So which is it? Were they offered blanket immunity from prosecution like one official tells it? Or are they given limited immunity?
Personally, I don't know if I trust what they are saying might be true or not. If they make incriminating statements and those can't be used against them in court, then that would at least give investigators information they might already have and lead towards a heavier way of prosecuting the men involved.
Regardless of what happened, the Iraqi parliament is voting on limiting immunity for US contractors because of this incident.
But before we throw these guys under the bus, I want to know the truth about whether or not they came under fire first. There's conflicting reports about who shot first.
So until we know that, we can't really judge them. However, the immunity deal is significant in that it points towards guilt.
Travis
No comments:
Post a Comment