« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Iraq Details Blackwater Shooting Incident
Blackwater had better hope there's an Iraqi Abraham Zapruder out there. The Interior Ministry has pieced together an account of Sunday's shooting in Mansour alleging that the private-security company fired on civilians at a traffic circle in Nisour Squar with practically no provocation.
In the Interior Ministry account — made available to The New York Times on Thursday — Iraqi investigators interviewed many witnesses but relied on the testimony of the people they considered to be the four most credible.The account says that as soon as the guards took positions in four locations in the square, they began shooting south, killing a driver who had failed to heed a traffic policeman’s call to stop.
“The Blackwater company is considered 100 percent guilty through this investigation,” the report concludes.
An internal U.S. forensic analysis is still ongoing, and an announced joint U.S.-Iraqi investigation has yet to get underway. But the Interior Ministry is already using the report as a lever for getting the State Department to cancel Blackwater's contract to protect U.S. diplomats -- a move State is refusing. The Iraqis also want U.S. security companies to be subject to Iraqi criminal liability.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the ministry's account of the day portrays Blackwater contractors as a band of murderous rogues, who shot without provocation and then just kept shooting:
In the Interior Ministry’s version of that day, the events began unfolding when a bomb exploded shortly before noon near the unfinished Rahman Mosque, about a mile north of Nisour Square. Embassy officials have said the convoy was responding to the bomb, but it is still unclear whether it was carrying officials away from the bomb scene, driving toward it to pick someone up or simply providing support.Whatever their mission, and whoever was inside, the convoy of at least four sport utility vehicles steered onto the square just after noon and took positions that blocked the flow of midday traffic in three directions. But one family’s car, approaching from the south along Yarmouk Street, apparently did not stop quickly enough, and the Blackwater guards opened fire, killing the man who was driving, the ministry account says.
“The woman next to the driver had a baby in her arms,” said an official who shared the report, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to share it. “She started to scream. They shot her,” the official said, adding that the guards then fired what appeared to be grenades or pump guns into the car as it continued to move. The car caught fire.
“The car kept rolling, so they burned it,” the official said.
Comments (27)
RichM wrote on September 21, 2007 11:32 AM:And people wonder how come 4 Blackwater employees were hung in Falluja. There can be no reconciliation in Iraq until the mercenaries are removed.
JackF wrote on September 21, 2007 11:49 AM:Should use of mercenaries be outlawed under international treaty? Is there any use of them which should be acceptable? Should employment of mercenaries be a crime punishable by life in prison?
EH wrote on September 21, 2007 11:55 AM:JackF: There is a video at crooksandliars.com with a clip of a Blackwater/contractor representative and a guy who wrote about book critical of them. International law states that there are 6 criteria for someone to be considered a mercenary, and because Blackwater contractors are not on active duty in a military not a party to the war (one of the six criteria), they are not mercenaries.
neo1 wrote on September 21, 2007 12:03 PM:I know you were trying to be 'cute' but why on earth should they be hoping that there is a filmed record of this? There are already filmed records of contractors murdering innocent people (See 'No End In Sight') and it is one of the most disturbing images I've seen in this entire foul enterprise.
hardheaded liberal wrote on September 21, 2007 12:06 PM:Gee, does this mean that if State refuses to cancel Blackwater's contract and the Iraqi government insists on getting rid of Blackwater that Ryan Crocker and the other State Department personnel will either have to come home or drive around Iraq without security?
Maybe Crocker & Petraeus should measure progress by the changes in firepower carried by their security details. I'm sure both of them have had to increase their personal security details, even in the Green Zone.
anonymouse wrote on September 21, 2007 12:22 PM:I cannot remember the exact situation, but about three years ago, an individual was charged by the Iraq governement for murder, but he was never prosecuted because the case was taken over by either our military or stated dept.
Does anyone recall this?
What impressed me, even back then, was that Iraq had such little control over their own destiny and rule of law. They weren't even able to try a person for murder in their own country without the United States' authorization... which they didn't get.
Jennifer Terry wrote on September 21, 2007 12:44 PM:There is a terrific op/ed piece in today's LA Times by Timothy K. Hsia, an Army infantry captain on his second deployment to Iraq, titled The Outsourced War. He writes, "The military can deploy with fewer soldiers and still achieve the administration's goals [i.e. Rumsfeld's revolution in military affairs]. Implicit in this revolution, though, is the reality that civilian contractors have come to take a significant, vital and cloaked role in the country's prosecution of a war in which Americans are fooled by the actual numbers required to carry out war." 180,000 contracted employees, most of them from economically impoverished nations, are working in Iraq. Between 20,000 and 30,000 of them are private security workers, including about 1000 Blackwater employees. The U.S. has outsourced the majority of its manufacturing jobs and a growing number of its service jobs. Why would it not do the same for jobs previously done by military personnel? Are we seeing the end of nation-state war-making and the rise of privatized war aimed at protecting not nations but precious investments and resources? Seems like it.
wwz wrote on September 21, 2007 12:47 PM:"EH wrote on September 21, 2007 11:55 AM:
JackF: ...and because Blackwater contractors are not on active duty in a military not a party to the war (one of the six criteria), they are not mercenaries."
You'd better view that vid again. You seem to have gotten nearly everything wrong.
thac0 wrote on September 21, 2007 2:10 PM:Can I have a refund on the tax money that bought the bullets to shoot the baby? Prolly, what, a hundred bucks a shot?
JEP wrote on September 21, 2007 2:12 PM:again, doesn't this qualify as State sposored terrorism?
right is right wrote on September 21, 2007 3:11 PM:Blackwater is not a mercenary
YoloMike wrote on September 21, 2007 4:05 PM:organization. It hires only security cleared professionals. It sickens me that the left wing armchair quarterbacks second-guess the situation on the ground in a warzone. The fact is Maliki is Al Sadr's puppet, both Shia...and the MOI is a farce. Of course they want US Military and US Diplomats out of Iraq so they can profit from the country's resources. Accordingly, they sponsor attacks such as these, by multiple local and foreign fighters, dressed in civilian clothing to wage war on the US Diplomats protected by Blackwater, and against the US military. It is incumbent upon the liberal left to realize that this isn't a war with a uniformed enemy. They are terrorists whose sole goal is to disrupt the democratic process while continuing to bleed the US dry of its reconstruction funds and continue to spread their extreme Muslim idealogy.
Right is Right is so wrong. Blackwater and other "contractors" are soldiers for hire, present in Iraq to do the legitimate jobs of the US military while operating under none of its political, legal, and moral constraints. Your description of the asymmetric techniques of the insurgents is nothing to the point of the discussion, which is the legitimacy and wisdom of privatizing military functions. Finally, your charge that the insurgents are trying to disrupt the democratic process is so ridiculously ironic that it beggars the imagination. Maliki is the fruit of our purple-fingered democratic revolution. Blackwater is operating under an exemption from Iraqi laws imposed by a colonial administration and not yet rescinded. Where's the democracy here?
I'm sick of rightwing know-nothing dead-enders who haven't a brain in their heads but somehow keep manging to flap their lips and move their typing fingers.
audiophileguy wrote on September 21, 2007 4:08 PM:Welcome to "democracy" in 2007. These mercenary front men for the CIA are halted for a few days, then are back in business as usual despite being forbidden by the "Prime Minister" and "government" of Iraq. No puppets here----just a bunch of American oilmen doing business as usual.
Punchy wrote on September 21, 2007 4:19 PM:"An internal U.S. forensic analysis is still ongoing, and an announced joint U.S.-Iraqi investigation has yet to get underway."
Let me save all of you the suspense of the rulings....
Blackwater is innocent, "forensic analysis" shows they were shot at by insurgent's Tomahawk missles, and the Iraqis faked their own injuries to earn bigger medals of courage.
right is right wrote on September 21, 2007 4:52 PM:YoloMike, you sir are an idiot. Not only are you an idiot with no first hand knowledge. I have been in country for three years facing this violence and politics on a daily basis.
horatius wrote on September 21, 2007 5:00 PM:Here's another paid right-wing troll mouthing off making no sense whatsoever.
rigth is right wrote on September 21, 2007 5:05 PM:paid so the liberal left can hide behind the freedom and protection that we pay for with our lives so cowards like you can enjoy your latte's and blackberry's...all of this is so laughable...why dont you go back to writing a thesis on global warming or some other ludicrous past time....
SeeDee wrote on September 22, 2007 12:45 AM:right is right, your blithering about 'paying with OUR LIVES' so cowards like you...etc.:
Quit beating your chest and 'stuff it'.
What a brain-washed, self-inflated little soldier you obviously are...either tbat, or you have a productive imagination, a troll pretending to be returned from Iraq.
My own grandson (who just returned from Iraq) and I sat down and discussed his duty there, his experiences, and his (and his buddies') takes on the war. He (and MOST of his fellow-soldiers) have a very different view than you.
Our discussions revealed his opinion that probably three-fourths of his unit were convinced that the war was an un-necessary, poorly-led effort that could never have a very good outcome for the U.S.A.
We talked about his committment to do the duty he had taken an oath to adhere to, and I encouraged him to honor his word.
But he was very emphatic about the feeling among most troops on the ground in Iraq that, despite the brain-washing and coercion natural in the military, are convinced that everything that goes on there borders on criminal conduct as far as American forces go.
You, right is right, demonstrate a total dis-connect with the lies that got us into the war in Iraq, the further lies that have resulted in a shattered country from an already tenuous nation, with yet even more lies to mask the expected looting of the Iraqi oil resources...and, finally, more lies paraded by a syncophantic little General to our gullible Congressmen.
Having served in combat situations long, long ago, right is right, I can only say that as an American, I do NOT at all respect the 'sacrifices' you wish use to claim some credit for 'defending America's freedoms'...you did not defend America...you defended a cowardly C-I-C and the thugs who fomented this Iraq debacle'.
I have even less respect for the firms like Blackwater and their over-paid personnel and for the government officials who contract for their services.
Leatherneck wrote on September 23, 2007 1:48 AM:"You defended a cowardly C-I-C and the thugs who fomented this Iraq debacle".
Does that include the Dems who pushed for and voted for the war, or are you just singling out Bush and his band of jack jooted thugs.
After all, We must include everyone now mustn't we.
Leatherneck wrote on September 23, 2007 1:49 AM:"You defended a cowardly C-I-C and the thugs who fomented this Iraq debacle".
Does that include the Dems who pushed for and voted for the war, or are you just singling out Bush and his band of jack booted thugs.
After all, We must include everyone now mustn't we.
SeeDee wrote on September 23, 2007 10:42 AM:Leatherneck: In answer to your question...YES...and, especially, those pols (of whatever stripe) who, like Lieberman, et al., take their orders from the Likud-dominated AIPAC or Halliburton and its sort.
There is NEVER an excuse for committing this nation's armed forces to a war which is based on deliberate lies, greed for war profits, looting of others resources/wealth....
And the top brass (including the C-I-C) of a military that supports such criminal activity is guilty of betraying the American Public.
Leatherneck wrote on September 23, 2007 10:12 PM:Well I beg to differ. My nephew has served 2 tours in Iraq, USMC. He would have a major problem with your 3/4 of the troops are disillusioned bs. As a matter of fact, He's going back as a Platoon leader and want's to see the job done and his brothers want to see the mission completed. To say that grown men who enlisted on their own free will are being brainwashed is just a god damned lie. Tell that to the Marines and they'll tell you to shove it. They want to win and you and Jack Murtha and his likes be damned.
Your GS and you seem to have problem with the military. No one forced your GS to join the armed forces and if he has a problem, he can opt to leave.
Semper FI
Anonymous wrote on September 23, 2007 10:14 PM:test
SeeDee wrote on September 23, 2007 11:00 PM:Leatherneck: go ahead invoke the 'Semper Fi' b/s to mask your frustration.
And while you are at it, figure out just what the 'job in Iraq' is supposed to be and tell us how and when we'll know that the 'mission is completed'?
Oh, yeah, you'll know when those who brain-washed you in the first place tell you it is 'completed'.
And 'grown men' are not necessarily from 'brain-washing' as is apparent.
Anonymous wrote on September 23, 2007 11:18 PM:"Leatherneck: go ahead invoke the 'Semper Fi' b/s to mask your frustration".
My frustration stems from people like you who think they speak for the military as a whole.
You don't and I am not frustrated. My Nephew wasn't coerced in to joining the Corp. He joined 3 years ago and new damned well he was going to Iraq.
He was old enough to know the ramifications of his actions and he enlisted. No one forced him to join, he joined of his own free will.
He thinks he's helping the Iraqi's and trying to make a difference. Like my Dad in WW-2 and my 2 brothers in the Nam.
Leatherneck wrote on September 23, 2007 11:19 PM:"Leatherneck: go ahead invoke the 'Semper Fi' b/s to mask your frustration".
My frustration stems from people like you who think they speak for the military as a whole.
You don't and I am not frustrated. My Nephew wasn't coerced in to joining the Corp. He joined 3 years ago and new damned well he was going to Iraq.
He was old enough to know the ramifications of his actions and he enlisted. No one forced him to join, he joined of his own free will.
He thinks he's helping the Iraqi's and trying to make a difference. Like my Dad in WW-2 and my 2 brothers in the Nam.
SeeDee wrote on September 24, 2007 1:19 AM:'Anonymous' and 'Leatherneck' sure seem to speak with the same voice..
As for your 'frustration' and your blatant lie that I "think that I speak for the military as a whole", you'll just have to work out your frustration as best you can...but why toss in the lie?
Nor did I say anything about your nephew (or anyone else) being coerced into joining the Marines.
I respect what this country has stood for for over two-hundred years...and it has NOT stood for the actions the Bush/Cheney/Jewish Likudian cabal has steered us into in Iraq.
I do not necessarily dis-respect your nephew's motivation (helping the Iraqis)...maybe he can explain why every reliable report of polling among the 'IRAQIS', shows over 75-percent of them want the U.S. forces to leave. It seems they've had just about all the 'help' they want from our military.
About the best thing I can accord you is a sincere wish that your nephew speedily returns safe and sound from his latest Iraq venture.
And, please, no more boasts of your 'connections' to this nation's previous wars...I'll be forced to tell you of my own combat experiences....and those of my other relatives going all the way back to the Revolutionary War. Only the War of 1812 and the Spanish-American War (1898) do not have the names of some ancestor on the lists.