Archive for category Afghanistan

Legal News: Four GardaWorld Contractors Charged Over Weapons

Feb 1

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Legal News | No Comments

Here is the latest status on the four GardaWorld security contractors that were detained by Afghan authorities for transporting weapons. If GardaWorld or any friends and family would like to speak about this incident, please feel free to do so in the comments. I would also suggest to contact Kimberley Motley in Afghanistan for any legal assistance if the company is looking for resources. -Matt

 

Britons charged over Afghan guns
January 31, 2012
Two British private security contractors arrested four weeks ago in Afghanistan on suspicion of smuggling AK-47 assault rifles have been charged by Afghan authorities.
Local police detained the men, named earlier this month as Julian Steele and James Davis, along with two Afghan colleagues in the capital Kabul on January 3.
Afghan officials said they were found to be transporting 30 AK-47s with their serial numbers scratched off and did not have the necessary firearms permits.
The international security firm all four men were working for, GardaWorld, confirmed on Tuesday that a charge sheet had been filed.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,

Industry Talk: Marines Expand Request For Civilian Guards At More Bases In Afghanistan

Jan 14

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Industry Talk | No Comments

The shift comes as 1st Battalion, 25th Marines, a Reserve unit out of Fort Devens, Mass., prepares to wrap up a deployment in which it guarded all three bases. As part of the drawdown, the Corps canceled the deployment of a replacement unit, 1st Battalion, 24th Marines, out of Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Mich. Marines with 1/24 would have replaced 1/25 this year.

So this part of the story was at the very end, and this is what I focused on. In essence, the Marines would have used 1/24 to do this work, but perhaps the latest defense cuts have forced them to not use them? I am also wondering if the Marines are putting this information out there as a message to congress that says ‘hey, if you are going to cut our funding, then we are going to have to find another means of protecting our bases in Afghanistan–so don’t be surprised if we turn to contractors’.

The reason why I say this is that Marines are famous for ‘first in, last out’. To have civilians perform base security at their top three bases in a war zone during a draw down, just does not go well with that famous quote and image. lol

But hey, I am not complaining. If the Marines trust security contractors to do this job, then the industry is thankful and honored. These are jobs that security contractors will be very happy to accept and do (as long as the companies treat them well….). The contractors that will do this work will also be veterans from all over the world, with probably more than a few of them being US Marine vets.

I just hope that the Marines have learned the lessons out there on how to set up these contracts properly, and provide plenty of oversight over the whole thing to make sure this becomes a good deal for them and the tax payer. Semper Fi. -Matt

 

Civilian guards wanted at more war-zone bases
By Dan Lamothe
Saturday Jan 14, 2012
Marine commanders have expanded a request for civilian contractors to provide military security at Marine bases in Afghanistan as U.S. forces withdraw.
Civilians will be needed to guard Camp Dwyer and Camp Delaram II, Marine officials said. The request, announced Jan. 3 by U.S. Army Contracting Command, comes after the military announced in November that at least 166 civilian contractors were needed to help guard Camp Leatherneck, the sprawling, 1,500-acre-plus installation that serves as the Corps’ main hub of operations in Helmand province. It is home to II Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward), headed by Maj. Gen. John Toolan.
“Security is the number one concern for service members deployed to Afghanistan,” said Navy Lt. Joseph Nawrocki, a command spokesman. “An efficient and orderly redeployment of U.S. Marines will eventually take place, and contractors will play an important role to ensure existing U.S. bases remain safe and secure.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , ,

Afghanistan: GardaWorld Is The Latest Victim Of A Corrupt Afghan Government

Jan 5

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Industry Talk | 2 Comments

This is ridiculous. The Afghan government is out of control on this stuff. Look, there is a reason why a private security company is armed with AK 47′s in Afghanistan. Because there is a war going on. So in my view, contractors transporting weapons in the back of their car is not at all abnormal, and nor should it be construed as illegal. Especially if there was a valid explanation for them having the weapons in there in the first place. Here is the quote from the company:

GardaWorld, in a statement, said that it did not yet own the weapons and that its guards were taking them to a rifle range for testing. “The weapons in question were being taken to be tested at a firing range before being purchased and properly licensed by GardaWorld,” the company said, adding that in its discussions with the government it hoped to clear up what it implied was a misunderstanding and “rectify the situation as soon as possible.”

To test these weapons is perfectly understandable, seeing how functional weapons for a security operation is pretty damn important. Now maybe if Afghanistan actually had weapons vendor laws where the dealer actually had to be licensed and all of his weapons must be licensed with Afghanistan, then maybe these kinds of incidents would not happen?

The other thing about this is that this company was operating off of the latest set of rules and laws, or the last agreements and contracts signed. According to GardaWorld, that is what they are dealing with right now. Here is the quote:

The company said it had complied with all Afghan laws and regulations in its operations in the country, where it provides mobile escort guard services and protection for compounds and bases. It would not specify which compounds or bases it protected.
The Interior Ministry said that the company had contracts to work in Kabul, Herat, Kandahar and two other cities, and that GardaWorld was one of 46 security companies licensed to operate in Afghanistan until March 2012.

Also, GardaWorld is a Canadian company. Canada has certainly contributed much to this war, and they expended blood and treasure for the sake of Afghanistan. And this is how Afghanistan treats a Canadian company?  Boy, if I was a businessman in Canada, I don’t think I would want to do business in an environment like that. The Canadian government should be furious that one of their companies is getting this kind of treatment.

I guess that is my point here. If Afghanistan is willing to do this to these businesses called PSC’s, then it is not a stretch to imagine Karzai and company doing the same to other businesses. In that kind of environment, I don’t know why anyone would want to put up with that. I guess if that is what Karzai wants, then that is what he will get. -Matt

 

Afghanistan Closes Firm Providing Security
By GRAHAM BOWLEY
January 5, 2012
The Afghan government said Thursday that it was shutting down the operations of one of the largest foreign security companies operating in the country after detaining two of its contractors on suspicion of gun smuggling.
After months of growing tension between the government and foreign security contractors, the decision marks a sharp escalation into public action by the Afghan authorities.
President Hamid Karzai is in the midst of replacing foreign security contractors with Afghan guards.
The Interior Ministry said it was immediately withdrawing the company’s license, although the company, GardaWorld, a private Canadian security outfit, said it was in discussions with the government and hoped to be able to continue to operate.
The Interior Ministry said that the contractors, two Britons, who were detained on Tuesday after being found with an arsenal of unlicensed AK-47 assault rifles in their sport utility vehicle, were among the 341 Afghan guards and 35 foreign contractors employed by GardaWorld in Afghanistan.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , ,

Industry Talk: Afghanistan Seizes Millions Of Dollars Worth Of Armored Vehicles And Weapons From Private Security Firms

Dec 29

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Industry Talk | No Comments

Kimberley Motley, an American lawyer in Kabul who advises security firms, said company executives were taken aback by the crackdown. They had opened their books to the government as a good-faith gesture, she said, in hopes that they could remain involved in the security industry as risk-mitigation consultants under the APPF model.
“A lot of companies are being penalized for trying to transparently run their security companies,” Motley said. The bulk of the equipment being seized, she said, was imported during years when there were “limited laws that dictated how they should operate.”

This government in Afghanistan is something else. First they ask the companies to see their books, and the companies comply in good faith, and then the government says ‘hey, let’s seize their valuable equipment’ listed in that book. Not a thought or care about any prior arrangements or contracts that allowed those companies to have that stuff in the first place. No compensation for that equipment, and just out-right take it for their own use. Boy, that is the kind of thing that will attract investors and business…….pffft.

The other thing that gets me about this whole deal is that part of what makes the private industry so effective, is the ability of the principal to just fire a poor company. If one security firm does not perform, then the principal goes with the next best company. The only thing the government should be involved with, is making sure everyone plays nice and that they deal specifically with the bad ‘agents’ or companies that ruin it for everyone else. That is how the free market is supposed to work.

With this arrangement, none of these NGO’s or companies investing in Afghanistan will have that option to ‘fire’ their protective detail.  And because Afghanistan is so corrupt anyways, all of these companies and groups thoroughly expect to not only get a poor service, but to be extorted and ripped off in the process. They have no choice in the matter, and to be honest, I do not blame them for making the decision to not do business in Afghanistan under those circumstances.

Hell, this whole deal of the government seizing property from these private companies should be a loud message to all. “Come to Afghanistan and get ripped off.” lol That should be their motto, and plaster it all over their flag or something. -Matt

 

Afghanistan cracks down on contractors
By Ernesto Londoño
December 2011
Afghan officials have seized millions of dollars worth of armored vehicles and weapons from private security firms in recent weeks, a move that has exacerbated concerns about the government’s plan to replace the hired guns that protect convoys and installations with an unprepared state-run guard force.
The crackdown is being carried out even though the Afghan Public Protection Force failed to meet any of the six benchmarks that were set out for it when President Hamid Karzai formally announced a plan to ban private security firms by March 20. An assessment team led by the NATO military coalition, which is heavily involved in the creation of the Afghan force, concluded in the fall that the guard force is far from ready to take over.
Diplomats, development experts and company executives worry that the abolition of private security contractors within three months could endanger Afghans and foreigners supporting NATO and its allies, halt reconstruction projects and open new channels for corruption.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,

Industry Talk: Civilians To Guard Marine Base In Afghanistan

Dec 28

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Industry Talk | 2 Comments

This is fantastic news. Check this out. In the solicitation below, they are going to use ‘Best Value Criteria’ for the selection of what company they will go with. So that means they will not be selecting companies by who is the ‘lowest priced and technically acceptable’, or what I call the lowest bidder. Outstanding news and this is exactly what I and others have been harping on for awhile now.

You don’t pick your doctor based on who is the ‘lowest priced, technically acceptable’ and it does not make sense to pick a security company like that either. In both cases, lives are at risk and at Camp Leatherneck, our Marines deserve better.

Now of course this also requires the government to do their due diligence and actually find a good company to do business with. And if they can implement key components into the contract to either keep that company in check, or have the means to get rid of them and go with a better partner, then they should exercise that option. They should also work hard and really understand the dynamics of the company and how they treat their people, once they are hiring and fielding folks. A company can talk a great game, but the proof is in the pudding. And the test is if the base security is sound and the services delivered are exactly what the contract stipulates.

The thing the government should also focus on is the happiness of the guards themselves. Are they getting paid what they were promised, is the company treating them fairly, are they paying their people on time, are they pleased with the living conditions, are they happy with their leadership, is the company giving them good weapons and kit, and is the company doing all they can to take care of their people. Because if you have a happy guard force, then they will work that much harder to keep their job and do well on that contract. Sure it is a war zone and there will be some discomfort with the assigned duties and the environment itself, but there are still a lot of areas that a company can control and do well at in order to keep their folks happy.

The government should also focus on the leadership out in the field and ask them if they are getting the support necessary from headquarters? You get some of these companies that could care less about their managers out in the field, and are horrible at supporting them when for example they are trying to discipline a contractor or get certain equipment that is vital to the mission. Like I said, headquarters should be purely focused on making sure their people on the ground in that war zone are happy and taken care of. If not, then that is when you get the high attrition rate or you have leaders and workers that slack off and could care less about doing a good job. You also have a hard time properly managing these contracts if you have folks that are constantly leaving because they hate working for the company.

The other thing about this contract that perked me up is that they will be fielding 166 guards, and those guards are all to be vetted with a secret security clearance and come from the US or Commonwealth nations. That is great, and that means you will not see a TWISS deal for this contract where Ugandans or similar contractors are guarding the facility.

This is the first such requirement recognized at a Marine Corps installation that requires a higher force-protection standard; therefore, this procurement will be restricted to the citizens of the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, or Canada (FVEY EXPAT). This procurement will contain Classified Information. Therefore, Offerors must also have a current facility clearance, have the appropriate business licenses to carry arms, and operate as a business in Afghanistan.

The other element of this contract that is interesting to me is the weapons. For this deal, contractors will be operating some serious firepower. Which is great, and that is the way it should be. It also explains why there is more of a focus on a ‘higher force-protection standard’.

Personnel will be expected to wear body armor, man security towers and be familiar with the M16A4 rifle, M4 carbine and M9 pistol, plus crew-served weapons such as the M240B heavy machine gun and M2 .50-caliber machine gun. A typical workweek will last up to 72 hours, military documents said.

I wouldn’t mind seeing some mortars or even a Carl Gustav or two thrown in there? Why not some Mk 19′s as well? I mean if you are going to give contractors M 240B’s and M2′s, then why not give them as many tools as necessary to get the job done? But if the Marines feel this appropriate for the base defense, or that maybe a military unit will be manning the bigger more lethal stuff, then that is fine.

Oh, and one more thing. I personally like the guard shift system of three shifts of eight hours. The 12 hour shift is too long and I question how sharp guards can actually be after doing 12 hour shifts for multiple months? Having worked both types of shifts, it is my opinion that the 8 hour shift is the optimum schedule for keeping a guard force happy and sharp. It also helps to have one day off a week, just so guards can disconnect from the job and just relax. It is little things like that, that will make all the difference in the world on these contracts. Either way, I am glad to see that someone is listening to reason when it comes to these contracts. -Matt

 

Civilians to guard Marine base in Afghanistan
By Dan Lamothe
Wednesday Dec 28, 2011
U.S. commanders want civilian contractors to provide military security at the Marine Corps’ largest base in Afghanistan as a planned withdrawal of U.S. forces from the war-torn country expands.
The contracted security personnel will guard Camp Leatherneck, the sprawling, 1,500-acre-plus installation that serves as the Corps’ main hub of operations in Helmand province and home to II Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward), commanded by Maj. Gen. John Toolan. To date, coalition forces have handled security at Leatherneck, but commanders have discussed using contractors for months in anticipation of a smaller Marine footprint, said Lt. Col. Riccoh Player, a Marine spokesman at Leatherneck.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , ,

Industry Talk: Afghanistan’s Karzai Extends Private Security Closure Deadline

Dec 11

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Industry Talk | 1 Comment

Boy, isn’t this a crack up? This was such big news within the industry when it first came out. But it looks like reality has hit and it is just not feasible for them to put together this ‘replacement force’ in time. Well….. I guess we will revisit this deadline in September of 2013. -Matt

 

Afghanistan’s Karzai extends private security closure deadline
11 Dec 2011
By Mirwais Harooni
Afghan President Hamid Karzai scrapped on Sunday a March 2012 deadline he had set for the closure of private security firms, giving them until September 2013 to operate in the country.
Karzai, a frequent critic of private security companies, has previously set dates for the cessation of their work in Afghanistan, but each time the deadline has been extended.
He did not say why he was giving the firms an extra 18 months, but the second half of this year has seen some of the bloodiest attacks on civilians and soldiers in the past decade.
“We give permission for them (to carry on working) for one and a half years more, and one and a half years later (in September 2013) our minister … will close them all,” Karzai said.
Karzai, speaking at an anti-corruption event in the capital Kabul, said the prevalence of security contractors weakened the state by providing many of the services that the public sector otherwise would.
“Another reason why the Afghan government is not able to tackle corruption is a parallel administration to the Afghan government,” he said.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , ,

Industry Talk: Report Details Problems For The PSC Replacing ‘Afghan Public Protection Force’

Nov 1

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Industry Talk | 2 Comments

Asked if he would be forced to end contracts if the situation was not resolved, one development company official said, “Absolutely.”
“We apply what we call the son and daughter standard,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to avoid alienating American and Afghan government officials. “Would we send our sons and daughters out there to do this work, and the answer is no.”

Boy, who couldn’t see this one coming? lol Of course Afghanistan is not able to put together this Afghan Public Protection Force.  As you all remember, this was the force that was supposed to replace private security forces in Afghanistan.

As that quote up top hints at, this APPF concept is not exactly giving all of the aid and development groups the confidence they require in order to send ‘their sons and daughters’ to Afghanistan. I wouldn’t trust my life in the hands of such a force, even if half of this report is true. This quote below is what perked me up:

The assessment makes it clear that much work needs to be done. Of 166 “essential” criteria to determine if the government was able to recruit, train and sustain the guard force, less than a third could be fully met, the assessment found. Sixty-three of the measurements could not be met at all.

Really?  So here is my suggestion. Private industry is really the only solution here, and the Afghans need to face reality, or everyone is going to pack up and leave. And that is a lot of money and projects just going out the door.

My suggestion is to implement a license and bonded PSC system. Streamline the licensing process, and tell the companies to put their money where their mouth is if they want to operate.  If they violate the contract, then they are fined via the surety bond. If they violate the terms of the license, then suspend the license. If they break a law, then prosecute those individuals. But the point is, find a way to work with private industry and do not try to re-invent the wheel. Let the various aid and development groups in country choose what licensed security they want, and focus on managing and regulating that. -Matt

 

Report Details Problems for Afghan Security Force Plan
By RAY RIVERA
November 1, 2011
KABUL, Afghanistan — President Hamid Karzai’s plan to disband private security companies that protect billions of dollars worth of aid projects and replace them with government forces is fraught with problems and unlikely to meet the president’s March deadline to complete the transition, according to a six-month assessment of the program.
The assessment, conducted by NATO and the Afghan Interior Ministry, outlines dozens of issues that have slowed the development of the new security force and raises questions about the government’s capacity to carry out and sustain the program and others as international aid money and military support dwindle in coming years.
The report, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, comes as international development companies are becoming increasingly worried about the security of their workers, many of whom are Afghans.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,

Aviation: Contract Aircraft, Non-military Aircraft Losses In Iraq And Afghanistan Wars

Oct 30

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Aviation, Industry Talk, Iraq | No Comments

What I wanted to do here is put together a list of all of the contract aviation losses in both wars. Thanks to wikipedia, it was easy to organize this and put it all together. If anyone has information they would like to add, or if you see some missing aircraft losses in this post, let me know in the comments.

Also, if you follow the links, they will take you to the overall aviation losses in these wars. In Iraq, the Kiowa Helicopter and the Apache really took a hit. Lots of crashes and combat losses there. But they were also heavily used.

In Afghanistan, I would have thought there would be more losses on both the military and civilian side. The CH 47 was the top aircraft that crashed or was shot down. The Blackhawk was right behind this aircraft. Although this war is not over, and these numbers could reach Iraq levels in a few years.

The big one in Afghanistan is the necessary power to get up to those elevations, and the CH 47 is a work horse for that. Hence why this was the top aircraft that crashed, because it gets the most use.

The total losses for military and civilian aircraft in the Iraq war was 133 rotary wing (with 43 lost to hostile fire) and 24 fixed wing losses (with 2 to hostile fire, and 2 to friendly fire).

In Afghanistan, it is 103 rotary wing (with 17 lost to hostile fire) and 23 fixed wing (with 1 lost to hostile fire on ground).

With those statistics, you get a good idea as to what the real danger is of flight in the war zones. The enemy is certainly a threat, but the environment/pilot error/equipment failure is what causes the majority of these crashes.

Also, it would be great to see our military or some think tank go through all of these accidents and combat losses, and find out if there is a better aircraft that could have been used for these types of missions. Sometimes the best aircraft is not necessarily the most expensive or fancier aircraft, but the one that can perform the job in the worst kind of conditions specific to that region or war zone. A hellfire missile fired from a Cessna Caravan, is no different than a hellfire missile fired from an Apache helicopter.

I guess my point is, are we using the correct aircraft with the best survivability and capability for the job that is required? We lost a lot of Kiowas, Apaches, CH 47′s, and Blackhawks in this war, and you wonder if there are aircraft that could have been better suited for these missions?

The other thing to think about is legacy aircraft for these countries when we leave. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are purchasing and using Cessna Caravans, and that is a great multipurpose aircraft that they could use. It is also cheap to keep running and pretty dependable. But once we give these countries the really expensive aircraft to operate and maintain, then how do we expect them to be able to afford using these things? And even with our own operations and the state of the US economy, we should be considering all options for aircraft, based on the requirements of the mission. It is not against the law to be more cost effective in war, and I have to think that there are cheaper options for some of the stuff we are doing in these conflicts. -Matt

 

Contract aircraft, non-military aircraft losses in the Iraq War
2009
July 17, 2009 – An MD-530F contracted to Xe (formerly Blackwater) crashes at Butler Range outside Baghdad. Two pilots died. The cause was not known.
2008
November 13, 2008 – An Antonov An-12 crashes after takeoff from Al Asad Air Base, killing all 7 crew members. Six members of the crew and one passenger died, three of them were Russians. The crew also consisted of a Belarusian, two Ukrainians and an Indian citizen.
2007
March 7, 2007 – A privately-contracted Mil Mi-8 helicopter from the Republic of Georgia crashes due to technical failures, injuring its three Ukrainian crewmembers, and several Iraqi passengers.
January 31, 2007 – A Blackwater USA Bell 412 helicopter is shot down under fire near Karma during a flight between Al Hillah and Baghdad. A US military helicopter rescues the passengers and crew.
January 23, 2007 – A Blackwater USA MD 530F helicopter is shot down by hostile fire in Baghdad. All of the 5 man crew are killed in the incident, likely executed after surviving the crash. The remaining survivor was also killed under unclear circumstances, when another Blackwater helicopter descended to the crash site.
January 9, 2007 – A Moldovan Antonov An-26 crashes near Balad in the 2007 Balad aircraft crash, killing 34 of the 35 on board.
2005
May 30, 2005 – A Comp Air 7SL aircraft with the Iraqi Air Force crashes in eastern Iraq, killing four Americans and an Iraqi on board.
April 21, 2005 – A Bulgarian Mil Mi-8 is shot down north of Baghdad, killing the 11 civilians on board, including six American contractors, three Bulgarian pilots, one of them is executed shortly after the crash, and two Fijian guards.
Link to Wikipedia here.
—————————————————————-
Contract aircraft, non-military aircraft losses in Afghanistan War
2011
July 6, 2011: IL-76 cargo plane, registered 4K-AZ55, was destroyed in an accident near Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan. The plane is said to have flown into the side of a mountain at about 12,500 feet (3,800 meters).The transport plane carried a total of 18 tons of cargo for the NATO-led forces at Bagram Air Base.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , ,

Jobs: Close Protection Specialist, Afghanistan

Oct 29

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Jobs | No Comments

Thanks to Ken for sending me this one. I don’t know anything about Jorge Scientific Corporation, but it looks like they are in need of some highly qualified close protection specialists. If anyone has anything to add to this one, do so in the comments. I am not the POC or recruiter for this job, and follow the links and directions below if you would like to apply. Good luck. -Matt

 

Jobs: Close Protection Specialist, Afghanistan
Details
Location: VA – Afghanistan
Job Type: Professional Services
Other
Base Pay: N/A
Required Education: High School
Bonus:
Required Experience: At least 10 year(s)
Other:
Required Travel: Not Specified
Employee Type: Full-Time
Relocation Covered: Not Specified
Industry Defense – Aerospace
Job ID: 11185
Description
Jorge Scientific Corporation is a leading systems integration firm; we provide cutting edge defense and government solutions. We are currently expanding our Engagement Group and seeking a highly motivated Close – Protection Specialist to help support our efforts in the Global War on Terrorism in Afghanistan. The incumbent for this position will provide essential driving and protection of personnel and assets in support operational and administrative activities of the program within the Afghanistan Theater of Operations.

Specific Duties:
Responsible for providing driving support to contractor personnel in high-risk areas
Responsible for planning, coordinating, and executing motor vehicle convoy operations in urban and rural environments IAW NATO and Combined Security Transition Command – Afghanistan movement control policy including but not limited to:
Route planning and analysis
Arrival and Departure procedures
IED Avoidance
Vehicle recover and self-recovery situations
Responsible for the force protection of embedded team members executing mentorship activities to Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police
Responsible for conducting weapons training, immediate action drills, and other security related activities required to accomplish operational requirements
Responsible for assisting research, analysis and written assessments on the purchase and implementation of new and current security equipment, vehicle and weapon employment in regards to protect program personnel
Carries and operates weapons as specified to accomplish daily operational requirements.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , ,

Afghanistan: Attack On NATO Convoy Kills 17, To Include 8 Contractors

Oct 29

Posted by Matt in Afghanistan, Industry Talk | 2 Comments

Very sad. These Rhinos are the large armored buses they use to transport folks and it sounds like it got hit by a very large VBIED. Rest in peace to the fallen. I do not know what company these guys were with, or if they were civilians hired directly by ISAF. -Matt

Edit: 11/01/11– Thanks to Ms Sparky. Fluor made a statement about the loss of their 7 contractors in this incident at her site. No word on the 8th contractor and who they worked for. Here is the statement:

Team Fluor,
Saturday we suffered a tragic loss of seven of our own teammates during an attack in Kabul. Each of those we lost was a friend and valued part of our team. We lived and worked together. We forged bonds of camaraderie that are only found at times like this.
We each deal with our grief in different ways; some will find comfort in memorial services like the one we held at Dubbs or the ramp ceremony at Bagram, others will find that talking to friends, a Chaplain, or counselor helps. We have Site Managers and Employee Assistance Program teams on site to help us through this difficult time and find ways to cope.
Yesterday we notified the families of those we lost and we have assistance officers with them to help each of the families get through the difficult times ahead. I have asked our leaders to stay engaged with our colleagues that need assistance here and answer the questions that we can. I want to be sure you all have this information, as I know that rumors and internet blogs have not always been the best source for information.
Should you have any questions or need assistance, please talk to your immediate supervisor. He or she can provide the first step to find direction or help and ensure the proper steps are taken. Keep in mind that we have professional counselors on our EAP team available to assist you.
Although many of us know them personally, out of respect for their families we are not releasing any names of those lost in the attack. Please join me as our thoughts and prayers are with our teammates and their families during this difficult time.

George Rabb, Country Manager, LOGCAP?Fluor Government Group

 

 

Attack on NATO convoy kills 17 in Afghanistan
By AMIR SHAH
October 29, 2011
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — A Taliban suicide bomber rammed a vehicle loaded with explosives into an armored NATO bus Saturday on a busy thoroughfare in Kabul, killing 17 people, including a dozen Americans, in the deadliest strike against the U.S.-led coalition in the Afghan capital since the war began.
The blast occurred on the same day that a man wearing an Afghan army uniform killed three coalition troops, who were reportedly Australian, in the south — attacks that show the resiliency of the insurgency and are likely to raise new doubts about the unpopular 10-year-old war and the Western strategy of trying to talk peace with the Taliban.
A spokesman for the fundamentalist Islamic movement, which was ousted in the 2001 invasion for its affiliation with al-Qaida, claimed responsibility for the attack, saying the bomber had used 1,540 pounds (700 kilograms) of explosives.
The Taliban and related groups have staged more than a dozen major attacks in Kabul this year, including seven since June, in an apparent campaign to weaken confidence in the Afghan government as it prepares to take over its own security ahead of a 2014 deadline for the U.S. and other NATO countries to withdraw their troops or move them into support roles.
Underscoring the difficulties ahead, the brazen assault occurred just hours after top Afghan and Western officials met in the heart of Kabul to discuss the second phase of shifting security responsibilities to Afghan forces in all or part of 17 of the country’s 34 provinces. Afghans already have the lead in the Afghan capital.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,