Army Policy Bars Interrogations by Private Contractors - NYT

[TacticalPeek]

INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION
Army Policy Bars Interrogations by Private Contractors
By JOEL BRINKLEY

Published: June 12, 2004

WASHINGTON, June 11 - The use of private contractors as interrogators at Abu Ghraib and other prisons in Iraq violates an Army policy that requires such jobs to be filled by government employees because of the "risk to national security," among other concerns, the Army acknowledged Friday.

An Army policy directive published in 2000 and still in effect today, the military said, classifies any job that involves "the gathering and analysis" of tactical intelligence as "an inherently governmental function barred from private sector performance."

snip

"Who in the world says they have authority to change the rules like that?" asked Representative Ike Skelton of Missouri, who is the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, referring to the policy directive. "I want to find out how and why these contractors got there."

The role of contactors in Iraq has come under scrutiny after two of them were named in an Army report as being "directly or indirectly responsible" for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/12/international/worldspecial/12cont.html

[Cronus Protagonist]

1. Blame the civilians...

But almost all the pics show military abusers....

[UpInArms]

2. Rules! We don't need not stinking Rules!

We have our magic bullet - 9/11 9/11 9/11!!!!

Colonel Hart said the officers violating the rule were "mindful of the risks articulated in the policy" but added that "in light of 9/11 and the war on terror, the world is a different place than it was when that was written in 2000."

and we have rules:

The Army directive is a result of a 1998 federal law that was intended to encourage government agencies to turn inherently "commercial services" over to private employees. That law, the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act, known as FAIR, also required each agency to draft rules that set out which of its jobs could not be turned over to contract workers.

The Army directive, dated Dec. 26, 2000, was written by Patrick T. Henry, who was assistant secretary of the Army for manpower and reserve affairs. The directive remains on the Army's Web site under a note that says it is "still in effect," and two Army spokesmen confirmed that.

and they go on to say:

The rule forbids the use of contractors at the tactical level under any circumstances "because intelligence at the tactical level is integral to the application of combat power." In Iraq, the Army might stage a military operation against insurgents based on intelligence a contract interrogator had gleaned from prisoners.

"At the operational and strategic level," the directive adds, intelligence positions "should be exempted from private sector performance on the basis of risk to national security, adding, "Private contractors may be acquired by foreign interests, acquire and maintain interests in foreign countries and provide support to foreign customers."

and why do we have those rules?

One concern, the directive adds, is that "administrative oversight exerted over contractors is very different from the command and control exerted over military and civilian employees."

The entire system has been perverted.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Wow! Yep its Friday!

Oh and the boys working for CACI and TITAN also wear
Army Uniforms... just not rank devices.

It does help with the confusion you know.

[Rebel_with_a_cause]

4. Bush has made a lot of "exceptions" under his administration

to include the ignoring of the Geneva Conventions.

[AndyTiedye]

5. Rules? In a Knife Fight? There Are No Roooooooooooooo......

[struggle4progress]

6. kick

:kick: