Blackwater: Did anyone hear this???

[Max Raker]

[ QUOTE ]
"This line of work is the only job in the world where everyone who has never stood in your shoes can make better judgements, conduct better investigations, write better reports, ...

[/ QUOTE ]

ORLY??????

[ QUOTE ]
I've become convinced any journalist who happens to be in Iraq will take down any and every story any Iraqi civilian tells them as they walk down the streets concerning the US Military, or Blackwater, publish it verbatim, without even going through the basic journalistic process of finding three sources which agree before publishing, then call the street story "fact." Then the same journalist will become incredulous when the State Dept actually investigates and says "uhhh No."

[/ QUOTE ]

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]

This isn't the big problem you make it out to be Midge.

However,

While this system seems to be working for ordinary military personnel, in that the sense that things get investigated and transgressors punished by their own parent nation's laws(its not perfect, but things rarely are) there have been some unfortunate specific incidents with immunity granted to Blackwater personnel.

Like I have said before I'm in not in the anti or pro camp, I am however always of the opinion that seemingly weird practices should be questioned. And these qualifiy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be very interested to know several things.

1) Has ANY security contractor been charged in The US Courts for a crime comitted as a contractor?

2) What jurisdiction do The US Federal Courts hold over alleged crimes committed outside the US or it's territories? Unlike uniformed soldiers, sailors, and marines which are subject to the UCMJ for the time of the service, regardless of location, these contractors remain private citizens conducting services outside the US. Should one of them be charged, would it not be a simple issue for a competent lawyer to get the charges dismissed based on lack of jurisdiction?

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I highlighted the important parts. To answer my own question, so you don't have to make up BS, they are not, nor have they ever been, immune from US law. Iraqi law, yes. US law, no.

[/ QUOTE ]

So not immune to US law, but they are immune to the sovereign country's laws the US is supposedly liberating??? Are you for real?

[/ QUOTE ]

MidGe, I'm not saying it's right or it's wrong. I'm saying it is pure dishonesty to say "These guys are immune from ALL prosecution." That is a lie, nothing more, nothing less.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"This line of work is the only job in the world where everyone who has never stood in your shoes can make better judgements, conduct better investigations, write better reports, ...

[/ QUOTE ]

ORLY??????

[ QUOTE ]
I've become convinced any journalist who happens to be in Iraq will take down any and every story any Iraqi civilian tells them as they walk down the streets concerning the US Military, or Blackwater, publish it verbatim, without even going through the basic journalistic process of finding three sources which agree before publishing, then call the street story "fact." Then the same journalist will become incredulous when the State Dept actually investigates and says "uhhh No."

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

You misquoted me.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd be very interested to know several things.

1) Has ANY security contractor been charged in The US Courts for a crime comitted as a contractor?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but then, there has never been a need for one. Once the State investigation clears the agent, they are returned to work.

[ QUOTE ]
2) What jurisdiction do The US Federal Courts hold over alleged crimes committed outside the US or it's territories? Unlike uniformed soldiers, sailors, and marines which are subject to the UCMJ for the time of the service, regardless of location, these contractors remain private citizens conducting services outside the US. Should one of them be charged, would it not be a simple issue for a competent lawyer to get the charges dismissed based on lack of jurisdiction?

[/ QUOTE ]

Possibly. The difference in myself and many people like MidGe is that I am interested in the truth, not quick, surefire ways to gain the easist, worst possible indictment.

[Max Raker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"This line of work is the only job in the world where everyone who has never stood in your shoes can make better judgements, conduct better investigations, write better reports, ...

[/ QUOTE ]

ORLY??????

[ QUOTE ]
I've become convinced any journalist who happens to be in Iraq will take down any and every story any Iraqi civilian tells them as they walk down the streets concerning the US Military, or Blackwater, publish it verbatim, without even going through the basic journalistic process of finding three sources which agree before publishing, then call the street story "fact." Then the same journalist will become incredulous when the State Dept actually investigates and says "uhhh No."

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

You misquoted me.

[/ QUOTE ]

How?

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd be very interested to know several things.

1) Has ANY security contractor been charged in The US Courts for a crime comitted as a contractor?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but then, there has never been a need for one. Once the State investigation clears the agent, they are returned to work.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. For the moment, we can assume that there hasn't been a need for one. Fair enough. I'm willing to aquiesce, for at least the purposes of this argument, that by hiring super highly trained, professional operators, Blackwater is less likely than almost all other armed combatants to act unprofessionally.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2) What jurisdiction do The US Federal Courts hold over alleged crimes committed outside the US or it's territories? Unlike uniformed soldiers, sailors, and marines which are subject to the UCMJ for the time of the service, regardless of location, these contractors remain private citizens conducting services outside the US. Should one of them be charged, would it not be a simple issue for a competent lawyer to get the charges dismissed based on lack of jurisdiction?

[/ QUOTE ]

Possibly. The difference in myself and many people like MidGe is that I am interested in the truth, not quick, surefire ways to gain the easist, worst possible indictment.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. I'm not looking for earth shattering largescale indictments or wholesale vindications either. But if the stated mechanism for accountability for the contractors is not tested wrt legal viability, would that not default it to unaccountable? Which both you and I agree is NOT a good situation.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd be very interested to know several things.

1) Has ANY security contractor been charged in The US Courts for a crime comitted as a contractor?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but then, there has never been a need for one. Once the State investigation clears the agent, they are returned to work.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. For the moment, we can assume that there hasn't been a need for one. Fair enough. I'm willing to aquiesce, for at least the purposes of this argument, that by hiring super highly trained, professional operators, Blackwater is less likely than almost all other armed combatants to act unprofessionally.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2) What jurisdiction do The US Federal Courts hold over alleged crimes committed outside the US or it's territories? Unlike uniformed soldiers, sailors, and marines which are subject to the UCMJ for the time of the service, regardless of location, these contractors remain private citizens conducting services outside the US. Should one of them be charged, would it not be a simple issue for a competent lawyer to get the charges dismissed based on lack of jurisdiction?

[/ QUOTE ]

Possibly. The difference in myself and many people like MidGe is that I am interested in the truth, not quick, surefire ways to gain the easist, worst possible indictment.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. I'm not looking for earth shattering largescale indictments or wholesale vindications either. But if the stated mechanism for accountability for the contractors is not tested wrt legal viability, would that not default it to unaccountable? Which both you and I agree is NOT a good situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can agree that some type of legal oversight should be there, just for the sake of it being there, but I think it should be very clear that, in this situation, turning American operators over to the hands of an unstable foreign government is not the answer.

Personally, I'd really like to see the US Military do it. They have a true knowledge of combat, and can better judge the appropriateness of response.

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]

Personally, I'd really like to see the US Military do it. They have a true knowledge of combat, and can better judge the appropriateness of response.

[/ QUOTE ]

The UCMJ is particularly harsh and the Court's Martial Process is far less open and free then a civilian court. I don't think the operators themselves would be too keen on accepting US Military jurisidicton. What about foreign operators Like Brit or Aussie former SAS guys?

PS I agree that unstable and faction heavy Iraqi authorities are close to the least viable avenue of oversight.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Personally, I'd really like to see the US Military do it. They have a true knowledge of combat, and can better judge the appropriateness of response.

[/ QUOTE ]

The UCMJ is particularly harsh and the Court's Martial Process is far less open and free then a civilian court. I don't think the operators themselves would be too keen on accepting US Military jurisidicton. What about foreign operators Like Brit or Aussie former SAS guys?

PS I agree that unstable and faction heavy Iraqi authorities are close to the least viable avenue of oversight.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I can't speak for the British and Aussie SAS guys, the American operators would probably accept the Military process, in spite of its flaws, as it is a system they would all be accustomed to.

(I'm not really posting this for you NTB, but for others who's comments have deemed it appropriate that it be said)
It is important to remember, alot of these operators are working in Iraq right now because it's the only job they've ever known. Most of them graduated high school at 18, enlisted in the military, and left the military and went straight to Blackwater.