CACI International was able to win a dismissal of a lawsuit by Abu Ghraib prisoners for directing torture at the notorious prison when a US federal court said it lacked jurisdiction. But getting away with participating in a torture program was not enough for CACI, now they want the Abu Ghraib prisoners who brought the suit to pay the company’s legal bills.
|By: DSWright Friday August 16, 2013 10:20 am|
|By: DSWright Wednesday January 9, 2013 11:25 am|
L-3 Communications, through its parent company Engility Holdings Inc, has disclosed in an SEC filing that it has paid over $5 million to victims of torture at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq during the U.S occupation.
|By: DSWright Wednesday January 9, 2013 7:45 am|
The fight over Chuck Hagel’s appointment as Secretary Of Defense has ventured into truly unfortunate terrain with assertions of prejudice and bigotry by Hagel’s opponents.
|By: Laura Raymond Monday June 6, 2011 12:30 pm|
The Obama administration has just recommended that the U.S. Supreme Court not hear a case brought by torture victims of Abu Ghraib and other detention centers in Iraq – a recommendation that leaves the Iraqi torture victims without any redress or accountability for those responsible for their torture. Through their case, Saleh v. Titan, these Iraqi civilians, many of whom still suffer from the effects of the physical and psychological harm done to them, seek to hold the two U.S. corporations implicated in their torture – CACI International and L-3 Services (formerly Titan Corporation) – accountable in a U.S. courthouse, and have their case heard by an American jury. The Obama administration has just recommended that the U.S. Supreme Court not hear a case brought by torture victims of Abu Ghraib and other detention centers in Iraq.
|By: emptywheel Tuesday July 20, 2010 2:50 pm|
Apart from aiming for another Pulitzer Prize, the other most (perhaps more) likely explanation for the style of the piece is that editors have tried so hard not to piss off the security establishment–and to stop short of voicing the conclusions that Dana Priest and William Arkin’s work support–that they’ve turned Priest and Arkin’s work into a bunch of disembodied fluff.