CIA flights [Archive]

Rodion Romanovich

11-28-2005, 16:36

Isn't it legal by international law to intervene with anti-aircraft guns and fighters when military aircraft of another nations flies over your air territory? If they're working in WOT, i.e. a war, then they're military personell and it's justified to shoot the planes down according to international law. Or?

Moving people to torture them outside the US because it's illegal in the US is hypocrisy. Either torture them in the USA and take back the signing of UN human rights documents, so it becomes obvious that the US regime is committing crimes which will have no positive effect at all for the USA, acts which aren't supported by more than a minority of the US population, and which isn't justifiable in any way, especially not against people which haven't gone through any sort of trial and where there's no burden of proof at all required before the torture, often so harsh that it is lethal, begins. If it's part of the Bush political program to torture people to death without a trial, then it should **** well have been written clearly, BEFORE the election took place, as one of the points on their political agenda.

If the torture victims will die anyway, just shoot the planes down so the torture hurts the guilty too. The CIA guys on them are carrying out inhumane, unjustified actions, and it's more or less only by fanatical literal interpretation of law that they can be called legal. Of course, give prior warning over radio that you'll open fire against these military flights before opening fire, and give them a chance to turn around. If they're out of fuel let them take down to refuel but only if they use the fuel to go back in the same direction they came from. If they abuse the ability to refuel more than three times, take it away.

master of the puppets

11-28-2005, 17:05

your right about the use of arms against hostile aircraft but CIA covery cannot be considered combatants and to some degree have extraterritoriality in many places which i think is just BS.

also finding a loophole in international conduct is dispicable if the only end to it will be the torture of some terrorists (if we can prove thats what really happens) even protecting the country can stop at some degree, i can agree with the adherence oh high stress on the enemy but not downright torture. we act as if we are better then other countries by invading there airspace, and that is not how to cement international relations.

Tribesman

11-28-2005, 19:24

Send these CIA ghost detainee fights to Shannon if you have a problem with people in legal limbo and under threat of possible torture using your airports . Bertie could really do with the landing/ATC fees and refueling payments to make his break up of the airport authorities look viable .
Oh damn , he has already done it, cheap whore that he is .

I wonder if Italy is still allowing these flights , since they put out those arrest warrents for the CIA agents for kidnapping they must have firm legal grounds to stop all CIA flights to see if these fugitives from justice are on board . ~D

As long as their documentation is in order, why bother...
How do you get documentation in order for someone who has been kidnapped ?

Kaiser of Arabia

11-28-2005, 22:33

This has gone on and on in Swedish press, and to be honest im hoping the swedish police/military gets their thumbs out of their asses and arrest/search that/those plane/s if they decide to land here again.
I hope you know that that would not go over well with the CIA. We'd have a rise in dissappearances in Sweden methinks.

And so the **** what? Their on planes, what does that have to do with you guys?

Tribesman

11-28-2005, 23:04

And so the **** what? Their on planes, what does that have to do with you guys?
Ever heard of a thing called soveriegnty , it covers land sea and air .
Ever heard of criminality or jurisdiction ?

Kaiser of Arabia

11-29-2005, 00:33

And so the **** what? Their on planes, what does that have to do with you guys?
Ever heard of a thing called soveriegnty , it covers land sea and air .
Ever heard of criminality or jurisdiction ?
Ever hear of escorts? Ever heard of transgression or threat of war? If you were to stop these flights it would be a transgression, and some very nasty things may happen. It's best just to ignore them.

Alexander the Pretty Good

11-29-2005, 00:35

I think CIA planes are safe from Sweden. ~;p

Redleg

11-29-2005, 01:16

Ever hear of escorts? Ever heard of transgression or threat of war? If you were to stop these flights it would be a transgression, and some very nasty things may happen. It's best just to ignore them.

If the plane is not flying under diplomatic recognization - then the plane must comply with the regulations and the laws of the nation in which it is overflying and/or landing in. If the plane is flying on a diplomatic mission it falls in a different catergory, not sure of all the rules in that regards

If they are using planes under the guise of diplomatic couriers - then maybe your comments here would be correct - but I am willing to wager that the planes are flying under a different guise then diplomatic.

If the nation where the plane plans to stop does not want the activities on their terrorities or the individuals - that nation can refuse them permission to land. If the nation allows the plane to stop but suspects actions that violate their laws - they then have two choices - arrest all involved and take ownership of situation - or allow the aircraft to depart. Most nations will ignore the situation while its own their soil - but complain after the fact. To bad they don't have the backbone to attempt to arrest the CIA agents and take the plane when its on their soil.

Tribesman

11-29-2005, 01:20

Ever heard of transgression or threat of war? If you were to stop these flights it would be a transgression, and some very nasty things may happen. It's best just to ignore them.
~D ~D ~D ~D ~D ~D ~D oh my~D ~D ~D ~D ~D stop it hurts~D ~D ~D
bloody hell capo what are you on ?
We will violate your soveriegnty ignore your laws and jurisdiction as well as our own laws and if you don't like it we will threaten you with war .:stupido: ~:doh: :stupido2: ~:doh: :stupido3: ~:doh:

Don't worry here comes some helpful medication:nurse:

solypsist

11-29-2005, 01:45

as redleg said, no one is forcing sweden to let the american cia use their airspace. there's some agreement between both countries involved here. i doubt sweden is completely ignorant of what's going on, too. so what, exactly, is the issue?

Kaiser of Arabia

11-29-2005, 02:09

Tribesman

11-29-2005, 02:26

so what, exactly, is the issue?
The issue is that the governments condemn it , launch inquiries into it , say they are protesting about it , but do bugger all to stop it .
Then again thats governments for ya~:handball:

Capo YAY PILLS! w00tage.~:thumb: stick to the ~:cheers: it messes your head but its legal .

Adrian II

11-29-2005, 02:29

i doubt sweden is completely ignorant of what's going on, too. so what, exactly, is the issue?Sweden is completely ignorant of what is going on. That is the issue. ~D

ichi

11-29-2005, 02:35

I guess the arguing will be something like :
"There are no flights.
And if there are, that's the democrats' fault."

or

"This is War on Terrorism man ! Your hippie ideology won't save you when OBL will be rapping your wife and eating your children. Plus, these guy are probably really bad and deserve to be tortured. I mean, Castro tortures people, so why couldn't we ?"

Edit : I almost forgot the good old
"Define Torture", or even "Define Flights"

You captured the essence perfectly.

BTW, your plane leaves in an hour~:cool:

ichi:bow:

Redleg

11-29-2005, 02:41

Sweden is completely ignorant of what is going on. That is the issue. ~D

Then its up to them to pay attention to what is going on in their airspace and on the ground at their airports

bmolsson

11-29-2005, 03:10

Then its up to them to pay attention to what is going on in their airspace and on the ground at their airports

You mean that Sweden is stupid to actually trust US when they declare the flights ?? ~:confused:

Redleg

11-29-2005, 03:34

You mean that Sweden is stupid to actually trust US when they declare the flights ?? ~:confused:

It would seem so wouldn't.

- its up to Sweden to insure that all aspects of its laws are honored by those who cross into thier soil. Its also up to the individuals who come into the terrority - but the enforcement aspect of the law is the responsiblity of the government which wants its laws obeyed.

If the plane lands on Swedish soil - and they believe or chose not to believe the declartion of the pilot it is still their (Sweden) resposiblity to verify that their laws are being obeyed and that the declartion is correct. If they chose to believe the declaration - then if it turns out to be incorrect - well its kind of hard to scream foul when you did not actually check anything.

But yeah is kind of stupid to trust anything if you don't verify the declarations some of the time. Trust on the part of the port authories is no excuse for slopply enforcement of the law, especially when it seems that your aware that the, you know it is happening concerning charter flights coming out of the United States flying to other countries, but you still just allow it to continue.

Soulforged

11-29-2005, 04:44

Wait what country allows torture besides the special case of USA...Sweden?!!! It cannot be can it?~:eek:
There's a side issue here. When a "criminal" tries to scape "justice" and fly to a foreing country in wich the "justice" has no jurisdiction, everyone sees him as a...well a worst criminal, and he must be repressed even worst. But when the organs of the state do it, oh no it's ok, after all it's political action. I understand that this kind of actions by any given state are simple and plain amoral and ilegitime.

Franconicus

11-29-2005, 09:18

I am not so worried about the flights itself. I am amazed that the European governments are upset. That is the issue. The Us always did things that were not very kind to their hosts. I remember some years ago TV quoted a report of German itelligence. It was clear that the CIA used the intelligence network in Germany (and they had and hace a lot of it) to spy German companies and give information to their US competitors. After the report the German government had to ask the US about this issue. They replied that German companies have nothing that could be of interest for the US companies. End of the story! And this was in the Clinton age.
So I am curious how it is going to end this time.

And I am curious what Merkel is going to do. She is just on her trip to Bush to tell him that she is his new pet. Bad timing~:joker:

Lazul

11-29-2005, 10:47

I think CIA planes are safe from Sweden. ~;p

what the f**k is that supposed to mean?

anyway, what I was trying to say is that if the yanks want to torture people they should get the hell of swedish soil and do it in the USA. Or are they such cowards they dont dare to do the torturing on their own soil? I guess thats the case.... Wanker-CIA.

Meneldil

11-29-2005, 11:00

Of course a lot of governements know what's going on with these planes. They're saying they'll investigate the issue so they don't appear as being totally powerless. They just don't have the gutts to stop the planes and arrest CIA agents. I mean, as someone said, as soon as one country will try to do that, official US propaganda will explain why this country is betraying democracy, helping the terrorists, and so on.

I remember, not so long ago, a few european countries said the War in Irak was a total joke, and puf, their goods were boycotted in the US, they were described as traitors, as lamers, etc.

Franconicus

11-29-2005, 13:23

I remember, not so long ago, a few european countries said the War in Irak was a total joke, and puf, their goods were boycotted in the US, they were described as traitors, as lamers, etc.
Any European country I know? ~;)

Proletariat

11-29-2005, 14:48

Of course a lot of governements know what's going on with these planes. They're saying they'll investigate the issue so they don't appear as being totally powerless. They just don't have the gutts to stop the planes and arrest CIA agents.

Your countries won't do anything because you like using the intel gleaned as well when the CIA shares it with you.

I remember, not so long ago, a few european countries said the War in Irak was a total joke, and puf, their goods were boycotted in the US, they were described as traitors, as lamers, etc.

Sure, the Freedom Fries movement was idiotic, but let's not pretend that that was when you were first described this way.

Rodion Romanovich

11-29-2005, 17:08

Your countries won't do anything because you like using the intel gleaned as well when the CIA shares it with you.

Or is it the other way around?
"Here, take our intel, as a reward for your "cooperation", now you're also culprits to the torture/killing and will look stupid if you officially pursue a view against the torture." That, with the (of course empty) threat of defaming and possibly attacking the countries in question, is a classical combo threat+bribe to keep cowardly state leaders silent.

It's difficult seeing exactly which point you're trying to argue against. Are you trying to defend the actual torture and killing without trial, or just saying that a case of "why don't you see the beam that is in your own eye" may perhaps exist in the situation?

I hope you know that that would not go over well with the CIA. We'd have a rise in dissappearances in Sweden methinks.

And so the **** what? Their on planes, what does that have to do with you guys?

And you think the world community hasn't learnt anything from Stalin's USSR? That mystically disappearing people equals killed people, and that they therefore end up martyrs just as much as those officially killed? Creating martyrs who died because they refused to accept government-driven torture and murder without trial will not exactly put the USA in a good light. It's a good way of creating a real tension, other than the rhetorical tension, between the USA and Europe, which would hurt both the USA and Europe in the future when East Asia will rise economically (and as a result, militarily). Not even the Bush administration would be foolish enough to make such a move in response to Europeans making arrests.

Proletariat

11-29-2005, 18:15

It's difficult seeing exactly which point you're trying to argue against. Are you trying to defend the actual torture and killing without trial, or just saying that a case of "why don't you see the beam that is in your own eye" may perhaps exist in the situation?

The latter. It just seems a little naive to think that it's only the CIA that could be doing dirty work here.

I'm not saying it's okay, but let's try and look at the whole thing. Then we can realize how pointless it is trying to solve any of these problems and go back to our video games and coffee.

:coffeenews: :charge:

Meneldil

11-29-2005, 18:27

Your countries won't do anything because you like using the intel gleaned as well when the CIA shares it with you.

Our intelligence is enough, thanks ~:)

Sure, the Freedom Fries movement was idiotic, but let's not pretend that that was when you were first described this way.

Never said so. Each time France doesn't lay down with America, we're targetered by economic measures and crappy propaganda. That's fairly usual now (note : It works the other way around, we like to blame america for nothing).
That might explain why other countries won't protest against these flights. At best, they'll be ignored and the planes will stop in Algeria instead of Spain, and at worse (ie. if Bush needs to find another international target due to his national issues), they'll be described as terrorists' b****, traitors and antichrists.

Edit : Glad to see you're back :)

Any European country I know?

Yeah, that was Russia, and two other socialist-hippies countries, but I can't remember which ones... ;)

Tribesman

11-29-2005, 18:39

Your countries won't do anything because you like using the intel gleaned as well when the CIA shares it with you.

would this be the intel that helped convict a terrorist involved in the 9/11 attacks ?
oh no sorry , wrong case , the conviction was overturned because the intel wasn't shared was it .
See it is vital in this war on terror to be able to do anything you like to bring terrorists to justice , well ..... apart from actually bringing terrorists to justice~:confused: .

Rodion Romanovich

11-29-2005, 18:55

The latter. It just seems a little naive to think that it's only the CIA that could be doing dirty work here.

It's the CIA doing the torture and killing. If others like it, then it's not their fault. Compare it to if you own a shop and your worst competitor's shop is vandalized and robbed. Do you consider yourself guilty? It's up to the CIA to decide whether they want to carry out torturing and killing or not, whether they'll use public trials or not. The decision lies entirely in the hands of the USA. If they're doing it as part of an alliance with another country, then it's foolish to make US hands carry out all the work and not let the ally do the rest. Show me proof that another country is carrying out torture and killings, and I'll despise their actions as well.

I'm not saying it's okay, but let's try and look at the whole thing.

So what parts of the whole thing is it you claim we're missing?

Adrian II

11-29-2005, 20:34

Your countries won't do anything because you like using the intel gleaned as well when the CIA shares it with you.What intel would that be? And how has it been useful?

Tribesman

11-29-2005, 20:54

What intel would that be? And how has it been useful?
Well it can be very useful , look at that bloke who was transferrred to Morrocco to be tortured , he gave loads of information about the planned Sarin attack in London , which was really useful as it was a load of rubbish , but it meant Blair and Co. could scare the hell out of Britain for two years before they finally had to admit it was all rubbish .
It did give a chance for a judge to threaten Blunkett with jail though , so there is a bright side~;)

Proletariat

11-29-2005, 22:54

Glad to see you're back :)

Thanks.

Proletariat

11-29-2005, 22:59

It's the CIA doing the torture and killing. If others like it, then it's not their fault. Compare it to if you own a shop and your worst competitor's shop is vandalized and robbed. Do you consider yourself guilty?

No, but if I looked the other way while it was being robbed I would.

So what parts of the whole thing is it you claim we're missing?

I don't know myself, but why don't we try and explore that instead of stating that the planes be shot down?

Tribesman

11-30-2005, 00:25

don't know myself, but why don't we try and explore that
Where would you like to start ?
Accountability ? well the White house/State Dept says it is going to answer Europes questions over the issue ...soon...very soon ... honestly we are getting round to it but you must understand these are hard questions and we need to think up some really almost convincing answers .~;)
Torture ? Oh no no no , civilised countries don't do torture and if they sign agreements banning torture then they cannot aid or fascilitate its execution in any way .
Inquireys ? well if they turn up what they expect to turn up then two countries that tried for years before being allowed to join the EU are going to get their voting rights taken away . I wonder if that will be extended to other EU countries involved ? I doubt it
Diplomatic Immunity ? Judge says no , grave offenses are not covered by diplomatic immunity and many of the operatives have no diplomatic status anyway .
Sharing intelligence ? see earlier posts on not sharing intelligence , or sharing intelligence obtained through torture which is such a reliable way to get innaccurate information .
Doing something about the issues ? yeah well as its politicians making a big noise while doing nothing then as usual little will be done~:handball:

Redleg

11-30-2005, 00:38

don't know myself, but why don't we try and explore that
Where would you like to start ?

Good - a discussion on the facts.

Accountability ? well the White house/State Dept says it is going to answer Europes questions over the issue ...soon...very soon ... honestly we are getting round to it but you must understand these are hard questions and we need to think up some really almost convincing answers .~;)

That is only one part of the accountablity. One must look at the complete picture. How many nations are protesting the action in public - but within the confines of the government are supporting and even assisting the United States with its actions. Having the White House account for its actions is what needs to happen - but others must also be held to account. The United States is not doing this without the knowledge of the governments of some the nations that are asking for the accountablity.

Torture ? Oh no no no , civilised countries don't do torture and if they sign agreements banning torture then they cannot aid or fascilitate its execution in any way .

However one can send criminal suspects back to their country of origin. However I don't agree with the CIA having secert little holding places to question their "guest" - sending the "guests" back to their country of origin is one thing - and is allowed, sending to another country to get information however should be questioned, investigated, and prevented if found to be in violating the treaties on this.

Inquireys ? well if they turn up what they expect to turn up then two countries that tried for years before being allowed to join the EU are going to get their voting rights taken away . I wonder if that will be extended to other EU countries involved ? I doubt it

So the hyprocrisy is not just the United States now is it?

Diplomatic Immunity ? Judge says no , grave offenses are not covered by diplomatic immunity and many of the operatives have no diplomatic status anyway .

Then the when the plane lands in the country that questions the validity of the aircraft's stated course and purpose - they should investigate. If they don't the onus of being accountable for a crime also falls on them.

Sharing intelligence ? see earlier posts on not sharing intelligence , or sharing intelligence obtained through torture which is such a reliable way to get innaccurate information .

~:eek:

Doing something about the issues ? yeah well as its politicians making a big noise while doing nothing then as usual little will be done~:handball:

Yep the hypocrisy of the European governments and thier politicans on this issue is very evident for all to see. And the ones that could do something about it have no backbone to make the arrest when the plane lands on their terrority.

Tribesman

11-30-2005, 01:39

That is only one part of the accountablity
skip to the last bit you quote from me Red .~:handball:

Then the when the plane lands in the country that questions the validity of the aircraft's stated course and purpose - they should investigate. If they don't the onus of being accountable for a crime also falls on them.

That bit you are addressing is from a case where charges have been filed , warrants issued and applications for extradition lodged . The defense(US govt) says no to extradition and appeals , the judge throws out the appeal as baseless under law .
So who is the onus on now Red ? are they going to appeal again on other grounds or are they going to hand over the fugitives . Only one suspect had claims to diplomatic immunity (which has been rejected) so even if Lady had won the appeal the other 21 would have to be handed over , and they cannot say that the charges are false or without foundation or they wouldn't be fighting through the Italian courts would they .

So the hyprocrisy is not just the United States now is it?

Wow Red nearly the whole topic goes on about the European governments actions , did you miss it ???? Or has the persecution complex kicked in ~;)

Redleg

11-30-2005, 02:23

That is only one part of the accountablity
skip to the last bit you quote from me Red .~:handball:

Actually I only address your bullet comment on this one - the rest of the points I address as I went. Each issue warranted its own seperate discussion.

Then the when the plane lands in the country that questions the validity of the aircraft's stated course and purpose - they should investigate. If they don't the onus of being accountable for a crime also falls on them.

That bit you are addressing is from a case where charges have been filed , warrants issued and applications for extradition lodged . The defense(US govt) says no to extradition and appeals , the judge throws out the appeal as baseless under law .

It doesn't quit work that way - when the official at the port decides that a possible crime is being committed.

So who is the onus on now Red ? are they going to appeal again on other grounds or are they going to hand over the fugitives . Only one suspect had claims to diplomatic immunity (which has been rejected) so even if Lady had won the appeal the other 21 would have to be handed over , and they cannot say that the charges are false or without foundation or they wouldn't be fighting through the Italian courts would they .

The onus is on the individuals who committ the crime and the officals who allow the crime to happen. Regardless of the country or countries involved. Yes indeed the United States could be doing an illegal act - but again if the plane lands in a soveriegn land and they know that a possible crime is being committed and they refuse to do anything about it. They are just as culible in the activity as the United States.

So the hyprocrisy is not just the United States now is it?

Wow Red nearly the whole topic goes on about the European governments actions , did you miss it ???? Or has the persecution complex kicked in ~;)

Nope just stating the obvious - good to assume you think otherwise. Maybe your guilt is beginnig to also set in.~:joker:

Franconicus

11-30-2005, 09:44

News:

1) Condoleza promised to clarify the flights to the European nations. She did not tell when or how.
I really wonder what the Americans understand of 'normal relationships' and how Merkel wants to improve the relationship Germany / US.

2) The first German is captured by terrorists in Iraq. Merkel realy has a tough start.

Rodion Romanovich

11-30-2005, 13:44

No, but if I looked the other way while it was being robbed I would.

Exactly, that's why we think European governments are acting wrong according to most posters in this thread. They refuse to do arrests or shooting the planes down or anything similar, while at the same time saying they're worried about the flights. Either they know of the crimes and do something to stop them, or they must pretend not to know about them. This way is ridiculous both ethically and rhetorically.

I don't know myself, but why don't we try and explore that instead of stating that the planes be shot down?

That's what I tought we were already exploring in this thread. Why is arresting the guilty or shooting down military flights, which is allowed by law, a bad solution in your opinion? Explain that, and we'll have an interesting discussion started. I don't go into any debate claiming my view is perfect, I state my view, or part of it, until I get contra-arguments with motivations. If the contra-arguments are valid, I adapt my opinion accordingly, without forgetting the arguments which supported my initial view, trying to make a view which has all the pro arguments but none of the contra arguments against it - Click (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method). However if you keep hiding what your arguments are, there's no way both our arguments can be tried for correctness, and the discussion has been pointless, because neither of us understand the other part better.

1) Condoleza promised to clarify the flights to the European nations.

It makes me happy to hear that US officials admit their mistake and are considering to be honorable and correct the mistake. While it's obvious the torture is either used as a way of spreading fear/making examples or for quickly getting information about terrorist cells before they disperse, and this is an understandable approach to some extent seen from a strictly military view, it turns out it's not very effective to use fear of death against suicide candidate terrorists and that speed of action and the element of surprise isn't as important in an already drawn-out war, where the USA also have superior tactical strength. It turns out both the ethical aspects of torture, and the lack of military effectiveness of it, are pointing in the same direction when it comes to hinting which decision to make in the matter to torture or not to torture.

Franconicus

11-30-2005, 14:33

It makes me happy to hear that US officials admit their mistake and are considering to be honorable and correct the mistake. While it's obvious the torture is either used as a way of spreading fear/making examples or for quickly getting information about terrorist cells before they disperse, and this is an understandable approach to some extent seen from a strictly military view, it turns out it's not very effective to use fear of death against suicide candidate terrorists and that speed of action and the element of surprise isn't as important in an already drawn-out war, where the USA also have superior tactical strength. It turns out both the ethical aspects of torture, and the lack of military effectiveness of it, are pointing in the same direction when it comes to hinting which decision to make in the matter to torture or not to torture.
Se only promised to give some information; did not tell when and what. To me it sounds like the diplomatic version of: MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS

Adrian II

11-30-2005, 15:57

Se only promised to give some information; did not tell when and what. To me it sounds like the diplomatic version of: MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESSRice will be visiting European countries next week I believe. Germany has been mentioned by State as one possible destination.

Louis VI the Fat

12-01-2005, 01:49

I think Redleg and Proletariat are right. 'The United States is not doing this without the knowledge of the governments of some the nations that are asking for the accountablity'.

France does have a rather long and unpleasant history (http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-bin/justtop.cgi?act=justtop&url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/110.2/br_18.html) of it's own in using 'unconventional methods' to counter terrorism:

The French experience that was developed during the wars in Indochina and, especially, in Algeria emphasized the role of intelligence in counterrevolutionary warfare. This approach gave the intelligence services a central role in the repressive campaign. Torture was defended as a legitimate military device in the counterinsurgency effort. The main argument given was that military necessity demanded the use of torture in order to extract information from the enemy. Information had to be obtained rapidly in order to prevent further acts of violence. According to this rationale, the rules of war did not apply to a new type of war without clearly defined battle lines or large concentrations of combatants and weaponry. Thus the state could resort to "unconventional methods" to protect its citizens from an elusive and insidious enemy: terrorism/subversion.
Now I don't know about a place like Sweden, but the French secret services are and have always been run by cynical, 'realist', objective oriented policies. (Rainbow Warrior, anyone?) And we know we are a target (http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1807396,00.html) to terrorists.

The relations between the American and French intelligence agencies have been surprisingly good, despite the Iraq affair, with a great deal of information sharing. Now the nasty thing with secret services is that they tend to operate in secret, so it's not possible to know everything that goes on, but I'm under no illusion that the Americans are asked where and by which means they got their information from.

Tribesman

12-01-2005, 02:05

think Redleg and Proletariat are right. 'The United States is not doing this without the knowledge of the governments of some the nations that are asking for the accountablity'.

Yep France has allowed two flights , Austria has a case though , but that is over violation of airspace . Germany tops the list with 96 flights followed by Britain with 80 .

The relations between the American and French intelligence agencies have been surprisingly good, despite the Iraq affair, with a great deal of information sharing.
I wonder with all the senseless french bashing if some people realise that without French help America couldn't have blown up those involved in the attack on the USS Cole .

Proletariat

12-01-2005, 02:39

I wonder with all the senseless french bashing if some people realise that without French help America couldn't have blown up those involved in the attack on the USS Cole .

Sure do. I'm quite fond of the French anyhow, and it has nothing to do with whether or not they're co-operative with my government's foriegn policies. Sorry Tribesman, not every American fits your preconcieved notions.

I was only bothered that the first page of this thread came across as not leaving enough blame on all the likely parties. I'm not excusing anything the CIA's done. Let's just be fair.

I don't even know what the CIA has actually been guilty of so far, but from the posts on page one you'd think half the backroom Euro's were a bunch of ex-spook whistle blowers who know the ins and outs of every dungeon and torture chamber the CIA runs in eastern Europe.

Adrian II

12-01-2005, 03:13

The French experience that was developed during the wars in Indochina and, especially, in Algeria emphasized the role of intelligence in counterrevolutionary warfare.Which reminds me of the glory days of Dutch military intelligence right after World War II, when The Netherlands tried to regain control of their former colony of Indonesia.

Our military intelligence did an excellent job torturing suspects both publicly and behind closed doors, burning down entire villages and targeting all the wrong installations and areas. A new age had dawned in warfare, the age of... terrorism! To fight it, we believed new rules were required, or better still: no rules at all. With hindsight, it brought us just as far as it did the British and the French: nowhere. The only differenc being that we got there quicker. Within the span of a mere two years we had managed to turn not only the entire Indonesian population squarely against us, but all of world opinion from the United States to China and from Brazil to the Soviet Union as well. Bravo!

Of course the triumphant, yet ever so timely homecoming of our valiant troops in 1949 was not at all marred by the sight of tails hanging limply between legs and pockets disgustingly overflowing with the illicit proceeds of 350 years of mass murder, repression and economic exploitation.
~:rolleyes:

Franconicus

12-01-2005, 08:24

Cool down, Red Inquisitor! No body said that the US invented torture. Actually, isn't torture a bid antiquated?

Tribesman

12-01-2005, 10:06

Sorry Tribesman, not every American fits your preconcieved notions.

Yes they do they are all the same ~;) some people some people some people
Just in case people didn't know , in the new dictionary some people is now defined as Every American~:rolleyes:
Well you learn something new every day don't ya ~;)

Adrian II

12-01-2005, 13:38

Actually, isn't torture a bid antiquated?That is precisely what Meneldil, I and others are trying to say.

Tribesman

12-04-2005, 04:38

well the White house/State Dept says it is going to answer Europes questions over the issue ...soon...very soon ... honestly we are getting round to it but you must understand these are hard questions and we need to think up some really almost convincing answers .
It looks as if , after much thought and delibertion on the answers to Europes questions , they are ready to give a reply .
And the reply is basically....stuff you ~:eek:

Adrian II

12-05-2005, 10:03

It looks as if, after much thought and delibertion on the answers to Europes questions, they are ready to give a reply. And the reply is basically....stuff you ~:eek:I thought they had run out of paint, but it seems they haven't. And since there a still a few inches of corner left...

Tribesman

12-05-2005, 21:15

A.Saturnus

12-05-2005, 23:23

Politicians, don´t you love them? Rice has begun her answering with saying "we´re saving lives". Yep, if you got to explain whether or not you have tortured people all across a continent, it´s always good to start with "we´re saving lives".
The former German Minister of Interior Otto Schily apparently new of what was going on. What a carrere: he defended terrorists (in court), prosecuted terrorists (unsuccesfully) and helped torturing them. Seems to be some kind of hate/love relationship. ~:rolleyes:

Kralizec

12-06-2005, 00:00

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/05/us.secretprisons.ap/index.html

But she also offered assurances that the United States respects the sovereignty of other countries, that it does not condone torture under any circumstances and that it does not allow detainees to be transported to countries where they will be tortured.

Sounds like a clear denial.

Adrian II

12-06-2005, 22:44

Painted into a corner Adrian ? They have painted the whole floor and the walls , and now are hanging from a corner of the ceiling that hasn't quite been fully painted yet and are trying to say that the ceiling is really the floor and its the rest of the world that is upside down .The Germans should have arrested her, whisked her away to a secret location in Croatia and tortured her until she came up with all the names of these secret CIA locations. Besides a few days of waterboarding should take care of the hair-do, which in itself is a severe threat to global security.

Tribesman

12-06-2005, 23:19

Sounds like a clear denial.
Yes a denial of what everyone knows is true . So who is she trying to convince ? herself maybe .
If as she claims they don't do torture then why try to get the CIA exempted from the ban on torture ?
If as she claims they don't send people to places where they are tortured then why do they send people to places where they are tortured .

Is there anything in her adresses from the past two days (apart from her pointing out the complicity of other governments) that cannot be picked apart and shown as rubbish by anyone with an ounce of of sense ?

Redleg

12-06-2005, 23:52

Pretty much sums up the hyprocrisy of most of the European Governments doesn't?

"It is up to those governments and their citizens to decide if they wish to work with us to prevent terrorist attacks against their own country or other countries, and decide how much sensitive information they can make public. They have a sovereign right to make that choice," she said in remarks delivered at Andrews Air Force Base before her departure.

So if you want the information your seeking - apply pressure to your own governments to find out what they know. Unless of course you don't live in a democratic country..........~:joker:

Adrian II

12-06-2005, 23:55

Is there anything in her adresses from the past two days (apart from her pointing out the complicity of other governments) that cannot be picked apart and shown as rubbish by anyone with an ounce of of sense ?Looks like Condi is having one of those 'Powell moments'. Asked by the President to lie, complying with a wry smile, knowing it will do neither her nor the U.S. any good in the long run.

Proletariat

12-07-2005, 00:12

This thread has gone from a joke to just being ridiculous. I'm surprised by the amount of CIA insiders who posted, though. Glad to know every single thing alleged was verified by you all.

I guess the only thing Condi could've said that would appease this crowd is something like this.

"The United States agrees with every charge alleged, has outlawed itself, and it's immediate dissolution is commencing."

Condi has it tough. Whether this stuff went on or not, she's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't. Too bad no one in this thread seems to care what has or has not happened. It's already been decided what occured and you guys are sticking to it.

~:cheers:

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 00:36

So if you want the information your seeking - apply pressure to your own governments to find out what they know. Unless of course you don't live in a democratic country..........~:joker:In case you haven't noticed, that is exactly what has been happening over the past week. Brits, Frenchmen, Germans, Dutchmen, Italians, Spaniards all demand to know what has been going on and what their governments have known about this. The European Commission has announced that member states who are found complicit will face serious repercussions.

And please don't turn this into a 'European issue', that is just nonsense. Americans too demand to know what is going on, and certain elements in the U.S. are using the present European concern as a pry bar. Did you see the story about scores of renditions leaked by CIA people to the Washington Post on Sunday, the day before Condi's European trip?

Oh, and the leaking goes on and on (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/04/AR2005120400885_pf.html).

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 00:59

Condi has it tough. Whether this stuff went on or not, she's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.Yes, I just wrote that she has a 'Powell moment'. Maybe she should have chosen another profession, chosen to work for a different politician, or no politician at all. It is her choice and I do not pity her.

I do pity the innocent who are picked off the streets -- and streets in countries that are allied to the U.S. at that -- and deported to unknown destinations, held incommunicado and forced to 'confess' through 'waterboarding' and other torture. Hundreds of people have now 'been disappeared' as, I believe, Joseph Heller first put it in Catch-22. The only reason why the U.S. would render 'high-profile detainees' to countries that routinely practice torture is in order for them to be tortured.

I asked you before: what information has the U.S. provided to Europeans that has been useful in the fight against terrorism? If there was anything worthwhile, we would know. We know about dozens of plots that were foiled by European agencies, who have more human intelligence and better sources in the Arab and muslim world than the United States.

I suspect that the main reason why European governments and their secret services have been cooperating with U.S. intelligence is that they want to stay posted about what the opposition is up to. The opposition being the United States, not Al Qaeda. European governments are more concerned about future war plans made in Washington than those made in Afghan caves. And rightly so.

Proletariat

12-07-2005, 01:31

Yes, I just wrote that she has a 'Powell moment'. Maybe she should have chosen another profession, chosen to work for a different politician, or no politician at all. It is her choice and I do not pity her.

It was a joke, you missed my point.

I do pity the innocent who are picked off the streets -- and streets in countries that are allied to the U.S. at that -- and deported to unknown destinations, held incommunicado and forced to 'confess' through 'waterboarding' and other torture. Hundreds of people have now 'been disappeared' as, I believe, Joseph Heller first put it in Catch-22. The only reason why the U.S. would render 'high-profile detainees' to countries that routinely practice torture is in order for them to be tortured.

More hard evidence that this whole thread has been based on. Keep it coming! ~:cool:

I asked you before: what information has the U.S. provided to Europeans that has been useful in the fight against terrorism? If there was anything worthwhile, we would know. We know about dozens of plots that were foiled by European agencies, who have more human intelligence and better sources in the Arab and muslim world than the United States.

Adrian, I already conceded that you know more than me. You and Tribesman and all the other ex-CIA employees who posted here. You obviously have had access to top secret documents and have seen all the hard evidence necessary to find all parties guilty already.

I'm just surprised with all your vast and intimate knowledge of the inner workings of all these intelligence organizations, that an ignorant pleb like me, who is just trying to follow the investigations in the media as best as she can, is even allowed into this discussion.

:bow:

Kralizec

12-07-2005, 01:40

So if you want the information your seeking - apply pressure to your own governments to find out what they know. Unless of course you don't live in a democratic country..........~:joker:

A citizen of the USA suggesting that European governments aren't being honest with their citizens? ~:joker:

I'm just surprised with all your vast and intimate knowledge of the inner workings of all these intelligence organizations, that an ignorant pleb like me, who is just trying to follow the investigations in the media as best as she can, is even allowed into this discussion.

Nice drama act. Keep it up and you might win an award some day ~:cheers:

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 02:41

More hard evidence that this whole thread has been based on. Keep it coming! ~:cool:It is your fellow citizens themselves who keep most of the information coming. They don't need me to tell them what's what.

A most encouraging thing about this whole torture business is that more and more Americans are speaking up and demanding to know the truth, that American soldiers are speaking up, that intelligence people are speaking up and that politicians are acting on it. John McCain has done a fantastic job.

There is Army Captain Ian Fishback of the 82nd Airborne Division who wrote a public letter to McCain saying that White House and Pentagon policies have cultivated torture on the battlefield. For 17 months, Fishback sought clarification from his superiors and got none. 'I am certain that this confusion contributed to a wide range of abuses including death threats, beatings, broken bones, murder,' he wrote to McCain in September: 'I and troops under my command witnessed some of these abuses in both Afghanistan and Iraq. It is morally inconsistent with the Constitution and justice in war. If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession.'

There is Army Spc. Tony Lagouranis who worked as an interrogator at Abu Ghraib and in a special intelligence unit in Iraq in 2004. After many failed attempts to report wrongdoing he became frustrated and went to the media. 'It's all over Iraq,' he said on Frontline in late September: 'The worst stuff I saw was from the detaining units who would torture people in their homes. They were using things like burns. They would smash people's feet with the back of an axe-head. They would break bones, ribs.' At the root of the abuse, he said, was a 'frustration that we weren't getting good intel' and therefore the treatment of prisoners degraded into 'pure sadism.'
You and Tribesman and all the other ex-CIA employees who posted here. You obviously have had access to top secret documents and have seen all the hard evidence necessary to find all parties guilty already.Where has my lady been lately? A lot of real ex-CIA employees have already spoken, on the record. Here is an interesting article (http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=32861&dcn=todaysnews)that quotes long-standing CIA operatives who are knowledgeable about torture. They also address the point that Lagouranis was maming about the futility and self-serving aspect of torture.

Merle Pribbenow for instance, a 27-year veteran of clandestine CIA operations, makes a very convincing case why torture is counterproductive. Not only will the victim in the end ‘confess’ anything his torturer wants to hear, but the torture becomes an end in itself.

And there’s the former CIA top interrogator in Saigon, Frank Snepp, who states that the acceptance of torture within the service is a sign of a serious problem: torture is not only inhumane, it gets in the way of the actual process of information gathering.

They are all worried about the institutionalisation of torture in the American intelligence community. As one of the, a 30-year veteran, says: 'I think as late as a decade ago, there were enough of us around who had enough experience to constitute the majority view, which was that this was simply not the way we did business, and for good reasons of practicality or morality. It's not just about what it does or doesn't do, but about who, and where, we as a country want to be.'

So no, I don't think Americans need AdrianII to tell them what is going down with these black sites and saltpits and stuff. They are quite capable of doing that all by themselves.
:bow:

Redleg

12-07-2005, 02:47

In case you haven't noticed, that is exactly what has been happening over the past week. Brits, Frenchmen, Germans, Dutchmen, Italians, Spaniards all demand to know what has been going on and what their governments have known about this. The European Commission has announced that member states who are found complicit will face serious repercussions.

So is it an European issue or is it not? It seems that with this statement that it is indeed an European Issue also.....

And please don't turn this into a 'European issue', that is just nonsense. Americans too demand to know what is going on, and certain elements in the U.S. are using the present European concern as a pry bar. Did you see the story about scores of renditions leaked by CIA people to the Washington Post on Sunday, the day before Condi's European trip?

Oh, and the leaking goes on and on (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/04/AR2005120400885_pf.html).

Oh I see it as a issue that affects both the United States and Europe. With several nations playing dirty.

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 02:47

Oh I see it as a issue that affects both the United States and Europe. With several nations playing dirty.Agreed! :bow:

Redleg

12-07-2005, 02:51

A citizen of the USA suggesting that European governments aren't being honest with their citizens? ~:joker:

Right back at you - European Nations have a longer history and more checkered past of not being honest with their citizens then the United States does.............

Kralizec

12-07-2005, 03:03

European Nations have a longer history

Maybe that's why ~;)

Meneldil

12-07-2005, 07:13

I just saw on TV that a german citizen will be suing the CIA. Apparently, he was kidnapped in FYROM, deported to Afghanistan, where he was tortured until CIA agents found out they made a mistake (not a biggy, they thought he was a dangerous terrorist, while he was not) and let him go.

I'll have to be careful now. I don't want to be kidnapped by the CIA on the soil of my sovereign country just because I'm long haired, or because I've got a Quran at home ~:rolleyes:

Tribesman

12-07-2005, 08:51

I don't want to be kidnapped by the CIA on the soil of my sovereign country just because I'm long haired, or because I've got a Quran at home
The US does not violate soveriegnty , it does not torture and it does not send people to places where they are tortured .
So you are safe , oh but it does do all those things , but they are a mistake honestly .~D ~D ~D
And they don't have secret prisonsi n Europe , they emptied them last month to move the detainees to other countries that apparently don't do torture . The move had to happen because some silly bugger launched an investigation into their existance .
These damn people asking questions why don't they just trust the Administration to tell them the truth.:stupido2:

Kralizec

12-07-2005, 10:56

I just saw on TV that a german citizen will be suing the CIA. Apparently, he was kidnapped in FYROM, deported to Afghanistan, where he was tortured until CIA agents found out they made a mistake (not a biggy, they thought he was a dangerous terrorist, while he was not) and left him go.

I'll have to be careful now. I don't want to be kidnapped by the CIA on the soil of my sovereign country just because I'm long haired, or because I've got a Quran at home ~:rolleyes:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/06/cia.rendition/index.html

~:eek:

Tribesman

12-07-2005, 11:43

Oh well she is in Ukraine now , and is again contradicting earlier statements by herself and the Administration . :shrug:
Is she really that stupid or what ?????

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 13:53

Oh well she is in Ukraine now , and is again contradicting earlier statements by herself and the Administration . :shrug:
Is she really that stupid or what ?????She is mixing up the lawyers' briefings she was given before take-off. Like I said, Condi should be waterboarded for a couple of weeks. She is a threat to global security.

Meanwhile prosecutors in Italy have issued arrest warrants for 22 CIA operatives in connection with the abduction of a man in Italy.

Link (http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/latimes960.html)

Strike For The South

12-07-2005, 13:57

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/06/cia.rendition/index.html

~:eek:

He was a nazi:sneaky:

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 14:51

He was a nazi:sneaky:Speaking of which, this procedure is indeed reminiscent of the nazi Nacht und Nebel procedure.

And speaking of Germany, this issue is totally embarrassing for Gerhard Schröder and his former Interior Minister Otto Schily as Saturnus already pointed out. It is one thing for the U.S. to abduct a foreign national, but quite another for that national's own government to knowingly keep the lid on it. I have no doubt that Schily would have had to step down if he had still been in office. On the other hand I doubt that Merkel will make a clean start unless she is forced by German public opinion.

In Italy prosecutors have embarrassed Silvio Berlusconi's government by issuing arrest warrants for 22 CIA operatives over the abduction of a man in Italy. The Interior Minister has called the mai prosecutor in the case a 'left-wing extremist', which means the gloves are coming off in Italy as well.

In Great Britain a nonpartisan committee yesterday dismissed Condoleezza Rice's explanations as 'disingenious' and 'defying belief'. More bad news for Tony, who seems to be still in denial.

The affair reminds me of the run-up to the Iraq war in early 2003 when 80% of European public opinion was against the war, but many governments went along with it anyway. Hopefully we have moved beyond the stage where European capitals are willing to give this U.S. Administration the benefit of the doubt. Hopefully our governments will understand that some of the U.S. policies are not just criminal, but mistaken as well (to quote Talleyrand). As Andrew Tyrie, the Tory spokesman in the British committee, put it: 'It's not just that people may have been tortured. It's that using torture to combat terrorism is likely to inflame Muslim opinion and leave us less secure, not more. We have learnt that lesson the hard way in Northern Ireland; the French learnt that lesson in Algeria.'

Geoffrey S

12-07-2005, 15:27

Hopefully this whole business might shake up the European populations belief in their governments; obviously they knew more than they're letting on, yet suddenly once it becomes public they're joining the crowd in indignation. The classic trick, if it all goes wrong criticise the US so all the blame heads that way, whilst quietly hoping no-one notices they went along with it all the way.

Public opinion is key; it was ignored over Iraq, and governments are learning the lesson from that.

AdrianII, out of curiosity, do you know what the Dutch government's position is on all this? I read they're considering refusing to to send troops to a particular area in Afghanistan if the situation isn't cleared up, but it's been remarkably quiet overall as far as I can tell; how is it being treated in the media and the Tweede Kamer? I'm consistently amazed as to how much the Dutch public lets their government get away with.

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 16:32

AdrianII, out of curiosity, do you know what the Dutch government's position is on all this? I read they're considering refusing to to send troops to a particular area in Afghanistan if the situation isn't cleared up, but it's been remarkably quiet overall as far as I can tell; how is it being treated in the media and the Tweede Kamer? I'm consistently amazed as to how much the Dutch public lets their government get away with.Seeing that we are a trading nation with worldwide investments and other interests, our foreign policy has long been a balancing act between the world's power centres including the larger European states. Until WWII we had this huge colonial empire as a counterweight in our balancing act, but that advantage is gone.

During the Cold war of course neutrality was not an option. Since 1989 we have managed to balance our alliance with the U.S. on the one hand and our European affiliations on the other. Now that the two blocks are growing further and further apart over issues of economic policy, strategy, human rights, etcetera, Dutch foreign policy has become something of a split screen.

The trouble with our relationship with the U.S. is that has always been pretty much a one way traffic. As long as we comply with he thrust of American strategy we're golden. As soon as we diverge, doors in Washington are shut. The U.S. doesn't need us and our protests would not make so much as a dent in American public opinion. So given this disparity between the two nations, the Dutch have only one shot at upsetting Washington over a particular issue. We won't get a second chance because the U.S. will just ignore us from that moment on.

I believe the Dutch public is realistic about this. They know that if we create a big stink about the American renditions, it will not make a difference in Washington but Washington's wrath will have a lasting effect on The Netherlands. You don't mess with the 800 pound gorilla on the block as long as he treats you with regard, and if you want to confront him you should be damn sure that it is worth the effort. The only way we can 'face off' Washington on an issue like this is if we do it together with other European nations -- which appears to be the case, or at least a possibility, at this moment.

The Dutch Marines were scheduled to take over Uruzgan, a particularly hazardous area in Southern Afghanistan, from the U.S. special forces, but this has now been put on hold. The Dutch first want assurances that any people they arrest in that area will not be tortured and/or killed by American personnel. Another consideration is that the Dutch soldiers will be in the thick of it, Dutchmen and Afghans are going to die and it is not going to be pretty, so they want assurances that the Canadians, Germans and Brits are going to be there as promised.

doc_bean

12-07-2005, 16:57

Bah, this whole thing is disgusting. Not as much the CIA torturing people, although that's bad too, but how all our countries are allowing this to happen on European soil. It's time Europe got some cojones back, maybe the EU isn't such a bad idea, and maybe we should make a decent Euro army while we're at it :duel:

Geoffrey S

12-07-2005, 17:07

Seeing that we are a trading nation with worldwide investments and other interests, our foreign policy has long been a balancing act between the world's power centres including the larger European states. Until WWII we had this huge colonial empire as a counterweight in our balancing act, but that advantage is gone.
This much is clear, and probably to the majority of Dutch people; while few would admit it outright, most seem resigned to a position of less importance on the world stage.

During the Cold war of course neutrality was not an option. Since 1989 we have managed to balance our alliance with the U.S. on the one hand and our European affiliations on the other. Now that the two blocks are growing further and further apart over issues of economic policy, strategy, human rights, etcetera, Dutch foreign policy has become something of a split screen.
And a damaging one at that. If no firm policy is reached gaffes like the rejection of the EU constitution will repeat themselves over and over again. If the government can't stand firmly behind something how can they expect the public to do so?

The trouble with our relationship with the U.S. is that has always been pretty much a one way traffic. As long as we comply with he thrust of American strategy we're golden. As soon as we diverge, doors in Washington are shut. The U.S. doesn't need us and our protests would not make so much as a dent in American public opinion. So given this disparity between the two nations, the Dutch have only one shot at upsetting Washington over a particular issue. We won't get a second chance because the U.S. will just ignore us from that moment on.

I believe the Dutch public is realistic about this. They know that if we create a big stink about the American renditions, it will not make a difference in Washington but Washington's wrath will have a lasting effect on The Netherlands. You don't mess with the 800 pound gorilla on the block as long as he treats you with regard, and if you want to confront him you should be damn sure that it is worth the effort. The only way we can 'face off' Washington on an issue like this is if we do it together with other European nations -- which appears to be the case, or at least a possibility, at this moment.
Put that way, the Dutch government's attitude on this seems quite sensible. What is strange is the lack of reaction against the cabinet over the current CIA issue from opposition parties or the public, seeing as it's obvious the cabinet has not been forthcoming on this issue nor on a number of other issues pertaining to the war in Iraq. The attitude of parliament I can understand since they would have the same pragmatic approach to the US as the cabinet, but the public seems to be taking the lack of forthcoming truth and constant mess-ups by Balkenende's cabinet remarkably quietly; not just on this issue, but on quiet a few things that have popped up during Balkenende's time in office.

This approach, whilst nominally keeping Holland neutral, does entail a loss of respect and future bargaining power. Again, the lack of a firm policy doesn't give a good impression as it's obvious to all, both intra- and internationally, that the Dutch government is weaseling about; looks like the current administration has become adept at the famed poldering and gedoogbeleiden of its predecessor.

The Dutch Marines were scheduled to take over Uruzgan, a particularly hazardous area in Southern Afghanistan, from the U.S. special forces, but this has now been put on hold. The Dutch first want assurances that any people they arrest in that area will not be tortured and/or killed by American personnel. Another consideration is that the Dutch soldiers will be in the thick of it, Dutchmen and Afghans are going to die and it is not going to be pretty, so they want assurances that the Canadians, Germans and Brits are going to be there as promised.
Okay, that helps. One question, was the movement of Dutch troops to Uruzgan already in doubt before this CIA flights business, or has it popped up since then?

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 17:21

Again, the lack of a firm policy doesn't give a good impression as it's obvious to all, both intra- and internationally, that the Dutch government is weaseling about (..)I am afraid you are right. In 2003 they supported the Iraq invasion -- and I quote -- 'politically, but not militarily'. Nonetheless they sent Dutch Marines to Iraq after the invasion, then withdrew them again before their time was up. What sort of ally are we? A fair-weather friend, really. One thing that can be said in their defense is that it takes both time and guts to say good-bye to fifty years of Trans-Atlantic friendship, cooperation and American protection of Dutch interests and freedoms. Particularly since there is no strong, unified EU foreign policy and strategic view. And there should be no need for such a separate strategy and policy, if only this ******* Bush Administration hadn't come along...
One question, was the movement of Dutch troops to Uruzgan already in doubt before this CIA flights business, or has it popped up since then?It has popped up rather suddenly in connection with this torture and rendition issue. What made the worst impression on the Dutch is that on the one hand the U.S. Congress is reiterating a ban on torture that is already U.S. law, while on the other hand the Vice-President is trying to exempt the CIA from it. And now we have Condoleezza Rice telling us all this nonsense instead of coming clean, which is not helpful at all.

Geoffrey S

12-07-2005, 17:39

One thing that can be said in their defense is that it takes both time and guts to say good-bye to fifty years of Trans-Atlantic friendship, cooperation and American protection of Dutch interests and freedoms. Particularly since there is no strong, unified EU foreign policy and strategic view. And there should be no need for such a separate strategy and policy, if only this ******* Bush Administration hadn't come along...
All too true. Until the EU can prove itself to be a viable and reliable option to dedicate a nation to, and the Dutch government can show that this is the case to the public (which is impossible with the current ambivalent politics) there is no way Holland will be in a position of relative authority. The nation won't jump without assurances of a safe landing.

What made the worst impression on the Dutch is that on the one hand the U.S. Congress is reiterating a ban on torture that is already U.S. law, while on the other hand the Vice-President is trying to exempt the CIA from it.
Precisely the reasons the people in the EU are so sceptical about the good intentions of the Bush administration. If there's nothing to be ashamed of, why put up a show?

And now we have Condoleezza Rice telling us all this nonsense instead of coming clean, which is not helpful at all.
I guess this is what we get after the shifting policies with regards to the US over the years, and not just in Holland. That kind of politics does not gain any respect from anyone, either for or against the war, and that lack of respect is coming right back at us. The way Condoleezza Rice has dismissed the problems doesn't help anyone, but it is a direct consequence of the way the US have come to see and expect Europe to react.

Ambivalent policies are dangerous for those utilising them. It doesn't make Holland or a number of other countries an enemy of the US, but it certainly does make one an unreliable (and hence almost irrelevant) ally.

Adrian II

12-07-2005, 17:54

I guess this is what we get after the shifting policies with regards to the US over the years, and not just in Holland. That kind of politics does not gain any respect from anyone, either for or against the war, and that lack of respect is coming right back at us.Well, it is hard to imagine the relationship between a dwarf nation and a superpower to be anything else but ambivalent.

And speaking of reliability: don't forget that after 11/9 and the invocation of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty (acknowledging the terrorist attack as an attack on all NATO member states) the U.S. has gone its own way without any consultation with its allies (which is obligatory under the treaty) whatsoever, to the point of telling us that U.S. coalitions will henceforth depend on the mission at hand. You can hardly blame other NATO members for deciding that they, too, will make their cooperation with the U.S. dependent only on their own interests.
The way Condoleezza Rice has dismissed the problems doesn't help anyone, but it is a direct consequence of the way the US have come to see and expect Europe to react.If our governments take this crap lying down, they will lose even more credibility in the eyes of their own nations. And in the eyes of that part of American opinion that is equally concerned about this whole business. I really hope our weasels can be forced to draw some semblance of a line in the sand. After all it is not that hard to understand, is it? You can not fight islamofascism with islamofascist methods.

Geoffrey S

12-07-2005, 18:05

Well, it is hard to imagine the relationship between a dwarf nation and a superpower to be anything else but ambivalent.
Even when it's obvious that such policies are damaging to the relationship with other nations and the authority within the nation's own borders? It certainly didn't help Holland to join the coalition in such an uncommitted way, and pull out of Iraq before the time was up; it caused a loss of respectability in the US, Europe, and among an ashamed Dutch population. Noncommital policies don't help anyone in the long term, since they put off decisions which grow more pressing over time, and may force a nation to doing something that isn't actually in their best interest.

If our governments take this crap lying down, they will lose even more credibility in the eyes of their own nations. And in the eyes of that part of American opinion that is equally concerned about this whole business. I really hope our weasels can be forced to draw some semblance of a line in the sand. After all it is not that hard to understand, is it? You can not fight islamofascism with islamofascist methods.
It would be about time, but considering our trackrecord I'm not convinced the politicians won't back down again.

A.Saturnus

12-07-2005, 22:44

Oh well she is in Ukraine now , and is again contradicting earlier statements by herself and the Administration . :shrug:
Is she really that stupid or what ?????

She isn´t really contradicting herself, she just says "We don´t do torture and never did and we promise that we won´t do it again."

Her other option would have been "oh, you mean THAT torture?!"

KukriKhan

12-07-2005, 23:15

She isn´t really contradicting herself, she just says "We don´t do torture and never did and we promise that we won´t do it again."

Her other option would have been "oh, you mean THAT torture?!"

LoL.

Still, her statement today:

"As a matter of U.S. policy, the United States' obligations under the CAT, which prohibits, of course, cruel and inhumane and degrading treatment, those obligations extend to U.S. personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the United States or outside the United States,"

might signal a new, less-Cheney-esque approach. One can only hope.

Geoffrey S

12-08-2005, 16:46

I hope so. Still, it does leave room for US-sanctioned torturing by foreign nationals, but that's probably nitpicking.

Ben Bot (makes me think of phone adverts) is happy now, apparently.

doc_bean

12-08-2005, 18:17

I heard the 'results' of the get together of a bunch of foreign ministers in Belgium last night. There is no clarity, but everyone was put at ease.

It's time for the revolution ! :knight:

Adrian II

12-09-2005, 00:01

It's time for the revolution ! :knight:No, but it may just be appropriate to unplug a tiny bottle of fizzy plunk because as far as diplomatic revolutions go, this is one. Both the White House and Condoleezza Rice have been waterboarded long enough by Congressmen, American public opinion, allies and reporters abroad to change their stance. Apparently there will be no exception for the CIA when it comes to turture, and U.S. personnel abroad will come under scrutiny from now on.

Of course this leaves open the matter of rendition to countries that do practice torture. Let's keep the pressure on.

Franconicus

12-09-2005, 08:15

When I started this thread my intention was to discuss the German and European politics.

Since then the situation changed. First there were just illegal flights over Europe, but now there is a case of kidnapping, illegal restraint and battery of the German citizen El Masri. If this is true - and it looks so - then this is much more severe. It also seems like a minister of the former government and a minister of the new one knew about it.

How should the German government react?

Meneldil

12-09-2005, 10:17

doc_bean

12-09-2005, 12:34

Germany should invade the US, because this country owns WMDs and is allied with some of the biggest terrorists on earth, such as the Saudi family and Augusto Pinochet. They also clearly threaten our way of life and our freedom, and they proved it by kidnapping and torturing an innocent german citizen. ~D

France would probably join Germany, now that would be weird ~:eek:

Franconicus

12-09-2005, 12:54

C'mon, this is no fun. The most important job of the German government (any government) is to protect the right of its citizens. So Germany should make a clear answer to the US.

Rodion Romanovich

12-09-2005, 13:24

France would probably join Germany, now that would be weird ~:eek:

And hopefully the 50 percent of the US population that want Bush to go, and the 49 percent who voted Bush because there was no acceptable alternative! Hopefully the American dictator will be overthrown so that the American people, and their European friends, brothers and allies can live in peace and freedom

Tribesman

12-09-2005, 19:29

Resign and volunteer for hit or miss mine detection in Afghanistan , the same for all the other governments who are complicit .
Oh and just to add a bit of sweetness , they cannot be told the location of any mines whose location may have been obtained by torture .
:bow:

Redleg

12-09-2005, 19:32

Germany should invade the US, because this country owns WMDs and is allied with some of the biggest terrorists on earth, such as the Saudi family and Augusto Pinochet. They also clearly threaten our way of life and our freedom, and they proved it by kidnapping and torturing an innocent german citizen. ~D

Go ahead and try - it should be rather amusing - considering the number of soldiers in Germany from the United States already.~:joker:

Rodion Romanovich

12-09-2005, 20:19

Geoffrey S

12-09-2005, 20:32

If the Germans would invade the USA in order to protect the German people by helping the Americans to overthrow George Bush and make it possible for the Americans to democratically vote for someone else and then withdraw when that had been achieved, should any American soldier, if he was a defender of freedom, democracy and human rights, and not a personal bodyguard of George Bush, really fight that invasion? Shouldn't they join the German soldiers in the fight for safety and justice? Or do American soldiers swear an oath of personal loyalty to George Bush?
They've got their right to bear arms should a government become overbearing, in theory. Besides, George Bush was elected democratically, certainly the second time round; were it to come to this hypothetical invasion the majority Americans would rally for America rather than the incumbent president, regardless of the invading force or motives thereof.

Rodion Romanovich

12-09-2005, 20:50

Well, obviously the democratic system of the USA isn't democratic enough if so many vote for someone like Bush because there was no alternative. Much like in a certain European country in the thirties. Would it in any way be possible for the USA to use a system much like that of France, where there are two vote rounds, so that you dare voting for smaller parties and not feel your vote is thrown away. With a first round being between all candidates, and second round being finals between the two strongest. And is coalition governments allowed in the USA, something important for allowing new parties to challenge the established ones? What the USA - and all her victims - need, is a more democratic system where the established and incredibly corrupt parties known as "democrats" and "republicans" can be challenged, and hopefully, removed from power altogether, or if not that, at least so heavily challenged that they are forced to abandon their corruption in order to have a chance of competing with the newcomers.

We all know what happened in the Weimar republic, and it would be a shame if we created the same situation again. Would you look your children in the eye in fifty years and say to them: "we could have given you freedom and peace, through a simple act, but we refused. We, I included, created the blood that has come over you".

Even if Bush isn't as bad as a certain other historical dictator, he's really, really bad, and even if he would be as good as a saint, the basic system is such a failure that it has a potential of allowing a terrible leader to get the power over the technologically (but not morally) strongest army of the world. If there's one threat to the security of the world, it's exactly that - someone unworthy getting the power over the US army. A terrorist group stealing five nukes, Russia attacking Europe, global warming - they're nothing compared to that one threat.

Geoffrey S

12-09-2005, 20:54

Well, obviously the democratic system of the USA isn't democratic enough if so many vote for someone like Bush because there was no alternative. Much like in a certain European country in the thirties.
It's not that there wasn't an alternative to Bush; it's more that the alternative was Kerry, and he was crap.

What the USA - and all her victims - need, is a more democratic system where the established and incredibly corrupt parties known as "democrats" and "republicans" can be challenged, and hopefully, removed from power altogether, or if not that, at least so heavily challenged that they are forced to abandon their corruption in order to have a chance of competing with the newcomers.
Would be good, I think. The two parties are almost incestuous in nature, and between them prevent change.

doc_bean

12-10-2005, 00:51

Just for the record, I'm not for invading the US, just for blowing up any plane that enters our air space unauthorized. After all, it might be terrorists ! ~D

And if the US starts arresting people from my country, I think we should just arrest some Americans, say diplomats, and arrange for an exchange, all nice and friendly of course...~:cheers:

Proletariat

12-10-2005, 01:12

Sorry Legio, I wouldn't want my government modeled after any system that let's Le Pen have any sort of chance.

Kralizec

12-10-2005, 01:30

Le Pen didn't stand a chance in France. The reason he got in the second round was the low turnout in the first round due to political apathy among the French voters. Le Pen and his ilk though, fanatical right wingers, almost all voted. When it turned out Le Pen had actually entered the second round of election the vast majority of French people were shocked. In the second round the moderate right and the left voted en masse on Chirac just to stop Le Pen. Result: over 80 % in Chiracs favour.

Proletariat

12-10-2005, 01:48

Chirac vs Le Pen > W. Bush vs Kerry?

We might as well stick with what we have.

Adrian II

12-10-2005, 01:53

We might as well stick with what we have.Yup. When it comes to torture policies I would prefer Bush outright to Le Pen, who has been known to engage personally in torture in Algeria...

Louis VI the Fat

12-10-2005, 02:41

Sorry Legio, I wouldn't want my government modeled after any system that let's Le Pen have any sort of chance.The shortcomings of both electoral systems are easy to see.

In America only candidates from two parties stand a realistic chance of getting elected. And on top of that, those two candidates are chosen in preliminaries - for which you have to be a member of either party to vote.

In France, every man and his dog can run for president directly, from the whole spectre of politics.The downside of having too many candidates run is that votes, from the left to the right, get spread out over a whole array of candidates.
In the last election, Jospin, the mainstream left-wing contester of Chirac, didn't manage to rally enough support from the left, the left-wing vote being spread out over half a dozen or so candidates.

The horror scenario would be two candidates from the extreme left and right, each only representing the lunatic fringe, winning the first round because of their disciplined voter-blocks.

A fine commentary on the 2002 elections. (http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20020425_falvy.html)

Rodion Romanovich

12-10-2005, 10:51

Sorry Legio, I wouldn't want my government modeled after any system that let's Le Pen have any sort of chance.

But you like a system modelled after one that not only gave a certain dictator in the thirties a chance, but also victory?

Le Pen never had a chance thanks to the French system. Thanks to the two round voting system, people could express discontent at the conventional parties by voting Le Pen, without ever risking him to win - that's a very good democratic system. It creates pressure on the conventional parties before they've gone so far in corruption and ideological degradation that people WILL vote for someone like Le Pen. In the Weimar republic, all conventional parties were allowed to degrade because they lacked pressure, and when a maniac turned up, he could easily win, because he was a populist, i.e. together with his mad idea/ideas, he had the politics people wanted. There's nothing wrong with populism that gives people what they want - it's the very definition of democracy, but when it's used to get a mad idea through, then it's wrong. And that is possible when all conventional parties get corrupt and use politics very far from what the people want. The only way to fight maniacs using populism, is by letting the maniacs that use populism pressure the conventional parties.

Louis the Fat is however right that there is still a weakness in the French system - that it's theoretically possible that two extremists, one from each wing, could make it to the finals. I've thought about alternative systems, and it seems like one of the best so far is something resembling the two-round votes of France, but with the second round not being finals between the two who recieved most votes, but a repetition of the first round. The first round would be used for seeing the outcome of a presumptive vote, and if the outcome would result in your vote being thrown away, you could, in the second round, alter your vote and vote for someone else. This way it would be possible to see if the support for a new party was growing, so people would dare to vote for newcomers if there was a chance they'd win, so that it would be possible for new competitors to enter the field. Coalition governments are also an important factor in allowing multiple parties, and should be allowed.

The four key factors in creating a good democratic system are:
- make it easy for new parties to enter the political arena, if they have a good ideology
- pressure conventional parties so that no party becomes too certain that it'll keep power no matter what
- make it difficult for parties to cooperate in order to prevent change
- make it difficult for maniacs using populistic tactics to win

Edit: I of course must add, to make it fully clear, that I think also France, and all other countries who want to live up to the word democracy, should change their systems in similar ways, to get rid of the weaknesses and possible threats in them. The reason why it at this time is most important for the USA to do this quickly, is because the USA has the strongest army at the moment.

teja

12-10-2005, 13:22

The flights are the lower ranked problem. The main problem is the fact that US-government is not following national-, or international rights. As it is not enough European secret service are helping with information’s to find targets for such illegal acts. In Germany the local service helped to give information about a National Citizen which led into kidnapping him by US powers in former Yogoslavia. After that the Schröder-administration did nothing to help his own citizen to initiate legal proceedings against that kidnapped Muslim at justice. He was kidnapped and threatens by folks not following any judge but the will of G.W.Bush.

With such acts Bush's abettors abused US-, International- and German law. I start to loose my fait into our good western democratic separation of powers. I want this, now abused democratic Principe to get used for any place at the world. It is a shame that those, who once declared to rid the world from despotism, fascism and communism, are now using their ugliest tools for themselves. Will be good if Schröder will get a summons for German justice to declare what happened. We cannot take care for what Bush is doing in the world and the USA, but Germany must make its own homework.

In the USA the current movements for justice gives me back the hope they can do their part for correct behaviour. Democratic regimes may abuse their power sometimes, but the system must be able to stop it and sort it out. So anything will become good again.

To look from a funny side: I do not want to become kidnapped for over a year only because I shout out "Osama Bin Laden" three times and turn myself three times around my own axis. It is important to stop the current radical challenge of Islamic idiots, but not at the cost of law and justice.

A.Saturnus

12-10-2005, 21:07

Evil_Maniac From Mars

12-11-2005, 04:57

Who elected her anyway?!?~:rolleyes:
Not me.

HEY! What happened to the smilies? :san_angry:

I love this time of year...:san_grin:

teja

12-11-2005, 12:12

I don´t think that German authorities actually took part in the kidnapping. The German secret service gave the CIA information about various people they had under observation. The CIA confused a name and erranuously kidnapped and tortured Mister al Mazri. After they found out he´s the wrong guy, they released him and told the German Minister of Interior what happened. He then failed to inform the parliament.
What the German authorities can be accused of is neglecting their duty to inform the voter of transgressions of a foreign secret service but not illegal actions against Mister al Mazri.

I don't think that German authorities took part of the kidnapping too, but you missed one important point. Mister al Mazri had been observed by German service for some time. When he disappears suddenly (if they do not know about the kidnapping), it is their turn to start investigations. It should not be easy to find out that he got kidnapped. Because it is the prime use of a Nation to protect their citizen they ignored it.

On the other hand look what happend after the infamous kidnapping of another German citizen just 2 weeks ago in the Iraq. Susanne Osthoff got kidnapped by an Iraqi gang. This time the police and politic started what we can expect: Starting investigations, forming a staff for coordination and other things too.

:2cents: