Senior U.S. Military Official Faults Blackwater In The Shooting Of 11 Iraqi Civilians
Senior U.S. Military Official Faults Blackwater In The Shooting Of 11 Iraqi Civilians
A senior U.S. military official tells the Washington Post that the Sept. 16 firing incident at Nissor Square involving Blackwater USA was unprovoked and that the 11 civilian victims were unarmed:
“It was obviously excessive, it was obviously wrong,” said the U.S. military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the incident remains the subject of several investigations. “The civilians that were fired upon, they didn’t have any weapons to fire back at them. And none of the IP (Iraqi Police) or any of the local security forces fired back at them.”
Military reports also “appear to corroborate the Iraqi government’s contention that Blackwater was at fault.”
Separately, an Iraqi investigation “recommends that the security guards face trial in Iraqi courts and that the company compensate the victims.” A panel led by the Iraqi Defense Minister said that “Blackwater guards sprayed western Baghdad’s Nisoor Square with gunfire Sept. 16 without provocation.”
ThinkProgress reported on Monday that the FBI has been sent to Baghdad to conduct an investigation at the request of the State Department. Yesterday, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack “hinted…that Blackwater guards could face legal proceedings,” and that the FBI investigation was “a hedge against the possibility that an investigation leads to the point where there may need to be a referral” to U.S. prosecutors.
The U.S. Congress is also looking into the matter of private security firms. Yesterday the House of Representatives voted “to bring private security firms in Iraq out of legal limbo” by making security firms stationed in combat zones “subject to action in US courts.” Private contractors have not been subject to prosecution under a directive issued by Paul Bremer, shortly before leaving his post as head of the provisional authority in Iraq.
– Dave de Give
This post was submitted through our Blog Fellows program. Make your own contribution — and get paid for it — by clicking here.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
40 Responses to “Senior U.S. Military Official Faults Blackwater In The Shooting Of 11 Iraqi Civilians”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Nicely done, Dave. I hope Congress will keep on top of this one beyond the Nissor Square massacre and truly do something to stop these mercenary outfits.
October 5th, 2007 at 10:54 amcountdown to repugs trashing the military in 3…2…111
October 5th, 2007 at 10:56 amWhen Chickenhawks Attack
by Brandon Friedman
Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 06:18:23 AM PDT
promoted by DemFromCT
Earlier this week, someone on the Republican side of the aisle put out the word: The best way to discredit combat veterans who disagree with the President’s policies is to insinuate (or directly say) that they are being “used” by the nefarious Left, that they are being “fed” information, and that they can’t think for themselves.
The idea is to suggest that common soldiers couldn’t possibly formulate the complex, nuanced, and knowledgeable opinions on military and foreign policy needed to compete on the national scene—at least not to the extent that Beltway sophisticates like Joe Watkins can. Or hypocritical draft-dodgers like Rush Limbaugh.
Yes, unfortunately, it’s come to this. Republican strategists and radio hosts haven’t had a leg to stand on all week with the Rush Limbaugh suicide bomber hoopla. So when we at VoteVets.org (and other media organizations) have come after them, they’ve had to fall back on accusing us of being ignorant simpletons. I’d like to share a few examples with you.
* Brandon Friedman’s diary :: Permalink ::
* There’s more… (262 comments)
too late - as seen on daily kos they already have started to trash the military
October 5th, 2007 at 10:57 amI like the use of the term “faults”, not “charges” or “accuses”, but “faults”, likes it was a boo-boo and the penalty of murdering 11 civilians will be a slap-on-the-wrist.
October 5th, 2007 at 10:59 amWhen our civilian contractors are no longer able to cannot kill innocent Iraqis then the terrorists have won.
October 5th, 2007 at 10:59 ambob h, I wish I hadn’t gone to read that diary. I’m in a really bad mood now.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:03 amIf a foreign country contracted with a quasi-military organization to provide security within the United States borders, and if that same organization killed civilians…. what would we be calling it?
October 5th, 2007 at 11:04 amThese cowboys should have to face an Iraqi judge. Let’s show Bush’s private army what Iraqis have learned about democracy. If we’re over there trying to support the Iraqi Gov’t and it’s people, then we have no right to bring these loose cannons back home for trial in America. Being hung by their necks or languishing in an Iraqi prison might go a long way in keeping some of these stormtroopers in check. Perhaps they might actually think before just blasting away at unarmed families.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:04 amThe big question being, Why do we have lots of unaccountable, heavily armed thugs running around in Iraq? I thought private armies were typically illegal in the US.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:04 amyes, good job Dave!
…
with TP’s load lightened somewhat, maybe they could use that time to
thin out the mindless trooll droppings that abound…
i’m sure the commenters have been clicking that “report abuse” button!
October 5th, 2007 at 11:04 am… and ignoring the stoopidity… right?
ugh…
Nice action portrait of O. Bigpoot
October 5th, 2007 at 11:05 amraynman sez:
The police.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:07 ambob h, I wish I hadn’t gone to read that diary. I’m in a really bad mood now.
Comment by Candyce — October 5, 2007 @ 11:03 am
sorry candyce…
October 5th, 2007 at 11:08 amIf a foreign country contracted with a quasi-military organization to provide security within the United States borders, and if that same organization killed civilians…. what would we be calling it?
Comment by raynman — October 5, 2007 @ 11:04 am
i know my community would simply be using a tractor to cover their (contractors) dead bodies in a pit- wed hush about it and not call them anyhting.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:09 amDon’t forget to add some Lye to keep the smell down Bob.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:15 am1999 incident of Chevron using a private army to harass opponents of their business practices there.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12532
And if you ask how this is relevant, remember that Condoleezza Rice, now the person overseeing these Blackwater contracts, was sitting on the Board of Chevron at the time.
Latest news from two months ago that Chevron will be tried in US court for these deaths.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:17 amhttp://allafrica.com/stories/200708160007.html
No word if Condi is going to have to testify on the hiring, use and oversight of private armies in the trial.
lye or plant corn….corn grows real good on old battlefields.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:17 amwhere are the trolls?
October 5th, 2007 at 11:18 ampopping their medications probably
October 5th, 2007 at 11:21 am“It was obviously excessive, it was obviously wrong,†said the U.S. military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the incident remains the subject of several investigations.
Dude, its called cold blooded MURDER!
October 5th, 2007 at 11:22 amwhere are the trolls?
Comment by duus — October 5, 2007 @ 11:18 am
Waiting for Rush to tell them what to think.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:22 amprobably schizing b/c they didnt receive the talking point indicating soldiers = bad now.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:22 amMilitary needs to take out Blackwater before there are any more mysterious US military assinations.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:38 ampopping their medications probably
Comment by bob h — October 5, 2007 @ 11:21 am
Trolls med up via suppository…
October 5th, 2007 at 11:45 amIf a foreign country contracted with a quasi-military organization to provide security within the United States borders, and if that same organization killed civilians…. what would we be calling it?
Comment by raynman — October 5, 2007 @ 11:04 am
Unlawful enemy combatants? Hmm, can the Iraqis legally claim that Blackwater mercenaries are unlawful enemy combatants and send them to their own version of GITMO?
Oh no, they can’t, thanks to Bremerm who legitimized their presence in Iraq and put them outside of Iraqi law’s reach.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:48 ambefore we hold a public hanging?
More likely Bush will declare someone a “hero” and give the man medal.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:57 amwhere are the trolls?
Comment by duus — October 5, 2007 @ 11:18 am
THE troll spent all night on the Coulter thread. Switching identities and posting drivel all night is hard work, it’s tired.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:58 amWhy are we jumping to conclusions based on a “U.S. military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity?†Could we perhaps wait for the conclusion of the public hearings before we hold a public hanging?
Comment by Tampachessdon — October 5, 2007 @ 11:51 am
Well the Iraqis have done their own investigations, too, and they reached the same conclusion. So it’s not only that one anonymous military official who’s blaming Blackwater.
October 5th, 2007 at 12:10 pmIn Washington this week, all eyes are on the Blackwater hearings. But the relentless focus on potential atrocities committed by unaccountable, grotesquely overpaid private security firms in Iraq and Afghanistan obscures the larger issue for the United States. That is, mercenary forces simply should have no place in the national defense of an American democracy.
For the details, see:
October 5th, 2007 at 12:13 pm“The Meaning of Blackwater.”
Erik Prince and family have long ties to Bush in 2004 the contributed $325,000 to Bush’s campaign. That is just what had to be recorded.
Factcheck.org
Blackwater was also involved in arranging private parties with call girls and Senators in Washington D.C. a few years ago. My thought…party on but don’t be bible thumping to the masses while doing what you do.
October 5th, 2007 at 12:17 pmThat is, mercenary forces simply should have no place in the national defense of an American democracy.
Comment by AngryOne — October 5, 2007 @ 12:13 pm
Neither should torture, secret prisons, dropping White Phosphorus on civilians, etc, etc, etc………
October 5th, 2007 at 12:26 pmWhy are we jumping to conclusions based on a “U.S. military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity?†Could we perhaps wait for the conclusion of the public hearings before we hold a public hanging?
Comment by Tampachessdon — October 5, 2007 @ 11:51 am
Jumping to conclusions for 6 years, now. It’s time for public hangings, starting with Cheney, Bush and Rice, followed by Rumsfeld, Perle and Kristol. Then the Podhoretz’s can have their own gallows, followed by Lieberman, Hunter and Rush Limbaugh.
This could take a while; treason is rampant on the right.
October 5th, 2007 at 12:33 pm#33 would it be possible to lump them all together and flush the whole bunch at once ? Lie after lie after lie and still the 31%ers continue to stand up for their man. This 31 % must be the ones still thinking Nixon got a dirty deal.
Like the person caught in adultery “who are you going to believe me or your lying eyes?”
October 5th, 2007 at 12:47 pmWhy drag Slick Willy into this?
Comment by Tampachessdon — October 5, 2007 @ 12:53 pm
Why not? he wasn’t a mass murderer without a conscience, like Bush is. He stands up quite well, morally, intellectually and politically, next to the Shrub. Bring him up? Of course we should, and we should be proud of our last successful president, even though the rightards spent $70 million of taxpayer money to not convict him of anything. Nothing, zero, zip.
hahaha, you’re such f*cking losers. Thansk for ‘06!
October 5th, 2007 at 1:06 pm#35 Consensual sex is better than 3808 troops who will never come home. Ask their families who they would rather have as President.
You must be being paid to support this despicable piece of garbage or just not very bright.
October 5th, 2007 at 1:14 pmtampachessdon: ” Could we perhaps wait for the conclusion of the public hearings before we hold a public hanging?”
Did you hold this thoughtful position in the 90’s?
October 5th, 2007 at 1:37 pmTampachessdon: “Why drag Slick Willy into this?”
Shouldn’t your handle be “tampacheckersdon?”
October 5th, 2007 at 1:38 pmBlackwater … our black eye!
http://osi-speaks.blogspot.com/ 2007/ 10/ blackwater-could-turn-out-to-be-black.html
October 5th, 2007 at 2:01 pmThank you candyce and katy for the support. It’s an understatement to say that this type of behavoir really needs to be reigned in.
October 5th, 2007 at 3:22 pm>Why are we jumping to conclusions based on a “U.S. military official,
> who spoke on condition of anonymity?â€
Because, genius, whether you like it or not, Blackwater meets the united states own definition of an “unlawful combatant”. Since when is someone like you insisting that we need due process for unlawful combatants accused of wrongdoing by our own military? And unlike others accused of being unlawful combatants, these guys have contractually designated themselves as such. So no need to even give them a hearing to determine thier status. Two of the five elements (elements meaning you need all of them) to the united states definition of what constitutes a lawful combatant is that you 1) wear a uniform and 2) are bound by some code of military justice. Blackwater meets neither. Ergo, they are (by the united states own designation) unlawful combatants.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:22 am