The "Special" Relationship

[Metal Vendetta]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 982640.ece

AMERICA has told Britain that it can “kidnap” British citizens if they are wanted for crimes in the United States.

A senior lawyer for the American government has told the Court of Appeal in London that kidnapping foreign citizens is permissible under American law because the US Supreme Court has sanctioned it.

...

The American government has for the first time made it clear in a British court that the law applies to anyone, British or otherwise, suspected of a crime by Washington.

...er, and the Supreme Court has jurisdiction in the UK since when?

[Brendocon]

Love to see them try that in South America. Or North Korea.

[Guest]

...er, and the Supreme Court has jurisdiction in the UK since when?

Don't you remember?

The Supreme Court made this ruling that their jurisdiction was applicable anywhere in the world wherever they needed it to be, and for as long as needed.

That way they could legally send in the troops as "suppression to possible uprising," which otherwise would be called "invading a country because we don't like the look of their guys."


Mmm, refusing to recognise the sovereign rights of other nations. I'm getting all nostalgic about a century ago.

[Metal Vendetta]

At least the British had the good grace to call theirs "The British Empire". The Americans flat out deny that they even have one, despite having troops stationed in 70% of the world's countries. Also slightly annoyed by the fact that they denied that they do kidnap people from other countries for so long before this admission. I mean it's not like Britain has an extradition treaty with them or anything...

[BB Shockwave]

Well, despite all the moral speeches the "might makes right" is still the No. 1. law in the so-called democracy as well. I just wish the yankees weren't so sanctimonous about it.

I mean, I could have swallowed the USA's latest antics if they had a leader who simply tells "we're gonna invade Iraq 'cause we don't like that bugger Saddam, plus we need their oil badly so we'll give them a puppet goverment" instead of mr. "we'll liberate the poor and give them freedom and democracy and do God's work in the world" Bush.

I mean, people would value some honesty in politics. I know I do.

[wideload]

I find this a little odd. Is the US planning on sending agents to any country they see fit to? Surely, there must be more to this law than this. Don't they run the risk of having their agents convicted of kidnapping in foreign jurisdictions?

I like how this story mentions Canada wouldn't take any of their crap though.

[Leatherneck]

tbh, right or wrong, we have the covert capabilities to do just about whatever we want where ever we see fit. I'm fairly surprised we even said anything about it.

[Kaylee]

As Rebis observed, we have an extradition agreement why do they need to take people by force?

Unless it's just one of those grand-standing statements the US government and its agents seem to love making which should actually read: 'if we ever had a matter of great legal importance and the UK government refused to hand the individual over we would not rule out the option of taking them by force' used in this case to try and force the hand of a foreign court despite it potentially being an empty threat. But naturally that doesn't read well so they changed it to 'We gawn kidnap ya peoples, foo'!'

I wish Mr. T ran the USA

[Best First]

tbh, right or wrong, we have the covert capabilities to do just about whatever we want where ever we see fit. I'm fairly surprised we even said anything about it.

its the right or wrong bit people are generally concerned about.

I mean, operating outside the law to echieve your own ends through the means of force... hmm, kinda sounds like terrorism, huh?

On the fairness side at least 'they' (booga booga!) are more or less equally contemptuous for the civil rights of their own population.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

Its like spooks.