Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Vanity Fair has an article about Blackwater founder Erik Prince that is absolutely mind-blowing. It begins with this incredibly tone deaf statement:
Iput myself and my company at the C.I.A.'s disposal for some very risky missions," says Erik Prince as he surveys his heavily fortified, 7,000-acre compound in rural Moyock, North Carolina. "But when it became politically expedient to do so, someone threw me under the bus."
Awww, I'm sorry. Did we not give you enough hundreds of millions of dollars to do the government's dirty work? You want a medal for smuggling illegal weapons out of the country, killing innocent people and bribing Iraqi officials? Are you not getting enough respect, Erik? My heart absolutely bleeds for you.
Politics
Comments
Erik probably thinks that his surname is a title. I wonder which circle Dante would assign him to.
Posted by: Budbear | December 5, 2009 9:41 AM
"I bravely sent other peoples' children to die for money! I'm a war hero goddamnit!" isn't a terribly compelling argument.
Posted by: JThompson | December 5, 2009 9:42 AM
According to an article in the Washington Independent, what this is is a shot across the bow of the CIA, indicating that if fascist goatfucker Prince goes down, he'll take the CIA with him.
http://washingtonindependent.com/69770/erik-princes-brushback-pitch
Posted by: SLC | December 5, 2009 10:04 AM
The stories are worth reading, particularly for bits like this one about the CIA hit team.
You come away believing prince is either incredibly unhinged, or dishonest to a monumental scale. The final quote below lends credence to the unhinged description (at least to me)
Just the type of psychopath every school board wants in its employ, I'm sure.
Posted by: dean | December 5, 2009 10:14 AM
Apparently this guy never watched tv. "As always, should you, or any of your IM Force, be caught or killed, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of the matter." Or to quote another of my favorites: "Miliary secrets are the most fleeting of all".
Posted by: Ann Klein | December 5, 2009 11:24 AM
"You come away believing prince is either incredibly unhinged, or dishonest to a monumental scale."
I've always had the feeling that he's both.
Posted by: Equisetum | December 5, 2009 12:05 PM
A couple of observations:
The Bush regime failed to destroy al Qaeda, most notably because they did not have the will or the fortitude to effectively hunt them down and kill them or take them into custody.
Not only does such outsourcing weaken our own internal capabilities as federal resources quit for higher pay, we pay a far higher price for such services while having far less control of their results.
Blackwater's upper management, like ex-CIA Cofer Black instead made big bucks by leaving the CIA prior to succeeding in their personal commitment to President Bush to kill al Qaeda's leaders, instead milking the financial gravy train. Perhaps one of the biggest legacies Bush leaves is that we:
a) suffered the single worst terrorist attack on American soil in U.S. history
b) Bush failed miserably to take out al Qaeda*
c) Many of Bush's financial and political constituents made fortunes milking Bush's on-going failure.
The financial, operational, and diplomatic lessons we should learn from Blackwater's performance is that none of their activities should be outsourced. The Obama Administration has failed by not publically voicing their cognizance of this lesson and acting accordingly.
*In terms of our having to continue to expend blood and treasure as a result of 9/11; along with all the other fall-out due to Bush not taking the bull by the horns in Dec-01 when we had the opportunity or effectively create another opportunity after Bush's failure in Dec-01.
Posted by: Michael Heath | December 5, 2009 12:07 PM
Prince is quite the patriotic mercenary--what happens when it becomes financially expedient for Blackwater to accept a higher bid from a nation other than the United States (perhaps even one the United States is fighting)? It may seem far-fetched, but it seems like the prerequisites for such a scenario are in place.
Posted by: scott pilutik | December 5, 2009 12:09 PM
Michael - does anyone know that such cozy little arrangements ('outsourcing' services traditionally handled by the State Department and the CIA, in exchange for unknown amounts 'off-the-books' money) aren't continuing under the current administration? And if they are how will/would we ever find out? - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | December 5, 2009 12:14 PM
Notice how he puts himself into the same sentence with "very risky missions"? That's... almost elegant.
Posted by: konrad_arflane | December 5, 2009 12:26 PM
DJ - much of what Blackwater/Xe does and has done is a matter of public record and always has been. The VF article Ed links notes some of the non-confidential services. I think they still provide security for State and CIA in some countries, including Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Posted by: Michael Heath | December 5, 2009 12:28 PM
I thought a lot of this kind of thing was considered to be 'Commercial in Confidence' so no public disclosure was necessary. If a new company of Mercs sets themselves up in the the Virgin Islands, or St. Kitts or some other information 'black-hole' how would the public know?
If we don't who to put an FOI request in on (assuming any request is granted, and assuming any of the information is not redacted for 'nation security' reasons) is there any general method of digging up the truth, from a legal perspective? - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | December 5, 2009 12:38 PM
Imagine standing right in front of Erik Prince in a small room with no furnishings. You are looking him squarely in the eye as you ask him, "What part of the dishonest, duplicitous, covert, distractionary, deceitful and boldly false nature of your chosen field of endeavor don't you understand?"
Perhaps he has never actually been present when someone was quite literally thrown under a bus.
The needle of my empathy meter hasn't so much as quivered.
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | December 5, 2009 1:25 PM
Outsourcing always amazes me as an incredibly stupid idea. The claim is that the government saves training and other expenses, but who does Blackwater hire? Ex-military. Who trained them? The government.
Business people have the weirdest superstitions. It's amazing that they actually manage to make money.
Posted by: BaldApe | December 5, 2009 1:37 PM
maybe not but did he give the orders?
Posted by: Matty | December 5, 2009 1:40 PM
Doesn't matter, Matty. He is the chief cook and bottle washer. The head man. The founder.
Ethically speaking, he is now foundering.
Basic human politics; parliamentary procedure; chain of command. Power is ever attended by responsibility which, when called, can be a formidable burden. Sometimes frighteningly so.
Not that Erik was unprepared to assume his responsibility but that he was unprepared for a foreseeable confluence of not improbable events actually leading to a moment when a large, flashing red arrow points directly at his own head. His embarrassment is understandable but an issue unworthy of consideration.
I stress again that engagement in covert, secret, extra specially dangerous and cavalier activities necessary for the security of the
kingnation is fraught with the same threats internally that it presents externally to the latest enemy.That he should so much as mention his discomfort is astounding. No true warrior would show such weakness. That he is surprised is confounding given his career choice.
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | December 5, 2009 2:13 PM
Baldape @ 14:
Always? I was a manager/director for nine years at a subcontract manfacturer and I can think of countless examples of when its prudent. Particularly when subs bring marginally superior cost advantages and skills while also significantly reducing their customer's fixed costs and future liabilities of holding such fixed costs.
I agree its insane in this instance, mainly because Blackwater doesn't bring those advantages with them. One of the reasons the U.S. enjoyed big productivity gains in the late-1990s was due to increased capacity utilization by companies sharing manufacturing resources with other companies through a subcontractor. That transfer of fixed assets to liquid assets allowed the tech industry the ability to more aggressively invest in new technologies rather than paying to maintain a factor at 40% capacity with above-market costs that hurt their profit margins.
An ironic experience I had was a start-up recruited me away from my former employer to move and manage their manufacturing operations to an off-shore subcontractor. After being there six weeks I told them such a move would ruin the company, not risk the company's profit expectations, but flat-out ruin it. Some of their manufacturing processes were too immature and required far better talent than they realized (which their Engineering VP was telling them well in advance of my arrival). I spent the next two years working to develop our in-house repetitive capabilities (as a start-up their volumes were low when I arrived but were just going into production).
Posted by: Usually not anonymous | December 5, 2009 3:01 PM
Emphasis was mine in "always" @ 17, and not in BaldApe's original comment. My apologies for this inadvertent error.
Posted by: Usually not anonymous | December 5, 2009 3:08 PM
Prince's blind spot, unawareness of the nature of his activities, might be rooted in his evangelical Christian faith. His conception of there being a 'side of the angles', the US and him being on it, and working it up the other way, therefore his actions are above suspicious and question, has left him vulnerable.
There is also a good chance any leaks may have been motivated, at least in part, by his and his families conspicuous contributions to far-right and fundamentalist Christian causes.
Such deeply held beliefs can tend to make one predictable, unable to blend, unable to operate in a field with a lot of grays. In a word vulnerable.
Much as many fundamentalist Muslims read a passage in the Koran and assume this means their pants legs must be six inches off the ground. And that this has become a highly handy way of identifying the fundamentalist cadre within a group.
Posted by: Art | December 5, 2009 3:11 PM
in west michigan, home of the prince family, they (and other rich right-wing families, such as the DeVos and VanAndel families) are held in great regard by many. There is little questioning of their statements or actions. eric grew up in this situation, and now seems offended that someone dares find him to have acted badly. he's simply taking the eric cartman route and saying "screw you guys, I'm going home".
Posted by: dean | December 5, 2009 4:18 PM
well since we havent had the Token rightie comment on this . i will play one "we have guys like Erik Prince to yhank for protecting our freedoms blah blah yadda yadda"
Posted by: Vic Vanity | December 5, 2009 5:49 PM
Honestly, what did he think he was getting paid for? The military has plenty of very well trained, very motivated people who work for less at the government's disposal.
The whole point of hiring someone else to do your dirty work is so that when the shit hits the fan, it ends up on them, not you.
Posted by: MPL | December 5, 2009 6:57 PM
He sounds like the ultimate REMF.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | December 5, 2009 10:26 PM
Blackwater, according to Vanity Fair, was not technically involved in this program per se. Rather "these were supposedly off-the-books initiatives done on Prince’s own dime, for which he was later reimbursed."
This has the stink of Cheney all over it.
When did being a super-villian become a job requirement for VP.
Posted by: NJ Osprey | December 5, 2009 11:28 PM
Marcus Ranum - You've convinced me.
Originally I thought 'Prince Eric' deserved the "G. Gordon Liddy Memorial Plumber's Mate" for moronic 'boy's own adventures' contrary to the good of their country, now I realise he deserves no less that the "Robert Strange McNamara REMF medal, with bronzed cluster-fucks" - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | December 6, 2009 12:22 AM
In defense of Prince, he was a Navy Seal. So it's a touch unfair to refer to him as REMF.
As for Prince, someone really should have explain that getting thrown under the bus was part of the job.
Posted by: History Punk | December 6, 2009 4:32 AM
Hmm ... who takes "asshole of the year" award? Erik, or this guy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8397683.stm
Posted by: MadScientist | December 6, 2009 5:13 AM
If he mentioned Moore's Law, I don't remember it. By my rough calculations of same, a comparable modern computer should do the job in under three seconds, yet somehow the accuracy hasn't trickled down to local forecasts yet..
Posted by: sikiş | December 6, 2009 5:52 AM
History Punk:
"In defense of Prince, he was a Navy Seal. So it's a touch unfair to refer to him as REMF."
This:
"Jack Lynch, president of a national SEALs association, says, "He was a good operator. Guys liked going in the water with him." Deployed to Haiti, Bosnia and the Middle East, Prince saw no actual combat, though, he says, "I've certainly been mortared and rocketed a few times" in war zones since then." (Newsweek--http://www.newsweek.com/id/43361/page/2)
is, I suspect, accurate.
Not to demean the skills or bravery of the Nayy's SEAL personnel but completing the training to be a combat soldier, of even the highest order, is not the same as being a combat veteran--a distinction that I'm certain Erik Prince would be loathe to admit. Cooks and cleaners in the employ of Halliburton are mortared and rocketed in Iraq. I don't see Erik Prince as being any kind of heroic figure. I see him as another fucked up rich kid, albeit one who probably liked pulling the wings off of flies. It is interesting to me that he left the U.S. Naval Academy as a sophomore and yet was still accepted into the Navy's Officer Training and SEAL programs. Somebody must have liked him, or his daddy's money.
Posted by: democommie | December 6, 2009 8:31 AM
There is a (British?) Naval (semi) equivalent that was on the same page in the Urban Dictionary as REMF, but I can't find it now. It meant an officer who made damn sure you knew he was the your superior, at least in the chain of command.
Any old salts out there who can help? - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | December 6, 2009 8:44 AM
From Princess Leia to Erik Prince: "If money is all that you love, then that's what you'll receive."
You got your money so quit your bitching.
Posted by: We Are The 801 | December 6, 2009 4:06 PM
Posted by: Paul Murray | December 7, 2009 6:37 AM
REMF is a Rear Echelon M****r F****r, a pejorative usually reserved for clerks and jerks who will never see the front lines...
Posted by: flherp | December 7, 2009 7:46 AM
@8 - this is the problem with hiring mercenaries for anything, they're not loyal to you but to money. It's not a new thing either, Machiavelli for one had an pretty dim view of mercenaries:
"Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy.
...
The mercenary captains are either capable men or they are not; if they are, you cannot trust them, because they always aspire to their own greatness, either by oppressing you, who are their master, or others contrary to your intentions; but if the captain is not skilful, you are ruined in the usual way."
Which is centuries old yet seems to sum up Blackwater/Xe's works fairly well.
Posted by: Captain Obvious | December 7, 2009 9:51 AM