Image Courtesy of Rogue Media

This past weekend, I stood in the rain at Occupy DC as police in riot gear trampled through the camp at McPherson Square. I ran as they charged the crowd with police horses. I watched as they grabbed clothing, books, tents, shoes, and other personal property, and tossed it all into dumpsters.

I marched through New York in September of last year on the first day of Occupy Wall Street. I laid down my sleeping bag in the open air in Zuccotti Park on the first intense nights of the occupation. Then, I brought my sleeping bag back to Washington DC, where I live. With some hopeful companions, I began occupying McPherson Square on K Street, home to some of the most corrupt lobbyists in the world. We held meetings in the cool October air, not yet the biting chill of winter. And we went to work building a library, a clinic, a kitchen, a media center -- a small village. A second camp quickly emerged in another part of town, within sight of Congress.

I occupied because the rich are too rich, because Wall Street and the corporations control too much, and because all of our governments won't even begin to seriously address some of the biggest challenges of our time, like climate change. I occupied because, like so many in the 99 percent, I am fed up with the status quo. I occupied because people are suffering all over the country and all over the world, while the power to build a better future is in our hands.

Now, most of Occupy DC has been emptied. Many occupiers were made homeless. Miraculously, the cops spared my humble little tent, with a newly broken pole, but sleeping in the park would now likely get me arrested. (I hadn't slept at the park recently anyway. Another occupier was staying in my tent.)

Was it all worth it? Yes, and I'll do it again.

This week, the Senate Budget Committee will hold a hearing about inequality and social mobility, hearing from experts like Sarah Anderson at the Institute for Policy Studies, who has published studies on the CEO-worker pay gap for 18 years. Would the Senate be doing this before Occupy? Probably not.

Mitt Romney is struggling to shed the stigma of being a "one percent candidate," because his Richie Rich image continues to harm his campaign. Even Newt "Huge Tiffany's Tab" Gingrich is making jabs at Romney's wealth. Would this have happened before Occupy? Probably not.

One of President Barack Obama's favorite stump speeches these days is on making the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations pay their fair share, which would reduce inequality in this country. Would this have become a favorite presidential refrain before Occupy? Probably not.

A thousand plans are afoot to "re-occupy" this spring. But even if the camps were to end now, the Occupy movement has made millions of Americans think harder about our economic, environmental, and political realities, and that has the potential to change everything. It has created spaces for us to bring a bold new world to life. It has sparked conversations and ideas that no police barricade can hold back. And it has opened dreams that we are all still dreaming -- whether we campers are allowed to sleep or not.

Lacy MacAuley wears two hats, which isn't always easy. She is the media relations manager at the Institute for Policy Studies and a participant in the Occupy movement. www.ips-dc.org

Editor's Note It is bad enough that Komen decided to stop funding to Planned Parenthood. To then turn around and come up with a bogus apology to take the heat off is despicable. I encourage folks to contact the Komen Foundation (contact form) and let them know what you think, and to give to Planned Parenthood.

The organization is behaving more like Bank of America, one of its most prominent sponsors. Like a Wall Street bank, its using its monopoly power to crush competitors, dictate its terms to the public, and to speak both disingenuously and hypocritically to the American people. The Susan G. Komen organization has become "too big to fail."

"Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation," said a statement issued today. But the evidence shows that no such policy was ever enforced for anyone but Planned Parenthood.

"We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political," the statement continued. Yet criminal investigations were ignored, and only the politically-based investigation resulted in action. The only logical explanation is that this policy never existed, or was invented solely for the purpose of defunding Planned Parenthood.

Monopoly to Monopoly

And while the alleged policy was aimed at grant recipients, not donors, the charity's increasingly implausible claim reeks of hypocrisy when the sources of its money are considered. Several large Komen donors are also the targets of past or current investigations. Bank of America, which is prominently displayed on the Komen website as a member of its "Million Dollar Council Elite," has paid tens of millions to settle fraud charges in recent years as the result of "federal investigations."

The Susan G. Komen Foundation targeted Planned Parenthood for moral scorn to justify a decision that we now know to be political, while accepting money from organizations that are under investigation and giving to others in the same condition.

That's what happens when a single charity pursues and achieves excessive control over one area of need. Like B of A and other large banks, it's a monopoly that's leveraging its size and influence improperly. Case in point: The foundation chose to cut funding for stem cell research. Given its size and dominance, that's a serious threat to this critical avenue of research.

The Komen website includes a sales pitch to corporate donors which notes that "Americans believe it's more important than ever for companies to be socially responsible... In fact, 83 percent of Americans wish more of the products, services and retailers they use would support causes... "

It's now clear that the foundation has a double-standard about who it gives money to and receives money from, and no compunction about using its well-known (and well-guarded) name to provide marketing clout and the appearance of good behavior to some bad corporate actors. And when it came to Bank of America and Komen, it was a case of one monopoly helping another.

Double Standard

In the aftermath of its move to defund Planned Parenthood, Susan G. Komen officials said it had adopted a new policy of refusing to fund any institution that was under federal investigation. CEO Nancy Brinker (who travels first-class at foundation expense, according to financial documents filed with the government) put it even more broadly when she said that the group had the "right to cancel if a group is under investigation" -- which presumably means any investigation.

Despite the new presence of a Sarah Palin-endorsed anti-choice politician as its public policy director, and despite new revelations that it quietly stopped funding stem cell research, the Komen Foundation continues to insist this isn't a politically motivated move. They claim they would cut funds for any organization that's under investigation.

The easiest way to defuse the controversy would have been to list other groups that were losing funding under the same policy. They didn't, which strongly suggests no others have been affected. And look who receives Kamen funds and hasn't lost funds.

Based on its latest legal filings, which is nevertheless only a partial listing of grantees, a casual review reveals five organizations which are under federal investigation yet still receive Komen funds. There may be many more; this is what a quick read-through revealed.)

Before we begin, let's be clear: We're not suggesting that these institutions don't do terrific work in the search for a cancer cure, or that their funding should be compromised in any way by the existence of these investigations. The purpose of this exercise is strictly to demonstrate that the Komen Foundation's stated reason for slashing Planned Parenthood funding is demonstrably false.

That said, here are the institutions whose current or recent investigations seem to undermine the "under investigation" rationale for defunding Planned Parenthood.

Harvard University is currently under federal investigation for allegedly discriminating against Asian-Americans and is also being investigated for violations of the Animal Welfare Act after a monkey died in its research labs.

Yale University is currently under federal investigation for failing to adequately address sexual misconduct and harassment.

Columbia University is currently under federal investigation for religious discrimination.

The University of Texas was the subject of an IRS investigation regarding its executive salaries and compensation.

Massachusetts General Hospital paid a million dollars last year after an investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services regarding HIPAA (patient privacy) violations.

The Komen foundation also continues to give funding to the University of Madison, where a cancer researcher was forced to resign after internal investigations disclosed unacceptable conflicts of interest. And while we were conducting this research, Adam Serwer at Mother Jones noted that Penn State is also receiving Komen funding while it is under investigation.

The Million-Dollar Council Elite...

When it comes to federal investigations, a review of its business partners is even uglier. Consider the corporate members of its "Million Dollar Council Elite":

Ford Motor Corporation has been the subject of multiple federal investigations in the last two years alone. Probes involved defective floor mats on Ford Fusions, a jack defect on the Ford Freestar that was said to have caused at least one death, and an investigation of multiple potential defects on the Ford F-150 truck.

American Airlines is currently locked in a dispute with the Pension Fund Guaranty Agency, which filed $91 million in liens against the company the day before yesterday. The federal agency accusing Americans of "pocketing pension relief money instead of putting it into workers' retirements," as the Associated Press reported. No doubt there was a "federal investigation" before these liens were filed.

And while breast cancer is a great cause, one might well also ask why a corporation that says it's too broke to honor its pension obligations belongs to the "Million Dollar Council Elite" program.

... Million Dollar Settlements, That Is

But nobody outdoes Bank of America, which is featured on both the Komen Foundation's "Million Dollar Council Elite" page, and on its plain old, non-elite "Million Dollar Council."

Bank of America is currently under federal investigation regarding charges it has illegally foreclosed on borrowers. It stands accused of committing widespread mortgage fraud, including what was allegedly the largest "robo-signing" operation of them all. ("Robo-signing" is the falsification of court documents, and the filing of false court documents is perjury.)

Bank of America has settled fraud charges with SEC six times in the past 15 years. Each settlement was the result of a "federal investigation." With each settlement it promised to stop committing the same form of fraud. And yet it has done so anyway, at least five additional times.

Bank of America hasn't just been the target of many federal investigations. It "significantly hindered" one of those investigations. As Shahien Nasipour noted in a summary of the mountain of evidence against the bank, a federal auditor stated that "HUD's internal watchdog issued two subpoenas requesting documents and information, and what was returned was incomplete, had conflicting information, and in some cases, the bank provided excerpts of documents rather than the complete record." An auditor also said that the bank refused to permit a walk-through of its mortgage documents unit.

The HUD's internal audit -- a federal investigation -- concluded that the bank knowingly provided the U.S. government with false information. A federal investigation of the bank's foreclosure activity is ongoing, and was recently joined by New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.

Any organization that cuts ties to Planned Parenthood over investigations while advertising its ties to Bank of America is guilty of gross hypocrisy.

Resist -- But Give if You Can

It would be tragic if women's cancer services lost funding as a result of this scandal. But the Susan G. Komen Foundation story appears to be one of power abuse, corporate cronyism, and politicized decision-making. The Komen group has been extremely aggressive in its attempts to force other such groups off the field so that it can dominate breast cancer giving.

That's too much power for one organization to have -- especially if it has shown itself to be unwilling to act transparently and change direction when it abuses that power. Stem cell research is a highly promising avenue for a cure. If the organization that's moved so aggressively to dominate funding refuses to fund it, an approach has been partially obstructed that might eventually save millions of lives in the future.

I'm not rich, but I plan to give more money to both Planned Parenthood and another cancer research organization as a result of this incident. I hope others will do the same. This could all turn out for the best, especially if the fall of one organization raises breast cancer awareness and increases support for treatment and research.

"When the poet stands at nadir the world must indeed be upside-down. If the poet can no longer speak for society, but only for himself, then we are at the last ditch."-- Excerpt from, The Time of the Assassins, a study of Rimbaud, by Henry Miller

"When the poet lives his hell, it is no longer possible for the common man to escape it."-- Excerpt from, The Time of the Assassins, a study of Rimbaud, by Henry Miller

The bells, I say, the bells break down their tower;
And swing I know not where. Their tongues engrave
Membrane through marrow, my long-scattered score
Of broken intervals...And I, their sexton slave!-- Hart Crane , excerpt from The Broken Tower

"Often we're not so much afraid of our own limitations, as we are of the infinite within us."--Nelson Mandela (from an interview from his prison cell, conducted by the late Irish poet and priest, John O'Donnahey)

Phil Rockstroh is a poet, lyricist and philosopher bard living in New York City. He may be contacted at: phil@philrockstroh.com. Visit Phil's website: http://philrockstroh.com/ or at FaceBook.

Image from Punchstock royalty free pictures.

When Bill Clinton and his scary, scary libido stalked the public realm, Republicans warned his presence was so anathema to all things holy that his hot breath served to salt the wings of choirs of angels.

When Bush/Cheney sat at the helm of empire and plundered foreign lands and breached the rule of law, Democratic partisans insisted that constitutional order be reestablished by having Bush et al marched in shackles from the halls of power. To do anything short of this was to risk the foundation of the republic being crushed to rubble and silt beneath the boot of tyranny.

Yet, we critics of duopoly are accused of being impractical sorts who don't dwell in this world, the world of the possible. Although, it seems that political partisans give themselves permission to dwell, simultaneously, in two worlds: This one, as well as a Bizarro World--the parallel universe limned in comic books--where all things are done in reverse, where true is false and false is true, as well as, apparently, a realm where Newt Gingrich is a shining standard bearer of moral rectitude and a defender of faith and family and President Obama is a protector of constitutional law and a friend of the downtrodden.

According to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, 77% of the citizens of the U.S. expressed the belief that the massive power imbalance in place in the nation is a direct result of the vast wealth inequity between the 1% and the 99%. In addition, according to a poll by Time Magazine, 86% of Americans held the conviction that Wall Street and its lobbyists exert undue influence over the U.S. political class.

Still, both major U.S. political parties remain unmoved by the opinions of their constituents and unresponsive to their needs. By having the right to vote under present day, political duopoly, one is granted the right to co-sign the ongoing fraud that the nation is a democratic republic. To vote for either a Democratic or Republican candidate (i.e., the well vetted stooges of the 1%) is to cast a vote in favor of the only political party allowed in the rigged process--The Big Money, Perpetual War Party.

Believing that replacing one of these candidates with the other...is in any way propitious is analogous to believing that the hanging of new wallpaper within a house with a rotted-out foundation constitutes renovating the structure.

Memo to those who cling to the hope you can change the order of a calcified system from within e.g., the U.S. political, corporate and governmental order:

What has caused you to believe you can change the insatiable appetite of a mindless beast from within the belly of said leviathan? Seemingly, your predicament presents you with these alternatives: 1) paste up some soothing wallpaper. 2) Learn to play the xylophone on its ribcage (i.e., turn your powerlessness into the stuff of art). 3) Light a fire and have the creature vomit you to freedom. Otherwise, you're going to be digested; you will lose your mind and body to the dehumanizing system and become part of its monstrous form.

As they embody the Spiritus Mundi of empire's end, Obama builds towering monuments of verbiage into empty air while Mitt Romney bores the soul of liberty into a soporific state, causing her to sleepwalk into a bottomless abyss of bland.

Obama and Romney manage to hide the malevolent, hungry ghost of empire behind a veneer of soul-defying, daylight normalcy. But Newt Gingrich's bloated carcass displays imperium's murderous id. What has become of the diminishing resources of the world? Newt grows ever fatter and more grotesque as he greedily devours these things. What terrible fate befell the U.S. constitution? Newt dry humped it to dust.

Regarding the mindset, libido, and modus operandi of the 1%: We are confronted with types who would clearcut the last tree standing in the last forest on earth to render down to toothpicks used to pick scraps of flesh from the teeth of the members of their class who just dined on the last Bird of Paradise.

To resist, we, as individuals and en masse, are advised to mitigate our sense of powerlessness by occupying our own libido, thereby allowing oneself to be drawn into the élan vital of the world...to ride the zeitgeist, embodying the eros of resistance and renewal, and, in so doing, refusing to defer to the corrupt-beyond-redemption machinations of the U.S. political and big media classes.

Ask yourself and those around you Rainer Maria Rilke's deceptively simple question: How shall I spend my days?

To appropriate Cornell West's phrase, launch yourself into the midst of "the funk of life" by means of the gritty sublime of cultural eros...This act is a marriage of earthly complaint and winged aspiration--both a lamentation and goof take--a conversation/a collaboration/a spirited debate between what has been lost to indifference, exploitation, and cupidity--and the insistent eros of the breathing moment--a commitment to occupy life's restive pantheon of purpose and decay.

Show your face to the world. Occupy libido by acts large and small, public and private.

Conversely, in what way is it attractive, healthy, or even interesting to willingly submit to the dictates of a culture that has conjured from the zeitgeist the likes of Gingrich--a high chair tyrant of the lowest order--a grotesque man-brat banging on the sides of his elevated seat, insisting that all the things of the world he sees are, "MINE!"

Why did the zeitgeist regurgitate Gingrich into our midst? Newt embodies the misappropriated libido and attendant, oceanic sense of entitlement of the corporate consumer state i.e., modes of being conjured by the dark magicians of advertising and finance to enslave the 99%, as, all the while, the system's rapacious verities and doomed vectors serve as the lodestar and raison d'être of the 1%.

Eric Hoffer advised, "You can never get enough of what you don't really need."

William Butler Yeats, on the subject of being overwhelmed by abundance:

The salmon-falls, the mackerel-crowded seas,

Fish, flesh, or fowl, commend all summer long

Whatever is begotten, born, and dies.

Caught in that sensual music all neglect

Monuments of unageing intellect.--excerpt: Sailing to Byzantium

One's character is forged amid this agon of excess and restraint e.g., of discerning the difference between the habitual excesses of consumer addiction and the callings of one's character; life lessons that are arrested by the shallow compulsions and time-sucking demands of the current neoliberal order.

As things stand, there exists no panacea to prevent this dilemma. Yet the messy, learning process known as creative resistance will suffice i.e., a type of endeavor similar to an artist's approach to his craft, involving his working with the materials at hand...At present, those materials being: you--your longings, your inspiration, your aspirations, your defeats, your mindful refusal to accept the diminished and demeaning status quo, and, of course, the found material of: the status quo itself.

As revealed by the deeds of OWS, promoting a dialog between individual and cultural forces leaves one receptive to the transformation that unfolds when enjoined in the conversation of the times. Don't allow the soul of discourse to be dominated by the half-mad, hungry ghosts possessing empire's end.

"Awareness, no matter how confused it may be, develops from every act of rebellion: the sudden, dazzling perception that there is something in man with which he can identify himself, if only for a moment ... What was at first the man's obstinate resistance now becomes the whole man, who is identified with and summed up in this resistance. The part of himself that he wanted to be respected he proceeds to place above everything else and proclaims it preferable to everything, even to life itself ... [Resistance] lures the individual from his solitude. It founds its first value on the whole human race. I rebel-therefore we exist."--Albert Camus

Phil Rockstroh is a poet, lyricist and philosopher bard living in New York City. He may be contacted at: phil@philrockstroh.com. Visit Phil's website: http://philrockstroh.com/ or at FaceBook.

Blackwater in Iraq - from Wikileaks

Wherever they're deployed, they're menacing and feared for good reason. Known historically by various names, they include mercenaries, soldiers of fortune, dogs of war, and Condottieri for wealthy city state leaders and the Papacy in the late Middle Ages and Renaissance Italy.

Article 47 of the 1977 Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions calls them anyone:

• specially recruited locally or abroad to fight in armed conflicts;


• directly participating in hostilities:


• doing so for greater private gain than conscripted or otherwise recruited combatants;


• acting unaffiliated to conflict parties and not a resident of territory where they're waged;


• not an armed forces member of either side; and


• not sent by a nation unrelated to hostilities as a member of its armed forces.

During the 1990s, America privatized military functions to let mercenaries serve in place of conventional forces. They're used tactically as combatants, for training, advice, personal security, technical expertise, intelligence gathering, weapons systems management, transportation, and other non-combatant functions.

In May 2011, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) said as of March 2011, the Defense Department (DOD) "had more contractor personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq (155,000) than uniformed personnel (145,000)."

In 2010, an estimated 260,000 of all types were used globally, including by the State Department and USAID.

Some analysts call DOD figures understated. The General Accounting Office (GOA) says they're approximations at best and shouldn't be used for precise analysis. DOD acknowledges data shortcomings, including costs. Estimates exceed $300 billion annually.

Given black budgets and enormous amounts of waste, fraud, and abuse, precise figures are hard to verify. A recent joint congressional investigation estimated around $60 billion. Misappropriations, corruption, and other forms of malfeasance may, in fact, be much greater.

Since the 1990s, as troop levels fell, PMCs increased. From 2000 - 2005, DOD spending doubled from around $134 billion to $270 billion. In war theaters, the ratio of PMCs to troops escalated dramatically. In the 1991 Gulf War, it was one to 50. For the 1999 Yugoslavia conflict, it was one for every 10, and by the 2003 Iraq War, PMCs comprised the second largest force after the US military.

They've also been used in numerous civil wars globally in nations like Angola, Sierra Leone, the Balkans throughout the 1990s, Papua New Guinea, and elsewhere. From 1990 - 2000, they participated in 80 conflicts, compared to 15 from 1950 - 1989.

Widespread PMC Abuses

In April 2011, the University of Illinois Law Review published a study titled, "The Absence of Justice: Private Military Contractors, Sexual Assault, and the US Government's Policy of Indifference."

In Iraq alone, mercenaries like Blackwater (renamed Xe, then Academi to disguise its scoundrel history), DynCorp, CACI, Titan, and others operate unaccountably off the congressional radar.

Many know about Abu Ghraib torture and abuse. Some recall Blackwater's Nisour Square rampage, murdering 17 Iraqis in cold blood. Prosecutions never follow. Nor when other appalling crimes are committed, including sexual abuse and human trafficking.

In 1999, DynCorp employees were accused of "buying and keeping women and girls as young as twelve years old in sexual slavery in Bosnia." Most shocking is that no one was held accountable. In fact, the company got a new $250 million contract to train Iraqi police - notably after whistleblower employees were fired.

PMC accountability is lacking. Liability depends largely on laws where crimes are committed, but mainly on agreements between Washington and host nations. If committed today in war zones, sanctions alone might follow, not prosecutions.

Liability for these crimes "should extend beyond the individual perpetrator to the US government itself."

Notably, in all conflict and occupation zones, "women have been treated as spoils of war...." Reports regularly surface about peacekeeper abuses, including mass rapes, sex trafficking, murders and other crimes. Though common wherever Blue Helmets are deployed, immunity comes with them.

Instead of restoring order, maintaining peace and security, upholding rule of law principles, facilitating reconstruction and development, providing essential needs, they terrorize populations with impunity.

They have power. Occupied people don't. Who'll stop them no matter what they do. The same holds for PMCs everywhere. Their personnel had military training. They're taught to view women as the enemy "other" to be conquered, subdued and abused.

Currently, they operate in over 50 countries globally, including Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Somalia, Pakistan, Libya, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq.

A misogyny culture accompanies their arrival. "Research suggests that military culture" indoctrinates abusive "views of women and sexuality." Intractable problems are created, including immunity for horrendous crimes.

Around one-third of female veterans from Vietnam through the 1991 Gulf War reported being raped. "A 1995 study of female veterans reported that ninety percent had been sexually harassed...."

Notably, over 90% of sexual assaults aren't reported because commanders aren't sympathetic and women worry about reprisals.

Occupied populations are especially vulnerable. Sex crimes committed by US military personnel and PMCs are commonplace. Evidence includes "acts causing bodily harm using unlawful force as well as sexual offenses including, but no limited to rape, sodomy and indecent assault."

The 2009 Franken Amendment followed evidence of rape and other sexual abuse committed by male PMCs against female co-workers. It prohibits DOD from doing business with firms requiring employees to sign arbitration agreements for certain claims, including rape, assault and other forms of harassment.

Enforcement it's another matter as authorities turn a blind eye to horrendous abuses. Justice rarely followers. Perpetrators operate with impunity.

For example, the US Army US Army Field Manual (FM) 27-10 incorporates the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment and Principles, as well as The Law of Land Warfare (1956). Rules of engagement (ROE) are explicit.

FM's paragraph 498 says any person, military or civilian, who commits a crime under international law is responsible for it and may be punished.

Paragraph 499 defines a war crime. Paragraph 500 refers to a conspiracy, attempts to commit it and complicity with respect to international crimes.

Paragraph 509 denies the defense of superior orders in the commission of a crime, and paragraph 510 denies the defense of an "act of state" absolving them.

Two points are key:

These provisions apply to all US military and civilian personnel, including top commanders, the Secretary of Defense, his subordinates, and the President and Vice President of the United States.

Moreover, under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2), all international laws and treaties are the "supreme Law of the Land."

Nonetheless, Iraq commanders gave orders to kill all military age males. Stjepan Mestovic documented Col. Michale Steele's involvement in his book titled, "The 'Good Soldier' On Trial: A Sociological Study of Misconduct by the US Military Pertaining to Operation Iron Triangle, Iraq."

He also exposed how low-ranking troops are sacrificed to absolve higher-ups. In addition, ROE provisions and rule of law principles are one thing, enforcement another.

Notably, "PMCs are in a unique position to exploit the vulnerabilities of women because (they operate) in post-conflict environments." Moreover, studies show that "histories of sexual violence are key indicators of future victimization."

For example, Bosnian and Kosovo women suffered during war. PMCs then treated them as exploitable sex objects. Yet they're immune from suits unless crimes occurred in war zones or on US military or government installations.

In 2006, Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations implemented the 2000 Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). It requires PMCs develop policies ensuring against sexual abuse and human trafficking.

In 2002, zero tolerance became DOD policy for military personnel. Amending TVPA followed to include PMCs. However, laws produced no accountability. PMCs became self-enforcing.

DynCorp abuses showed they don't comply with mandates. Only whistleblowers were fired. The company's $2 billion in DOD contracts stayed in force.

Numerous UN reports on Blue Helmet abuses show "zero compliance with zero tolerance." It's also true for PMCs nearly always and military personnel nearly as often.

Moreover, at issue is applying US laws abroad. Although limited ways allow it, follow through rarely happens.

Notably, the Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction Act (SMTJA) applies for crimes committed on certain type military and government facilities abroad, including sexual ones by or against US nationals. However, loopholes let PMCs escape accountability. In addition, many of their employees aren't US citizens or residents.

One time only SMTJA successfully prosecuted a CIA contractor for beating an Afghan detainee to death.

The 2000 Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (MEJA) authorizes domestic prosecutions of DOD contractors under US criminal law. It applies to overseas crimes considered a felony in America. Again, using it is rare. In fact, only one successful prosecution resulted. It involved a contractor guilty of child pornography possession in 2007, hardly a capital or violent crime offense.

America's Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) are key. The DOD's Defense Technical Information Center calls them "an agreement that defines the legal position of a visiting military force in the territory of a friendly state."

In his book titled, "Sorrows of Empire," Chalmers Johnson called America's "foreign military enclaves (micro-colonies) in that they are completely beyond the jurisdiction of the occupied nation."

As a result, military personnel and PMCs are protected. Moreover, if crimes are too egregious to ignore, companies or Pentagon officials can repatriate perpetrators to escape accountability.

Universally applicable human rights laws are also ignored, including the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against women (CEDAW). Called an international women's bill of rights, it took effect in September 1981. However, America never signed it.

It prohibits gender-based violence, including rape called a form of torture and crime against humanity. Even DOD admits that rape is considered "perhaps the most traumatic of violent of crimes on victims (excluding murder)."

However, America "sought to ensure PMC immunity from prosecution under international law, rather than imposing obligations on them." Laws and rules are one thing, enforcement another. Washington wants its troops and contractors operating with impunity.

Truth and bad journalism are the first casualties of war. So is accountability when America wages them.

A Final Comment

The University of Illinois Law Review said PMCs are "a convenient way for the US government to evade its legal obligations, including the responsibility to protect the human rights of civilians in war and peace, by allowing private individuals, rather than official state actors, to perform services on behalf of the US military."

As a result, murder, sexual abuse, human trafficking, and other crimes go unpunished. Women especially are affected. Political Washington, Pentagon commanders, and intelligence operatives ignore rule of law principles. Only wealth, power, and full spectrum dominance matter.

Given their might, viciousness and influence, who'll challenge them? Only mass public outrage has a chance.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.