Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
lord_casek

white slavery, sex trafficking

Recommended Posts

cynthia mckinney

^video

 

TRIBUNE UPDATE

U.S. stalls on human trafficking

Pentagon has yet to ban contractors from using forced labor

 

By Cam Simpson

Washington Bureau

Published December 27, 2005

 

WASHINGTON -- Three years ago, President Bush declared that he had "zero tolerance" for trafficking in humans by the government's overseas contractors, and two years ago Congress mandated a similar policy.

 

But notwithstanding the president's statement and the congressional edict, the Defense Department has yet to adopt a policy to bar human trafficking.

 

A proposal prohibiting defense contractor involvement in human trafficking for forced prostitution and labor was drafted by the Pentagon last summer, but five defense lobbying groups oppose key provisions and a final policy still appears to be months away, according to those involved and Defense Department records.

 

The lobbying groups opposing the plan say they're in favor of the idea in principle, but said they believe that implementing key portions of it overseas is unrealistic. They represent thousands of firms, including some of the industry's biggest names, such as DynCorp International and Halliburton subsidiary KBR, both of which have been linked to trafficking-related concerns.

 

Lining up on the opposite side of the defense industry are some human-trafficking experts who say significant aspects of the Pentagon's proposed policy might actually do more harm than good unless they're changed. These experts have told the Pentagon that the policy would merely formalize practices that have allowed contractors working overseas to escape punishment for involvement in trafficking, the records show.

 

The long-awaited debate inside the Pentagon on how to implement presidential and congressional directives on human trafficking is unfolding just as countertrafficking advocates in Congress are running into resistance. A bill reauthorizing the nation's efforts against trafficking for the next two years was overwhelmingly passed by the House this month, but only after a provision creating a trafficking watchdog at the Pentagon was stripped from the measure at the insistence of defense-friendly lawmakers, according to congressional records and officials. The Senate passed the bill last week.

 

Delay seen as weakness

 

The Pentagon's delay in tackling the issue, the perceived weakness of its proposed policy and the recent setbacks in Congress have some criticizing the Pentagon for not taking the issue seriously enough.

 

"Ultimately, what we really hope to see is resources and leadership on this issue from the Pentagon," said Sarah Mendelson, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a national security think tank in Washington. She also had called for creation of an internal Pentagon watchdog after investigating the military's links to sex trafficking in the Balkans.

 

Rep. Christopher Smith (R-N.J.), author of the original legislation targeting human trafficking, said there seems to be an institutional lethargy on the issue at the Pentagon below the most senior levels. He said he was concerned that the Pentagon's overseas-contractor proposal might not be tough enough and that the delays in developing it could mean more people "were being exploited while they were sharpening their pencils."

 

But he pledged to maintain aggressive oversight of the plan.

 

`We're addressing the issue'

 

Glenn Flood, a Pentagon spokesman, said he did not know why it has taken so long to develop a proposal but said, "From our point of view, we're addressing the issue."

 

An official more directly involved with the effort to draft a formal policy barring contractors from involvement in trafficking said it might not be ready until April, at least in part because of concerns raised by the defense contractors.

 

Bush declared zero tolerance for involvement in human trafficking by federal employees and contractors in a National Security Presidential Directive he signed in December 2002 after media reports detailing the alleged involvement of DynCorp employees in buying women and girls as sex slaves in Bosnia during the U.S. military's deployment there in the late 1990s.

 

Ultimately, the company fired eight employees for their alleged involvement in sex trafficking and illegal arms deals.

 

In 2003, Smith followed Bush's decree with legislation ordering federal agencies to include anti-trafficking provisions in all contracts. The bill covered trafficking for forced prostitution and forced labor and applied to overseas contractors and their subcontractors.

 

But it wasn't until last summer that the Pentagon issued a proposed policy to enforce the 2003 law and Bush's December 2002 directive.

 

The proposal drew a strong response from five defense-contractor-lobbying groups within the umbrella Council of Defense and Space Industries Associations: the Contract Services Association, the Professional Services Council, the National Defense Industrial Association, the American Shipbuilding Association and the Electronic Industries Alliance.

 

The response's first target was a provision requiring contractors to police their overseas subcontractors for human trafficking.

 

In a two-part series published in October, the Tribune detailed how Middle Eastern firms working under American subcontracts in Iraq, and a chain of human brokers beneath them, engaged in the kind of abuses condemned elsewhere by the U.S. government as human trafficking. KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary, relies on more than 200 subcontractors to carry out a multibillion-dollar U.S. Army contract for privatization of military support operations in the war zone.

 

Case of 12 Nepali men

 

The Tribune retraced the journey of 12 Nepali men recruited from poor villages in one of the most remote and impoverished corners of the world and documented a trail of deceit, fraud and negligence stretching into Iraq. The men were kidnapped from an unprotected caravan and executed en route to jobs at an American military base in 2004.

 

At the time, Halliburton said it was not responsible for the recruitment or hiring practices of its subcontractors, and the U.S. Army, which oversees the privatization contract, said questions about alleged misconduct "by subcontractor firms should be addressed to those firms, as these are not Army issues."

 

Once implemented, the new policy could dramatically change responsibilities for KBR and the Army.

 

Alan Chvotkin, senior vice president and counsel for the Professional Services Council who drafted the contractors' eight-page critique of the Pentagon proposal, said it was not realistic to expect foreign companies operating overseas to accept or act on U.S. foreign policy objectives.

 

"This is a clash between mission execution [of the contract] and policy execution," Chvotkin said. "So we're looking for a little flexibility."

 

He said that rather than a "requirement that says you have to flow this through to everybody," the group wants the policy to simply require firms to notify the Pentagon when their subcontractors refuse to accept contract clauses barring support for human trafficking.

 

Still, Chvotkin said, "We don't want to do anything that conveys the idea that we are sanctioning or tolerating trafficking."

 

In a joint memo of their own, Mendelson and another Washington-based expert, Martina Vandenberg, a lawyer who investigated sex trafficking for Human Rights Watch, told the Pentagon its draft policy "institutionalizes ineffective procedures currently used by the Department of Defense contractor community in handling allegations of human trafficking."

 

Without tough provisions requiring referrals to prosecutors, they said, contractors could still get their employees on planes back to the U.S. before investigations commenced, as they allege happened in several documented cases in the Balkans. They said some local contract managers even had "special arrangements" with police in the Balkans that allowed them to quickly get employees returned to the U.S. if they were found to be engaged in illegal activities.

 

----------

 

csimpson@tribune.com

 

To read the investigative series "Pipeline to Peril," go to chicagotribune.com/nepal

 

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationw...ack=1&cset=true

 

http://bugmenot.com/view.php?url=www.chicagotribune.com

 

 

 

this is some news we need to discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dyncorp has been found to be involved in white slavery rings many times.

 

nothing is being done about it.

 

think kidnapping.

 

 

no joke.

 

oh, and google is your friend (for now)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by yum@Mar 14 2006, 07:41 PM

whats the definition of 'white slavery'

 

 

Dictionary

white slavery

n.

 

Forced prostitution.

 

 

Wikipedia

white slavery

 

 

White Slavery is a term which has had a number of different meanings.

 

Economic Metaphor

 

The term was originally used in the 19th century to denote the enslavement to wage labor experienced by workers in industrializing Britain.

 

The use of the term spread to the U.S., where it held particular currency for post-bellum Americans who felt that freedom was defined by the ability for a man to earn a living and support one's family.

 

As the U.S. had just abolished slavery, the right to earn a living was invoked often during Reconstruction. This use of the term "freedom" was supported by property laws and poor laws, which privileged property holders.

 

The expression wage slavery has replaced this use.

 

In the American South

 

During the period of slavery in the United States, there were some slaves who had mostly white ancestry and/or appeared white, due to the legal doctrine of partus. The existence of these slaves was highly emphasised in anti-slavery propaganda.

 

Forced Prostitution

 

By the beginning of the 20th century, the term was coming to mean as well the abduction of white girls into forced prostitution, and after about 1905 it was used for this definition almost exclusively. "White slavery" was the focus of a major moral panic at the end of the Progressive Era. Although sexual slavery did and still does occur, "white slavery" is usually used to refer to this moral panic, where there was a perception that this form of abuse was a danger to every young woman.

 

The term generally had racist overtones.

 

Chinese immigrants were particularly stereotyped and demonized as white slavers and were referred to as the yellow peril during this time. As an example of this in American culture, the musical comedy Thoroughly Modern Millie features a Chinese-run prostitution ring.

 

Similar accusations have also been frequently applied against Jewish men and appear in a great deal of anti-Semitic propaganda.

 

In the Extreme Right-Wing

 

The term white slavery is also used in revisionist and white supremacy literature to refer to any slavery of people with light skin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

uh, aren't dyncorp the guys that were also caught trafficking young sex workers to saudi royals awhile back..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by BURLAP@Mar 14 2006, 09:05 PM

uh, aren't dyncorp the guys that were also caught trafficking young sex workers to saudi royals awhile back..?

 

 

yep, same ones. they're a shady bunch.

not many people are aware of how much

crazy crap these fuckwads are into.

 

 

oh, and dyncorp is also part of the RFID move

in the u.s. everyone will be chipped if they have

their way.

 

are we cattle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That depends. Are you armed to the teeth? If the answer is "yes, " then no, you are not cattle. If the answer is "no," then you might as well be cattle, because you are absolutely powerless to defend yourself from people who would like to herd you around.

 

BTW, every military force in the world has camp followers and always has. It's hard for me to imagine any young woman getting recruited into wartime employment in a combat zone without knowing what's up. Most of the time, the girls are pros to begin with. Maybe not all the time, but no pimp in his right mind wants to deal with an amateur when much more productive professionals are available.

 

When I was stationed on Okinawa, all the hookers were from the Phillipines. The only Japanese working girls we ever saw were half- or quarter- or eighth- American. It was kind of eerie--they looked American from a distance, but they were like Okinawa's "untouchables." If you think Americans are racists, wait til you get to visit Japan. Holy shit, they take race hatred to a whole different level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kabar: tell me about texas and the toll roads.

do the spanish own the major highways? king of spain?

 

dyncorp is down there, too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait... everyone's down on dynacorp but from what I gathered off that wikipedia definition, we should be looking at the Chinese and the Jews... and probably rounding up all the Chinese Jews...

 

THEN we can worry about Dcorp...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Smart@Mar 15 2006, 09:17 AM

Wait... everyone's down on dynacorp but from what I gathered off that wikipedia definition, we should be looking at the Chinese and the Jews... and probably rounding up all the Chinese Jews...

 

THEN we can worry about Dcorp...

 

 

we need to be worrying about dyncorp and blackwater

being hired in as "hired guns" while all the sheriffes deputies in jefferson parish louisiana are being fired. fascism. armed to the teeth men who are not under the control of local law enforcement, but instead are under the control of dyncorp and blackwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spectr

we are all slaves to the allmighty dollar we just got better masters then some other slaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

arcel: did you read the definition of white slavery?

 

it has nothing to do with white people. what it has to do

with is women of all colors. in south africa, and you can check the facts for yourself, there were tons of women raped and murdered by UN "peace keepers". dyncorp is part of this "peace keeping" bullshit. constantly hired out by our govt. to "protect", but it turns out that they are making more of a profit by kidnapping, raping, and torturing women and then sellign them to arabs, chinese, etc. etc. it's really an atrocity.

 

but, whatever. people don't care. they'd rather watch american idol and sunday football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by ARCEL@Mar 24 2006, 04:06 AM

WHITE slavery? something must be done about this, at once!

 

 

 

caseks sarcasm radar detection device was broken, i guess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all kind of droll and distant until it's somebody you know. I met a girl back in the 1970's who had been sort of kidnapped while vacationing in Mexico. She initially went with the guy because he was handsome and rich and lived on a ranch. When she got out there, she had no way to get back, and nobody would give her a ride. Mr. Handsome Rich Boy turned out to have a sort of dark side. It was a big house with a garden and a pool, etc., but no way for her to get a ride out. Eventually she wound up walking several miles to the road and hitchhiking to a town. She said the local cops were even more frightening than the rich guy, but she eventually got a bus ticket to the border and back into the United States.

 

I had a friend in San Francisco whose very attractive younger sister lived at a big estate in Hawaii (as a runaway, more or less) from age 16 to age 24. She was the wealthy son's erstwhile girlfriend and playmate. When she got older (24--what a crone) he kicked her out without a penny and got another 16 year old chickie from California.

 

These examples aren't actually white slavery, but they sort of come close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now THAT'S some interesting shit, right there. You realize of course, that the pro-slavery states were all DEMOCRATIC in 1860, and those same states are all REPUBLICAN now? Wow. Talk about your political reversals. People from those states would have shot a Republican on sight in 1860! The Republican Party and the Radical Republican Party were the very embodiment of abolitionism in 1860. My, how things do change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by guerillaeye@Mar 27 2006, 06:30 PM

img-1143431548.jpg

 

im sure you dont want to open this can of worms.

 

take for instance, the state of illinois' black codes, yes the state where Lincoln made his home. along with blacks having to post a 1000$ bond upon entry of illinois, check this out...

 

 

"But the elimination of legal slavery did not mean the removal of the Black Codes. Indeed, it was not until the passage of the Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the adoption of the Illinois Constitution of 1870 that the last legal barriers (but not the societal) ended. Like their midwestern neighbors, most early Illinois settlers believed in white supremacy and African-American inferiority. Consequently, Illinois' constitutions and laws reflected those views.

 

According to John Mason Peck, an early Illinois Baptist missionary and historian, the French introduced slavery into the French-controlled Illinois country, perhaps as early as 1717 or as late as 1721. The British, who took control of the Illinois Country in 1765, permitted slavery to continue, and so did the Americans after George Rogers Clark's conquest in 1778. Although the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 prohibited slavery or involuntary servitude, territorial and later state laws and interpretations permitted the retention of French slaves. When Congress admitted Illinois as a state in 1818, the state's constitution permitted limited slavery at the salt mines in Massac County, and it legalized the continued bondage of slaves introduced by the French. At the same time, the new constitution included a provision

 

 

that would eventually free even those slaves by declaring that the children of slaves were to be freed when they reached adulthood: for women that age was eighteen, for men it was twenty-one. Thus, it appeared that the last slave would not be freed until 1839, or twenty-one years after the adoption of the state constitution and Illinois' admission into the union.

 

Legislators in the first General Assembly passed measures designed to discourage African-Americans from coming to Illinois. Blacks were denied suffrage, and other laws deprived them of most rights accorded free white men. African-Americans were prohibited from immigrating without a certificate of freedom. Moreover, they had to register that certificate, along with the certificates of any children, immediately upon entering the state. Among other things, the state legislature intended to discourage Illinois from becoming a haven for runaway slaves. Any runaway found in the state could be sentenced by a justice of the peace to thirty-five lashes. African-Americans assembling in groups of three or more could be jailed and flogged. Additionally, they could not testify in court nor serve in the militia. Finally, state law forbade slaveholders, under penalty of a severe fine, from bringing slaves into Illinois in order to free them.

 

 

To counteract those repressive measures, just before the General Assembly convened following the election of 1822, "Free Persons of Color" submitted a petition requesting the right of suffrage. In the memorial they noted, "We pay taxes, work on public high-ways, like others ...." The petition was denied, and some legislators increased their efforts to bring additional slaves into the state. When the General Assembly convened in 1822, pro-slavery advocates succeeded in passing a resolution requiring the state's citizens to vote on whether to call a constitutional convention. That decision provoked a long and bitter struggle.

 

The state's leading political, religious, and social leaders engaged in a strenuous war of words in newspapers and pamphlets, in the pulpit, and on the stump. Many of the state's leading founding politicians, including its first governor, Shadrach Bond, and first lieutenant governor, Pierre Menard, held slaves and supported the introduction of a pro-slave constitution. Newly elected Governor Edwards Coles, secretary of state (British-born) Morris Birkbeck, and pioneer Baptist missionary and historian John Mason Peck led the anti-slavery forces.

 

Illinois voters rejected (6,822 against, 4,950 for) the call for a constitutional convention. But further repressive measures were taken against the state's African-American residents. The state's newspapers were filled with advertisements from neighboring states offering rewards for the capture and return of runaway slaves. John Crain, sheriff of Washington County, advertised that he had taken two runaway slaves into custody. Unless their owners called for them, paid the charges and removed them from the state, they "will be hired out as the law directs." Slave hunters such as William Rose of Nashville, Tennessee, advertised their services as agents to find runaways in Illinois.

 

Not only did Illinois newspapers carry advertisements for runaways, the state attempted to further discourage black immigration by raising new barriers. The 1829 law required any free black to register in the county seat and post a $1,000 bond to cover costs should they become indigent or violate state or local laws. Since few black men or women had such sums available, they usually had to find a friendly white man to act as surety for them. At the same time, blacks also had to register their certificates of freedom from the state from which they immigrated.

 

Despite the restrictions and repression, the Illinois black population continued to grow slowly. While the number of slaves continued to decline, the indenture system remained harsh and restrictive. As late as 1843, United States Senator-elect Sidney Breese, needing money to set up housekeeping in Washington, D.C., wrote to former Lieutenant-Governor Pierre Menard, offering to "place in your hands some valuable negroes with power to sell them. . .." "

 

The North was the slave shipping center.

New Jersey also passed a law freeing blacks. the catch was they were freed ONLY after they were signed up for "Life time apprenticeship."

Oregon, Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia banned free blacks from their states. Massachussetts passed a law that said any free black in the state that wasnt supposed to be was to be flogged.

so this whole MYTH of the "morally superior good old boys from the north, trampling the oppressive racists of the South" is hogwash.

 

one ironic thing, the tax revolt of 1776 otherwise known as the American Revolution was the same thing as the Tariff Revolt of 1861, otherwise known as the Civil War. Europeans called out the colonists in 1776 for preaching about Liberty, when they were slave drivers.

the sad, simple fact is, in anti bellum america blacks were considered inferior, even by most radical abolitionists. Slavery is a moral stain on the WHOLE COUNTRY and the AMERICAN Flag just as it is on the south. Take For instance, George Mason, a strict anti federalist from the South, he almost didnt sign the constitution because it allowed FEDERAL protection to slavery, he believed the "general" government had no such power and he himself was opposed to slavery.

 

it would just be awesome one time for someone to tell the WHOLE truth. that the FEDERAL government protected slavery until the war to prevent southern secession, and that Lincoln, the guy who struck off the chains of chattel slavery, wanted blacks deported and didnt want slavery's extension into the territories for fear of COMPETITION AGAINST WHITE LABOR! The outcome of freeing the slaves was a good one. however the methods used and the tactics employed are the same techiniques used by the current federal government today. supression of civil liberties, controlling the press, fighting wars of noble purpose, which causes and reasons for fighting, constantly change.

 

I also might add that GW Bush is hardly the conservative the southern secessionists were. Thomas jefferson believed in secession as well as nullification of federal laws. the secessionists believed in the principles of 98 and federalism, and the Jeffersonian tradition, where as Bush believes in liberal wilsonianism, and the big government of LBJ and tramples the constitution almost as good as Lincoln did.

 

Dont forget about the North wanting to secede in the early 19th century because of the war of 1812. they didnt want to send troops and called secession conventions to secede. secession was a common thought during this time.

 

another odd fact is 2 of my ancestors came to this country as slaves. sorry, let me use the proper term..."indentured servants."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cynthia mckinney

 

 

i love that black woman, its a shame to think that even with her position and authority its unlikely to make any difference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My girlfriend's sister has some crazy theory about how that chick Natalie Holloway was kidnapped and smuggled by a sex trafficking and that theres a cover up. Crazy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×