XPost: ba.politics, dc.media, soc.penpals   
   XPost: alt.burningman   
   From: stench@codfish.com   
      
   When U.S. troops arrive back in Iraq to try to salvage its   
   rapidly deteriorating situation, they have more to worry about   
   than fighting ISIS terrorists. Those soldiers could also face   
   criminal prosecution in Iraqi courts, since President Barack   
   Obama failed to secure an immunity agreement for American forces.   
      
   Obama pulled troops out of Iraq in 2011 when he failed to get   
   the Iraqis to sign a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), part of   
   which would grant American troops immunity from lawsuits   
   (including criminal prosecutions) in Iraq’s courts. Far from the   
   “equal justice under law” that is the hallmark of America’s   
   judiciary, Iraq’s courts are thoroughly compromised and   
   unreliable.   
      
   As Obama sends U.S. forces back into Iraq without an immunity   
   agreement, they would daily face threat of arrest and   
   prosecution. Any American service member on the ground in the   
   Islamic state could, therefore, end up in an Iraqi prison.   
      
   Official immunity is a vitally important protection enjoyed by   
   government officials in America and other nations across the   
   globe. Many federal and state officials have absolute immunity   
   from suit for the execution of their official duties.   
      
   Congressmen, federal judges, and Obama himself, are 100 percent   
   immune from lawsuits or legal process targeting them   
   individually for their performance in office. No one can sue   
   federal, state, or local legislators for anything they say or do   
   during a legislative meeting. No one can get a subpoena to   
   compel a judge to reveal his emails to his law clerks regarding   
   a court case, or compel a congressman to reveal emails exchanged   
   with another member or congressional staff.   
      
   Obama relies upon this protection on a daily basis. No matter   
   how bad the conduct, the only remedy the Constitution allows is   
   for Congress to impeach and remove a president, not sue him.   
      
   Such absolute immunity is an integral part of conducting foreign   
   relations. Ambassadors are protected by diplomatic immunity,   
   which, in addition to protecting their families and staffs, also   
   covers U.S. Marines who guard embassies abroad, including the   
   U.S. embassy on the outskirts of Baghdad.   
      
   Official immunity remains one of the largest obstacles to U.S.   
   involvement in fighting the ISIS terrorist forces. The   
   Pentagon’s Rear Admiral John Kirby told reporters on June 20,   
   “We are pursuing something in writing. The Secretary [of Defense   
   Chuck Hagel] is absolutely committed to making sure that our   
   troops have the legal protections.”   
      
   Yet under Iraq’s form of government in its new constitution,   
   Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki cannot grant such immunity. He   
   would have to pass it through Iraq’s parliament. No U.S.   
   military commander recommended keeping U.S. forces on the ground   
   in 2011 without guaranteeing this legal protection.   
      
   However, Iraq’s parliament is in disarray, and it may need to   
   form a new government—electing a prime minister, president, and   
   speaker—before taking up such legislation. So it is unclear how   
   quickly Iraqi lawmakers could vote on granting such immunity,   
   leaving any forces sent to Iraq in the meantime under continuous   
   threat of full legal prosecution for anything that happens while   
   they attempt to save the fledgling regime from collapse or   
   overthrow.   
      
   Ken Klukowski is senior legal analyst for Breitbart News. Follow   
   him on Twitter @kenklukowski.   
      
   http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/06/23/Obama-Sending-   
   U-S-Troops-That-Could-be-Prosecuted-in-Iraqi-Courts   
      
       
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)