home

U.S. Blocking Reparations to Gulf War I Hostages

The LA Times has an update on the Bush Administration's attempt to block frozen Iraqi assets from being used to pay a judgment for $1 billion as damages to POW's in the 1991 Gulf War.

The case is now being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The last hope for the POWs rests with the Supreme Court. Their lawyers petitioned the high court last month to hear the case. Significantly, it has been renamed Acree vs. Iraq and the United States. The POWs say the justices should decide the "important and recurring question [of] whether U.S. citizens who are victims of state-sponsored terrorism [may] seek redress against terrorist states in federal court."

This week, Justice Department lawyers are expected to file a brief urging the court to turn away the appeal.

Our background on the case from 2003 is here.

< Michael Jackson: It's Only the Flu | New Magazine to Sell Using Homicide as a Theme? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    I do not have any problem with Iraqi assets being used to pay damages- my biggest concern is I fail to see how a US Federal Court has Jurisdiction over another soveriegn nation.That does not seem to be the proper venue for resolving International disputes. I do not think anyone feels their nation will get a fair shake in the courts of any nation that they are in conflict or outright dispute with. I do think our Government should be trying to recover some level of damages resulting from these claims, but that is to be negotiated and arbitrated at a bit higher level.

    Gerry Owen at February 15, 2005 02:24 PM
    sanity in a world gone mad. you've been on point on several post i've been following the last coupple of days. you do understand your interfering with my utter disdain for any thoughts coming from the right. you probably won't flip me to that side, but at least i see a light(sanity, cooperation) at the end of what's becoming a very dark tunnel. thanks for the well thought-out and inclusive (no party is going to get it done alone) comments.

    Re: U.S. Blocking Reparations to Gulf War I Hostag (none / 0) (#3)
    by Richard Aubrey on Tue Feb 15, 2005 at 07:35:06 PM EST
    This sort of thing has been going on for years. The PanAm families tried and failed to get any kind of relief. I believe it was Clinton's DOJ which fought that. I never understood any, which is to say not one, reason for it. Although this is a bit more understandable. The money will come from the people of Iraq, not from Saddaam. Maybe there's a Baathist account in Zurich which hasn't been tapped yet.

    Thanks hardleft- I just try to take in everything with an open mind and sort it all out- like all of us, I suppose. You are correct, one party cannot do it alone. Anytime one party gets too firm a hold on the reins of power, it is always bad. Unfortunately, I do not see the Dems moving much my way anytime soon, but I always hope. Just keep an open mind and believe that everyone for the most part wants what is best for the country and their kids. The tunnel isn't as dark as it seems!

    Re: U.S. Blocking Reparations to Gulf War I Hostag (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 07:05:24 AM EST
    Here Here Gerry and hardleft. I've always said we are at our best with a true balance of left and right in gov't. Things have gone too far to the right lately IMHO, but that can be debated. As for the reparations, I must say I have a problem with it. My fear is that raiding the Iraqi coffers to give to relatives of American victims would set back the rebuilding of Iraq. These people have suffered enough (Saddam's rule, US bombing, etc.), let them keep what money they have to rebuild.

    Re: U.S. Blocking Reparations to Gulf War I Hostag (none / 0) (#6)
    by john horse on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 03:24:00 PM EST
    re:"These people have suffered enough..." You are of course referring to the Iraqis, but lets take a look at what some of the American POWs suffered while they were in in Iraqi prisons (some ironically enough in Abu Ghraib). "Saddam Hussein's secret services broke bones, shattered skulls, whipped, burned, shocked, beat, and urinated on American prisoners. One was so battered, it was later reported that his body looked like it had been dipped in indigo ink. Another had his teeth broken through electric shock. Many suffered through their own faked executions. They were starved so severely that one was forced to eat the scabs off his body." As far as I'm concerned, if anyone deserves compensation, it is these POWs. To have the Bush administration trying to deny them compensation is to add insult to injury. This is a matter of justice. These people have suffered enough. Lets talk about the legalities of this case. According to Article 131 of the Geneva Conventions, no nation "'may absolve' a torturing state of 'any liability' for their torture." This is another example of our government attempting to weaken the Geneva Conventions. Also, according to the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996, US courts are authorized to award "money damages … against a foreign state for personal injury or death that was caused by an act of torture, extrajudicial killing, aircraft sabotage [or] hostage taking." The purpose of this act was to hold these governments accountable and to deter the abuse of POWs in any future wars. Some of you think that this will be negotiated later. Actually, what the Bush administration is doing is voiding all claims. If these POWs don't win this case, they are scr*wed. I find the hypocrisy of the Bush administration truly alarming. According to Bush Press Scretary Scott McClellan in 2003 "No amount of money can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering that they went through at the hands of this very brutal regime and at the hands of Saddam Hussein." Little did the POWs know that when McClellan said "no amount of money" that is exactly what the Bush administration is now offering.