NationStates Jolt Archive

Judge orders CIA team arrested over kidnap (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-06-24T173421Z_01_N24605471_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-SECURITY-ITALY-KIDNAPPING-DC.XML)

Have the Bush administration been reading "How to make friends and influence people?"

I thought to be a judge, one must display wisdom. Today must be Opposite Day :rolleyes:

Judge orders CIA team arrested over kidnap (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-06-24T173421Z_01_N24605471_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-SECURITY-ITALY-KIDNAPPING-DC.XML)

Have the Bush administration been reading "How to make friends and influence people?"

This topic has already been beaten to death in other threads.

He can issue all the warrants he likes. If the Italians don't have their real names (and I doubt they really do), then it's a waste of time.

The Washington Post in our area tried tracking down all of the names listed on the warrants - they all ended in dead ends - none (not even the name the Italians was sure was real) panned out.

Someone, or group commits a crime then they should be tried for that crime, being an agent of a foreignm power is irrelevant to this. Italian Judge orders arrest of suspected kidnappers is the fact here. That they were or were not CIA agents is irrelevant.

Or are you going to allow the agents of foreign governments to come into the USA to kidnap the financial backers of terrorist organisations such as the IRA?

Someone, or group commits a crime then they should be tried for that crime, being an agent of a foreignm power is irrelevant to this. Italian Judge orders arrest of suspected kidnappers is the fact here. That they were or were not CIA agents is irrelevant.

Or are you going to allow the agents of foreign governments to come into the USA to kidnap the financial backers of terrorist organisations such as the IRA?
What are their names?

If you don't have real names, we can't issue real warrants, can we?

Warrants can be issued for people 'known as' or 'using the name of'. Real names are irrelevant in most jurisdictions. Don't extend US law to Europe. They are different systems.

I totally agree with Alienborn. At the very least the USA should issue an official apology. IMO they should also hand the agents over to the Italians but that isn't going to happen.

Ooogh. From what I've been hearing lately the CIA thinks that they can do just about anything because Hollywood shows them that they could. Sicko.

I thought to be a judge, one must display wisdom. Today must be Opposite Day :rolleyes:Yeah. Everybody knows the CIA is a benevolent and loving organization that only has the best intentions and would never commit a crime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MKULTRA) to pursue those intentions.

Ooogh. From what I've been hearing lately the CIA thinks that they can do just about anything because Hollywood shows them that they could. Sicko.

I guess you watch too many movies, then.

The CIA, before the Church hearings (probably before you were born) had virtually no rules.

After the Church hearings, there were lots of rules.

After 9-11, there was a very minor softening of the rules, mostly in the area of assassinations.

It's not sick, and they didn't get their ideas from Hollywood. If anything, they get their ideas from the pre-Church hearing days, when the CIA was actually effective. Today, the modern CIA has trouble finding its ass with both hands.

The fact that the people were successfully spirited away and no one was caught makes me think that it wasn't the CIA - it was someone paid by the CIA - people with experience and knowledge.

I totally agree with Alienborn. At the very least the USA should issue an official apology. IMO they should also hand the agents over to the Italians but that isn't going to happen.


An official apology? Saying what? Sorry we didnt let you muck up our operation and carried it out succesfully, even though someone obviously tried to compromise us by leaking small details to try to make us look bad?

Or maybe-Sorry you have to pretend to be upset with our mission, even though you were in on it, because you are afraid of terrorist reprisals for being on the American's side?

An official apology? Saying what? Sorry we didnt let you muck up our operation and carried it out succesfully, even though someone obviously tried to compromise us by leaking small details to try to make us look bad?

Or maybe-Sorry you have to pretend to be upset with our mission, even though you were in on it, because you are afraid of terrorist reprisals for being on the American's side?

Are you not concerned with why, in a democratic country that supported the war in Iraq, these kidnappings had to happen. What would have been wrong with simply requesting extradition of the individuals concerned?

Oh, silly me, I forget that the kidnapees were taken to Egypt to be tortured, not to the USA to stand trial.

Yeah. Everybody knows the CIA is a benevolent and loving organization that only has the best intentions and would never commit a crime to pursue those intentions.


Wasn't that mainly in response to Soviet experiments in mind-control?

Right. And just because someone else steps over the line gives you the right to do likewise?

I guess you watch too many movies, then.

The CIA, before the Church hearings (probably before you were born) had virtually no rules.

After the Church hearings, there were lots of rules.

After 9-11, there was a very minor softening of the rules, mostly in the area of assassinations.

It's not sick, and they didn't get their ideas from Hollywood. If anything, they get their ideas from the pre-Church hearing days, when the CIA was actually effective. Today, the modern CIA has trouble finding its ass with both hands.

The fact that the people were successfully spirited away and no one was caught makes me think that it wasn't the CIA - it was someone paid by the CIA - people with experience and knowledge.

I do watch a lot of movies. lol.

Then again, if this guy was indeed somebody who could massacre millions, maybe it pays to fight a larger evil with a lesser evil.

All these moral dilemmas are quite confusing. :confused:

There are no degrees of evil. Either it is evil or it's not. It is that simple.

There are no degrees of evil. Either it is evil or it's not. It is that simple.
Of course not! There's evil, then there's an eviller version of evil etc.

And it's measured on the evil-o-meter!!! ;)

And it's measured on the evil-o-meter!!! ;)

perfected by the Imperial Republic of Dragons Bay! :D:D:D:D:D

And it's measured on the evil-o-meter!!! ;)

Which I am sure certain members of the board will declare to be a poorly thought out smear campaign device created by a certain political faction to discredit their opponents.

On a side note, home countries of intelligence agencies will normally keep silent if their operatives are caught in the act. The whole plausible deniability thing. Not a new trick, not a unique trick, but one thats quite commonplace.

I wonder if its in some kind of rulebook somewhere. "Intelligence Agencies for Dummies"