Threats

I'm not sure this really counts as a veiled threat:

I mean, I guess the threat's a little veiled, but not really. I suppose the only question is whether Rep. Issa (R-CA) is trying to say that if Waxman went to Iraq Blackwater personnel would simply fail to protect him, thus leading to his death at insurgent hands, or if he means that Blackwater personnel might shoot him in the back. And a further question: If Blackwater personnel assigned to do security for a US Congressman did shoot him in the back, what's the legal remedy?

Comments

Reminds me of what Jesse Helms said about President Clinton.

Posted by Steve | October 2, 2007 6:04 PM

"All your tax dollars are belong to us"

Posted by Don Williams | October 2, 2007 6:05 PM

Steve's comment nails it.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | October 2, 2007 6:08 PM

I thought the remedy has been established as $15,000 and an escort out of the country for the shooter.

Posted by Rob | October 2, 2007 6:14 PM

Sadly, the only remedy available would be impeachment of the president and vice president.

Posted by rea | October 2, 2007 6:24 PM

The US has proclaimed that if a Congressman is shot, anywhere in the world, that it has the right to try and punish the shooter under current federal criminal law. In fact, the US has proclaimed that if any US citizen is shot, anywhere in the world, that it has the right to try and punish the shooter under federal criminal law.

This is justified under the protective principle of extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction. There's nothing new needed to have a remedy.

Posted by Richard Campbell | October 2, 2007 6:32 PM

Sadly you gotta wonder if the Bush DOJ would prosecute said shooter under these hypothetical circumstances. They consider Waxman a traitor, after all.

Posted by Woody Bombay | October 2, 2007 6:40 PM

So, I just rad that post, and I'm left wondering, does Mat really think that American contractors are not subject to U.S. law? Like, sincerely believe that in a way that would make this a subject worth arguing about?

Posted by Béziers | October 2, 2007 6:48 PM

I think Issa was thinking about how much Henry "Mr. Nostrils" Waxman would like being bodyguarded by two green Army privates instead of security contractors that know their business.

"Uh, got it Sarge. No firing on innocent Iraqi civilians unless they prove they are hostile when they actually shoot the AK-47s pointed at us and the Jewish Congressman's head flies off..
OK, Mr. Waxman...ready to go on your tour outside the Green Zone?"

Posted by Chris Ford | October 2, 2007 7:01 PM

Beziers, would you call what they are doing in Iraq operating under any type of law? Our own laws exclude them from consequences.

Ironically, Issa is the one Republican Congressman who ever looks sane when he is on Bill Maher's show. Sigh.

Posted by Reality Man | October 2, 2007 7:05 PM

"Ya know, that's a nice Congressman ya got dere. 'Be a shame if sumpin happened to him, if ya know what I mean."

Posted by El Cid | October 2, 2007 7:06 PM

Somewhat off topic, but Reality Man have you noticed that no Conservatives seem willing to go on Maher's show anymore? Maybe it's just a fluke, but the last one I can remember was the Weekly Standard guy that wrote the Cheney Bio. It was a pretty rough week for him, he got his ass handed to him by Jon Stewart and Then Maher and Tim Robbins kept calling Bull Shit on his blatant lies. Since then it has been all liberals.

Posted by Eric K | October 2, 2007 7:55 PM

Well, here's my hypothetical question: When a neo-Nazi tiptoes up to the line of advocating murder of a minority, or an anti-abortion activist tiptoes up to the line of advocating murder of a healthcare provider who works in a family-planning clinic, and their admonitions are carried out, the advocates can be held liable.

So if a Blackwater dude frags Waxman, while we might not be able to get our hands on the mercenary, we could probably put Issa in the slammer (or at least nail him for a massive civil liability).

Posted by The Confidence Man | October 2, 2007 8:00 PM

I wonder why this idea that's going around of defending Blackwater by saying that they're necessary because the members of the US military are too incompetent to provide security doesn't count as traitorous insulting of the troops.

Posted by KCinDC | October 2, 2007 8:00 PM

Seriously, people need to investigate the law a little bit before they go asking questions. Ever since this Blackwater incident crept into the public consciousness, everyone has seemed to throw their hands up in ignorance as to what we should do. There are various legal remadies:

The Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction Statutes. If this shooting were to happen on a military base, prosecution would likely happen under this statute, as was in the case of military contractor David Passaro.

The Military Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction Act of 2004. Although this statute lacks teeth, in a high profile murder of a Congressperson, it could easily be applied.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice. This was recently amended to allow the court martialing of non-military personal, such as Blackwater.

And very unlikely, the War Crimes Act. Allows prosecution of violations of the Geneva Conventions. This is the least likely.

Posted by eggman | October 2, 2007 8:11 PM

Eggman, Laura Dickson wrote at Balkinization about possible ways of prosecuting contractors.

Posted by KCinDC | October 2, 2007 8:20 PM

Issa did make a point of saying that part of what made BW so good was that they had been navy seals (and presumably delta force). If that is a virtue, then training and equipping a similar outfit that is part of the u.s. military and accountable to the chain of command. The fundamental point here is that when the government cedes one of its principle functions to private entities it relinquishes part of its sovereignty. What's next: privatizing the IRS? what about the justice department? how bout we have private firms decide how to allocate earmarks?

Never mind the fact that military scientists from Sun Tzu to Clausewitz to Machiavelli have all given the strongest admonition against using mercenaries. Washington was also skeptical. For Issa to say, in an almost blase fashion, that this is the ordinary way to fight a war, ignores a substantial body of military thought.

Posted by JC | October 2, 2007 9:04 PM

I don't think Matt's comment was meant to be taken seriously. Obviously, if Blackwater killed Waxman in Iraq, they'd find some way to punish the shooter under some law. (even if the shooter was just a scapegoat)

The salient question is why ordinary Iraqis don't seem to be worthy of the same protection.

Its a question of power, not words on a page.

Posted by graeme | October 2, 2007 9:26 PM

"I think Issa was thinking about how much Henry "Mr. Nostrils" Waxman would like being bodyguarded by two green Army privates instead of security contractors that know their business."

Now, now, Chris, a hot-blooded (or cold-blooded,..., it's all a matter of perspective) patriot like yourself must have just a bit of a problem with hiring Hessian soldiers.

As to the "nostrils" potshot, certainly you're capable a wittier rejoinder...

Posted by Rihilism | October 2, 2007 9:28 PM

I'm sure anyone who shoots a nosey Democratic Congressman is a prime candidate for a Presidential Pardon.

Posted by Arun | October 2, 2007 9:57 PM

Chris Ford clearly believes U.S. soldiers in Iraq are incompetent morons. He probably considers them "phony soldiers." I bet he would mock them with Purple Heart band-aids if he got the chance.

Posted by Woody Bombay | October 2, 2007 10:01 PM

While this is a nice outrage post, and the liberal blogosphere will be duly outraged, what is happening? Why are the Dems, aware of a, the dependence of the armed forces in Iraq on these thugs, and b., aware that defunding Blackwater and other groups would be unpopular with only the subgroup of deep psycho hawks, maybe 5% - why do they do nothing? If they pulled the plug, the game would be over - either Bush would have to call up a lot more troops, in which case I can't imagine that even the GOP would support him, or he'd have to start real withdrawals. Plus, longrange, the evidence is in: the mercenaries are a pernicious force that undermine American interests abroad and suck American tax dollars like the greediest of parasites at home.

That nothing happens is, I think, about the bipartisan agreement that has survived Iraq, incredibly enough. That agreement is about expanded executive power and giving the Pentagon the ability to 'relieve political pressure' by hiring mercenaries to do controversial things. In other words, to pull the plug on the democratic constraints, the checks and balances, that align American military power with, broadly, the American popular will.

Let's hope these hearing lead to a nice, clean reform - removing entirely all private security forces from American federal employ. If the Dems want to make a play for the enlisted man and woman's vote, reforming the playing field and getting rid of these paramilitary pricks would be a fine start. When the choice comes down, next time, between a war and a draft, almost surely this will force the government to chose peace. And that will be a great thing.

Posted by roger | October 2, 2007 10:20 PM

Congressman Issa's comment suggests that he thinks Blackwater contractors are unprofessional and would be unable to put their personal feelings about Rep. Waxman aside to do their duty as guards. I eagerly await a response from Blackwater CEO Prince condemning this insult to his men.

Posted by Ben | October 2, 2007 11:03 PM

Darrell Issa is still pissed off because he didn't get chosen for prom king when he led the GOP recall on Governor Gray Davis.

Posted by shnooky | October 2, 2007 11:35 PM

Given the insane legal status of contractors in Iraq, would it be legal to have some other PMCs shoot the blackwater guys?

Posted by Justin | October 2, 2007 11:49 PM

Er, to be clear, that was responding to your hypothetical about them shooting Waxman in the back.

Posted by Justin | October 2, 2007 11:50 PM

Why does Chris Ford hate the troops?

Posted by DMonteith | October 3, 2007 12:17 AM

Well, I do hate - scratch that, despise - the troops, and consider them morons and "phoney solders" (albeit not for the reasons Rush thinks.)

The problem, as I've pointed out before, is that the Blackwater guys and US troops are the SAME GUYS, just on different career paths. (Blackwater probably does hire bozos from other national armies, or outright mercs as well - but most of these guys are probably ex-US military, simply because there are probably more of them to hire and they all speak English.)

As for PMCs shooting each other, I believe there have been several such incidents. But that's no surprise - there have been several incidents where US troops in Iraq fired at each other, being so trigger-happy that they didn't look to see who was shooting at them before returning fire. Given the US policy of "shoot up the entire street regardless", it's not surprising that one such "firefight" started when a power line transformer blew up.

Morons.

I like the idea of pulling the plug on the PMCs, thus forcing Bush to call for a draft. But since the Iran war is right around the corner, there's going to be a draft anyway. So that probably won't help.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | October 3, 2007 12:54 AM

Why would they shoot him in the back? He's not packing. They could shoot him in the face.

Posted by brooksfoe | October 3, 2007 3:03 AM

Why would they shoot him in the back? He's not packing. They could shoot him in the face.

Whichever way counts as not-sectarian violence.

Posted by Arun | October 3, 2007 3:29 AM

Re Richard Steven Hack

"But since the Iran war is right around the corner, there's going to be a draft anyway"

There will be a return of the draft when Mr. Hack sees the back of his own ear.

Re Chris Ford

The Prince family which formed the Blackwater Group is associated with Mr. Fords kind of people. From Ed Braytons' blog:

"The Prince family is deeply connected in conservative politics, especially among religious right groups. Edgar Prince, the patriarch of the family, was close friends with James Dobson and a strong supporter of Focus on the Family, having donated millions to that organization.. He was a founding board member of the Family Research Council before his death in 1995 and his wife still sits on the FRC board as well as on the Focus on the Family board. Both have also served on the board of the Council for National Policy, a secretive group that acts as a sort of religious right steering committee, the Alliance Defense Fund and a variety of other similar organizations."

Birds of a feather flock together.

Posted by SLC | October 3, 2007 6:02 AM

Why are the Dems, aware of a, the dependence of the armed forces in Iraq on these thugs, and b., aware that defunding Blackwater and other groups would be unpopular with only the subgroup of deep psycho hawks, maybe 5% - why do they do nothing?

Because nobody in the US, except maybe Kucinich, would ever seriously challenge the military-industrial complex - hate to say it, but the Dems are part of the problem.

Posted by novakant | October 3, 2007 6:27 AM

"Somewhat off topic, but Reality Man have you noticed that no Conservatives seem willing to go on Maher's show anymore? Maybe it's just a fluke, but the last one I can remember was the Weekly Standard guy that wrote the Cheney Bio. It was a pretty rough week for him, he got his ass handed to him by Jon Stewart and Then Maher and Tim Robbins kept calling Bull Shit on his blatant lies. Since then it has been all liberals.

Posted by Eric K | October 2, 2007 7:55 PM"

It does seem odd that this only started happening now. Maybe major Republicans have reached the breaking point where they realize the whole neocon approach to foreign policy is full of shit but know they will be excommunicated if they say so, so they are left with not arguing at all as the best choice? One of the good thing about Maher's show is that people often get called on bullshit, which you don't really see on cable news shows. The nearest thing that the Tim Russerts of the world do is 1) vaguely call Democrats idiots if they hold their ground (if they even get invited on) or 2) dumb "gotcha" interviews with questions like "12 years ago you were in favor of the Death Tax (TM). Now you are against The Death Tax (TM). Why are you a flip-flopper?"

Posted by Reality Man | October 3, 2007 8:55 AM

What bothers me about the growth of American Mercenary firms is that it creates a privately controlled body of men that are willing to do 'missions' for the republican party when called upon. Breaking up peace demonstrations, vandalizing democratic candidates offices, harassing get out the vote workers, beating up people after hours, staging/faking pro republican riots, handing out misleading 'voter information sheets' in heavily democratic neighbourhoods, and at the limit assassinating democratic party leaders. The republican party has created an invisible brown shirt army that opereates beneath the radar screen of law enforcement, the media and public. A stilleto dagger aimed at the heart of American democracy.

You may say, damn you are paranoid. I hope so. Just keep your eyes peeled for connections back to these goons as 'incidents' occur leading up to November 2008. Keep your local FBI agent office number handy to report suspicious activity.

Posted by Northern Observer | October 3, 2007 10:37 AM

"What bothers me about the growth of American Mercenary firms is that it creates a privately controlled body of men that are willing to do 'missions' for the republican party when called upon. Breaking up peace demonstrations, vandalizing democratic candidates offices, harassing get out the vote workers, beating up people after hours, staging/faking pro republican riots, handing out misleading 'voter information sheets' in heavily democratic neighbourhoods, and at the limit assassinating democratic party leaders. The republican party has created an invisible brown shirt army that opereates beneath the radar screen of law enforcement, the media and public. A stilleto dagger aimed at the heart of American democracy.

You may say, damn you are paranoid. I hope so. Just keep your eyes peeled for connections back to these goons as 'incidents' occur leading up to November 2008. Keep your local FBI agent office number handy to report suspicious activity.

Posted by Northern Observer | October 3, 2007 10:37 AM"

Maybe they think the military would not follow orders to do their dirty work, like when MacArthur broke up the march by underpaid WWI veterans. This has the potential to get really creepy.

Posted by Reality Man | October 3, 2007 11:11 AM

Blackwater and the others are the new Pinkertons?

Posted by KCinDC | October 3, 2007 1:56 PM