Stay the hell out of europe with your illegal "agents"
Don't allow a enviroment that breeds suicide bombers and ships them to the battlefield. Deal with your muslim extremist problem so we don't have to.Magpie wrote:
Stay the hell out of europe with your illegal "agents"
But you still don't get it, do you. Anyone can suspect anything. By your logic, this could be done to GWB because some people suspect him of being involved in 9/11ATG wrote:
We would have to be doing this to people not suspected of terrorism.
I'm curious as to why it matters that it's nationless................and find that either way, it makes no difference (still curious, though)! Whether something is right or wrong can't be conditional on whether the other guy's making it hard to do the right thing.ATG wrote:
These assholes want to hide behind a nationless movement, and the asshole countries like Saudi Arabia and the rest want to hide their responsibility because Al qiada is an international criminal organization.
As I've said before: fascism, by definiton, doesn't mix with religion.ATG wrote:
When Islamo fascist
So did Stalin. Or Mussolini. Or Hitler (sorry).ATG wrote:
I sleep perfectly well at night.
So does Osama.
Do you know what the word even means?Bubbalo wrote:
As I've said before: fascism, by definiton, doesn't mix with religion.ATG wrote:
When Islamo fascist
.
TTYL
The U.S is not a world police that can just come to any soverign country, kidnap citizens of the country take them abroad torture them in a us friendly country...We are not breeding the terrorist dont you dare blame that on europe..And we are dealing with the extremist problem but not ONLY the muslim..belive it or not muslims are people to...ATG wrote:
Don't allow a enviroment that breeds suicide bombers and ships them to the battlefield. Deal with your muslim extremist problem so we don't have to.Magpie wrote:
Stay the hell out of europe with your illegal "agents"
Wrong. Should Chinese agents operating extra-judicially within US borders in the name of ensuring their 'national security' be brought to justice? You're goddamn right they should - they would be impinging on US sovereignty. Despite the fact that these guys will never see any jail time this show trial must go ahead to put the US in its place and as a means of saying 'no more - by the book or else'. Appeasement? Pah. A statement that they are not going to put up with appeasement of the US much longer I would say.ATG wrote:
Basically, Italy is making a token gesture to appease the Muslim Extremist in their own midst. Shall I go on?
So what we have here is another European government living in fear and acting in ways that do not improve their relationship in the U.S. to try to avoid terrorism. I suspect the Italians were a little miffed at the CIA acting in its own borders, but this is a show trial against people who are not even in the country. There is zero chance the U.S. will be sending its intelligence agents to Europe to stand trial.
I hope this works for them and that there are no terrorist attacks in Italy.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-02-18 08:41:41)
There were Italian agents involved aswell, Cam. It would be like CIA and Chinese agents working together within US borders.
The actions of the US agents were not 'by the book' though, which is the point. We must remember that at that time corruptofascist Berlusconi was in power as well. And if I'm not mistaken the Italian agents are being charged as well, no?Bubbalo wrote:
There were Italian agents involved aswell, Cam. It would be like CIA and Chinese agents working together within US borders.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-02-18 08:44:00)
Yup. It's a form of totalitarianism which is, among other things, secular.ATG wrote:
Do you know what the word even means?
@ Scorpion, you say ATG cant make a coherent argument, look in the mirror. You say all this stuff about how we created Al Qaeda and its therefore our fault this stuff is happening to us and what not. But you created us, so by your logic doesn't that make all of this YOUR fault??
At ATG, we should follow our own rules, lest we wish to become the enemy in order to fight it. That renditions crap is wrong, so long as the people being kidnapped are there legally in the first place. If they aren't there legally, then its fine because taking someone away from a place they're not at isn't illegal. In fact CPoe, if China wants to take our illegal immigrants without our permission, I'd say pay them for the service!
At ATG, we should follow our own rules, lest we wish to become the enemy in order to fight it. That renditions crap is wrong, so long as the people being kidnapped are there legally in the first place. If they aren't there legally, then its fine because taking someone away from a place they're not at isn't illegal. In fact CPoe, if China wants to take our illegal immigrants without our permission, I'd say pay them for the service!
The UK colonised a nation which later rebelled.
The US funded a religious extremism group which later pursued religious extremism.
Can you spot the difference?
The US funded a religious extremism group which later pursued religious extremism.
Can you spot the difference?
The way I see it, ATG makes some really good points.
Scorpion made one good point as well though -- Iraq was an invasion that was basically lumped in with the War on Terror, even though it had nothing to do with 9/11.
My personal take on this is that, yes, Italy is basically appeasing their extremist elements since they haven't done much to deal with the extremists on their own terms.
Granted, the Italian government has never exactly been a model for stability or effectiveness in law enforcement.
Scorpion made one good point as well though -- Iraq was an invasion that was basically lumped in with the War on Terror, even though it had nothing to do with 9/11.
My personal take on this is that, yes, Italy is basically appeasing their extremist elements since they haven't done much to deal with the extremists on their own terms.
Granted, the Italian government has never exactly been a model for stability or effectiveness in law enforcement.
Nope.ATG wrote:
Basically, Italy is making a token gesture to appease the Muslim Extremist in their own midst.
This is a gesture to appease the European Moderate, who is appalled at his government's complicity in the CIA terror suspect 'rendition operations'.
I can't believe people have even mentioned this appeasement bullshit. The US kidnapped an innocent man without trial and sent him somewhere he was tortured! If that was going on under the noses of my government I'd damn sure want some answers and want someone to be taught a lesson.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-02-18 09:38:07)
Good point. I concede.CameronPoe wrote:
I can't believe people have even mentioned this appeasement bullshit. The US kidnapped an innocent man without trial and sent him somewhere he was tortured! If that was going on under the noses of my government I'd damn sure want some answers and want someone to be taught a lesson.
Wait a ticky, if there wasn't a trial how do you know he was innocent?CameronPoe wrote:
I can't believe people have even mentioned this appeasement bullshit. The US kidnapped an innocent man without trial and sent him somewhere he was tortured! If that was going on under the noses of my government I'd damn sure want some answers and want someone to be taught a lesson.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-18 11:07:37)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
How do you know he was guilty?
UDHR declares that all people have the right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a public trial.
UDHR declares that all people have the right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a public trial.
If he was really guilty, he would be in gitmo.Kmarion wrote:
Wait a ticky, if there wasn't a trial how do you know he was innocent?CameronPoe wrote:
I can't believe people have even mentioned this appeasement bullshit. The US kidnapped an innocent man without trial and sent him somewhere he was tortured! If that was going on under the noses of my government I'd damn sure want some answers and want someone to be taught a lesson.
But guilt is not necessary to be there, I heard.......
I didn't say he was. It seemed CP was making a statement. It sounded as though he was saying it as a matter of fact. He should have stated innocent until proven guilty. Not just, "he is innocent".Bubbalo wrote:
How do you know he was guilty?
UDHR declares that all people have the right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a public trial.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Good point....Kmarion wrote:
I didn't say he was. It seemed CP was making a statement. It sounded as though he was saying it as a matter of fact. He should have stated innocent until proven guilty. Not just, "he is innocent".Bubbalo wrote:
How do you know he was guilty?
UDHR declares that all people have the right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a public trial.
But so far as they were concerned, he was. The thought that my government might kidnap and torture me without even knowing for sure whether I've committed a crime terrifies me. Far more than the supposed terrorist threat does.Kmarion wrote:
I didn't say he was. It seemed CP was making a statement. It sounded as though he was saying it as a matter of fact. He should have stated innocent until proven guilty. Not just, "he is innocent".Bubbalo wrote:
How do you know he was guilty?
UDHR declares that all people have the right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a public trial.
What scares me even more is that he is not the only one, the intel services seem to do a shitty job.Bubbalo wrote:
But so far as they were concerned, he was. The thought that my government might kidnap and torture me without even knowing for sure whether I've committed a crime terrifies me. Far more than the supposed terrorist threat does.Kmarion wrote:
I didn't say he was. It seemed CP was making a statement. It sounded as though he was saying it as a matter of fact. He should have stated innocent until proven guilty. Not just, "he is innocent".Bubbalo wrote:
How do you know he was guilty?
UDHR declares that all people have the right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a public trial.
As a vanilla citizen yes you would, but turning agents over could be a security risk. We have no real international law.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
So if I were to go the US, commit a kidnapping, and then return to the UK, would it be right for the UK government to refuse to extradite me to the US?
No it would not.
They are accused of commiting a crime, therefor they should stand trial. And they should stand trial in the country in which that crime was committed.
But the US would demand that any UK agents return.
And the UK would refuse. The system works .
And the UK would refuse. The system works .
Where BTW, I must be blind.Bubbalo wrote:
How do you know he was guilty?
UDHR declares that all people have the right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a public trial.
Edit:Found it, it's not on Wiki though. It's article 11.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-18 13:25:49)
Xbone Stormsurgezz