• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« Former Federal Prosecutor In D.C. Accused of Misconduct | Main | Senior Senate Judiciary Committee Attorney Resigns for MacArthur Foundation Job »

March 29, 2012


Scott Shepard

The attacks were an act of war, not an act of terrorism, because they was carried out deliberately against armed military personnel on duty. While the rules of engagement were restrictive, this is not to say that the men carried no arms at all. And they were backed by US military ships off the coast that fired into the targets on the mainland. You can't say, 'my ship fired, but I didn't.' If your ship fired, you are a belligerent. This suit treats the victims as if they were unarmed civilians. The American victims were on duty US military personnel. How can their families be compensated for their deaths, since they were on duty, on a military base?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad