Tortured POWs face fight to collect payout

Malachi151

Graduate Poster
M
Joined
May 24, 2003
Messages
1,404
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/10/1068329485243.html

The Bush Administration is seeking to block a group of American troops who were tortured in Iraqi prisons during the Gulf War in 1991 from collecting any of the hundreds of millions of dollars in frozen Iraqi assets they won last year in a federal court ruling against the government of Saddam Hussein.

In a court challenge that the Administration is winning so far but is not eager to publicise, Administration lawyers have argued that Iraqi assets frozen in bank accounts in the US are needed for Iraqi reconstruction and that the judgement won by the 17 former American prisoners should be overturned in its entirety.

If the Administration succeeds, the former prisoners would be deprived of the money they won and, they say, of the validation of a judge's ruling that documented their accounts of torture by the Iraqis - including beatings, burnings, starvation, mock executions and repeated threats of castration and dismemberment.
Click to expand...

It gets better:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/11/20031106-5.html

Q Scott, there are 17 former POWs from the first Gulf War who were tortured and filed suit against the regime of Saddam Hussein. And a judge has ordered that they are entitled to substantial financial damages. What is the administration's position on that? Is it the view of this White House that that money would be better spent rebuilding Iraq rather than going to these former POWs?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know that I view it in those terms, David. I think that the United States -- first of all, the United States condemns in the strongest terms the brutal torture to which these Americans were subjected. They bravely and heroically served our nation and made sacrifices during the Gulf War in 1991, and there is simply no amount of money that can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering that they went through at the hands of Saddam Hussein's brutal regime. That's what our view is.

Q But, so -- but isn't it true that this White House --

Q They think they're is an --

Q Excuse me, Helen -- that this White House is standing in the way of them getting those awards, those financial awards, because it views it that money better spent on rebuilding Iraq?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, there's simply no amount of money that can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering --

Q Why won't you spell out what your position is?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm coming to your question. Believe me, I am. Let me finish. Let me start over again, though. No amount of money can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering that they went through at the hands of a very brutal regime, at the hands of Saddam Hussein. It was determined earlier this year by Congress and the administration that those assets were no longer assets of Iraq, but they were resources required for the urgent national security needs of rebuilding Iraq. But again, there is simply no amount of compensation that could ever truly compensate these brave men and women.

Q Just one more. Why would you stand in the way of at least letting them get some of that money?

MR. McCLELLAN: I disagree with the way you characterize it.

Q But if the law that Congress passed entitles them to access frozen assets of the former regime, then why isn't that money, per a judge's order, available to these victims?

MR. McCLELLAN: That's why I pointed out that that was an issue that was addressed earlier this year. But make no mistake about it, we condemn in the strongest possible terms the torture that these brave individuals went through --

Q -- you don't think they should get money?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- at the hands of Saddam Hussein. There is simply no amount of money that can truly compensate those men and women who heroically served --

Q That's not the issue --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- who heroically served our nation.

Q Are you opposed to them getting some of the money?

MR. McCLELLAN: And, again, I just said that that had been addressed earlier this year.

Q No, but it hasn't been addressed. They're entitled to the money under the law. The question is, is this administration blocking their effort to access some of that money, and why?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't view it that way at all. I view it the way that I stated it, that this issue was --

Q But you are opposed to them getting the money.

MR. McCLELLAN: This issue was addressed earlier this year, and we believe that there's simply no amount of money that could truly compensate these brave men and women for what they went through and for the suffering that they went through at the hands of Saddam Hussein --

Q So no money.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and that's my answer.
Click to expand...
 
Happy Veteran's Day! I'm sure we'll hear much more of these same platitudes expressed later today.

OT Is it me or does the new Press Secretary seem really unready for these type of questions?
 
The 17 soldiers are preparing to sue the U.S. government.

The amount in question is $1 billion. Fifty-eight million per soldier does seem a bit high in my estimation. The soldiers were beaten, shocked, and starved.
 
The suit was of course origionally against Saddam, so everyone felt the the higher the price the better. Now that the suit is "against America" I guess attitudes are different... hmm...

Nevertheless I heard on the news yesterday something about Bush inceasing some small benefit for Veterans, they didn't mention anything about this though...
 
Emotions aside, Do these guys really expect to get this money? Wasntthis a default judgement, I dont think "Iraq" showed up to defend itself.

Plus Saddam isnt even around so why should they get access to Iraqs money. How many thousands of Iraqs have the same claims agiainst saddam.

This sort of reminds me of slave reparations except these guys would be suing a government that no longer exists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom