Immunity Deals Offered to Blackwater Guards

It also wasn't the subject of my inquiry. It was all the other garbage in his earlier post.

Yet, the same partisan hacks who still whine about Clinton 7 years after his presidency, during which they did nothing but "investigate" the Clintons, will tell you that it's just partisanship when Democrats ask for oversight of the actions taken by and on behalf of this admin. And you rightly point out that we're talking about people dying because of butchered intel and no planning which has led to the deaths of thousands. Those deaths can be placed at the doorstep of this admin and its henchmen.

But they still whine about a blue dress.



I belive than plans where under way for all this carnage well in advance of 911 all thats was needed was and i quote

a 'Pearl Harbor' type of incident being necessary to foster the frame of mind needed for the American public to support a war in the Middle
Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NAC304A.html - 12k



In the summer of 2000, the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neo-conservative think tank riddled with soon to be Bush administration officials and advisors, issued a document calling for the radical restructuring of U.S. government and military policies. It advocated the massive expansion of defense spending, the re-invasion of Iraq, the military and economic securing of Afghanistan and Central Asia, increased centralized power and funds for the CIA, FBI, and NSA, among a slew of other policies that would, in the near future, be enacted upon their ascension to power. In the same document, they cite a potential problem with their plan. Referring to the goals of transforming the U.S. and global power structure, the paper states that because of the American Public's slant toward ideas of democracy and freedom, "this process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor." (ibid.)

PNAC members, and signees to its policy documents, include: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wofowitz, Jeb Bush, Richard Perle, John Bolton, Scooter Libby, Elliot Abrams, Richard Armitage, William Bennet, William Kristol, and Zalmy Khalilzad - men with their hands deep in the private defense, oil, and multi-national corporate industries poised to make vast sums of money and secure huge tracts of power and influence if PNAC policy evolved into U.S. Government policy. Nine months after they rose to power, and assumed central positions of leadership up and down the spectrum of military, civilian, domestic, and international agencies, they got their 'New Pearl Harbor'. And PNAC policy essentially evolved into the Bush Administration's official agenda. While this alarmingly convenient coincidence does not prove anything in and of itself, it does establish motive. And it certainly would raise the eyebrows of concern from any serious investigator looking into the facts of September 11.

Another alarming coincidence surrounding PNAC and September 11 has been revealed by attorney Stanley Hilton. Hilton, a graduate of Harvard Law School and former senior advisor and lead counsel for Bob Dole, attended the University of Chicago as an undergraduate in the 1960s. He studied under the infamous Leo Strauss, considered by many the father of neo-conservatism. Fellow students and acquaintances of Hilton's at the time included Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle. Hilton reports that, under the supervision of Strauss, his senior thesis detailed a plan to establish a Presidential Dictatorship using a fabricated 'Pearl Harbor-like incident' as justification. He further states that he, Perle, Wolfowitz, and other students of Strauss discussed an array of different plots and incidents 'like September 11th' and 'flying airplanes into buildings way back in the 60s'.

In light of these revelations, it is no surprise that Hilton has been trying to blow the whistle on government involvement in 9/11 for years. He has also filed a lawsuit against the government on behalf of a number of victims' families. As a result of his actions, Hilton has been harassed, threatened, burgled, and hounded repeatedly by the authorities.



OPERATION NORTHWOODS: US PLANNED FAKE TERROR ATTACKS ON CITIZENS ...Code named Operation Northwoods, the plan, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent ...
www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html
 
I think the police are allowed to lie and say anything they want to obtain a confession. My guess is the state department could do even more in that regard since they aren't a law enforcement agency. The guy wasn't under "custodial interrogation" so no Miranda rights kick in. And to assert a fifth amendment privilege, the guy would have had to assert it. I'd think they're SOL.

:eusa_doh:

That's right, the US Supreme Court has ruled that way. I remember being stunned by it. Any hint of deceit or inducement here and bang, you lose the record of interview [although the court is allowed discretion - R v Ireland (1970) 126 CLR 321, at 333; Bunning v Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54]
 
No RGS, you just ASSUME so.

I personally have a problem with any politician who lies in bed with people doing business with government. I can't understand how anyone would condone such a thing.

The system is so deeply corrupt that it travels all the way down to your local city.

You have a 400 million dollar bridge being built in your city? You think that contract didn't have anything to do with cronyism? Come on...

Politicians get paid to be where they're at by the rich businessmen who use them for their power in office.

It's how it will always be until people care enough to start looking into a candidate before just voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

If you only have 2 evils to pick from, then either don't vote or write someone else in...but quit fucking electing CROOKS for christs sake!

Hillary Clinton does NOT have to get elected president, no matter how much the media wants you to think she will.

JUST DON'T VOTE FOR HER.

I ABSOLUTLY agree, just remember, its a TWO way street, and both DIRECTIONS have, and are being used.

To look at what goes on in Washington in ANY other way is simply burying your head in the sand, and removes ANY relevance your statement MAY of had.:eusa_think:
 
You afraid to link all that?

And what has Bill or Hillary been convicted of or even charged with besides a blue dress?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Jones#Conclusion_of_case

In April 1999, Judge Wright found President Clinton in civil contempt of court for misleading testimony in the Jones case. She ordered Clinton to pay Jones $91,000 for the expenses incurred as the result of Clinton's evasive and misleading answers.

Wright then referred Clinton's conduct to the Arkansas Bar for disciplinary action, and on January 19, 2001, the day before President Clinton left the White House, Clinton entered into an agreement with the Arkansas Bar and Independent Counsel Robert Ray under which Clinton consented to a five-year suspension of his law license.
 
If the US had any balls, and prosecuted the head honcho of Blackwater, they'd throw away the key. Good riddence to bad medicine.


However, they haven't, so they won't.

The guy is the scum of the Earth. A piece of shit...

I completely disagree. He's hired to do a job. He has a 100% success rate at a loss of 28 of his own operatives.

I'll take that percentage ANY day.
 
They did not, BUT ( Jillain can correct me if I am wrong) if they made statements believing they had immunity at the very least those statements have to be thrown out, it sounds like since they offered it the problem is what to do now. If they take it back, no statements and they can not even allude to them.

My question is, what were the statements, how could the big brass at the company be in trouble for the detachment firing on what they claim they preceived as a threat.

From what I can tell the initial fire was directed at a vehicle that did not stop and they felt was a threat and it escalated from there, some claiming the Iraqi army unit near by started firing and causing the guards to think they were under attack.

As for Gumps claim of scum... back it up, provide us with a link or a quote to substantiate the claim. The State Department hires these guys, I doubt they would hire a shady operator. More importantly in all the years they have guarded the officials NO official has died or been captured.

In a combat zone, a perceived attack IS an attack and I for one am laying down defensive fire.
 
I completely disagree. He's hired to do a job. He has a 100% success rate at a loss of 28 of his own operatives.

I'll take that percentage ANY day.

its not supposed to be a job..its supposed to be something that is done by the military for the protection of the nation and its people and in keeping with standards ,protocols and accountability not something with a board of directors , share holders and employees motivated by profit
 
His whole attitude during the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing reeked of Holier than Thou, arrogant, above-the-law rhetoric. I don;t give a shit if no official has died or been captured. I rate the lives of the 17 Iraqis who were killed by his minions on the same level as the officials. You?

BTW, as an aside, if you have made a typo re my avatar, cool. If not, from now on you are referred to as retiredrunnyfaggot. Cool?

Nope. The Iraqis lives in fact do NOT rate the same to the Blackwater operatives as the lives of those they are hired to protect.

I've heard this realtivist argument before about war. Sorry, but the cold hard fact is our guys are worth more than their guys, and noncombatants being killed during a war is collateral damage. They aren't targetted .. they're just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

That's the way war goes ... and always has.
 
its not supposed to be a job..its supposed to be something that is done by the military for the protection of the nation and its people and in keeping with standards ,protocols and accountability not something with a board of directors , share holders and employees motivated by profit

Really? Find me where it says guarding State Dept officials is the job of the US military.
 
Isn't it a relativist argument to say "our people are worth more than their people"?

One obviously based on common sense and logic if one wishes to win or wishes for their society/nation to survive.

I was just trying to be nice and not call it a biased, anti-American argument. But if you want to play ... we can play ....
 
Relativism would specifically mean that there is no inherent difference between their guys and ours. That is essentially what relativism is (or sophistry, as I prefer to call it, to remind people that moral relativism goes back some 2,500 years to the time of Socrates).
 
Relativism would specifically mean that there is no inherent difference between their guys and ours. That is essentially what relativism is (or sophistry, as I prefer to call it, to remind people that moral relativism goes back some 2,500 years to the time of Socrates).

Sshhh .... you'll spoil his fun.:badgrin:
 
originally referred to by the media and governmentent as a private security firm
IE.. [Blackwater Security Guards: employees or ...Unlike the two other major military contractors that provide security services in Iraq, Blackwater treats its security guards as independent contractors, ...]

but then it changed from security guard and employees to "blackwater operatives"

Blackwater Tactical WeeklyThis one incident gives the reader an idea of how dangerous the missions that Blackwater operatives take on really are. The training courses that Blackwater ...
www.blackwaterusa.com/btw2005/archive/032105btw.html - 29k -
 
The impeachment was about a blue dress. :clap2:

And, in case you've forgotten, he was found "not guilty" by the senate. :eusa_dance:

You asked about charges, I gave you the charges (no mention of a blue dress)
You obviously can't distinguish the difference between charges and evidence

Perjury before the grand jury
Perjury in the Jones case
Obstruction of justice
Abuse of power
----------------------------
You asked about Starrs results....
I won't repeat them, you ignore them anyway
---------------------------
You asked about Clintons convictions...

I told you that too....
No convictions, but disbarred and fined $25,000
---------------------------

No mention of a blue dress anywhere, though you keep repeating that....

I don't know what gave me the impression you had a working brain....I'm beginning to doubt that, and your lack of reading comprehension is obvious...
 
It also wasn't the subject of my inquiry. It was all the other garbage in his earlier post.

Yet, the same partisan hacks who still whine about Clinton 7 years after his presidency, during which they did nothing but "investigate" the Clintons, will tell you that it's just partisanship when Democrats ask for oversight of the actions taken by and on behalf of this admin. And you rightly point out that we're talking about people dying because of butchered intel and no planning which has led to the deaths of thousands. Those deaths can be placed at the doorstep of this admin and its henchmen.

But they still whine about a blue dress.

And to anyone following the thread, its PLAIN that YOU first brought up Starr, and Clinton and the dress...that makes it you that is the partisan HACK....
No one else mentioned that shit before YOU...:eusa_clap:
 
And to anyone following the thread, its PLAIN that YOU first brought up Starr, and Clinton and the dress...that makes it you that is the partisan HACK....
No one else mentioned that shit before YOU...:eusa_clap:

Er... no.. YOU were the one who started whining about Clinton. ;)

I just pointed out it was all about a blue dress. Do try again.
 
Er... no.. YOU were the one who started whining about Clinton. ;)

I just pointed out it was all about a blue dress. Do try again.

This is YOU, is it not...

I'm not particularly interested in the whole Clinton thing. After 40 million dollars of our money being spent on investigating the Clinton's all Ken Starr got was a blue dress.
(POST #13)

Clinton...blue dress...Starr.....investigation ????

You do have an inkling about what you type don't you.....
and how you mis-characterize what the investigation was all about...

Conversing with you is like talking to a belligerent, pigheaded child...:eusa_wall:
 

Forum List

Back
Top