Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 4 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Blackwater: Legal Remedy Recommendation

By       (Page 1 of 5 pages)   10 comments
Message Virginia Simson
Become a Fan
  (6 fans)
The time has arrived. We know that.

Acting as one we can now end the torture regime.

Blackwater is NOT to get another contract paid for by US taxpayer money.

Once again, here is the link to have Nancy Pelosi removed as House Speaker:
And here is the GLOBAL petition to impeach Richard Cheney.
I am seriously ill - but would appreciate your emails at
Help me get these items to go VIRAL, for which I thank you in advance.

BLACKWATER: Legal Remedy Recommendation

Personal Opinions

Disclaimer: These are not statements of fact, but private, personal opinions which may or may not be widely held, and are not statements of law; nor are they assertions of any judicial findings from any tribunal.

It doesn’t matter if there are “holes” in US laws; Geneva remains unblemished.

Blackwater can be adjudicated under Geneva

The laws of war are binding on all combatants, regardless their willingness to be bound by the laws of war; or their belief about their accountability to any law. Combatants acting with the belief that they are not accountable to any law impermissibly allows combatants to descend to barbarism, in contravention to the objectives of Geneva in regulating combat operations.

When combatants ignore the laws of war; or, through their conduct and statements, show they are not willing to be bound by the laws of war, then the protections of the laws of war may be denied by a competent tribunal. Justice is not served when employees presuming that no laws of war hold them accountable; and/or act outside the law, yet are granted shields and immunities not afforded to similarly situated prisoners. It appears the following legal conclusions are reasonable by a grand jury, inter alia:

All evidence gleaned from the Blackwater employees was made without any _lawful_ promise by a competent _tribunal_ to grant that immunity;

All promises Blackwater employees, while under interrogation for alleged war crimes, were or should have been known to be methods to induce intelligence gathering, and secure information in a combat environment; and any method to glean information should foreseeably been known to include any method, including "foreseeable torture or abuse" including false or unenforceable promises by interrogators outside the tribunal;

Blackwater employees knew, or should have known, that the grant of immunity was not by a competent tribunal; any promise of immunity they knew could only be enforce by a tribunal; any promise of immunity by an interrogator or fact finding was or should have been known to be not enforceable as a right of any defendant acting outside US laws, or conducting their military affairs as if US laws or Geneva were not applicable;

Blackwater employees were not lawful combatants; were not protected by US law; nor were they in a position in this situation in Iraq to negotiate for protections of any laws related to immunity, shields, agreements, or contracts;

Blackwater employees and legal counsel did not reasonably conduct themselves within all legal requirements; in doing so, they do not appear to be entitled to privileges afforded only to lawful combatants;

Adverse inferences are warranted. The destruction of the evidence on the vehicles was, or should have been known to be related to an alleged effort to spoil evidence, in contravention to reasonable standards of conduct Blackwater employees knew or should have known were applicable in a serious incident; competent counsel should have immediately known that the vehicles should have been safeguarded as evidence; assertions that the vehicles "had" to be returned immediately are not supported by a reasonableness standard, especially given their alleged involvement with a serious alleged war crime involving non-combatant Iraqi civilians;

All evidence gleaned from Blackwater should be admissible; all evidence of spoliage should be fully admissible to The Hague and or war crimes tribunal, with adverse inferences. The information was obtained under interrogation conditions where Blackwater employees knew, or should have known, they might be subject to promises that were not enforceable, or they were not entitled; therefore,

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Virginia Simson Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Virginia Simson is a blogger - as well as a blog on the uranium industry and hydraulic fracking at which anticipated the Japanese meltdowns. She has a large archive of material on (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

State-wide Foreclosure Moratorium: How to Get One

Infragard - First in a series

Torture, the CIA, the NYT, war crimes and Mark Mansfield

Canadian Activism Alert Versus War Criminal BuZh!

NOW Is the time to learn about the SPP. A tutorial

Martial law! Earthquake(s)! What is at stake. Alarmist action alert

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend