Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR
John Manning
Victim: Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR
KBR Told Victim She Could Lose Her Job If She Sought Help After Being
Raped, She Says
By Brian Ross, Maddy Saur & Justin Rood
ABCNews.com, Dec. 10, 2007
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3977702&page=1
A Houston, Texas woman says she was gang-raped by Halliburton/KBR
coworkers in Baghdad, and the company and the U.S. government are
covering up the incident.
Jamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men
at a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a
shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for
medical treatment, she'd be out of a job.
"Don't plan on working back in Iraq. There won't be a position here, and
there won't be a position in Houston," Jones says she was told.
In a lawsuit filed in federal court against Halliburton and its
then-subsidiary KBR, Jones says she was held in the shipping container
for at least 24 hours without food or water by KBR, which posted armed
security guards outside her door, who would not let her leave.
"It felt like prison," says Jones, who told her story to ABC News as
part of an upcoming "20/20" investigation. "I was upset; I was curled up
in a ball on the bed; I just could not believe what had happened."
Finally, Jones says, she convinced a sympathetic guard to loan her a
cell phone so she could call her father in Texas.
"I said, 'Dad, I've been raped. I don't know what to do. I'm in this
container, and I'm not able to leave,'" she said. Her father called
their congressman, Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas.
"We contacted the State Department first," Poe told ABCNews.com, "and
told them of the urgency of rescuing an American citizen" -- from her
American employer.
Poe says his office contacted the State Department, which quickly
dispatched agents from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad to Jones' camp, where
they rescued her from the container.
According to her lawsuit, Jones was raped by "several attackers who
first drugged her, then repeatedly raped and injured her, both
physically and emotionally."
Jones told ABCNews.com that an examination by Army doctors showed she
had been raped "both vaginally and anally," but that the rape kit
disappeared after it was handed over to KBR security officers.
A spokesperson for the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security
told ABCNews.com he could not comment on the matter.
Over two years later, the Justice Department has brought no criminal
charges in the matter. In fact, ABC News could not confirm any federal
agency was investigating the case.
Legal experts say Jones' alleged assailants will likely never face a
judge and jury, due to an enormous loophole that has effectively left
contractors in Iraq beyond the reach of United States law.
"It's very troubling," said Dean John Hutson of the Franklin Pierce Law
Center. "The way the law presently stands, I would say that they don't
have, at least in the criminal system, the opportunity for justice."
Congressman Poe says neither the departments of State nor Justice will
give him answers on the status of the Jones investigation.
Asked what reasons the departments gave for the apparent slowness of the
probes, Poe sounded frustrated.
"There are several, I think, their excuses, why the perpetrators haven't
been prosecuted," Poe told ABC News. "But I think it is the
responsibility of our government, the Justice Department and the State
Department, when crimes occur against American citizens overseas in
Iraq, contractors that are paid by the American public, that we pursue
the criminal cases as best as we possibly can and that people are
prosecuted."
Since no criminal charges have been filed, the only other option,
according to Hutson, is the civil system, which is the approach that
Jones is trying now. But Jones' former employer doesn't want this case
to see the inside of a civil courtroom.
KBR has moved for Jones' claim to be heard in private arbitration,
instead of a public courtroom. It says her employment contract requires it.
In arbitration, there is no public record nor transcript of the
proceedings, meaning that Jones' claims would not be heard before a
judge and jury. Rather, a private arbitrator would decide Jones' case.
In recent testimony before Congress, employment lawyer Cathy
Ventrell-Monsees said that Halliburton won more than 80 percent of
arbitration proceedings brought against it.
In his interview with ABC News, Rep. Poe said he sided with Jones.
"Air things out in a public forum of a courtroom," said Rep. Poe.
"That's why we have courts in the United States."
In her lawsuit, Jones' lawyer, Todd Kelly, says KBR and Halliburton
created a "boys will be boys" atmosphere at the company barracks which
put her and other female employees at great risk.
"I think that men who are there believe that they live without laws,"
said Kelly. "The last thing she should have expected was for her own
people to turn on her."
Halliburton, which has since divested itself of KBR, says it "is
improperly named" in the suit.
In a statement, KBR said it was "instructed to cease" its own
investigation by U.S. government authorities "because they were assuming
sole responsibility for the criminal investigations."
"The safety and security of all employees remains KBR's top priority,"
it said in a statement. "Our commitment in this regard is unwavering."
Since the attacks, Jones has started a nonprofit foundation called the
Jamie Leigh Foundation, which is dedicated to helping victims who were
raped or sexually assaulted overseas while working for government
contractors or other corporations.
"I want other women to know that it's not their fault," said Jones.
"They can go against corporations that have treated them this way."
Jones said that any proceeds from the civil suit will go to her foundation.
"There needs to be a voice out there that really pushed for change," she
said. "I'd like to be that voice."
Mike Sullivan
"John Manning" <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote in message
news:YLadnRG-JO2hKsDa...@giganews.com...
>
>
> Victim: Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR
>
> KBR Told Victim She Could Lose Her Job If She Sought Help After Being
> Raped, She Says
>
> By Brian Ross, Maddy Saur & Justin Rood
> ABCNews.com, Dec. 10, 2007
> http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3977702&page=1
>
>
> A Houston, Texas woman says she was gang-raped by Halliburton/KBR
> coworkers in Baghdad, and the company and the U.S. government are covering
> up the incident.
Right wingers believe this is moral, since the war is
moral. To them, it is an unfortunate side effect of a just
war.
It is ok with them that there is no way to bring criminal charges
against the KBR perps or officials. Indeed, I think they would like
to see to it that Jamie Lee Jones' father has his guns taken away
so he isn't tempted to go out and start shooting up KBR officials.
John Manning
That's the wingnut version of the rule of law and justice in America.
Mike Sullivan
"Jake Horn" <Jake.H...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
news:20eul3hoej23036ie...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:29:02 -0800, "Mike Sullivan"
> <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu> wrote:
>
snip
>
> You know better than that. I'm suprised at you.
Is this a moral war and occupation? Was the rape an illegal act according
to the
current rules of this war and occupation?
If the rape is not illegal in a moral war, what other conclusion can you
draw?
Nobody at KBR can be criminally prosecuted for the act making it defacto
legal, just like the collateral damage of killing 100s of thousands of
Iraqis
in the war is simply an unfortunate result of the moral war.
This is the consequence of arguing that this is a moral war, something
many right wing supporters have done.
Perhaps you can make another argument? Are you outraged
at lawless mercenaries acting on behalf of your country?
Mike
s...@slac.stanford.edu
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:53:18 -0800, "Mike Sullivan"
>
>
>
>
>
> <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> >"Jake Horn" <Jake.Horn...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:20eul3hoej23036ie...@4ax.com...
> >> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:29:02 -0800, "Mike Sullivan"
> >> <s...@slacSNIP.stanford.edu> wrote:
>
>
> >> You know better than that. I'm suprised at you.
>
> >Is this a moral war and occupation? Was the rape an illegal act according
> >to the
> >current rules of this war and occupation?
>
> >If the rape is not illegal in a moral war, what other conclusion can you
> >draw?
> >Nobody at KBR can be criminally prosecuted for the act making it defacto
> >legal, just like the collateral damage of killing 100s of thousands of
> >Iraqis
> >in the war is simply an unfortunate result of the moral war.
>
> >This is the consequence of arguing that this is a moral war, something
> >many right wing supporters have done.
>
> >Perhaps you can make another argument? Are you outraged
> >at lawless mercenaries acting on behalf of your country?
>
> >Mike
>
>
> >>>Right wingers believe this is moral, since the war is
> >>>moral. To them, it is an unfortunate side effect of a just
> >>>war.
>
> whether or not the war we are fighting is moral any more than whether
> or not it is moral for a bird to crap on your head.
>
> Your starting to sound more like JM all the time.
>
> - Jake
> Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm trying to reply from google, wish me luck.
The long argument I've had w/ ppl here is over the morality of the
war.
I think it (and all wars) is immoral, and you and others believe it
is moral.
Part of what makes war immoral is the destruction to civilians, ppl
who did not choose to participate in a fight, and the argument on the
"moral war" side says that innocent casualties are an unfortunate
result
of a moral war.
Contractors were given immunity from US and Iraqi legal actions by
executive order for this war. Thus, the rape is unprosecutable and
de-facto
legal since no law has been broken, just like dropping cluster bombs
and
phosphorus incindiaries are legal according to your 'war is moral'
POV.
You and I both agree that the rape of this young woman was immoral.
But
I think all the violent actions of death, destruction, rape, and
torture
of the war are immoral so can assign responsibility to our leadership
and
ultimately the American people. You have a problem in that since
the war is moral, legal actions taken during that war become moral by
your
definition.
You don't need to reconcile this, of course, you can pretend there is
no
moral failing and severe rational disconnect in your position.
Or you could explain what recourse a free and moral society might
have.
Mike
Mike Sullivan
"Jake Horn" <Jake.H...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:54:24 -0800 (PST), s...@slac.stanford.edu wrote:
>
>>On Dec 14, 2:20 pm, Jake Horn <Jake.Horn...@Gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:53:18 -0800, "Mike Sullivan"
>
>
>
>
> You claimed that the rape was considered moral by right wingers, since
> the war is moral.
You do think the war is moral. If acts done in the commission of that
war are considered "legal" according to the rules of warfare in that action,
does that make those actions moral?
>
>>> >>>Right wingers believe this is moral, since the war is
>>> >>>moral. To them, it is an unfortunate side effect of a just
>>> >>>war.
>
>
>>But
>>I think all the violent actions of death, destruction, rape, and
>>torture
>> of the war are immoral so can assign responsibility to our leadership
>>and
>>ultimately the American people. You have a problem in that since
>>the war is moral, legal actions taken during that war become moral by
>>your
>>definition.
>
> Your trying to take the immoral action of rape, and infer that it is
> considered moral by all the people that support an effort that you
> don't consider to be moral. It was not caused by those whom support
> the war, it was caused by immoral prople.
Does that same logic extend to bombing of innocent civilians?
>
>>Or you could explain what recourse a free and moral society might
>>have.
>
>>Mike
>
> Well, "might" is the key word. If all war is immoral, then we wouldn't
> have freedom, now would we, and that would be immoral.
No, it means that we would have to engage in the immorality
of war in order to defend our freedom.
This is the problem with the thinking of war supporters. They have
no conscience about the results of this war since they believe the
war is moral, by extension the consequences of that war are also moral.
For a society that truly believes war is immoral, they will truly see
war as a last resort.