[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 93 (Tuesday, July 12, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H5714-H5718]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              OUTSOURCING MILITARY TO SOLDIERS OF FORTUNE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Conaway). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, this evening, I would like to talk about a

[[Page H5715]]

cultural change occurring in the U.S. military that is very troubling 
to me. For those people who have served our country and continue to 
serve our country in the military service, the words honor, duty, God, 
and country mean everything. These timeless words have motivated 
hundreds of thousands of our patriotic citizens to enlist and serve in 
the United States military over the decades, and they inspire a calling 
to rise above one's own self-interest for the betterment of our Nation 
and her highest principles: Liberty, equality and justice.
  Those high principles are in stark contrast to what the World Book 
Dictionary defines as a soldier of fortune, ``a man serving or ready to 
serve as a soldier under any government for money, for adventure or for 
pleasure.''
  I could not help but think about this and read and reread that 
definition as I examine how pay and benefits provided to these private 
military personnel engaged in the Iraqi war dwarf what we provide our 
all-volunteer military. Guards for private security firms on average 
are earning $400 to $600 a day or $144,000 to $216,000 in a single 
year, and they are earning it tax free. That is right. These salaries 
and tax-free dollars are provided so long as the men remain in-country 
for more than a year.
  The slain guards for Blackwater were earning nearly a thousand 
dollars a day for an astronomical salary of $365,000 a year. Let us 
compare that to what we provide the men and women who have served in 
our military for 6 years, not even the 1 or 2 years that most personnel 
in Iraq are at. A military commissioned officer can expect to earn 
between $100 and $270 a day, for a paltry total of $36,000 to $96,000 a 
year. Enlisted soldiers, those who carry out the toughest assignments 
and are in the most danger and need the most support, earn $36,000 in a 
good year. That is outrageous.
  General Omar Bradley, the GI general himself said, ``Leadership in 
the democratic Army means firmness, not harshness; understanding, not 
weakness; justice, not license; humaneness, not intolerance; 
generosity, not selfishness; pride, not egotism.''
  I thought a lot about those words as I am increasingly saddened as I 
watch what seems to be transpiring in the Iraqi war. As each day 
passes, a nonsensical strategy is unraveling in Iraq that threatens to 
transform many of our most important ideals into crash commercialism. 
The utter mismanagement of the war troubles me as I witness what I 
perceive to be the undermining of the honor code and the diminishment 
of the meaning of the words ``service'' and ``duty'' that have served 
as hallmarks of our military tradition from its inception.
  Let me be clear. For those soldiers, both enlisted personnel and 
officers serving under the time-tested rules of engagement, I have no 
quarrel. They serve bravely. Their integrity is indisputable, their 
will resolute. No, my apprehension lies with the architects of war. 
Where I am growing increasingly uncomfortable and downright concerned 
is with the actions of the President and his role as commander in 
chief, his Vice President, and their Secretary of Defense, Donald 
Rumsfeld. Together, they are authorizing a strategy for the outsourcing 
of military functions that is unparalleled in scope and size in the 
history of this Nation. Never before have so many private contractors, 
an estimated 20,000 private military personnel and 100,000 civilian 
contractors, been utilized in such a function to perform critical 
security and military needs in theater, duties that heretofore had been 
under the direct purview of the regular military and its established 
chain of command beginning with the commander in chief and his joint 
chiefs of staff.
  Mr. Speaker, no one in Congress has any idea of the exact number of 
private security contractors working and operating in Iraq. Last year, 
in response to a detailed request levied by myself and dozens of our 
colleagues, the Coalition Provisional Authority compiled a list of 60 
different firms employing a total of 20,000 personnel back then, 
including U.S. citizens, Iraqis and third country nationals. No 
additional information, no specifics on the contracts awarded, just a 
list.
  And so we watch the news, and we try to figure out what is actually 
happening over there. According to an excellent journalistic expose' on 
Frontline, and I quote, ``Beforehand handing over power to the newly 
elected Iraqi government in January 2005, the CPA established 
Memorandum 17, a notice that called for all private security companies 
operating in Iraq to register by June 1 and established an oversight 
committee led by Iraq's Ministry of the Interior. According to Lawrence 
Peter, a former CPA official and the director of the Private Security 
Association of Iraq, as of June 21, 2005, 37 security contractors have 
registered with the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior. One is awaiting 
approval, and 18 additional security companies are in the process of 
registering.''
  Mr. Speaker, what on earth is going on in Iraq? How do we distinguish 
between soldiers of fortune and those of our own military who are 
committed to honor, duty, God, and country? Why can this Congress not 
get straight answers from the administration on this and a bevy of 
other issues? Why are we relying on thousands of contractors, including 
some from third countries, to provide backup and support to our regular 
military? Why is it perfectly acceptable to outsource war, and this 
under a veil of secrecy? I have hundreds of questions, and Members can 
rest assured I will refuse to stop asking them until the American 
people get real and substantive answers to those responsible.
  What really bothered me was when I saw that Paul Bremer at the 
beginning had guards around him that did not have military-issued 
uniforms nor U.S. Department of Defense weapons. I began to ask 
questions. I will continue to raise them, and I include for the Record 
some additional materials.
  Honor, duty, God, country. These timeless words have motivated 
hundreds of thousands of patriotic citizens to enlist and serve in the 
United States Military over the decades. These words inspire a calling 
to rise above ones own self for the betterment of our nation and her 
highest principals--liberty, equality, justice.
  General Omar Bradley (the GI General himself) said that ``Leadership 
in the democratic army means firmness, not harshness; understanding, 
not weakness; justice, not license; humaneness, not intolerance; 
generosity, not selfishness; pride, not egotism.'' / General George 
Marshall, the architect of the Marshall Plan and one of the foremost 
General officers of his day is oft quoted as saying, ``Morale is the 
state of mind. It is steadfastness and courage and hope. It is 
confidence and zeal and loyalty. It is elan, esprit de corps and 
determination.'' If only we were to heed the words of these two 
incredible men as we continue to engage in a costly and unpredictable 
war in Iraq.
  Instead, I am increasingly saddened as I watch what seems to be 
transpiring in the Iraqi war. As each day passes, a nonsensical 
strategy is unraveling in Iraq that threatens to transform many of our 
most important ideals into crass commercialism. The utter mis-
management of the war troubles me as I witness what I perceive to be 
the undermining of the honor code--and the diminishment of the meaning 
of words ``service'' and ``duty'' that have served as hallmarks of our 
military tradition from its inception.
  Let me be clear. For those soldiers (both enlisted personnel and 
officers) serving under the time tested rules of engagement, I have no 
quarrel. They serve bravely. Their integrity is indisputable. Their 
will resolute.
  No, my apprehension lies with the architects of the War. Where I am 
growing increasingly uncomfortable and downright concerned, is with the 
actions of this President in his role as Commander and Chief, his Vice 
President, and their Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld.
  Together they are authorizing a strategy for the outsourcing of 
military functions that is unparalleled in scope and size. Never before 
have so many private contractors (an estimated 20,000 private military 
personnel and 100,000 civilian contractors) been utilized in such a 
fashion--to perform critical security and military needs in theatre. 
Duties that had heretofore been under the direct purview of the regular 
military and its established chain of command--beginning with the 
Commander in Chief and Joint Chiefs of Staff.
  Mr. Speaker, no one in this Congress has any idea of the exact number 
of private security contractors working and operating in Iraq. Last 
year, in response to a detailed request levied by myself and dozens of 
colleagues, the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) compiled a list 
of 60 different firms employing a total of 20,000 personnel (including 
U.S. citizens, Iraqis and third-country nationals). No additional 
information. No specifics on the contracts that were awarded. Just a 
list.

[[Page H5716]]

  My colleagues and I are forced to rely on the tabulation of news 
articles and press releases to keep on top of what companies are 
operating in theater, what duties they may or may not be performing and 
just how much money the United States government is paying them.
  According to an excellent journalistic expose on the PBS program 
Frontline, ``before handing over power to the newly elected Iraqi 
government in January 2005, the CPA established ``Memorandum 17'' a 
notice that called for all private security companies operating in Iraq 
to register by June 1 and established an oversight committee led by 
Iraq's Ministry of the Interior. According to Lawrence Peter, a former 
CPA official and the director of the Private Security Company 
Association of Iraq, as of June 21, 2005, 37 security contractors have 
registered with the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior. One is awaiting 
approval, and at least 18 additional security companies are in the 
process of registering.''
  Mr. Speaker--What on earth is going on in Iraq? Why can't this 
Congress get straight answers from the administration on this and a 
bevy of other issues? Why are we relying on thousands of contractors to 
provide backup and support to our regular military? Why is it perfectly 
acceptable to outsource war--and this under a veil of secrecy? I have 
hundreds of questions Mr. Speaker, and you can be assured that I refuse 
to stop asking them until the American people get real and substantive 
answers from those responsible.
  Perhaps the problem is the constant replacement of theater commanders 
during an already tumultuous occupation. After the ground victory, the 
U.S. watched the architect of the rapid sprint to Baghdad--General 
Tommy Franks--retire early. When his photo appeared like a 12 inch high 
pin up on the cover of Cigar Aficionado Magazine in December of 2003, 
just months into the occupation, I wondered what Generals Joe Stillwell 
and Omar Bradley would think. In that interview, General Franks 
discussed the over-reliance on Reserve troops, and the types of jobs 
that U.S. military personnel were asked to handle. He said ``We need to 
get people out of those jobs, get civilians in them, and get our 
military into the jobs that are the highest payoff in terms of the 
military skills.'' I thought to myself: ``This is coming from a general 
who has left nearly 150,000 of his troops in theater, while at the same 
time feels that we are not allocating our resources in the best way 
possible.'' I couldn't think of a single precedent for such an action--
to leave before relative calm was restored. Before the peace was won.
  General Franks had it half right. We are getting civilians into 
thousands of jobs in Iraq with ease, but we're doing it in exactly the 
wrong way. We are filling critical slots with civilians who are paid 
far more money than regular U.S. troops, who have a much more cavalier 
attitude toward duty, justice and honor and who are simply wrong for 
the job.
  My concerns grew exponentially during the first year of the 
occupation. It was quite a shock to see Ambassador Paul Bremmer on the 
front page of the New York Times guarded not by U.S. soldiers (in 
regular military uniform and carrying military issue weapons), but by 
private contractors in civilian clothing looking like something out of 
the NYPD undercover squad. To then learn their salaries were 5 to 10 
times as high as our soldiers--who by the way still can't get adequate 
body or vehicle armor--riveted my attention.
  Then, on March 31, 2004, four Blackwater USA guards (again, private 
military/security forces) were ambushed by Iraqi insurgents while on 
escort-duty west of Fallujah. As recounted, ``The guards were killed; a 
mob of Iraqis set their cars on fire and hung two of the bodies from a 
bridge. The families of the guards are suing Blackwater for wrongful 
death: They claim the company did not meet its contractual obligation 
to supply two SUVs with three guards per vehicle.''
  Those men went into Fallujah without notifying or seeking the 
approval of the U.S. Marine Corps, then responsible for the security of 
that sector. Tragically those men lost their lives and it is a miracle 
that our own military servicemen--who were ordered in to recover their 
remains--escaped uninjured. More importantly, the regional Marine 
commander was forced to alter his strategy for quelling the insurgency 
to not only recover the remains of the men, but deal with the 
heightened tensions caused by the incident.
  Mr. Speaker, the World Book Dictionary defines a soldier of fortune 
as: ``a man serving or ready to serve as a soldier under any government 
for money, adventure, or pleasure.''
  I cannot help but read and re-read that definition as I examine how 
pay and benefits provided to these private military personnel dwarf 
what we provide our all-volunteer military.
  Guards for private security firms on average, earn $400 to $600 per 
day--or $144,000 to $216,000 in a single year. Tax-free. That's right 
Mr. Speaker, these salaries are tax-free providing that these men 
remain in-country for more than one year. The slain guards for 
Blackwater were earning nearly $1000 a day for an astronomical $365,000 
yearly salary.
  Let's compare that to what we provide the men and women who'' have 
served in our military for six years (not even the one or two years 
that most personnel are in Iraq). A military commissioned officer can 
expect to earn between $100 and $270 a day--for a paltry total of 
$36,000 to $96,000 each year. Enlisted soldiers, those who carry out 
the toughest assignments, are in the most danger and need the most 
support might earn $36,000 in a good year. That is outrageous, Mr. 
Speaker.
  In my hand I hold a solicitation sent to a police officer in my 
Congressional District in Toledo, Ohio. It is from DynCorp 
International LLC and promises an annual compensation of over $120,000 
to perform an ``armed, plainclothes mission'' to ``help the Iraqi 
judicial system organize effective civilian law enforcement agencies.''

  This is what we are dealing with on a daily basis Mr. Speaker. As the 
U.S. attempts to secure the peace in Iraq, thousands of individuals are 
flooding into the country to perform armed, dangerous and complex 
tasks, often with little to no formal or military training.
  A constituent of mine reports that her husband of more than 20 years, 
who moved to Kuwait last year to take a very high-paying job ferrying 
security personnel into (and out of) Iraq, is earning a huge salary and 
may not return to the U.S. He has decided to divorce her for a much 
younger Asian woman who has moved to Kuwait. Both intend to remain in 
the Middle East.
  Mr. Speaker, this is not honor. It is not duty. It is not God. And it 
certainly is not country. It is money. It is adventure. It is pleasure.
  Mr. Speaker, we need to ask ourselves a fundamental question: what is 
a soldier and what is a mercenary? Why are we short-changing, under-
supplying and selling out our own U.S. troops to pay private military 
companies hundreds of millions of dollars so that their professional 
warriors can earn exorbitant salaries?
  I will be in the well of this House (every day if I must) asking 
these questions until they are answered in a satisfactory manner.

                              Mission Iraq


                    annual compensation $120,632.00

                  Foreign Income Tax Exemption Applies

       WORK OVERSEAS!
       NOW HIRING!
       Up to 1,000 civilian police advisors will be deployed to 
     help the Iraqi judicial system organize effective civilian 
     law enforcement agencies.
       Advisors will work with Iraqi criminal justice 
     organizations at the national, provincial and municipal 
     levels to assess threats to public order and mentor personnel 
     at all levels of the Iraqi law enforcement system.
       Contract length is one year. This is an armed, plainclothes 
     mission.
       All lodging, meals, and transportation, logistical, 
     technical and administrative support is provided at no cost 
     to the officer.


                        requirements to qualify

       United States Citizenship.
       Minimum 5 years full time sworn law enforcement experience.
       Actively serving law enforcement officers, or recently 
     separated (within 3 years).
       Unblemished background.
       Excellent health.
       Valid U.S. driver's license.
       Valid U.S. Passport.
       Ability to communicate in English.
       Minimum age of 26.
       Ability to qualify with a 9MM semi-automatic weapon.
       Annual pay package is $120,632.00.
       Resumes should detail specific experience, certifications, 
     specialties, ranks, and assignments.
       Apply today!
                                  ____


                    [From FOXNews.com, July 6, 2005]

                 How Do You Like Your Contractor Money?

                           (By Liza Porteus)

       New York.--For three days, a group of 16 American 
     contractors in Iraq feared they had stumbled into a different 
     world--one where the U.S. military viewed them, and not 
     Islamic extremists, as the enemy.
       The ordeal began May 28 when a group of Marines suspected 
     the contractors for Zapata Engineering (search) of shooting 
     at them and Iraqi civilians in Fallujah. The Marines 
     allegedly bound and roughed up the contractors, who were 
     given orange jumpsuits to wear. They also received a prayer 
     rug and a copy of the Koran (search) and were placed in a 
     cell next to Iraqi insurgent suspects.
       The contractors, eight of whom are former military men, 
     wondered how the Marines supposedly could throw the idea of 
     ``Semper Fi'' out the window and treat fellow Americans so 
     poorly.
       ``If we were terrorists, they would have extradited us so 
     they could have charged us . . . once they cleared us, they 
     should have let us go,'' Pete Ginter, one of the Zapata 
     contractors, told FOXNews.com in a recent interview. ``I 
     think it's some personal vendetta they had against us.''
       Several of the contractors told FOXNews.com the gripe 
     appeared to be financial, stemming from jealousy over the 
     belief that contractors make more money.

[[Page H5717]]

       ``How do you like your contractor money now?'' one Marine 
     barked, according to those contractors interviewed.
       On June 9, a statement from a Marine spokesman said that 
     while detained ``in accordance with standard operation 
     procedures, the Americans were segregated from the rest of 
     the detainee population and, like all security detainees, 
     were treated humanely and respectfully.''
       The statement said the investigation will look into ``all 
     aspects of the incident, as well as the accusations made by 
     the contractors.''
       Manuel Zapata, president of Zapata Engineering, released a 
     statement soon after the incident saying he was ``disturbed'' 
     by the allegations but acknowledged the root cause likely was 
     a ``misunderstanding by people who are living and working in 
     an intense and stressful situation.''
       He added: ``At the same time, we are also disturbed over 
     reported accounts by our personnel of their treatment while 
     in Marine detention.''


                       `blue-on-white' antagonism

       The Zapata crew was part of a community of about 120,000 
     private foreign contractors in Iraq, many working side by 
     side with U.S. military personnel to rebuild a country 
     virtually destroyed by 30 years of neglect and war.
       These contractors say they wholeheartedly stand behind 
     President Bush and the U.S. military in the mission to put 
     Iraq on the road toward democracy. But they say a few bad 
     apples aren't helping in those efforts.
       ``It seems there's a lot more American-on-American 
     [conflict] right now--we call it `blue on white'--but then 
     again there's a lot of military people who are our closest 
     friends . . . so it's a catch-22,'' said Robert Shaver, 
     another detained Zapata contractor.
       Among the contractors are about 20,000 who work for private 
     security companies, some of whom have come under criticism 
     for bad behavior. Witnesses have been quoted telling stories 
     about caravans of intimidating contractors driving fast 
     through Iraqi streets in their SUVs with guns hanging out the 
     window.
       Marine Col. John Toolan, who was the military commander of 
     the area that included Fallujah when four private security 
     contractors employed by Blackwater (search) were ambushed and 
     murdered last year, told PBS' ``Frontline'' that the part of 
     the problem is that the military and contractors have 
     different motivations in a dangerous environment.
       ``We have a tendency to want to be a little bit more sure 
     about operating in an environment,'' he said. ``Whereas I 
     think some of the contractors are motivated by the financial 
     remuneration and the fact that they probably want to get 
     someplace from point A to point B quickly, their tendency 
     [is] to have a little more risk. So yes, we're at odds. But 
     we can work it out.''
       Contractors who were once in the armed forces themselves, 
     like Zapata's Ginter and Matt Raiche, say they went over to 
     Iraq as private citizens to help pay the bills back home.
       ``I didn't want a dead-end job, I didn't want to live 
     paycheck to paycheck'' and live off loans, Ginter told 
     FOXNews.com about why he became a contractor.


                     A Case of They Said, They Said

       The Zapata contractors were detained in Fallujah (search) 
     after the Marines said the contractors sprayed gunfire at 
     them and a group of Iraqi civilians from an armored convoy 
     twice earlier that day. The crew was in Iraq destroying enemy 
     ammunition and explosives.
       The contractors say they have proof that they weren't near 
     the position where the Marines claim they were shot at 
     earlier in the day and were actually dropping off ordnances 
     at Camp Victory at the time. Several told FOXNews.com in 
     interviews that sign-in logs can corroborate their story and 
     they said they have receipts from a restaurant and other 
     places they stopped at during the time in question. Plus, the 
     contractors say the Marines' description of the convoy 
     doesn't match the vehicles they were driving.
       Ginter and Raiche say the problems began with a flat tire. 
     Their group was changing a tire that blew out after their 
     driver didn't make a turn wide enough to avoid a spike strip 
     when a group of Marines came out and said they wanted to go 
     back to their compound and talk.
       The Marines said two rounds of ammunition had hit near 
     where they were stationed. When the Zapata crew asked to see 
     exactly where the rounds hit, they said they couldn't get a 
     straight answer.
       The contractors said they fired warning shots into the 
     ground--standard procedure--to prevent a suspicious vehicle 
     from approaching their convoy but that they never aimed at 
     Marines or civilians.
       The Marines eventually brought the Zapata contractors to a 
     compound where they were put in 6-by-6 foot concrete cells. 
     When they asked for an attorney, they were told to ``shut 
     up,'' the contractors claim. They were detained there for 
     three days.
       ``I know for a fact with our situation, the first 36 hours 
     we were detained, there was a lot of tension in the air and a 
     lot of animosity toward us contractors for the money we 
     make,'' Shaver, who is now back in the United States and 
     living in upstate New York, told FOXNews.com.
       Ginter claims that on his way back from being escorted from 
     the bathroom, one of the Marines ``physically forces me on 
     the ground, banged my knees on the ground . . . he kicked my 
     ankle into the cross position,'' and took off his 
     cross necklace. He also claims the Marine squeezed his 
     testicles ``so hard I almost puked'' and threatened to 
     unleash a dog on him if he moved.
       ``Seriously, I thought someone had died, I thought some way 
     they had connected a death to us and I thought . . . maybe it 
     was a joke, maybe it was training and we didn't know about 
     it,'' Ginter added.
       Raiche said he had his wedding ring and jewelry removed and 
     was also threatened with the dog. He also said he heard one 
     Marine heckle, ``how does it feel to make that contractors' 
     money now?'' A female Marine was taking pictures of the 
     proceedings, they said. The contractors had blacked-out 
     goggles placed over their heads when they were put on a bus 
     from the original detention site to another one near 
     Fallujah, where Iraqi insurgent suspects are also kept. 
     Ginter said there was a small slit in the goggles that he 
     could see out of.
       ``I watched as my fellow brothers were thrown to the 
     ground, physically abused . . . knees, necks, tossed to the 
     ground with the female taking pictures,'' Ginter said. ``It 
     was like going into the Twilight Zone.''
       Ginter and Raiche said only five or six members of their 
     group were interviewed when investigators from agencies like 
     the FBI showed up. They said they asked for a lawyer, to make 
     a phone call, to contact the Red Cross, Amnesty International 
     and others but were denied such requests. They claim about 
     four Marines, however, were in ``total awe--they could not 
     believe what was happening,'' Ginter said.


                    Investigating the Investigations

       Neither Ginter nor Raiche have been questioned by military 
     investigators since they returned from Iraq. Mark Schopper, 
     the Nevada-based lawyer for some of the contractors in 
     question, said he doesn't believe anyone in the group has 
     been. The Justice Department also reportedly is looking into 
     the incident.
       Gail Rosenberg, a public relations consultant for Zapata, 
     told FOXNews.com on Thursday that the internal investigation 
     from Zapata Engineering is still ongoing. Rosenberg added 
     that ``there has been no direct contact'' between Zapata and 
     the government on the investigation since the original Zapata 
     statement was released after the incident.
       The military has had little to say about the incident since 
     it first happened. Lt. Col. David Lapan, a Marine spokesman, 
     issued a statement saying the Naval Criminal Investigative 
     Service would handle the investigation.
       Lapan suggested that the Marines were following procedure 
     in how they handled the contractors. And while Lapan said all 
     charges would be investigated, he added ``thus far we have 
     seen nothing to substantiate the claims.''
       When contacted by FOX News for an update on the 
     investigation last week, Lapan said in an e-mail exchange: 
     ``No new developments on the military side. The investigation 
     continues.''
       So far, even though some of the Zapata contractors say they 
     haven't been contacted by the NCIS, investigators have spoken 
     to personnel with the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.
       ``As far we know, it's still ongoing, we don't have 
     anything new'' on the investigation, said Kim Gillespie, a 
     spokeswoman for the U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center 
     in Huntsville, Ala., which specializes in ordnance and 
     explosives and administered the Zapata contract. ``They 
     didn't give us any indication as to when they're going to 
     wrap this up . . . I will assume we will be made aware when 
     this investigation is complete.''
       Coincidentally, Gillespie said Zapata's contract for the 
     explosives work it was doing in Iraq expired Thursday; that 
     contract date was predetermined a year ago, however, and has 
     nothing to do with the alleged incident involving the 
     Marines.


                          Getting on With Life

       After the Fallujah incident, the military gave each of the 
     16 contractors a letter barring them from further operations 
     in Al Anbar province in western Iraq.
       ``The contractors clearly, without doubt, experienced 
     physical and psychological abuse and have suffered serious 
     monetary damages,'' Schopper said. ``They lost their jobs, 
     some of them their careers. . . . There are serious, serious 
     civil rights violations.''
       Schopper said that since he went public with information 
     regarding credit card receipts and time logs that show his 
     clients weren't in the area of the first shootings at the 
     time in question, the Marines have changed their story as to 
     who they think shot at them.
       He has not yet filed any formal complaints with the 
     military because, ``until we get a better feel of what's 
     going on, it doesn't behoove us to show any of our cards.''
       ``We're hoping in fact that this is cleared up without any 
     legal action and hopefully the investigation, if they are in 
     fact doing one, is in fact legitimate and will clear our 
     guys,'' Schopper added.
       Until then, several of the contractors said their lives 
     have been at a virtual standstill.
       ``There's not much we can do'' so far as work is concerned, 
     Ginter said, noting that many government jobs he's qualified 
     for involve high-level security clearances, which involve 
     background checks. ``Right now, with this blot on my 
     background, it ruins everything, even if I was to work for 
     the post

[[Page H5718]]

     office . . . unless I want to work at McDonald's in a job.''
       Raiche, a former firefighter before heading to Iraq, said 
     he couldn't even get that job back, nor a job in law 
     enforcement, until his name is cleared.
       ``I have guys in the military right now who were personal 
     friends of mine,'' Ginter said. ``I have no resentment toward 
     the military. I want this off my record.''

                          ____________________