Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


rulemylife -> Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 6:06:26 PM)

Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out

BAGHDAD – Iraqis seeking justice for 17 people shot dead at a Baghdad intersection responded with bitterness and outrage Friday at a U.S. judge's decision to throw out a case against a Blackwater security team accused in the killings.

The Iraqi government vowed to pursue the case, which became a source of contention between the U.S. and the Iraqi government. Many Iraqis also held up the judge's decision as proof of what they'd long believed: U.S. security contractors were above the law.

"There is no justice," said Bura Sadoun Ismael, who was wounded by two bullets and shrapnel during the shooting. "I expected the American court would side with the Blackwater security guards who committed a massacre in Nisoor Square."

What happened on Nisoor Square on Sept. 16, 2007, raised Iraqi concerns about their sovereignty because Iraqi officials were powerless to do anything to the Blackwater employees who had immunity from local prosecution.

The shootings also highlighted the degree to which the U.S. relied on private contractors during the Iraq conflict. Blackwater had been hired by the State Department to protect U.S. diplomats in Iraq. The guards said they were ambushed at a busy intersection in western Baghdad, but U.S. prosecutors and many Iraqis said the Blackwater guards let loose an unprovoked attack on civilians using machine guns and grenades.

"Investigations conducted by specialized Iraqi authorities confirmed unequivocally that the guards of Blackwater committed the crime of murder and broke the rules by using arms without the existence of any threat obliging them to use force," Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said in a statement Friday.

He did not elaborate on what steps the government planned to take to pursue the case. The shootings led the Iraqi government to strip the North Carolina-based company of its license to work in the country, and Blackwater replaced its management and changed its name to Xe Services.

Five guards from the company were charged in the case with manslaughter and weapons violations. The charges carried mandatory 30-year prison terms, but a federal judge Friday dismissed all the charges.

U.S. District Judge Ricardo Urbina cited repeated government missteps in the investigation, saying that prosecutors built their case on sworn statements that the guards had given with the idea that they would be immune from prosecution.





TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 6:16:08 PM)

Yep.  It seems the prosecutors botched the preparation of the case, relying heavily on inadmissible evidence.  An omen of what will happen when we try to put terrorists who have been held and interrogated outside the civilian system on trial in New York, perhaps?




kittinSol -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 6:45:56 PM)

Iraq to sue Blackwater guards.

Since the American justice system failed the victims...




AnimusRex -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 6:49:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Yep.  It seems the prosecutors botched the preparation of the case, relying heavily on inadmissible evidence.  An omen of what will happen when we try to put terrorists who have been held and interrogated outside the civilian system on trial in New York, perhaps?


You make a very good point.

The Blackwater guards should have been imprisoned indefinitely without charges, trial, or representation, to keep them from abusing our criminal justice system and getting off on a techncality.

See what happens when you trust in crap like "due process" and the "rule of law'?

Bet it was a liberal judge who let the criminals go. Maybe Bill O'Reilly can ambush him on the street and ask him about the case.




DarkSteven -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 6:50:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

Iraq to sue Blackwater guards.

Since the American justice system failed the victims...


Wow... this is an attempt by the Iraqi government to take control of the situation away from the US.  It should prove interesting, especially since Iraq didn't object to the US trying them initially.




Jeffff -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 6:59:15 PM)

There is a pretty good, not excellent, but pretty good book on this. By Jeremy Scahill.

The Author does have a bias, but nonetheless presents a fair amount of documented evidence that Blackwater Ltd.
operated well beyond the guidelines of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.


Jeff




Real0ne -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 7:11:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Yep.  It seems the prosecutors botched the preparation of the case, relying heavily on inadmissible evidence.  An omen of what will happen when we try to put terrorists who have been held and interrogated outside the civilian system on trial in New York, perhaps?



on what do you base that?




TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 7:33:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimusRex

You make a very good point.

The Blackwater guards should have been imprisoned indefinitely without charges, trial, or representation, to keep them from abusing our criminal justice system and getting off on a techncality.

See what happens when you trust in crap like "due process" and the "rule of law'?

Bet it was a liberal judge who let the criminals go. Maybe Bill O'Reilly can ambush him on the street and ask him about the case.



A little over the top with the foaming at the mouth, don't you think, Rex?  How about, I don't think the civilian system is up to the task of trying cases where the crime occured during military action.  I think there is a good reason for knee-jerk bashers to oppose such a venue as well, but I haven't found a lefty yet who could spot it.

Let's call a spade a spade here.  These are mercenaries.  Their use is a direct result of tying the hands of our sworn servicemen with politically correct rules of engagement.  We just don't have a good mechanism in place to handle a case like this.   




Real0ne -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 7:42:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimusRex

You make a very good point.

The Blackwater guards should have been imprisoned indefinitely without charges, trial, or representation, to keep them from abusing our criminal justice system and getting off on a techncality.

See what happens when you trust in crap like "due process" and the "rule of law'?

Bet it was a liberal judge who let the criminals go. Maybe Bill O'Reilly can ambush him on the street and ask him about the case.



A little over the top with the foaming at the mouth, don't you think, Rex?  How about, I don't think the civilian system is up to the task of trying cases where the crime occured during military action.  I think there is a good reason for knee-jerk bashers to oppose such a venue as well, but I haven't found a lefty yet who could spot it.

Let's call a spade a spade here.  These are mercenaries.  Their use is a direct result of tying the hands of our sworn servicemen with politically correct rules of engagement.  We just don't have a good mechanism in place to handle a case like this.   


yeh but rich...

what is the reason.

Again you said everything but the reason you believe civilian courts for ______ cant handle it.

ps: you are th eone opposing the venue




DarkSteven -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 7:46:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Yep.  It seems the prosecutors botched the preparation of the case, relying heavily on inadmissible evidence.  An omen of what will happen when we try to put terrorists who have been held and interrogated outside the civilian system on trial in New York, perhaps?


on what do you base that?



I'll take this one, Rich.

Evidence against the alleged terrorists has been obtained by torture, which is inadmissible in US courts.  I suspect that much if not all of the remaining evidence is from hearsay, and the ones who made the claims may not be reachable.  Also inadmissible.




Real0ne -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 8:16:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Yep.  It seems the prosecutors botched the preparation of the case, relying heavily on inadmissible evidence.  An omen of what will happen when we try to put terrorists who have been held and interrogated outside the civilian system on trial in New York, perhaps?


on what do you base that?



I'll take this one, Rich.

Evidence against the alleged terrorists has been obtained by torture, which is inadmissible in US courts.  I suspect that much if not all of the remaining evidence is from hearsay, and the ones who made the claims may not be reachable.  Also inadmissible.



so do you guys believe that is admissinble in a military tribunal?




TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 9:18:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

so do you guys believe that is admissinble in a military tribunal?




I don't think anybody said such a thing, Real.  However, a military proceeding is going to be more competent to look into a combat situation.  Situations involving mercenaries under contract to the US government might require a whole new set of rules and procedures.  It's quite a mess.  The incompetence here is pretty plain to see, though.

Trying terrorists is a whole different ball of string




InvisibleBlack -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 9:28:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

so do you guys believe that is admissinble in a military tribunal?




I don't think anybody said such a thing, Real.  However, a military proceeding is going to be more competent to look into a combat situation.  Situations involving mercenaries under contract to the US government might require a whole new set of rules and procedures.  It's quite a mess.  The incompetence here is pretty plain to see, though.

Trying terrorists is a whole different ball of string


I have to assume that before being able to work in a security or military context for a U. S..Embassy in a foreign nation that any company has to sign some sort of agreement or contract which specifies both what behavior and actions are acceptable and how disputes, contract violations and breaches of U. S. or international law will be handled. I'd be very curious to see what those contracts say as regards violations of the U. S. military's rules of engagement by mercenary forces in an embassy's employ.




pahunkboy -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 9:49:51 PM)

well- no law in theory does not exist.  they then will look at "international law", in theory...




Sanity -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 9:56:29 PM)


In the United States don't embassy personnel from foreign countries enjoy full diplomatic immunity?

quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack

I have to assume that before being able to work in a security or military context for a U. S..Embassy in a foreign nation that any company has to sign some sort of agreement or contract which specifies both what behavior and actions are acceptable and how disputes, contract violations and breaches of U. S. or international law will be handled. I'd be very curious to see what those contracts say as regards violations of the U. S. military's rules of engagement by mercenary forces in an embassy's employ.




InvisibleBlack -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 10:06:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


In the United States don't embassy personnel from foreign countries enjoy full diplomatic immunity?

quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack

I have to assume that before being able to work in a security or military context for a U. S..Embassy in a foreign nation that any company has to sign some sort of agreement or contract which specifies both what behavior and actions are acceptable and how disputes, contract violations and breaches of U. S. or international law will be handled. I'd be very curious to see what those contracts say as regards violations of the U. S. military's rules of engagement by mercenary forces in an embassy's employ.



Embassy personnel definitely enjoy full diplomatic immunity. That doesn't mean that embassy guards are immune to violations of their own county's laws. Some time ago a friend of mine was a marine stationed guarding an embassy in Morocco. There was an incident which resulted in an exchange of gunfire (he got a part of his left ring finger shot off during the incident). He and his squad mates were brought before a military court to determine the appropriateness of their actions (and they were exonerated, btw).

Had it turned out that there actions were not correct - if they had for instance fired on a crowd of civilians without any provocation - they would have been court martialed and sentenced under the UMCJ - not for any violation of Morocco's laws but for violations of the Uniform Military Code of Justice of the United States of America.

I cannot imagine that if those marines were replaced with contractors hired from a private firm, that there would be no regulations in place governing their conduct and how such incidents were to be handled.

(My friend got a fair amount of teasing, btw. For a long time he was known both online and off as "Frodo of the Nine Fingers".)




Real0ne -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 10:36:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

so do you guys believe that is admissinble in a military tribunal?




I don't think anybody said such a thing, Real.  However, a military proceeding is going to be more competent to look into a combat situation.  Situations involving mercenaries under contract to the US government might require a whole new set of rules and procedures.  It's quite a mess.  The incompetence here is pretty plain to see, though.

Trying terrorists is a whole different ball of string


well my question remained unanswered.

Not at all....

The proper jurisdiction and venue would have been in iraq in an iraqi tribunal.

Why would you desire a military tribunal to try  civilians? 

Mercernaries are civilians.

Further what crime is attached to the word "terrorist"?  (one who frightens another)




Sanity -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 10:42:12 PM)



But they're also embassy personnel, even if they're contractors - possibly with immunity. And it was essentially martial law there at the time.

I'm not claiming I have the answers, its just a hell of a mess. I really doubt that their contracts covered this eventuality and if they did how legally binding they are, or which courts should have jurisdiction.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

so do you guys believe that is admissinble in a military tribunal?




I don't think anybody said such a thing, Real.  However, a military proceeding is going to be more competent to look into a combat situation.  Situations involving mercenaries under contract to the US government might require a whole new set of rules and procedures.  It's quite a mess.  The incompetence here is pretty plain to see, though.

Trying terrorists is a whole different ball of string


well my question remained unanswered.

Not at all....

The proper jurisdiction and venue would have been in iraq in an iraqi tribunal.

Why would you desire a military tribunal to try  civilians? 

Mercernaries are civilians.

Further what crime is attached to the word "terrorist"?  (one who frightens another)




Real0ne -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/1/2010 11:04:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

well my question remained unanswered.

Not at all....

The proper jurisdiction and venue would have been in iraq in an iraqi tribunal.

Why would you desire a military tribunal to try  civilians? 

Mercernaries are civilians.

Further what crime is attached to the word "terrorist"?  (one who frightens another)



But they're also embassy personnel, even if they're contractors - possibly with immunity. And it was essentially martial law there at the time.

I'm not claiming I have the answers, its just a hell of a mess. I really doubt that their contracts covered this eventuality and if they did how legally binding they are, or which courts should have jurisdiction.


well the us cant grant immunity on iraqi turf any more than I can grant someone immunity to operate in your house.  so if that is true it woul dhave had to come from the iraqis.

martial law does not grant any special immunity or authority to murder people either.

the matter involves murdered iraqis so its an iraqi matter in iraqi jurisdiction.

No amount of us interference will change the way it is "supposed" to happen.




Arpig -> RE: Iraqis outraged as Blackwater case thrown out (1/2/2010 1:59:40 AM)

I'm with RealOne on this, it should have been an Iraqi court




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625