Bush administration asks judge to deny damage award to former Iraqi POWs

[thedrifter]

Bush administration asks judge to deny damage award to former Iraqi POWs


By Sam Hananel
ASSOCIATED PRESS
2:30 p.m., July 29, 2003

WASHINGTON – Assets seized from the Iraqi government should be used to rebuild the country and not to compensate 17 Americans held captive in Iraq in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Justice Department lawyers told a federal judge Tuesday.

Attorneys for the former POWs argued that a 1996 federal law should give them access to the money.

The case before U.S. District Judge Richard W. Roberts has put the Bush administration in a difficult position – trying to show sympathy for POWs seeking compensation for alleged torture while seeking to ensure that every resource possible is available to pay the rising costs of rebuilding Iraq.

Roberts awarded the POWs $653 million in compensatory damages this month and ordered the government to set aside that amount from the $1.7 billion in frozen Iraqi assets held in a special bank account in New York.

The Justice Department asked Roberts to rescind that order, arguing that President Bush formally seized the money for the United States after U.S. troops invaded Iraq in March.

"The president has looked at this pot of money – this $1.7 billion – and made a judgment that this would be best used toward the rebuilding of Iraq," Justice Department attorney Shannen Coffin said during arguments Tuesday.

Stephen Fennell, a lawyer for the former POWs, chastised the government for withholding the money from American military personnel who paid a harsh penalty for fighting for their country.

"It really is unthinkable in the end that the reconstruction of Iraq should be done on the backs of the POWs who were tortured in Iraq," Fennell said.

"We need to deter the continued torture of American POWs that has happened in war after war," he said. "Without the payment of these funds, every rogue dictator in the world is going to say it doesn't affect us."

The ex-POWs brought their case under a law that allows such lawsuits by American victims of torture or other abuses by agents of countries on the State Department's list of nations that sponsor terror.

Fennell questioned the Bush administration's need for the $653 million, citing government assertions that much of the reconstruction of Iraq would be paid for by Iraq's massive oil reserves. He also said the amount pales in comparison to the $60 billion the United States already has designated toward rebuilding efforts.

Coffin said most of that money already has been spent on military action, and according to L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator for Iraq, the United States is running a $2.2 billion deficit in Iraq.

When Roberts asked whether the parties have considered settling the case outside court, Coffin said it was under consideration. "At this point the answer is no," she said.

One plaintiff, Lt. Col. Richard Dale Storr of Spokane, Wash., now with the Washington Air National Guard, said awarding the money would send a strong message to other nations that might mistreat American soldiers.

Storr, an A-10 pilot shot down over Iraq, was beaten, starved and nearly froze to death during the 33 days Iraqi forces held him captive.

"Hopefully, it will deter future abuses that POWs might suffer," Storr said. "I want to hold Iraq accountable."

Roberts promised a quick ruling.





On the Net:

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia: www.dcd.uscourts.gov/

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20030729-1430-gulfwar-pows.html


Sempers,

Roger
:marine:

[firstsgtmike]

"On July 9, 2003 U.S. District Court Judge Richard W. Roberts awarded 17 US POWs in the Iraqi War of 1991 $959 million in damages for their suffering, denouncing what the judge termed “unrestrained savagery” on the part of the Iraqis. The POWs stand to collect between $16 million and $35 million each, while 37 family members could receive damage awards of $5 million to $10 million apiece."

They will be filing claims against the Iraqi funds impounded by the US government.

Not to belittle in any way the pain and suffering of the POWs and their families, HOWEVER, I believe there are members and viewers of this site who can legitimately make comparisons to THEIR pain and suffering, and that of their family members, to that suffered by the 17 POWs and their families.

Shouldn't the factors determining compensation be equal??????

If we are compensating family members for "their" pain and anguish, does it depend upon whose wife cries the loudest, whose three year old misses their daddy more?

Were comparisons made of the families of the 17 and of those Vietnam vets who still suffer from PTSD?

I have problems digesting all of this. Will someone PLEASE explain it to me?

Thank you.

[firstsgtmike]

17 Ex-P.O.W.'s Won't Get Part of Seized Iraq Assets, Judge Says
By ADAM LIPTAK
New York Times

A federal judge in Washington ruled yesterday that 17 former prisoners of war might not collect the hundreds of millions of dollars they won in a suit against Iraq.

The American ex-prisoners, who were tortured by their Iraqi captors in the first war in the Persian Gulf in 1991, had sought the money from frozen Iraqi bank accounts that the United States seized in March.

The government expressed sympathy for what the plaintiffs had endured, but opposed the collection effort, saying the money was needed to rebuild Iraq.

Judge Richard W. Roberts, who awarded almost $1 billion to the service members and their families this month, ruled with evident reluctance. "The secretary's position that the P.O.W.'s are unable to recover any portion of their judgment, despite their sacrifice in the service of their country, seems extreme," Judge Roberts wrote, referring to Treasury Secretary John W. Snow.

But the judge said the government had the better legal argument.
"Though the penalty is great and the responsibility heavy, the court's duty is clear," he wrote, quoting a decision of the Supreme Court that allowed Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the convicted spies, to be executed.

A law enacted in November allowed people who won court awards against some countries that support terrorism, including Iraq, to be paid from frozen funds of those countries. American civilians who were used as human shields in the first gulf war have collected $95 million under the law.

But more recently, in general language in a law passed in April to appropriate money for the Iraq war, Congress authorized the president to void other laws concerning Iraq. In May, President Bush used that authority to void the November law.

A lawyer for the former prisoners, Steven A. Fennell, said, "A few general words buried in an appropriations bill" should not "take away the ability of American P.O.W.'s tortured in the dungeons of Iraq to realize a measure of accountability."

He said his clients would appeal.
-----------------------------------

The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away!
==============================


I find it hard to believe that NO ONE has any comments to make.

I'll just mark everyone down for a "DUH?" and we'll come up with something easier to handle.

Mr. Hope, the entertainer, aged 100 just passed away. What was his first name?

[greensideout]

There is no money in the world that can ease human suffering.
Any money that is given to them will do nothing more then sugar coat the wounds and the pain will remain.

Tell them to forget the money and to seek healing in a more real and lasting way.

You ask, there you go.

Semper Fi,
Ron

[bubbar]

Col Cliff Acree, Lt. Col Craig Berryman, CWO 5 Guy Hunter (Ret) and 14 other former POWs from the Gulf War were let down by our government this week. A U.S. District Court in DC ruled the former POWs and family members were owed over $600 million for the torture and unspeakable physical and emotional abuse they received at the hands of Saddam Hussein and his Iraqi Intelligence Service. The Court found the POWs were owed damages by the government of Iraq, Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi Intelligence Service. The money is available to pay the POWs from U.S. Government accounts holding seized Iraqi funds.

DOJ made the decision to fight the award and a U.S. District Judge reluctantly upheld the government's position. The law states it is up to the President to decide whether the government settles the claim or not. The law permits the President to authorize payment but DOJ chose to fight the judicial award. Here are the links to review courts findings: Court's Memorandum Opinion outlining the reluctantly finding against the POWs. http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/03-1549.pdf : Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/02-632.pdf and the order awarding the POWs which the government fought and won the right not to pay http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/02-632a.pdf

Please pass this on to your to all your contacts and friends. If we can get the media to pick this up maybe President Bush would authorize payment. I am sure he does not even know about this travesty and would be very angry that his DOJ made this decision.

[greensideout]

I'm with you Mike, where are the comments?
Is anyone out there? This is laced with all kinds of controversy!

How about: We funnel all the money through a construction company, they get 10% then give the rest to the former POW's?

How about: Give them the money. Let the Iraqi oil pay for the rebuilding of that sand pile? Should we ask the Iraqi people to get off their duffs and go to work?

How about: You crap on are troops and you pay?

How about: Treat our POW's with the proper respect or our courts will bankrupt your government?

Our goverment says no-o-o-o, don't pay them? Tell me why?!!!

[bubbar]

The Congress gave power to the President to pay or not pay. I think our President is not aware of the situation. The Justice Department in their parochial ways are once again running amuck, with lawyers attempting to make their bones on the backs of our servicemen. I guarantee if President Bush was fully and honestly briefed he would authorize payments to these heros and their families. This is unsat. We need a Gunny on the White House staff to take care of the troops and Marines.

[firstsgtmike]

SORRY!

This issue of compensitory benefits was decided long before the above referenced court findings of 1992 and 1993.

Please refer to the guide for VA benefits for current amounts.

While I agree that VA benefits are MUCH TOO LOW, I believe that:

"The POWs stand to collect between $16 million and $35 million each, while 37 family members could receive damage awards of $5 million to $10 million apiece."

is OUTRAGEOUS!

Particularly when the issue of the Disabled Veterans Tax (i.e. VA and Retirement Benefits) is still being hotly contested.

Did the 17 POWs sign the petition favoring the Restoration of Retiree Pay?

Did they file a claim for VA benefits? What was the result?

If their case is based upon moral grounds and not pure greed, then I suggest they donate the "award" to the VA to increase the benefits paid to ALL veterans with physical or emotional disabilities.

(I'm excluded. I have no claim to VA disability benefits.) My anger is based upon equity.

[greensideout]

Well put bubbar, but my concern is this. What about other troops that have suffered, been maimed or killed. What is the message to there familes? The former POW's get the money, but their loved one receives none?

[bubbar]

Top you are missing the boat here. These claims are not against the VA, but Saddam and his thugs who tortured these guys. A Federal Judge found they were totured outside the rules of land warfare. They probably don't want the money just acknowledgement that they were treated wrong. The sad part is a court ruled in their favor but our government would rather use the seized Iraqi money to rebuild sandland. Heck, we already paid a bunch of CIVILIAN workers who were used as human shields who did not suffer a fraction of the abuse these servicemen and women did. This is not about money it is about justice.

[greensideout]

bubbar, I read your profile and would like to say:

Glory begins to fade near the moment it began.

Semper Fi

[firstsgtmike]

Bubar,

You said:

"They probably don't want the money just acknowledgement that they were treated wrong."

Seems to me the court acknowledged that they were treated wrong. So they got what they wanted.

I said:

"If their case is based upon moral grounds and not pure greed, then I suggest they donate the "award" to the VA to increase the benefits paid to ALL veterans with physical or emotional disabilities. "

Let's see who's right. Greed or morality?

I haven't read anyplace that they suggested the moeny go someplace other than their pockets.

If you have an inside track on that info, I'd like to know about it.

[bubbar]

Greensideout, Glory is in the heart you keep it to yourself and it lasts forever. You brag about it, it starts to fade.

Back to the POWs Top makes a good point. Getting killed and maimed is awful but is a lawful part of war. Torture and abuse is outside the law of land warfare, and the U.S. and International Courts have recognized this. It is just like the Nazi's at Nuremberg who were following orders. I find it hard to swallow that we give the money to the civilian human shields but hold out on the POWs. Hell this is money seized from Saddams regime. It is not U.S. funds, I would rather see it go the the POWs as allowed by war then rebuild Iraq. We will have to go back by the end of the decade anyway and do it all over again.

Semper Fi

[bubbar]

Top,
Check out the www.dcd.uscourts.gov website the govt tonight is now challenging the judgement. The award is gone unless Pres Bush allows the payment. The law states it is his determinination. But why should the Feds fight the ruling, it is purely symbolic they should have just let it lay and have it be over.

[firstsgtmike]

Bubbar,

You list your current ocupation as law enforcement. So I have a question.

Do you feel that the wives and children of the POWs are any more deserving than the widows and children of the law enforcement officers who lost their lives on 9/11?

How about the widow and children of the law enforcement officer who was killed preventing a hold-up three months ago?

[bubbar]

In this case I support the POWs claims, not the wives and children's claim. The wifes and children from 9/11 were taken care of by the means made available by the govt and private agencies . I personally know two of them and the system took care of them well. The widows and children from the hold up three months ago are also taken of by various funds: ie special Dept of Justice Fund, most agencies have death benefits also private groups such as Marine Corps Scholarhship Fund and the Fraternal Order of Police are a big help.
Don't get me wrong deaths and injury in both the military and law enforcement suck and no amount of money will make it better.
But in this case the law allowed for the payment for the toture. Again it is the funds from Saddam that are being used not U.S. Govt funds.
It is hard to live by the rule of law rather than the rule of man, because many times it will break your heart. But our country was set up under the premise of the rule of law, by James Madison, Tom Jefferson and the rest.

[bubbar]

How do I get my Chevrons (Sgt) on my profile?

[thedrifter]

bubbar,

Welcome Aboard to the Best Marine Site on the net. Also welcome to your home away from home................
We have a great crew of Marines in here from WW II to the present............
Throw your sea bag in a corner, pull up a footlocker, sit and chat awhile.........


To place your rank in.....

Under user cp (Top of Page) click on edit options....
on the bottom you will see avatars...click on more info....choose your rank...
then click on submit modifications.....

"AGAIN WELCOME ABOARD."

Sempers,

Roger

[bubbar]

drifter thanks for the clue on the chevrons it worked. This looks like an outstanding site. I look forward to hanging out.
Semper Fi
Bubbar

[firstsgtmike]

I have promised to read the documents referred to in previous posts, and I will, and, naturally, I will have some additional comments to make.

I assume I will be reading tear-jerking tales of past horror stories of hurt, pain, and anguish. "I missed him so much, my children missed their daddy and that's why I feel entitled to 10 million dollars while my husband is entitled to 35 million."

I would suggest that all parties concerned visit a VA Hospital's Vegetable Garden on visitor's day. Pick and choose who you would like to trade places with, child for child, wife for wife, vet for vet.

One of the 17 POWs is now a co-pilot for a commercial airline. I could probably find thousands of vets wives who would gladly change places with his wife, and she could keep the 10 million she "earned" through her grief.

One argument that has been advanced is that it is NOT the US government who is paying, but the Iraqi government.

I wasn't aware that a government has ANY money, except that which it collects from its citizens. In that event, it is ALL of the Iraqi citizens paying for the excesses of a few.

It's not OUR money paying the 1 billion?

American citizens are paying for our activities and expenses in Iraq. Hopefully, through the sale of their oil, Iraqi citizens will begin paying for the ongoing reconstruction of their country. Until then, you and I will be paying for it.

Will we ever be reimbursed? Do you seriously think you will receive a check or a tax credit as reimbursement from the Iraqis?

Impounded Iraqi money is earmarked to begin paying reconstruction costs. If that money did not, or does not exist, it would have to be provided by US.

It's not a question of whether we think it is right or wrong. IT WILL HAPPEN!.

I believe that if One Billion Dollars is added to the Iraqi reconstruction costs, that money should be shared by ALL disabled U.S. veterans and their families, and NOT restricted to 17 vets and their families.

(I'm also looking forward to reading the reports of the on-going disabilities of the 17 vets, and the current psychiatric treatment of them and their families.) (Particularly that of the air-line co-pilot.)

[marinemom]

I have to agree with firstsgtmike on this one - but I also have to ask a question?

Can anyone find any records of court cases against Japan and Germany by WWII POWs - even those from the Bataan Death March? I think not.

While I agree that we must be certain and sure in our care of those who have served this country - I am getting the feeling that this is another case of Shakespeare - The first thing we do, we kill all the lawyers.

[firstsgtmike]

I read the pleading, the decision, the Government's pleading and the decision on that too. <br />
<br />
Yes, as expected, the case read like a horror story. But no more so than POW experiences in Nam or Iran....