US says it has right to kidnap British citizens

[jose]

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 admission will alarm the British business community after the case of the so-called NatWest Three, bankers who were extradited to America on fraud charges. More than a dozen other British executives, including senior managers at British Airways and BAE Systems, are under investigation by the US authorities and could face criminal charges in America. Until now it was commonly assumed that US law permitted kidnapping only in the “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects.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. Legal experts confirmed this weekend that America viewed extradition as just one way of getting foreign suspects back to face trial. Rendition, or kidnapping, dates back to 19th-century bounty hunting and Washington believes it is still legitimate.

US says it has right to kidnap British citizens - Times Online
does this work both ways?

[another day]

Because the US SUPREME COURT sanctioned it??? Since when do they have jurisdiction over other sovereign countries?

There is an extradition process for a reason, to prevent willy nilly shit like this, and also to stop countries from "kidnapping" suspects that are wanted in their country on charges that breach basic human rights. Ie: political prisoners.

[Praxius]

Who are the Terrorists again?

That's who I thought.

And people are worried about Iran?

That's what Extraditions are for ffs.... What kind of world do we live in where we can allow some country that boasts about freedoms and the rule of law, to go and sneak into the borders of other allied nations and "Kidnap" their citizens as they see fit.... regardless if they broke some US law or not.

What if they never stepped foot in the US but somehow the person in question broke some sort of law in the US which isn't a law in their own country.... can they still just come along and kidnap them?

This is bull shit, plain and simple, and doesn't diserve any abreviations, because this is yet another level of hypocracy coming from the US government.

If any other country did that to a US citizen, there'd be war.... of course a half assed war, but there'd be outrage.

A perfect example of this would be how the leader of the political Marijuana part in BC was arrested by US athorities because he was selling "Legal" marijuana seeds across the border.... and not actual pot.

But instead of going after the real drug dealers and those growing the pot, they went after him because he was the main figure head in the promotion of legalization and decided to make an example out of him.

I swear if I was in power, I'd've cut relations years ago and watch the US rot away with no nearby oil, fresh water, lumber or uranium coming from us.

I don't see how any allied nation can just sit by and put up with this BS.

If the US want's to make it's own rules. kidnap, torture and detain people without proper legal acess, then they can do it to their own god damn people.

Isolate yourselves some more why don't you, cuz you guys sure as hell arn't making anymore new friends by acting like this.

[HelioPrime]

I guess we can do it because what is Britain going to do about it?

If a man is wanted in the US and we grab in and bring him home what are they going to do to stop it? Stealing him back would accomplish nothing.

And I've have to say, if Canada found a man who was guilty of killing dozens of people in Canada would you oppose them bringing him back for trail even if he was in a country that wouldn't allow it?

[Matt W]

I think you're missing the point. The US of A is supposed to be our closest ally. And they choose to disrespect us, our sovereignty, international law, and our history to say that they will 'walk in' and grab someone.

Do you actually want allies, or subjects?

[Osborn F Enready]

Matt said: Do you actually want allies, or subjects?

Well said Matt.

The shame is the reversal of who is asking that question, (American or Britain) which I doubt many will grasp.

I am so ashamed as an American of the actions of this country over the last 25 years of my life.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Praxius Who are the Terrorists again? That's who I thought. And people are worried about Iran?.

Well, that just about where I am on this.


The nerve of some people.

[HelioPrime]

Well if these men are found guilty after investigation would Britain send them over for trial?

[Jack]

Rendition, or kidnapping, dates back to 19th-century bounty hunting and Washington believes it is still legitimate.

What next? Will Bush reinstate slavery?

[Matt W]

Quote by: HelioPrime Well if these men are found guilty after investigation would Britain send them over for trial?

That's what extradition treaties are for. Sadly, it's highly unlikely the US would reciprocate.

[Praxius]

Quote by: HelioPrime I guess we can do it because what is Britain going to do about it? If a man is wanted in the US and we grab in and bring him home what are they going to do to stop it? Stealing him back would accomplish nothing.

That would screw with relations as it shows a level of mistrust and compromise in the UK's own national security where a forign country just come through the borders, takes someone and leaves without approval of the UK Government.

Stealing him back wouldn't be their response, that's for sure. What has always worked in the past was one country goes to the other country, tells them the situation and crime at hand, and then the other country would say ok, and send him off, much like what occured with that pedopile freak from Canada who was going after kids in Asia.... they sent out a warrent for his arrest, he was found back in Canada, he was arrested and then sent to them to seek justice.

It's called co-operation, and when a country decides to pull yet another stupid stunt such as this, it drops the said country's credibility and trust down into the pits.

And I've have to say, if Canada found a man who was guilty of killing dozens of people in Canada would you oppose them bringing him back for trail even if he was in a country that wouldn't allow it?

Them's the breaks. They are protected by their own country, if they don't want to give them up for crimes they may have commited in our country, then don't allow anybody else from that country to enter, if they are not accountable to our laws..... plain and simple.... turn them all back at the borders and restrict relations and economic ties.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Praxius That would screw with relations as it shows a level of mistrust and compromise in the UK's own national security where a forign country just come through the borders, takes someone and leaves without approval of the UK Government. Stealing him back wouldn't be their response, that's for sure.

What would fix the situation? It's not something easy like telling a dog not to bark.

Grandpa h.

[Praxius]

Quote by: grandpa What would fix the situation? It's not something easy like telling a dog not to bark. Grandpa h.

Simple, for security reasons and the protection of citizens, refuse any entry of law enforcement from said country unless proper information is provided. If someone is kidnapped during this process or during the period of the ban of law enforcement (Or whatever forces they plan on sending over) Then this would be either be proclaimed as a terrorist attack/act or a direct threat to national security and peace of the citizens in which the government is sworn to protect from outside invaders.

If this occured while I was leader of a country, I would label this as an act of aggression on the soverignty of my nation and either the country in question who kidnapped one of my citizens returns them and follows proper extrodition proceedures, or further action will be enforced apon that country.

[Dieval]

Everyone is obviously opposed to "kidnapping" people...but lets just throw another perspective on this...

A British citizen is suspected of brutally raping, torturing, then killing your mother. He flees back to Britian. Britian won't extradite. What do you do? Go!

[Osborn F Enready]

You work to appeal to the British courts to hear the case, or approve extradition.

[jose]

Quote by: Dieval Everyone is obviously opposed to "kidnapping" people...but lets just throw another perspective on this... A British citizen is suspected of brutally raping, torturing, then killing your mother. He flees back to Britian. Britian won't extradite. What do you do? Go!

Er.... provide evidence to a British court of law beyond a resonable doubt?

[Arawn-ap-Hywel]

Quote by: jose US says it has right to kidnap British citizens - Times Online does this work both ways?

Those unaware of the USA's rendition code are sadly negligent if they commit an act that transgresses the US courts sufficiently.

The universal bounty hunting offered by US juries is an viable and worth while economic contributor.

It's not only the Brits who can feel the benefits of this long arm of the law

[Praxius]

Quote by: Dieval Everyone is obviously opposed to "kidnapping" people...but lets just throw another perspective on this... A British citizen is suspected of brutally raping, torturing, then killing your mother. He flees back to Britian. Britian won't extradite. What do you do? Go!

Kidnapping is Kidnapping, something your government doesn't like terrorists doing, yet seems ok with when they decide to do it..... yet another hypocritical situation from those doing exactly what they claim they are fighting.

[Dieval]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready You work to appeal to the British courts to hear the case, or approve extradition.

Good answer....for arguements sake, lets say they don't budge and still won't extradite. What now?

Quote by: jose Er.... provide evidence to a British court of law beyond a resonable doubt?

That would be a good way to go, but what if you can't provide all the evidence until he's back in the states... what do you do?

Quote by: Praxius Kidnapping is Kidnapping, something your government doesn't like terrorists doing, yet seems ok with when they decide to do it..... yet another hypocritical situation from those doing exactly what they claim they are fighting.

As expected...you believe bringing people to justice in the US is the same as terrorists kiddnapping COMPLETELY INNOCENT people and cutting their heads off. Nice.

[Osborn F Enready]

Dieval said: Good answer....for arguements sake, lets say they don't budge and still won't extradite. What now?

Thats a personal choice to make, if justice can't be achieved. Can you live with injustice of this magnitude? Would your life be worth living knowing this type of injustice exists?

You know full well what your choices would be, the question is, do you have the will, the dedication to justice and the balls to do what you believe in.

Injustice should not be tolerated, but it should not be a national issue at this level.

There are reasons it is ok to kidnap.
There are reasons it is ok to use force.
There are reasons to rebel, revolt and take individual action against unjust entities.

THERE IS NO REASON THIS SHOULD BE A BLANKET PROVISION FOR ANY ENTITY, however, without the measure of objective law and objective justice.

It is an individual choice however, and looking at the world around you, its a choice we all make everyday.

I know what I would do, do you?