Former Halliburton subsidiary sued for human trafficking

[anitram]

Heckuva job.

One of America's biggest military contractors is being sued by a Nepali labourer and the families of a dozen other employees who say they were taken against their will to work in Iraq. All but one of the Nepalese workers were subsequently kidnapped and murdered.

According to the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles, the Nepalese workers were recruited in 2004 in their home country by KBR and its Jordanian contractors, Daoud & Partners, to work as kitchen staff in a luxury hotel in Amman. Once they reached the Jordanian capital, however, their passports were taken from them and they were sent to Iraq. While travelling in an unprotected convoy, the Nepalis were kidnapped and later executed.

"It doesn't appear that any of them knew they were going to Iraq," said Matthew Handley, a lawyer representing the only survivor and the families of those who were killed. "A few were told they were going to work at an American camp... They thought they were going to work in America."

The lawsuit says that, after the 12 men were kidnapped, the sole survivor, Buddi Prasad Gurung, was forced to work for 15 months against his will in a warehouse at the al-Asad air base before his passport was finally returned. The plaintiffs allege the "illicit trafficking scheme - from their recruitment in Nepal to their eventual employment in Iraq - was engineered by KBR and its subcontractor".

The lawsuit was brought under a new human trafficking law that allows foreign citizens to sue the US government, military or corporations over human rights abuses committed in their countries.

Story.

The contractor story has been lost in all of the stories coming out of Iraq. Not just this aspect, but safety of the employees, the mercenary status of many of the subcontracting parties, and the general lawlessness in which they operate.

 

[financeguy]

Par for the course for the privateer neo-cons.

They're evil people. I said so all along, and I was right.

 

[BVS]

Halliburton 4 prez...

 

[A_Wanderer]

Par for the course for the privateer neo-cons.

They're evil people. I said so all along, and I was right.

What do you mean by neo-con?

Is it the liberal interventionists? Corporatist profiteers? Big government social conservatives?

What is a neo-con?

 

[financeguy]

What do you mean by neo-con?

Is it the liberal interventionists? Corporatist profiteers? Big government social conservatives?

What is a neo-con?

None of the above, at least not specifically. (There is nothing, per se wrong with corporatist profiteering, in my opinion. There's a lot wrong with liberal interventionism and some aspects of big government social conservativism, but their intentions at least are in general good.)

I would distinguish between neo-conservatism and all three of the above, and I would say that although neo-conservativism is somewhat linked to liberal interventionism and corporatist profiteering, I wouldn't see much in common with neo-conservatism and traditional big government social conservatives.

I would essentially view neo-conservatism as the ideology expounded by the likes of Norman Podhoretz and Irving Kristol, with the likes of Ann Coulter and Mark Stein expounding the dumbed-down, tabloidised version of the philosophy, and I would define it as the belief that America should "export democracy", that is, aggressively spread its ideals of government, economics, and culture abroad.

It terms of political influence, it probably kicked off under Reagan (although Reagan personally wasn't a neo-con, in my view, and I admire some of what he did), reached its adolescence under Bush I and grew to adulthood under Bush II.

Your reference to liberal interventionism, as expounded by the likes of Madeleine Albright and Tony Blair, is relevant, and I would also tend to criticize that ideology.