# Controversial contractors paid $2.4M by Canadian Forces



## jollyjacktar (1 Feb 2012)

Shared with the usual caveats.  Oh the horror, the horror   :

Documents show Canadian Forces used former Blackwater training facility
By Laura Payton, CBC News

The Canadian Forces spent $2.4 million last year on training at a facility run by Xe Services, the U.S. private security company formerly known as Blackwater.  The company and its training facility were used to teach precision shooting and defensive driving, as well as VIP escort requirements and close quarter combat techniques, according to documents tabled Monday in the House of Commons.

It appears the training provided by Xe instructors was for precision shooting and defensive driving. The documents note much of the training in VIP escorting and close quarter combat was done by CF instructors and standards personnel.  Special forces members also had precision shooting and defensive driving training at the facility, although for operational security reasons the government wouldn't say how many trained there.

Full story at link.  http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/01/31/pol-cf-training-former-blackwater.html


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Feb 2012)

Since I can't see where CBC is sharing the public document they based the story on, you can find the document (a written response to a written question from an MP) attached - enjoy!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Feb 2012)

Mr Teapot, please meet Ms Tempest in the CBC Foyer, thank you.


----------



## TN2IC (2 Feb 2012)

May be I'm a little uneducated in the access of information. But why is the public allow to find out what DND is spending? Also doesn't OPSEC / PERSEC come into play?  Who is the real enemy? The media, period.

         It's the reason why we aren't in a combat role in Afghanistan now. The media twists everything around, and makes the Government of Canada withdraw with it's tail between it's legs.

        Or may be I'm just a little confused / bitter about my time in the box. I don't know folks. Care to shed some light for me?

Regards,
TN


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Feb 2012)

I hope I don't regret this, but I'm going to give it a try.....


			
				TN said:
			
		

> May be I'm a little uneducated in the access of information. But why is the public allow to find out what DND is spending? Also doesn't OPSEC / PERSEC come into play?  Who is the real enemy? The media, period.


In a democratic society, taxpayers should know generally how their money is spent.  That said, not _everything_ is released to the public - for example, in the attached document above, there's a lot of detail NOT mentioned about SF troops.



			
				TN said:
			
		

> It's the reason why we aren't in a combat role in Afghanistan now. The media twists everything around, and makes the Government of Canada withdraw with it's tail between it's legs.


The government will do what it will do, based on what they think the public wants - that's another bit of democracy.



			
				TN said:
			
		

> Or may be I'm just a little confused / bitter about my time in the box. I don't know folks. Care to shed some light for me?


Believe me when I say that you're certainly not the only person posting/reading here who might be frustrated about what's different between what you saw/lived and what you read/see/hear in the media.  And you have a right to be p***ed off.  Also know that there are folks out there (me included) who appreciate the job you've done (and continue to do, assuming you're not out of the CF).  Try to take the media with a bit of a grain of salt - read a lot of different stuff, and maybe the average of all of it'll come closer to reality.  I've found myself less stressed taking in less media than I used to.

While the media may not be perfect, remember it's better to have lots of outlets to check things out in than to have only one message coming out of one source - didn't work well in the USSR, doesn't seem to be working well in North Korea.

My  :2c:


----------



## dimsum (3 Feb 2012)

The media isn't necessarily the enemy here.  

This is a bit dated (but maybe still valid), but the Danish media helped the Danish military publicize their Afghan contribution so much so that the majority of their public actually supports their mission there (not just "the troops", but what the troops are doing.)  Of course this was when I was there in mid-2010 and in passing convo with some Danish troops, so maybe things have changed.


----------



## jmlane (3 Feb 2012)

I wonder if that is due to the cultural differences between Canadian—with our geographic isolation—and the European intimate knowledge and history of conflict. Surely it is more complex than that, but maybe that is enough to shift public opinion from fear and misunderstand to empathy and support? Would be interesting to read an anthropological theoretical view on the Canadian public opinion of Afghanistan.


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Feb 2012)

Demotivational poster material here, can any one make it?

"The good old CBC. Undermining military efforts for fifty years!"


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Feb 2012)

I was not surprised at the left fest amongst the comments, lots of hate there for the military.  Feels like old times again.   :


----------



## ModlrMike (3 Feb 2012)

Clearly the CBC has restarted the engine of their anti military machine. I've notice over the last month more and more articles with a negative slant. You're right: feels like old times.


----------



## jmlane (3 Feb 2012)

Is this undermining of the CF by the CBC a political issue? I have no concept of the history involved and would be interested in any materials that can shed light on this historical issue.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Feb 2012)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Clearly the CBC has restarted the engine of their anti military machine. I've notice over the last month more and more articles with a negative slant. You're right: feels like old times.


Yup.  Time for Ralph Benmurgi to come up to the surface again.  I still remember his rants of poison from Mid-Day in the 90's (Oka era).  Hate him to this day too.


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Feb 2012)

How do we make these posters? I feel artistic today.

"The CBC - trashing the military effort for half a century!"


----------



## jmlane (3 Feb 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> How do we make these posters? I feel artistic today.


http://diy.despair.com/


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Feb 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> How do we make these posters? I feel artistic today.
> 
> "The CBC - trashing the military effort for half a century!"


Wrong CBC, right?


----------



## TN2IC (3 Feb 2012)

So we blame the media.... but what about the People of Canada? I sure would point the finger at them, no problem. Can any one say 'Airborne'? Try reading "Who Killing the Canadian Military" and see my view. I try not to be bitter about a lot of things. But I don't trust the People of Canada. ie the public. Or the media.

Regards,
TN


----------



## Sig_Des (3 Feb 2012)

TN said:
			
		

> So we blame the media.... but what about the People of Canada? I sure would point the finger at them, no problem. Can any one say 'Airborne'? Try reading "Who Killing the Canadian Military" and see my view. I try not to be bitter about a lot of things. But I don't trust the People of Canada. ie the public. Or the media.



From Dave Grossman's *On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs *;



> The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence.....The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."
> 
> Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.



http://www.mwkworks.com/onsheepwolvesandsheepdogs.html


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Feb 2012)

TN said:
			
		

> So we blame the media.... but what about the People of Canada? I sure would point the finger at them, no problem. Can any one say 'Airborne'? Try reading "Who Killing the Canadian Military" and see my view. I try not to be bitter about a lot of things. But I don't trust the People of Canada. ie the public. Or the media.
> 
> Regards,
> TN



I read that book. Each chapter was dedicated to a different sector, including the CF itself. Each of us has a role - government, the CF, the media, th public etc.
Singling out the people of Canada is unfair. We, in the CF are also people of Canada.


----------



## Hurricane (3 Feb 2012)

Whats more interesting is the comments that the "Experts" of the public have below the article.


----------



## TN2IC (3 Feb 2012)

Beadwindow 7 said:
			
		

> From Dave Grossman's *On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs *;



I really enjoy reading his work. But I did'nt get the chance to read that one yet.

[quote author=Jim Seggie]We, in the CF are also people of Canada.
[/quote]

Hey Jim, I thought we were soldiers. "To close with and destroy the enemy"  ;D



One thing that blows my mind is the "Taliban Propaganda Watch" topic on this forum. Who's side are we on? NATO or Al-Qaeda? Any "reporter" can go on this site, and "research" our forum. Bringing more fuel to the fire.

Remember this is all my opinion. I am very bitter these days.


----------



## OldSolduer (4 Feb 2012)

We are the people of Canada too. We didn't give up our citizenship when we signed on.


----------



## Kalatzi (4 Feb 2012)

"But I don't trust the People of Canada. "

I understadand that you may be bitter. Thank you and your kin for their service. 

I wish you well. 

I served in the 70's not a pleasent time. I was about as gung-ho as its would be possible to be. 

I hope that you can also see my concern about the - tail wagging the dog?


----------



## Swingline1984 (4 Feb 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> How do we make these posters? I feel artistic today.
> 
> "The CBC - trashing the military effort for half a century!"



Not a demotivational poster, and the subject is not the military, but it fits the bill I think.


----------



## lethalLemon (4 Feb 2012)

Swingline1984 said:
			
		

> Not a demotivational poster, and the subject is not the military, but it fits the bill I think.




BAhahahahahaha :rofl:

Oops... For a minute there I thought that it was a joke


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Feb 2012)

TN said:
			
		

> One thing that blows my mind is the "Taliban Propaganda Watch" topic on this forum. Who's side are we on? NATO or Al-Qaeda? Any "reporter" can go on this site, and "research" our forum. Bringing more fuel to the fire.


Happy to take this one, since I populate that thread.  

When you read the statements of Taliban spokespersons in the media, some sound like they're just giving their side of the story.  If you see more of the Taliban's material, you realize just how much they exaggerate.  

One example:  overall, the Taliban was reporting 14 Canadians killed for every one actually killed (see attached).  See that in any mainstream media?  Not so much.  

Another example:  how about the Taliban claiming a Red Cross report says their dead don't rot?  I'm still waiting for media to pick that howler up.

If this is how much they're exaggerating on their web page, could they be doing that when they make other statements to the media?  I'm guessing yes.  But if folks don't see what the bad guys are saying in general, they can't compare, can they?



			
				TN said:
			
		

> Hey Jim, I thought we were soldiers. "To close with and destroy the enemy"  ;D


Although not Canadian, a quote from George Washington applies here to some extent:  "When we assumed the Soldier, we did not lay aside the Citizen."  That's inscribed in one of the main structures at Arlington National Cemetery in Washington, D.C.



			
				TN said:
			
		

> Remember this is all my opinion. I am very bitter these days.


More than entitled - also good to share it here.


----------



## TN2IC (4 Feb 2012)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> When you read the statements of Taliban spokespersons in the media, some sound like they're just giving their side of the story.  If you see more of the Taliban's material, you realize just how much they exaggerate.



Yes, and *YOU* bring it to the English table and let every Canadian Anti War supporter fight their case against the Harper government. Now who this the enemy?

Regards,
An Afghan Veteran


----------



## aesop081 (4 Feb 2012)

TN said:
			
		

> Now who this the enemy?



Not him.

You need to calm down dude. Honestly.

I know you got much of your mind but your focusing on the wrong targets.


----------



## OldSolduer (4 Feb 2012)

TN said:
			
		

> Yes, and *YOU* bring it to the English table and let every Canadian Anti War supporter fight their case against the Harper government. Now who this the enemy?



Maybe you haven't heard of the right to free speech, or freedom of the press?

We live in a democracy,  not  a dictatorship. Frankly, I find your bitterness towards Canada disturbing.


----------



## TN2IC (4 Feb 2012)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Not him.
> 
> You need to calm down dude. Honestly.
> 
> I know you got much of your mind but your focusing on the wrong targets.



May be I am, Pat.. who knows. Hints why I'm getting help.


----------



## aesop081 (4 Feb 2012)

TN said:
			
		

> May be I'm Pat.. who knows. Hints why I'm getting help.



I know dude. Just trying to help ya.


----------



## TN2IC (4 Feb 2012)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I know dude. Just trying to help ya.



I appreciated  it buddy.. I can always trust you.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Mar 2012)

Postmedia News' version of the story:


> An American private security firm whose employees have been implicated in the killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan was paid nearly $2.4 million to train Canadian soldiers last year.
> 
> Documents tabled in the House of Commons show Xe Services, formerly known as Blackwater, was providing select troops specialized training in precision shooting and defensive driving at the company's North Carolina facilities.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Mar 2012)

It appears the NDP read Postmedia News - this from Question Period yesterday:  





> *Ms. Christine Moore (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, NDP):* Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives often use a company that is known for having killed many civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan for training our troops. Blackwater's past was so dark and its image so bad that it had to change its name to Xe. Xe has become the Conservatives' company of choice for training our soldiers. The government uses its services regularly on untendered contracts. Why is there no call for tenders when the government hires a foreign private company to train our troops?
> 
> *Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC):* As always, Mr. Speaker, that is not true. Academi has facilities in North Carolina that offer a number of technical ranges that we do not have here in Canada. We contract facilities for short periods of time as a most cost-effective means of investing in our troops for training, as opposed to building fixed expensive infrastructure here in Canada. We use these technical ranges for specialized skill enhancement, such as defensive driving. We continue to invest in ensuring that we have the best trained forces in the world ....


  A bit more of the same on the link.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Mar 2012)

Some Liberals need to do more homework re:  company names - highlights mine from QP yesterday:





> *Hon. John McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood, Lib.):*  Mr. Speaker, our military has the justified reputation as a smart, ethical and effective force. It is therefore disheartening to see the Minister of National Defence *issue a contract to BlackBerry, formerly Xe Services*, now Academi. Changing names does not change a vigilante culture.
> 
> The world's largest mercenary army has been accused of murdering Afghanis and Iraqis with impunity and immunity and lying to Congress. That is hardly the way to win the hearts and minds of civilians.
> 
> ...


----------



## Teeps74 (10 Mar 2012)

> "...Mr. Speaker, we do not have a contract with BlackBerry or Blackwater at the Canadian Forces."



Actually, we do have a contract with BlackBerry. It is the "smartphone" of choice for the CF after all.

These quotes from both parties are disheartening. Are they really that clueless?


----------



## a_majoor (10 Mar 2012)

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> Actually, we do have a contract with BlackBerry. It is the "smartphone" of choice for the CF after all.
> 
> These quotes from both parties are disheartening. Are they really that clueless?



Yes. 

And so are their supporters.


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Mar 2012)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Some Liberals need to do more homework re:  company names - highlights mine from QP yesterday:


What a friggin dumbass.   :


----------



## saskcowboy13 (13 Mar 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Demotivational poster material here, can any one make it?
> 
> "The good old CBC. Undermining military efforts for fifty years!"


To Mr. Seggie I couldn't quite find a picture to suit your caption, but I hope this one works
KW


----------



## Jed (13 Mar 2012)

I vote for pressing the politicians to divert that extra taxpayer money pissed away on CBC extravagance to be used to make relevant posters highlighting the history of CBC trashing the Military for the past 50 years. This is a very relevant part of our Canadian Heritage that has not been taught in our education systems.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Mar 2012)

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> Actually, we do have a contract with BlackBerry. It is the "smartphone" of choice for the CF after all.
> 
> These quotes from both parties are disheartening. Are they really that clueless?



Still technically correct though isn't it? We have a contract with RIM, or other carrier, who supplies us with Blackberries. Not a contract with Blackberry


----------



## OldSolduer (16 Mar 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Still technically correct though isn't it? We have a contract with RIM, or other carrier, who supplies us with Blackberries. Not a contract with Blackberry



The contract is with Rogers. RIM makes the Blackberry, Rogers sells the service.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Mar 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> The contract is with Rogers. RIM makes the Blackberry, Rogers sells the service.



Right. What I said.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (17 Mar 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> The contract is with Rogers/Bell. RIM makes the Blackberry, Rogers/Bell sells the service.



 ;D


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Mar 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> The contract is with Rogers. RIM makes the Blackberry, Rogers sells the service.



correction, Rogers sells a barely adequate service if you happen to deploy/work in a major urban centre.


----------

