Pentagon Letter Complicates Blackwater Case

Source: WP/AP

The Pentagon wrote in 2007 that Blackwater Worldwide contractors in Iraq are not subject to U.S. civilian criminal laws, a position that undercuts the Justice Department's effort to prosecute five Blackwater security guards on manslaughter charges.

Defense contractors can be prosecuted in U.S. courts for crimes committed overseas, but because of a legal loophole, contractors for other agencies can face charges only if their work assignments supported the Defense Department.

Blackwater, the largest security contractor in Iraq, works for the State Department. Five of its guards face manslaughter charges for a 2007 shooting that killed 17 Iraqis.

Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England wrote late that year to Rep. David E. Price (D-N.C.) that the contractors "were not engaged in employment in support of the DoD mission" and that therefore federal prosecutors lack jurisdiction to charge the Blackwater guards.

Pentagon spokesman Chris Isleib said Monday that England's view remains that of the department.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/02/AR2009020203525.html?wpisrc=newsletter

that may or not be based on law. How could this be binding on the DOJ and forestall any legal probes?

was authorized and approved by the Pentagon, that it was part of Blackwater's duties as contractor labor assigned to the DOD?

I cannot in my mind imagine a situation over there (remember Ive been there as a soldier) where I or my squad would kill 17 people and wound many others, in one place, at one time. Its crazy.

SGT PASTO

:patriot:

sorry, you pentagon guys, but as much as it might disappoint you, you don't make the laws and you aren't above them. I know, I know, it really does suck, but that's the breaks. the days of your little fiefdom are over. See you all at Leavenworth. Cheers!

is worth nothing -

these people are not the definitive answer givers and cannot absolve anyone of their criminal activities

The original assertion of WMD's in Iraq would not require the State Department as support personnel. But "Plan B" to spread democracy to Iraq would require the support of the State Department. If there was no need for state department support. Then why are they even there? As we stormed Normandy. We didn't have the State Department bringing up the rear on those beaches. We weren't going to fall back on calculators and paperwork if the guns and bombs didn't work. So we need to nail down the Pentagon on which of the two missions was the actual mission. We are all well aware of which of the two was nothing more than a dodge.

I tried for years to get this looked at! I wrote to all my Senators, and legislatures and even wrote to McCain back in 2004 before I realized he was such a joke! They all wrote back to me - We don't think this is a problem. Right! The new AG must fight to bring back the laws of our land for all so that this does not happen again!

It doesn't matter jack fucking shit what the Pentagon says regarding who may be prosecuted.

It only matters what the court rules.

Then the Iraqis would be entirely justified to run a Black Op inside the USA, kidnap these criminals, covertly ship them to Iraq (or anywhere they choose), and keep them in isolation/incommunicado without charges for however long they wish to.

I Obama insists he has the right to do this, then so does each and every nation on the planet.