Bush Administration Seeks To Void Big Damage Award To Gulf War POWs

[Judi Lynn]

April 7, 2004


Bush Administration Seeks To Void Big Damage Award To Gulf War POWs


By JENNIFER C. KERR
Associated Press Writer

(AP) - The Bush administration urged an appeals court Wednesday to overturn a judge's order awarding nearly $1 billion in Iraqi money to 17 Americans taken prisoner by Saddam Hussein's government during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Attorneys for the POWs, who were tortured and starved, countered that the award - to be paid from Iraqi government assets frozen in this country - in no way threatens the rebuilding of Iraq, taking issue with the central argument of the administration.

Justice Department attorney Gregory Katsas said that foreign policy interests are at stake, and that the POWs' claims should be handled through diplomatic channels rather than the courts.

The administration maintains that countless people suffered at the hands of Saddam and plenty will be seeking compensation from the new government, jeopardizing its fragile existence. Once the Iraqi government gets on more solid footing, the administration believes reparations could be negotiated.
(snip/...)

http://www.wavy.com/Global/story.asp?S=1769932&nav=23iiM80q

[Supormom]

1. Way to support the troops!

POW's- tortured and starved- enough said! They deserve the money more than georgie's friends at Halliburton!

[Just Me]

2. Are you f*cking kidding me?

Why the hell would they do that?

WTF!!!!

[rocktivity]

10. I'll tell you why they'd do that

because they don't want to have to compensate IRAQ war victims, especially if Bush is found liable in some way.

:headbang:
rocknation

[maddezmom]

3. unfreakingbelievable

"foreign policy is a stake"? I thought Saddam was no longer in power?

[mike_c]

4. Haliburton has already triple entered the money into last year's...

...corporate books.

[Lorien]

5. A@@holes!

Damn, just when you thought they couldn't behave in a more corrupt, anti-American way...!!

[mbperrin]

6. Boy, that Crawford guy sure supports the troops,

don't he?

[CatWoman]

7. THOSE

BASTARDS!!

[shockingelk]

8. Encouraging "judicial activism", eh?

[]i]"The Bush administration urged an appeals court Wednesday to overturn..."

I thought judges were supposed to rule from law and not make ideological decisions.

[saigon68]

9. Way to Piss on the troops, thanks

And for your service we will piss on you.

And your kid should join the service to help Kill the RagHeads???

No one in my family will do a dishonorable thing like that----

NO ONE

Thanks chimp

</End Rant>

[zbdent]

11. I'm using this with the filter of "Bush Logic"

If W, in his "approved by me" commercials, can claim that Kerry voting against a tax cut is "voting to raise taxes" 350 times, then I believe that this can be used in the same way to point out that Bush has now tried to take approx 1 BILLION dollars away from Gulf I POWs.

Slap that in the faces of the Bushbots.

I even wrote a LTTE to the Akron Beacon Journal:

Bush's view on Kerry "tax hikes" translates to Bush "cutting" homeland security?

George W. Bush authorized campaign commercials that claim that John Kerry "voted to raise taxes 350 times". Bush comes out at the beginning of the commercial saying that he approves the contents of the commercial.

Now, the explanation of the "raising taxes" is really a warped definition of "raising". John Kerry voted against a package of tax cuts en masse, which included most of the tax cuts alluded to in the commercial.

Now, according to the logic, keeping the taxes at the same level as the day before is considered a raise in a tax. Hmmm.

Today's (04/08/2004) Akron Beacon Journal, page A6, has an article which points out that George Bush and his administration are trying to negate a ruling which awarded nearly one BILLION dollars to several Gulf War soldiers who became POWs during that war.

According to the Bush logic, then, George Bush is taking a BILLION dollars away from Gulf War POWs. That's quite a lot of money.

Another application of the Bush logic is that George Bush pressured Republicans to CUT funding for Homeland Defense. Not long ago, Democrats in Congress tried to ADD 600 MILLION dollars to the budget to strengthen Homeland security. The so-called "poison pill" of the bill was that the Democrats also wanted some protections to the actual workers that would be on the home front lines. In an amusing twist, George Bush had threatened to veto any budgets which asked for more money than he had asked for. At least, that could be how he justified the veto threat. The reality was that he threatened the veto because it proposed protections for actual workers.

With the application of the Bush logic (as applied to Kerry's "tax increase votes"), George W. Bush actually cut 600 million dollars from Homeland Defense.

Way to go, George.

[Judi Lynn]

12. Sweet family questions POW judgment

Thursday, April 08, 2004 — Time: 7:19:02 AM EST


Sweet family questions POW judgment

By ROGER ADKINS


WASHINGTON, W.Va. - The Wood County parents of a former prisoner of war are mystified by the Bush administration's continued attempts to deny a $1 billion judgment to 17 Americans who were captured and tortured by Iraqis during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Maj. Robert Sweet, a native of Washington, W.Va., is one of the 17 former POWs who sued and won against Saddam Hussein and the former Iraqi government. Sweet's aircraft was shot down in February 1991 and he was captured, tortured and interrogated for an extended period of time.
(snip)

Robert Sweet's parents, Arthur and Mary Ann Sweet, said they are disappointed the Bush administration is continuing to dishonor the American soldiers who fought and sacrificed for their country.

Mary Ann said she would be even more disappointed if she knew for sure the president was aware of the situation and was allowing the POWs to be denied their judgment.

"I'm hoping that the president does not know about this. I hope he's too busy to know what's going on," Mary Ann said Wednesday.
(snip/...)

http://www.newsandsentinel.com/news/story/048202004_new03_POWJudgment.asp

[lumpy]

13. Of course the chief

might not know about it. He doesn't want to clutter his beautiful mind with such dreadful facts. The puppet president is not in charge. In any event some one of his underlings should be pressing for satisfaction of these cases. It will only happen, it appears, if for political expediency and gain. Bad political publicity, you know.