Blackwater Founder Implicated in Murder

[Jug Pilot]

Blackwater Founder Implicated in Murder

A former Blackwater employee and an ex-US Marine who has worked as a security operative for the company have made a series of explosive allegations in sworn statements filed on August 3 in federal court in Virginia. The two men claim that the company's owner, Erik Prince, may have murdered or facilitated the murder of individuals who were cooperating with federal authorities investigating the company. The former employee also alleges that Prince "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe," and that Prince's companies "encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life."

In a separate sworn statement, the former US marine who worked for Blackwater in Iraq alleges that he has "learned from my Blackwater colleagues and former colleagues that one or more persons who have provided information, or who were planning to provide information about Erik Prince and Blackwater have been killed in suspicious circumstances."

It will be interesting to see how this one plays out.

[godfry n. glad]

Indeed.

Aren't they one of Halliburton's primary contractors? Weren't they brought in to Iraq at the request of Halliburton or BRK (now part of Halliburton)?

[Jug Pilot]

The plot thickens

Blackwater | Internet-D

Prince was aware of the use of prostitutes, “including child prostitutes,” at Blackwater’s “Man Camp” in Iraq, which he visited.

“Prince’s North Carolina operations had an ongoing wife-swapping and sex ring, which was participated in by many… top executives.”

You gotta love their Christian "family values".

[Demimonde]

Not ... the Doobie Brothers ... say it ain't so!












Sorry, everytime I see the thread title I've felt compelled to add that. 'Tis a serious issue though.

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by Jug Pilot

You gotta love their Christian "family values".

Um...King David as a exemplar? And, of course, his son, the sagacious Solomon, had 'thousands' of wives and concubines. I'll bet all their playthings were nothing but war booty, anyway. That's biblical, too.

[Joshua Adams]

You know whose fault this is? Barack Obama's.

[Stephen Maturin]

Goddamn right, Joshua. I'd insist that Attorney General Holder have Obama indicted for capital murder forthwith, but some socialist squealer would no doubt rat me out to the White House, which would make my mother and my Downs Syndrome baby stand before Obama's "death panel" and get beaten to death with rolled up Kenyanesian birth certificates.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by godfry n. glad

Um...King David as a exemplar? And, of course, his son, the sagacious Solomon, had 'thousands' of wives and concubines. I'll bet all their playthings were nothing but war booty, anyway. That's biblical, too.

David and Solomon were Christians? I learn something new on the internets every day.

[Clutch Munny]

This is your first exposure to the idea that Christians use Old Testament figures as exemplars?

[Angakuk]

No, but it is my first exposure to someone suggesting that Christians (or anyone else, for that matter) might be using David or Solomon as exemplars of Christian Family Values TM.

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

David and Solomon were Christians? I learn something new on the internets every day.

I'll do one better than that...By my understandings of the qualifications, both David and Solomon were not just christians, but 'christs'.

Christians also have a bad habit of quoting the Ten Commandments and citing both Genesis and Exodus as 'historical chronicles'.

Christian invoke "family values" and the Old Testament cites all the time. Often very together, too. Of course, we are quite clear over the past several decades that "family values" means fucking around on your spouse, snorting cocaine off the belly of your homosexual lover, picking up sexual partners in the airport men's rooms, and many other fun and idiosyncratic ways of demonstrating "family values".

It makes me think that the number one "family value" of christians is hypocrisy. It must right up there with spousal abuse, child abuse, and hating other people merely because of how they look.

[Demimonde]

Originally Posted by godfry n. glad

Christian Republicans who claim to be Christian invoke "family values" and the Old Testament cites all the time. Often very together, too. Of course, we are quite clear over the past several decades that "family values" (to those asshole politicos) means fucking around on your spouse, snorting cocaine off the belly of your homosexual lover, picking up sexual partners in the airport men's rooms, and many other fun and idiosyncratic ways of demonstrating "family values".

The antics of high profile, attention seeking, lying through their teeth, politicans does not necessarily embody the values of others who hold similar beliefs.

To extend your way of thought: Bin Laden speaks for all Muslims, and Michael Moore speaks for all liberals.

It makes me think that the number one "family value" of christians is hypocrisy. It must right up there with spousal abuse, child abuse, and hating other people merely because of how they look.

And hating on other people based on their religion is... what now?

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by Demimonde

Sorry...I don't accept your changes. These people were all forthright and self-referenced as 'Christians'. Veritable 'Defenders of the Faith' in the case of the politicos... If you'd like a longer list, we could start with the Roman Catholic church repeatedly protecting child molestors and consciously placing them in situations where they would repeat their offenses. Then we can start down through the long tawdry list of peoples and actions acting in the name of Christ while perpetrating crimes and/or moral depravities...

The antics of high profile, attention seeking, lying through their teeth, politicans does not necessarily embody the values of others who hold similar beliefs.

They are not all antics by politicians, but they are all claimed 'Christians'. One was a minister of god...or, claimed he was.

To extend your way of thought: Bin Laden speaks for all Muslims, and Michael Moore speaks for all liberals.

Nope, sorry...I don't think that at all. So, you misread my mind. Tough luck, try again some other time, when your 'psychic skills' are hotter.

I guess disliking those who teach one thing and act in another is...what now?

You don't say anything about that though, right? Because you might offend somebody, right? So you agree to people defrauding other people while you watch, right?

I'd just like to get this clear....

And hating on other people based on their religion is... what now?

Seemingly a normal state of affairs in 'Christian America'. Too bad it rebounds so poorly upon those who would actually wish to be 'christian'.

[godfry n. glad]

Wait...

I think I just got it.

"Christian" is a nonsense word. It really doesn't mean ANYTHING. People just invoke it because is sounds important.

Right, Angakuk?

[Petra]

WTF, g n.g?

Angakuk is a self-identified believer in Christ, but he is no right wing religious extremist. He strikes me a man of integrity and goodwill. He's no Pat Buchanan or Jerry Falwell. Why are you ragging on him?

[godfry n. glad]

Yes...and you, too.

That typification of me is entirely wrong. I am offended and I'm reacting.

That both of you would thank it is drawing my comment.

You can answer it if you wish...for what is being intimated is that if anyone criticizes ANYTHING christian...particularly by referencing it as hypocritical, it is somehow worthy of being painted as a...what was it again?

I call bullshit.

[Petra]

I thanked the reasoned argument Demi put forward that not all people of a persuasion are the same. I thanked it because I agreed with that sentiment. That is all.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by godfry n. glad

Wait...

I think I just got it.

"Christian" is a nonsense word. It really doesn't mean ANYTHING. People just invoke it because is sounds important.

Right, Angakuk?

In a sense, you are correct. Historically, the word refers to those who profess to follow Christ. However, that doesn't really tell you anything about who or what that person thinks Christ is or what it means that he/she follows him. It is not so much that it doesn't mean anything as that it can mean so many different things that, as a label, it lacks any real utility. This condition is hardly unique to this particular label. For this very reason it is probably not a particularly good idea to evaluate individuals based on the labels that are attached to them, whether self-inflicted or otherwise. Personally, I prefer to form my opinions about individuals based on what they do, not on what they say they are.

[godfry n. glad]

Thank you.

I shall endeavor to cease using it as a meaningful term.

[Clutch Munny]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

No, but it is my first exposure to someone suggesting that Christians (or anyone else, for that matter) might be using David or Solomon as exemplars of Christian Family Values TM.

I assume this is a lapse of memory on your part. Without endorsing anything particular that godfry is claiming, there is no serious question that OT figures are often cited as favorable theological-ethical exemplars by Christians. I've seen and heard it many times. I do not find it credible that you have not.

[seebs]

The term has meaning, but it doesn't necessarily refer to a unified group who are all culpable for each others' actions. I tend to view it as a matter of pedigree rather than of propositions.

[godfry n. glad]

Pure-bred Christians and mongrel Christians?

Why is it I get the suspicion that the mongrels will be smarter and easier to train?

[Clutch Munny]

Originally Posted by seebs

The term has meaning, but it doesn't necessarily refer to a unified group who are all culpable for each others' actions. I tend to view it as a matter of pedigree rather than of propositions.

It's both, I think, but I pretty much agree.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by Clutch Munny

I assume this is a lapse of memory on your part. Without endorsing anything particular that godfry is claiming, there is no serious question that OT figures are often cited as favorable theological-ethical exemplars by Christians. I've seen and heard it many times. I do not find it credible that you have not.

The reference was not to OT figures, in general, but specifically to David and Solomon. I can honestly say that I have never encountered anyone holding up either of those two as exemplars of Christian Family ValuesTM (other virtues perhaps, but not Christian Family ValuesTM). Had either of them been a Christian then his values and behaviors might well be considered relevant to a discussion of those same Christian Family ValuesTM.

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Had either of them been a Christian then his values and behaviors might well be considered relevant to a discussion of those same Christian Family ValuesTM.

Had either of them been a Christian?

JEEEBUS....I've already pointed out that they were both Christs....What more do you need? The Christs' family values will, of a matter of course, BE Christian Family Values.

No?