Halliburton covering up gang rape of employee.
Former Halliburton/KBR employee Jamie Leigh Jones has revealed that she was gang-raped by her co-workers while working in Baghdad, and then left by the company in a “shipping container for at least 24 hours without food or water.” ABC News reports:
Jamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men at a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she’d be out of a job. […]
Over two years later, the Justice Department has brought no criminal charges in the matter. In fact, ABC News could not confirm any federal agency was investigating the case.
Legal experts say Jones’ alleged assailants will likely never face a judge and jury, due to an enormous loophole that has effectively left contractors in Iraq beyond the reach of United States law.
Jones is now trying to proceed with the case in civil court, but KBR is pushing for it to be heard in “private arbitration,” without a “public record or transcript.” Halliburton has “won more than 80 percent of arbitration proceedings brought against it.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
105 Responses to “Halliburton covering up gang rape of employee.”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
just remember, we’re bringing freedom to the middle east…
December 10th, 2007 at 4:57 pmAmerican Values on parade. Aren’t we just the proud and noble bunch though??
December 10th, 2007 at 4:57 pmWell, considering that Halliburton is already covering up for the rape of the whole of America, I guess they just considered this a minor offense.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:59 pmThis precisely the sort of descent into barbarism that was inevitable when Bush and Cheney decided to assemble a private army and put it outside of the rule of law. Welcome to the future. These half-men should be hanged for their crimes.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:03 pmThis story made me want to vomit. I am shocked, appalled, but not surprised, which makes me want to vomit even more.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:03 pmHow many lashes will she be sentenced?
December 10th, 2007 at 5:04 pmYou can now add ‘white slave trade’ to the list of services no bid Department of Defense contractors provide.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:05 pmI think Kilo may have finally found a company subject to more oversight than Blackwater… Hallibortion…
December 10th, 2007 at 5:06 pmWhat has happened to my country. While the USA is suffering from a plague, “The Homeland” is being put in its place.
“The Homeland” is a place where we actually have a discussion about how much pain and humiliation we are permitted to cause to a human being.
In “The Homeland” we are allowing its agents to monitor all communications and secretly whisk us away to secret prisons where the above argument becomes relevant.
In “The Homeland” we are hiring companies that are covering for such appalling behavior by its employees and the government allows it all to happen under its nose.
I want my USA back! This “Homeland” is not my country. I am not willing to die for it. I am willing to give my life for the USA though.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:13 pmA lot was left out of this story. I have seen where the young lady got a cell phone from one of her guards and called her father in Texas [Ithink] and told him she had been raped and was being held under guard, and he contacted the State Dept. or someone and at least got her released. I’m sure we will hear more about this when and if other media picks up on it.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:14 pmAmerica the Beautiful
We no longer need to look for the terrorists….
we have become them
December 10th, 2007 at 5:15 pmThis story made me want to vomit. I am shocked, appalled, but not surprised, which makes me want to vomit even more.
Comment by debkakes — December 10, 2007 @ 5:03 pm
I made the mistake of reading some of the comments posted at ABC in response to the story there. The hateful things posted by hate-filled troglodytes are simply shocking.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:17 pmThis story is appalling, but what else can be expected from a company so used to raping the American taxpayer?
December 10th, 2007 at 5:18 pmI’m so mad I’m going to write a nasty comment on a blog!
December 10th, 2007 at 5:20 pmA lot was left out of this story. I have seen where the young lady got a cell phone from one of her guards and called her father in Texas [Ithink] and told him she had been raped and was being held under guard, and he contacted the State Dept. or someone and at least got her released. I’m sure we will hear more about this when and if other media picks up on it.
Comment by lylepink — December 10, 2007 @ 5:14 pm
Her father contacted the Republican congressman in her home district, and he in turn contacted the State department which got her released. The congressman seems to be supporting her endeavor to get some justice, but predictably to no avail.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:21 pmOT - sorry - Just heard from a friend in the Green Zone - the Iraqi Parliament is about to take another 30 day recess.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:21 pmKBR = Kill, Burn, Rape
December 10th, 2007 at 5:22 pmGod help this woman. Any moment now we should be hearing from Limbaugh/Savage/O’Reilly how it’s her fault she was raped.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:26 pmPlease support her! There is power in being able to show number.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:28 pmJoin the Facebook group -
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=19299185190
14 - not to take the shine off your cynicism there or anything, but a lot of us, in large part due to our participation in “the blogging”, have become very dedicated at contacting our elected officials to express our expectations of them vis a vis these topics.
More ordinary people’s active participation in our gov’t is the only thing that can save it now. Unless too many of our ordinary citizens have lost the capacity to figure out what’s actually in the best interest of themselves and their family, and that is a distinct possibility.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:34 pmtom: “American Values on parade. Aren’t we just the proud and noble bunch though??”
Corporate values, not American. This is what happens when corporations run things, not government and not the people.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:59 pmSick, sick, sick and then they have the gaul to cover this up by discarding the evidence. Oh wait, that would be kind of like destroying video tapes of torture or destroying millions of e-mails, sounds like this has the stamp of approval by GW666 on it.
Bush/Cheney/KBR
Hague Trials ‘09
Buck Fush
December 10th, 2007 at 5:59 pm“She had it coming”
December 10th, 2007 at 6:12 pm~Rush Limbaugh, 12/10/2007
roger that, colonel - though i can’t think of many contemporary exemplars of that which you and I could agree do represent genuine American values. Too many have become willing fish on the corporate stringer.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:14 pmJones’ assailants may not face trial and punishment but Jamie Lee Jones may certainly help to tank the GOP.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:15 pmAfter all, Cheney’s still on the payroll (retirement income at the very least) so let’s subpoena him to see what he knows about his old employees committing this crime.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:16 pmJohn Edwards comes close for me, if only because he is univerally villified by large American corporations. He’s not their favorite candidate.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:16 pm#15: Would the Congressman be Poe? I seem to recall that name from somewhere, but can’t place him. Let me know if you find out.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:18 pmhorrifying on every level
but isn’t it even more frightening the mention that 80% of Halliburton’s “private arbitrations” are decided in their favour. How many cases are being decided by private arbitration in the first place? and why? and does anyone who has seen how this company operates (see article above as corroborating evidence) even doubt that they are certainly capable of bribery, blackmail, theft etc to “win” those private arbitrations?
let more light shine down on these putrid maggots (sorry maggots) and let the world recoil in horror.
things need to change
December 10th, 2007 at 6:18 pmHmm…can anyone say “Duke lacrosss case”???????????
So let me get this straight! So all you libs think that if any woman CLAIMS she was raped by any man that she DEFINITELY was, right????? And the proof is……her WORD!!! Oh, ok, that sounds fair!! Those nasty Halliburton guys!!
Oh wait a minute! I think we have a system that says you’re innocent until proven guilty, right?? Whoops, sorry, I’m not living in lib land!!
December 10th, 2007 at 6:19 pmJK, you dolt. The story mentioned the confirmation by the doctor’s rape kit, which was conveniently handed over to Halliburton, and can’t be accounted for now.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:21 pmAll we have is a Doctor’s word….
Which is better than yours..
Lylepink ~ that was the Rep mentioned in the story I read. (On Americablog).
December 10th, 2007 at 6:22 pmHey, I dissed you on an earlier thread, my apologies. I thought you were another dismal troll. My bad…
JK isn’t the point that she is trying to prove her case and has found her right to a trial being sabotaged by the very party she is trying to take to court?
private arbitration of a rape case?
that is sickening.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:25 pmJohn Kerry you are a truly vile subhuman scum bag, please get off our planet, you are a disease that it does not need.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:29 pmIf KBR has nothing to hide, why are they pushing for private arbitration?
December 10th, 2007 at 6:30 pmHey, Johnny - did you bother to read the accompanying article…?
Here’s a little snippet for you, sparky:
Finally, Jones says, she convinced a sympathetic guard to loan her a cell phone so she could call her father in Texas.
“I said, ‘Dad, I’ve been raped. I don’t know what to do. I’m in this container, and I’m not able to leave,’” she said. Her father called their congressman, Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas.
“We contacted the State Department first,” Poe told ABCNews.com, “and told them of the urgency of rescuing an American citizen” — from her American employer.
Poe says his office contacted the State Department, which quickly dispatched agents from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad to Jones’ camp, where they rescued her from the container.
So…why was she stuck in the container, smart boy…? Got any ideas?
No? I didn’t think so. Idiot.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:30 pm“Lib land”…also known as the REAL WORLD.
Duh.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:32 pmSo, just why should a private company be held to a higher standard of conduct from the US Air Force Academy, and the Army?
And, she was, after all in the Middle East - that’s the way our allies (like Saudi Arabia) treat women who have the audacity to get raped, sounds like KBR is finally beginning to comply with local customs.
Torture, kidnap, murder, rape (and punish the victim); America’s looking more like our enemies evey day.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:46 pmWhere are the Bushbots now to tell us about the “fine men” of Halliburton and how they are there to protect us?
With friends like these who needs enemies….
December 10th, 2007 at 6:47 pmHey RUCerious
“JK, you dolt. The story mentioned the confirmation by the doctor’s rape kit, which was conveniently handed over to Halliburton, and can’t be accounted for now.”
I will AGAIN point to the Duke lacrosse case! Are you familar with it? Apparently not since you made this ridiculous comment!
TO:Leftside Annie
Since you’re such a loving, trustworthy and intelligent lib living in libland are you also a lawyer? Apparently not because, if so, you would wait for more information and who knows what you might find out that you don’t know now. Ever heard of rush to judgment. I’m sure NOT because if it has anything to do with the EVIL Halliburton you’re all for believing the worst.. This woman could be making the whole thing up (oh sorry, women never lie do they!) as has happened in thousands of cases. You are so ignorant of any of the FACTS in this case that you want to believe the first story you hear! Wake up!!
December 10th, 2007 at 6:49 pmComment by RUCerious — December 10, 2007 @ 6:21 pm
Lost on the room temperature IQ troll is the fact that, to make matters worse, the woman has no legal recourse other than arbitration because Halliburton is beyond the reach of the law, thanks to the Bush administration.
Also, I briefly visited the ABC comment section and Verbalkint is right: Some people commenting there barely rise above the level of troglodytes. These lowlifes are the stubborn 28%ers who still support Bush and his misadventure in the MiddleEast…
December 10th, 2007 at 6:54 pmThis is criminal, what would you have thought if this was your daughter or grand daughter?
December 10th, 2007 at 6:56 pmI thoght that I posted something like this before, but,m you know, senior moments.
Kerry, you asswipe, it was the prosecutor who trumped up the Duke case, and the ‘victim’ changed her story multiple times in the first 48 hours. You are a dolt, and a scumbag beyond description for trying to make light of this tragedy. Do you have a daughter>? Or a niece? We know you don’t have a mother…
December 10th, 2007 at 6:58 pmI am sure the Whitehouse has seen this tape too. I hear Dick Cheney keeps it in his human sized vault for quick reference.
-GSD
December 10th, 2007 at 7:03 pmWent to the ABC comment section there, and wow, you ReichWingers are some very sick subhuman scum bags, now if we can discover a virus that destroys scum bags, you know, the low IQ types, that would just rock.
John Kerry should be first in line for his dose.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:04 pmBuckie Boy, RUCerious…and all the rest…just continue name calling John Kerry. When you can’t win an arguement, you are only capable of calling people names (subhuman scum bags, asswipe, etc.) and challenging their IQ. You reveal your own inability to reason.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:16 pmah yes - here comes the JP to make glib comments about a rape victim - class act ya got goin there, clown.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:28 pmand when you guys can’t win an argument, you steal an election.
which would most people say is worse?
December 10th, 2007 at 7:29 pmAnother room temperature IQ troll who misses the point that this case will likely not be investigated by the proper authorities -let alone prosecuted- because Halliburton is beyond the reach of US law.
sshhessshhh….
December 10th, 2007 at 7:31 pmEvery time I think that they can’t be any more disgusting, they have to go and prove me wrong. What have we become as a nation. And how did we become what we are now. The only thing I can come up with is that our national apathy has allowed these criminals to think that they can get away with anything. And guess what, they do get away with everything.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:40 pmI’m sure we will hear more about this when and if other media picks up on it.
Don’t hold your breath that this will get much press coverage. She isn’t a missing white girl. She’s just a white girl that got raped.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:42 pmBuckie Boy, RUCerious…and all the rest…just continue name calling John Kerry. When you can’t win an arguement, you are only capable of calling people names (subhuman scum bags, asswipe, etc.) and challenging their IQ. You reveal your own inability to reason.
Comment by JPisHere
No JP, we just call a spade a spade. When they act like scumbags and asswipes, that is what we call them.
BTW, are you going to be objecting when your ilk do their name calling? Or is name calling OK for Republiscums but not for liberals?
December 10th, 2007 at 7:44 pm“O come and smell the freedom, o come and smell the freedom, o come and smell the freedom, Oh wait! I crapped my pants”
December 10th, 2007 at 7:50 pmOh, don’t let me leave you out JP, here -
You are a knuckdragging, fascist, traitorous, subhuman, neanderturd of a scum sucking, diseased bearing, pimple faced, fat ass, vile pig.
There JP just for you.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:54 pmNo JP, we just call a spade a spade. When they act like scumbags and asswipes, that is what we call them.
BTW, are you going to be objecting when your ilk do their name calling? Or is name calling OK for Republiscums but not for liberals?
Comment by bilbobaggins
Come on…you can respectfully disagree with someone without calling them names. People call names when they can’t defend their positions.
BTW, I will always object to and criticize ANYONE using these childish tactics, whether they are a democrat or republican or independent.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:57 pmOh, don’t let me leave you out JP, here -
You are a knuckdragging, fascist, traitorous, subhuman, neanderturd of a scum sucking, diseased bearing, pimple faced, fat ass, vile pig.
There JP just for you.
Comment by Buckie Boy
Thanks Buckie Boy, I appreciate your sentiment!
December 10th, 2007 at 7:59 pmand when you guys can’t win an argument, you steal an election.
which would most people say is worse?
Comment by tombaker
Steal an election? Oh come on and get over yourself. Last time I checked, I didn’t steal anything. I just voted. Did you ever research the final results of the election? Bush won…lets move on!
December 10th, 2007 at 8:04 pmno - you move on JP, and you get over myself.
no one who wants some “truthful debate” walks into the room in an obvious huff and starts hurling rocks, like you have on every thread here today.
the chip on your shoulder is visible from space.
your outrage over having some thrown back at you is a cheap trick at best.
no one here’s biting on the bait you’re fishing with.
find another pond.
December 10th, 2007 at 8:24 pmtombaker…you obviously need some dissention to better formulate your opinions. As an independent, I am open to other thought but when I see sites like this that are factually inaccurate…I attempt to understand another side. And then when you can’t defend your positions and resort to name calling…I see the real you…a person who is ideologically driven and unable to reason.
December 10th, 2007 at 8:48 pmHey RUCerious
“it was the prosecutor who trumped up the Duke case”
Are you on something pal? Do you have any knowledge of rape cases buddy? Well I sure do as I used to work for a lawyer who did and I can assure you Mr Know It All that there are many, many women who, for various reasons, cry rape and make up outlandish stories. Obviously I don’t know all the facts in this case but guess what….NEITHER do you or any of the left nut wackos commenting here have any more information than the press will allow us to know.
What a world this has become if we can come to a definite conclusion about a crime based on ONE person’s comments.
All of you libs are simply showing the distain you have for our legal justice system!
December 10th, 2007 at 8:51 pm#36 Leftside Anne: Thank for the info.I was almost sure I had heard or read something about this and it did not immediately come to mind. #32: RUCerious: apology accepted. I make mistakes myself, though not very often, ha.
December 10th, 2007 at 9:20 pmActually that is your country.
The only new thing you mentioned was that you now discuss torture, whereas before you didn’t. That is all that has changed in what you describe.
And what you aren’t willing to discuss and seek political opposition to in regard to the torture, rendition and domestic surveillence programs you mention (because they predated Bush and are therefor awkward to discuss) ensures that these programs will continue.
Yet when this is pointed out, we see nothing but denial in response. Or claims that “oh he’s just saying Clinton did it too” as though this means something.
Well guess what, Hillary / Obama will be doing it too, just like Bill did, because you’ve sought no other outcome that stopping Bush doing it. And he’s got a term limit, so you’ve really sought no end at all.
December 10th, 2007 at 9:32 pmIt’s not a rape case. It’s a civil case.
It’s a civil case because there was no criminal jurisdiction over that company while operating in Iraq.
You could see this one case as the problem, and support her facebook thing all you like, but it’ll still be the same deal for the next case.
Any progress on that criminal jurisdiction front from congress? It’s not like this is a new issue, we’ve been hearing about it for 4 years.
December 10th, 2007 at 9:46 pmThis is the same Halliburton who failed to provide clean water to our troops. This is the same company that had the Republican-controlled 109th Congress looking the other way and refusing to investigate. This was the same company about which a certain Republican Senator who claims he is an “Independent Democrat” — but we know better — promised to investigate with his newfound powers, yet after the election of ‘06 decided it just wasn’t worth his time.
I personally know a couple who have a son who was in Iraq and drank this “clean” water after his commanders told him it was safe to do so; this man who fought for spreading freedom and democracy throughout the Middle East is lucky to be alive. He must take about 20 forms of medication EVERY DAY just to be able to function.
And then we have the Abu Ghraib scandal and the members of our military who just HAD to lead nude prisoners around with a dog leash and smile for all the pretty pictures.
And finally, we have the 4 U.S. troops who raped a 14 year old Iraqi teen girl, and then killed her. But that wasn’t good enough…they had to burn her body. They also killed her family.
Yes, there are plenty of fine people serving in the military who are a hell of a lot better and have a hell of a lot more common sense and decency about them as compared to those involved in the situations above.
Having said that, excuse me if I am just a little f-ing biased towards Halliburton’s guilt in this latest situation. And yes, that is my opinion, but the bottom line is that we’ll likely never know because Bush’s little decision to put the contractors outside of U.S. law isn’t helping matters here, but I’m sure that Kilo and JK and JP think that it’s just fine that things are that way. Even if HB gets their way in a civil trial, we still will not know what really happened. I’d say that if it was a member of their family in Jamie’s situation our trolls would be singing a different tune, but who knows.
December 10th, 2007 at 11:10 pmJP, JK and Kilo would be arguing among themselves how many lashes she should get. that’s where they’re coming from.
December 10th, 2007 at 11:24 pmLefty Patriot:
You’re on something too
December 10th, 2007 at 11:26 pmYou are so ignorant of any of the FACTS in this case that you want to believe the first story you hear! Wake up!!
Comment by John Kerry
Heh. I remember someone invading a country for the lack of things you mention in your post, *sswipe.
December 10th, 2007 at 11:43 pmJuan C
You have a bad memory!
December 11th, 2007 at 12:03 amBush didn’t make any decision to put these contractors outside of US law. What sort of idiotic nonsense is that ?
What do you think happens next inauguration day ? Are there no laws in the US until the next president re-makes them ?
No, they’re not subject to US law, just like they weren’t under the last president.
And with the same amount of justification for saying so, I’m sure you have no problem with the woman being gang raped.
December 11th, 2007 at 12:16 amYou have a bad memory!
Comment by John Kerry — December 11, 2007 @ 12:03 am
Maybe so, but he aced you, you little punk. You need to have your meds readjusted; they’ve shut down your logic board. The fact that you’d believe a company that has screwed the public out of many millions of dollars while providing the troops with substandard food, water and housing says more about you than anything I’ve seen here. You’re just a sick puke.
December 11th, 2007 at 12:17 amAnd with the same amount of justification for saying so, I’m sure you have no problem with the woman being gang raped.
Comment by Kilo — December 11, 2007 @ 12:16 am
and you don’t know what you’re talking about, so just STFU. liar.
December 11th, 2007 at 12:18 amThis is your argument? Thanks for making our point! The law is inadequate ON PURPOSE and you gleefully hide behind it?! Couldn’t have described you guys better! The victim doesn’t matter, because really the law is all about protecting the accused!
As someone said earlier, how many lashes should this woman be assessed?
December 11th, 2007 at 1:10 amNo, they’re not subject to US law, just like they weren’t under the last president.
Comment by Kilo — December 11, 2007 @ 12:16 am
You truly have no idea what you are talking about, and obviously haven’t been paying attention:
Draft legislation that lifts immunity for foreign private security companies gained the consent of the Iraqi cabinet on Tuesday and was sent to Parliament for approval, a government spokesman said.
The measure would end a provision that protects the security companies from prosecution, which has been in effect since 2004, when the Americans handed sovereignty back to Iraq.
[…]
The draft law canceling the private security firms’ immunity was written by the legal adviser to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. It would overturn a measure known as Order 17, dating from the administration of L. Paul Bremer III.
Iraqi Cabinet Votes to End Security Firms’ Immunity
To summarize: The law that granted defense contractors in Iraq immunity from prosecution dates from after the invasion.
December 11th, 2007 at 1:27 amNo. It’s just the topic of the article.
You don’t have a point. In fact you appear not to even have a clue. I’ve explained what an article says to someone who didn’t understand it and you’ve shouted “AHA! score! what the article says is what we think!”. Idiot.
Well why don’t you not vote for me as your representative then. Oh wait, I forgot, I don’t have the power to make laws in the US.
And yet I’ve managed to pass just as many addressing this issue as the democrat controlled congress in the past year.
One of us is to blame. Why don’t you keep pretending it’s me if that makes you feel better.
I presume you are also describing the TP author here, given they explained the same thing I did here.
Did they also say why they asked such an irrelevant and ignorant question ?
December 11th, 2007 at 1:28 amPerhaps you would like to explain it chump.
You have a bad memory!
Comment by John Kerry
You are right. I don’t even remember OBL.
December 11th, 2007 at 1:29 amIs it me or you who has no idea what we are talking about ?
Tell us, who did you vote for in the last Iraqi elections ? Has he done his job for your American district ? Personally I bet he has a pretty poor attendance record in congress where US laws are passed.
And the US law which the CPA order superceeded ?
Ah yes, there wasn’t one. Because this has never been the jurisdiction of US law. Just like I said.
If you missed the point, nobody is calling for this rape case to be brought before an Iraqi court, where Iraqi laws apply.
The issue is that US criminal law jurisdiction does not apply to these non-military contractors on Iraqi soil.
Now, are you paying attention ?
December 11th, 2007 at 1:38 amLMAO, you never pass up an opportunity to make yourself look stupid do you.
The US doesn’t lash prisoners, although they do this in several other countries. In Singapore you can be lashed for dropping chewing gum on the sidewalk.
In Saudi Arabia and Pakistan rape victims aren’t considered to be this unless there were multiple witnesses to the incident, and may still be punished if they broke social codes while being raped.
What you’d be looking for there if you were a US citizen would be some kind of exemption from those foreign laws wouldn’t you ? Kind of like what the CPA granted to civilian contractors.
Of course if you opposed these exemptions, then yes, you really would be contemplating how many lashes you were going to receive under those foreign laws for your part in being raped.
December 11th, 2007 at 1:57 amThanks for pointing that out. Not sure why you would choose to, but there you go.
>Now, are you paying attention ?
For once in your miserable life can you plainly and straightforwardly explain to us the point of whatever it is your trying to get across?
and by the way moron, rape (i.e. assault) is a viable civil as well as criminal cause of action..
December 11th, 2007 at 2:28 am>I think we have a system that says
> you’re innocent until proven guilty, right??
> We have to assume this is true just because the alleged
> victim says it is true?
Hahahaahahah. HAhahahaha. Ahhhhh. Hearing these arguments coming from people who insist that a brain-damaged, C student fratboy who just happened to win (allegedly) a national popularity contest should have the right to indefinitely detain and torture american citizens, or anyone else, based on no evidence whatsoever, is truly the depth of irony.
> Why don’t we wait for the results of the investigation before jumping to >conclusions?
Like waiting to see if the guy insisting that Saddam had mobile weapons lab was actually in Iraq at the time he claimed to see them? Or waiting to see if uranium documents are forged or not? hahahaha
You pack of idiots are the cheerleaders for the kings of acting on unsubstaniated allegations……should you begrudge us a few here and there?
December 11th, 2007 at 2:35 am>Did they also say why they asked such an irrelevant and ignorant >question ?
What he was trying to get at is that the guy you idiots love to defend and stick up for likes to french kiss people who run governments that lash rape victims. The subject of this thread is rape by employees of a Bush/Cheney croney company, so its entirely relevant. Their saying that anybody who defends bush, hallibortion, cheney, blackwater, or any of those other twisted monsters are just as sick as those people/companies are. You’ve claimed before you don’t support bush, but I think you’re a liar, and if its true, why don’t you come out and explain exactly what it is you stand for, so you can’t keep hiding behind your obsurdly obfuscatory “i didnt say that/you didnt say that/thats irrelevant” crap?
December 11th, 2007 at 2:45 amLegal experts say Jones’ alleged assailants will likely never face a judge and jury, due to an enormous loophole that has effectively left contractors in Iraq beyond the reach of United States law.
That “enormous loophole” that this crime lies beyond the reach of is generally referred to as mainland United States.
If an American is raped in France the same legal concepts apply and once again, nothing done by the Bush administration has any bearing on it, just like it doesn’t in Iraq.
December 11th, 2007 at 2:46 amI did that in the post you replied to. As a supposed law student are you claiming you cannot distinguish between US legal jurisdiction and that of a foreign country, even after this is pointed out ?
It’s also a noun. Is there a reason we are pointing out facts that aren’t relevant or in dispute ?
December 11th, 2007 at 2:53 amOr did you just want to appear to be disagreeing with me on a matter you otherwise can’t.
>I did that in the post you replied to.
Do it again in one sentence.
> It’s also a noun.
you said rape wasnt a civil issue. it is.
>are you claiming you cannot distinguish between US legal jurisdiction and >that of a foreign country
your a master of obfuscation arent you? all I said was your assertion that rape was only a criminal issue was wrong. I wasnt discussing jurisdictional issues at all.
December 11th, 2007 at 2:58 am>If an American is raped in France the same legal concepts apply and once >again, nothing done by the Bush administration has any bearing on it, >just like it doesn’t in Iraq.
You’re completely wrong. The bush administration has extended (selectively) american courts jurisdiction to certain acts commmited outside the united states.
Thanks to the bush administration, if you go to france and have sex with the 17 year old girl you’ve been legally porking in texas, you can be charged in an american court. However, they havent seen fit to extend their jurisdiction to peopel who say, go to a foriegn country and kill a 17 year old girl. Kinda funny, Bushies priorities, huh?
December 11th, 2007 at 3:02 amThere’s just the 1 Saudi Arabia. It enjoys political support from both political parties and every US president. You need to lie to pretend otherwise.
Tell us how it is relevant.
It didn’t take place in a country that lashes rape victims. In fact if Iraqi law did determine that would be the case, everyone here would seem to support that, given the opposition to the cited exemption from Iraqi law.
Apart from that the company is doing the same work in Iraq under Bush that it did in Bosnia under Clinton. Likewise, any nation you wish to name that lashes rape victims has the same relationship with the US now that it did under the last administration.
And why do you restrict yourself to the supremely lame position of posting that you “think this” rather than just linking us to evidence which contradicts me?
That is of course a rhetorical question, we both know it is because you can’t.
I’ve been posting here for a couple of years now, without expressing support for Bush, which should inform you of whether I do or not.
By the same token I’ve not once seen you state that you like molesting children. So I guess I’d be equally justified in calling you a paedophile on the same basis.
You were pretending to be a law student only a couple of weeks ago. Dropped that routine have we ?
If I point out that US criminal law doesn’t extend beyond its borders I’m expressing a partisan political belief am I ? That I “stand for” the concept of legal jurisdictions, as though this is belief rather than just a fundamental concept of law.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:21 amThat means you are either a fraud or an intellectual fraud. Personally I don’t see any difference between the two.
another loophole “tactic” the bush administration has used to give its cronies immunity for thier criminal acts abroad is to have them hired by certain divisions of the government, for the reasons that those divisions contractors are not subject to laws that contractors of other divisions would be. dont quote me on the exact divisions, but say, for example, there are laws regulating the acts of contractors hired by the state department but not the defense department. well, even if the contractors are hired to protect state department officials, you can bet thier paychecks are going to come from a division of government which provides them less liability.. in fact, a recent court ruling that found a defense contractor commited fraud against the government was nullified by an appeals court because the appeals court decided that since the CPA was paying them, and CPA wasnt offically part of the united states government, that the fraud wasnt against the american government. yes, these are loopholes, and yes, scum like bush, cheney, hallibortion and blackwater use them to avoid prosecution and accountability..
December 11th, 2007 at 3:22 am>Dropped that routine have we ?
Nope, I’m about to graduate this friday. I’ll glady take a picture of myself at the ceremony holding up a sign that says “Kilo and Bush f@ck dogs” and post it here.
I asked for a single sentence and you give me paragraphs of BS.
> If I point out that US criminal law doesn’t extend beyond its borders I’m >expressing a partisan political belief am I
No, you’d just be completely wrong. US criminal and civil law does, selectively, extend beyond united states borders. You’d be wrong about that just like you were about your claim that “It’s not a rape case. It’s a civil case. It’s a civil case because there was no criminal jurisdiction over that company while operating in Iraq.”
no, you’d just be completely wrong.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:28 am>I’ve been posting here for a couple of years now, without expressing >support for Bush,
Yet you seem to attack pretty much anyone who criticizes what the guy, or his cronies do. What do you stand for and what policies do you support then? Its pretty easy to attack with obtuse, obfusctory statements when you claim to stand for obsolutely nothing.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:32 amOkay. He quoted me saying these people aren’t subject to US law, quoted a reference to the jurisdiction of Iraqi law and I pointed out these are two different things.
You really couldn’t figure that out without an explanation?
No I didn’t. I said the case was being brought as a civil case because US criminal law didn’t apply.
If I didn’t say this, the article, TP and every other reference available still would. So take it up with them if you want to discuss this concept further.
Yeah but the post you replied to and quoted did. In fact that is all it discussed. So when you quote it and ask what I was talking about when I referred to US vs Iraqi jurisdiction and nothing else, that is going to be the topic my reply relates to, you moron.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:33 amin fact, if Hallibortion had been hired by certain divisions of the government, they WOULD be criminally liable for thier acts abroad..but, shock of shock, they just happen to be getting their checks from a division of government whose independent contractors arent liable under those extraterrorial laws….
December 11th, 2007 at 3:37 amI’d settle for you just expressing agreement or disagreement with the legal principles I’ve referred to here.
And you’ve not yet acknowledged an understanding, let alone disagreement with what I wrote regarding US law.
Then why not state how I am wrong in this case, mr law graduate. What are you waiting for ?
December 11th, 2007 at 3:39 am>It’s not a rape case. It’s a civil case.
this is what you said.
Rape could be both a civil case and/or a criminal case. Saying “its a rape case” does not preclude it being a criminal case.
Now if you would have said “this is not a criminal case, its a civil case”, then you would making an accurate, although fairly irrelvant statemetn.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:43 am>Then why not state how I am wrong in this case.
Your assertion that United States laws cannot reach those acts outside the united states is incorrect. In this case , it is correct, but you didnt make that narrow of a claim. YOu said “United States law doesnt apply outside the united states and bush has nothing to do with that fact” and I pointed out that you were wrong because the Bush adminsitration has acted in a way as to very intentionally and tactically ensure that those they hire are not subject to those existing united states laws which DO reach outside the united states.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:47 am>Saying “its a rape case†does not preclude it being a criminal case.
oops I mean Saying “its a rape case†does not preclude it being a civil case.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:48 amYou are describing your bias, not mine.
And what an arrogant and ignorant assumption it is. That people’s opinions about topics are defined by their support for a particular political party. This would be retarded if you were talking about a US citizen, but you are not.
WTF do you think I care whether this president AND hillary/obama all get run over by the same bus, let alone care enough about them to have my views on every conceivable topic defined by my support for them.
On a blog where 100,000,000,000 views about Iraq have been expressed, do you think there’s 1 that has been defined by anyone’s support for the Iraqi PM ?
December 11th, 2007 at 3:50 amOk, I’ve got some imaginary finals to go study for. Anytime you feel like explaining the people, policies, and idealogies you stand for, instead of nitpicking apart statements of anyone who attacks people you claim not to support, let me know..
December 11th, 2007 at 3:50 amYeah, because for all you know I could have been talking about someone breaking the international moratorium on whaling, rather than the rape which is the topic of conversation.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:52 amTime for you to piss off now.
FYI: The only law that applies to anyone outside this country is the laws of the country where the crime was committed. This is true except for Military personnel, and they are covered by the laws of the military[UCMJ], that are quite similar to our own laws that apply to everyone, except diplomats. Hope this helps.
December 11th, 2007 at 4:26 amPerhaps someone could conveniently leak the names of those involved; I’d like to visit Iraq for a little bloodsport.
December 11th, 2007 at 9:30 amI worked for KBR in the Green Zone before and after this incident. I actually met Jamie on her first day at work. I also know some of the people who allegedly raped her. I wasn’t there that night and I don’t believe in blaming a victim, but there are some serious holes in Jamie’s story and a lot of missing information. It’s easy to automatically assume that Halliburton/ KBR did everything heinous they are accused of, because most of the time they did. Sometimes, however, there’s more to the story.
December 11th, 2007 at 8:21 pmBush didn’t make any decision to put these contractors outside of US law. What sort of idiotic nonsense is that ?
Comment by Kilo — December 11, 2007 @ 12:16 am
And you are so sure of that? You are full of sh_t. Read on if you think you can comprehend it.
(Source: Salon.com)
The Bush administration in 2004 also wanted to bestow on its own troops and personnel immunity from prosecution by Iraqi courts for killing Iraqis or destroying local property after the occupation ends and political power is transferred to an interim Iraqi government.
(Source: Wash. Post).
How would Bush do this? By extending Order 17. Which means…surprise!…he knew about the order and its details. If he didn’t want our troops or civilians prosecuted in Iraq, you can bet that he or someone in the administration inquired about whether or not they could be legally tried in the U.S.; after all, why give them immunity in Iraq only to allow them to be prosecuted in America?
Bottom line, it took action by Congress to attempt to close this loophole; Bush wasn’t exactly knocking down the doors to the Capitol demanding that Congress fix it.
Finally, these words from a Salon.com article sums all this up quite nicely:
December 12th, 2007 at 1:51 amLinks for the above sources:
Link.
Link.
December 12th, 2007 at 1:54 amJK, you dolt. The story mentioned the confirmation by the doctor’s rape kit, which was conveniently handed over to Halliburton, and can’t be accounted for now.
All we have is a Doctor’s word….
Just for the record, what the Duke Lacrosse Rape hoax began with was this: According to court documents, a physician and specially trained nurse that found the alleged victim had “signs, symptoms and injuries consistent with being raped and sexually assaulted” during an exam conducted after the alleged attack.
Sounds pretty open and shut, right? In fact, it turned out that there was never any actual medical evidence that Crystal Gail Mangum was raped. It turned out the examiner was a feminist ideologue who asserted, and continued to assert for over a year, that if a woman says she’s been raped then she’s been raped and that’s all that’s necessary. Even when the woman can’t even twice in a row get ANY of the details of her story straight.
That’s the fact of the matter. So at this point I’m not impressed by press quotes of medical personnel.
December 12th, 2007 at 7:06 pmYes I am sure of that. And no, I can’t comprehend what you have posted.
To prove that Bush did something, you’ve posted something which refers to someone else doing it. You suggested this would be some kind of rebuttal, and I can’t imagine how.
You’ve quoted me saying Bush didn’t exempt contractors from US law and now you are talking about an exemption from Iraqi law.
I’m sick of explaining crap that braindead pets could understand, so I’m just going to assume you can’t tell the difference between these 2 countries and leave it at that.
Now there’s some world class blame shifting.
I guess Bush is to blame for not pressuring congress to impeach him either.
Except that’s BS.
There are plenty of legal blogs about. Go find one that examines CPA-17 and will tell you something other than the fact this DOES NOT EXEMPT ANYONE from crimes not pursuant to their contracts.
Rape, murder, theft, fraud. Nobody is exempted from these crimes under Iraqi law by CPA-17.
If security contractors kill civilians in the course of their duties and can prove this was pursuant to carrying out their protection contract, then this will exempt them. Otherwise not.
If they break down and have to steal a car to get a VIP somewhere, this would exempt them, otherwise not.
Read a liberal law blog explaining this to you, just 2 months ago…
December 13th, 2007 at 9:14 amhttp://balkin.blogspot.com/ 2007/ 10/ immunity-for-military-contractors-under.html
Comment by Kilo — December 13, 2007 @ 9:14 am
The info at the link you posted does nothing to address the legal options in the U.S.
Nevertheless, Bush had to be involved in some way with the legalities re: Order 17. As stated above, he knew about the order. Am I saying that Bush said, “give our troops and contractors immunity”? No, but that does not mean that he wasn’t involved in some manner with Bremer’s actions. It is unthinkable that he was not briefed on the order given its repurcussions, and all it would take is for Bremer to tell him the plans, and then have Bush say, “Ok, I’m in.” He is The Decider, after all. As I said, he had to have inquired, or known, about the legal options that could come about in the U.S. Also as I said, Condi recently admitted there was a loophole in the law regarding legal action in the U.S., and it is likely that they knew about it much earlier.
Lawyers, like everyone else, are going to have differing interpretations on laws. You’ve put up your lawyer, now here’s mine:
This is from the Salon article I linked to above. Horton is also an adjunct professor of law at Columbia University where he lectures on international law and international humanitarian law.
December 13th, 2007 at 2:11 pm