
And so is the State Department, for continuing to rely on contractors when, in the words of the Project on Government Oversight’s letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, “the management of the contract to protect the U.S. Embassy Kabul is grossly deficient, posing a significant threat to the security of the Embassy and its personnel—and thereby to the diplomatic mission in Afghanistan.”
That document, at nearly 4,000 words, is a comprehensive indictment of the government’s use of private security contractors, of which the hazing of naked men is just one of many enumerated scandals.
While “peeing on people, eating potato chips out of ass cracks, vodka shots out of ass cracks ... broken doors after drnken [sic] brawls, threats and intimidation from those leaders participating in this activity” may be reprehensible, it doesn’t come close to the worst thing these soldiers of fortune have done while on the government payroll.
The real crime is that Uncle Sam still uses private contractors at all. —PS
Read POGO’s letter to Secretary Clinton.
New and Improved Comments