US says it has right to kidnap British citizens

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2982640.ece

Is America trying its best to push away its allies?

Hey, you guys thought it was perfectly okay back in 1812.

Which gave my regiment an excuse to kick your asses in January 1815. Cottonbalers By God!

There was plenty of shit done in the early nineteenth century that I'm sure you wouldn't want taking as legal precedent.

And yet there it is

I don't even care about legal mubo-jumbo. I just care about giving the 7th Infantry Regiment another crack at kicking the Lobsterbacks' asses just like we did under Andy Jackson!

Cottonbalers By God!

Hate to burst your little orgasmic bubble there but those guys are dead. Their children are dead. Their grandchildren are dead. Their great grandchildren are dead. None of them are doing any fighting.

If you really do want to take a precedent from it though wouldn't it be that taking another countries citizens is wrong and the US opposes it?

Easy to fix refuse to let us gov planes land or take off, until they stop doing it.

But the regiment lives forever, which means they live forever, which means I live forever.

Cottonbalers By God!

Bad idea.

So, what happens the first time a foreign government tries kidnapping someone on American soil?

They cease to exist?

Time to shut down all US bases in the UK I think.

ta ta old chaps.

Exactly. Then there'll be an international spat, and we'll have to rename our food again.

"Freedom Bacon" or "Freedom Waffles" or something.

We do what we've done every time it's happened. We hush it up, and then we file vigorous protests with the offending gov't.

While we're talking about older(ish) laws that need a second look, I say we do away with Executive Order 11905: Section 5(g)

Assassination of Heads of State?

Did you read the article? At all?

The stupid twat went to Canada, and they were willing to hand his ass over. Christ.

You make it seem like we sent Chuck Norris and the rest of Delta Force to his London flat and beat his wife.

You bastard!

Chuck Norris doesn't need Delta Force! Chuck Norris could kick the shit out of every one in the UK without so much as breaking a sweat!

Now apologize to Mr.Norris before he hunts your ass down and beats you with one of his home gym systems!

I thought this argument was settled in 1989 when we rolled up ol' Pizzaface Noriega.

This is a problem. People laugh and seem to think it's a joke. Sure... it has been used to nab some bad guys, but it can be misused just as easily.

When it is applied unjustly, how will we know? The only official information we get about such people is filtered through the government. Reporters who dig for information through government sources get thrown in to jail and are demanded to reveal the leakers.

This is the kind of thing they did in Germany in the early 1930s, and in Italy in the 1920s. It sounds out there, but its true.

Even if a government is not currently oppressive, it is the nature of people to abuse power. One only has to look at how much more power our government has over our individual lives as compared to 50 years ago.

This is bad stuff. A very disturbing and nasty trend. Even if the people employing this methodology now think they are doing it for good, it is foolish to believe it will always be used in such a way. It is an extraordinarily dangerous precedent.

It's been on the books for ages.

Where was the outrage in 1990 when it was actually used? Why is it suddenly repugnant now?

Much ado about not much.

It don't matter none to me! Yer all still Englishsters!

Because of the NatWest Three. Which is why I'm seriously conflicted about it. I hate the idea that the US thinks it can help itself to our citizens on our soil in abuse of our laws. OTOH, so far, the only cases where the US has even hinted at using it have been business fraudsters who thoroughly deserve locking up but who in our courts would barely get a slap on the wrist...

You don't find Chuck Norris, Chuck Norris finds you.

Nothing to be conflicted about. The solution is to fix the laws in Britain so that they face a proper punishment for their actions. It's not like there is a choice between agreeing with the US view or not punishing those guys. Also, what happens if there becomes a conflict between an unjust US law and a more fair one in another country?

How about you read the article again. Canada weren't willing to hand him over, in fact they sent him back to Britain because the USA was trying to bypass the usual rules of extradition.

Or how about this...

Or if you want to cast a wider net how about the CIA agents who are currently wanted in Italy for kidnapping a man from there?

Did you even read the article?

Try imagining not being an American.

Once again, I feel like I'm watching the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode Darmok. I'm sure Spider is trying to say something, but all I'm getting is gibberish.

And if there was the slightest chance of that ever happening, I wouldn't face the same degree of conflict. But don't forget, this is the country whose legal system in regard to fraud is so fucked it couldn't nail Maxwell while he was alive, and totally failed to nail Black.

Look out British citizens! It's only a matter of time before you too are kidnapped!

I don't think the issue is so much US law as it is US policy. OK, the law allows it. US law would allow Congress to declare war on England and the US President to nuke the place, too. But is that US policy?

I would be much more interested in knowing what US policy is in regards to this practice. If it is a rarely used thing, to which they resort only when all legal and diplomatic channels have been exhausted, and only when the offense is great enough, I am not about to get up in arms about it. If it is general policy, to just kidnap citizens of foreign countries (especially close allies) rather than go through the usual channels for extradition, I could never approve of that.

​