CIA vs Italy
Since there is no thread on it I thought I'd bring it up. I assume everyone knows what this is about. If not, here is a quick recap:
There was a suspected Al Quieda member living as an Italian citizen. The CIA picked him up and took him to Egypt where he was tortured. Italy is pissed saying we kidnapped him and has issued arrest warrants for all 13 agents involved as well as the guy the CIA took. INTERPOL has issued a global APB for the CIA agents as well. This brings up a lot of questions: 1. Is it kidnapping? If someone we want is in another country shouldn't we follow extradition laws to get this guy? If this is our policy that we will take anyone anywhere, regardless of local laws how can we expect other countries to abide by our extradition laws when we have someone they want? 2. Do you support taking people to 3rd countries that allow torture? How can we claim moral superiority that we don't torture people if we have no problem placing someone in a 3rd party's custody to do our dirty work? 3. Should the agents be handed over? Are the charges valid? I agree that it is kidnapping but I don't necessarily have a problem with it under the right circumstances. If it is a country we are friendly with, try to go through a formal legal process. If not, we will do what we must. However, those involved should have the understanding that if they are made then they may have to face the consequences for their involvement. I do not agree with sending people to other countries where they can be tortured and we stay 'clean'. Either we openly say "Yes we will torture people and if you don't like it, fuck off" or we do not torture anyone for any reason. If sick of this acting superior and being evil in the shadows act. It's transparant and everyone sees right through it. I don't think we should just hand these agents over but we shouldn't do anything to hamper the investigation and their capture. I compare them to Jack Bauer at the end of this season's 24. He engaged in an illegal operation, got caught, and was able to try to start over somewhere with the knowledge that if he gets caught we won't help him. |
1. Yes it is kidnapping.
2. I do support taking people to a third country for torture purposes. I think we need to re-evaluate our definations of torture, and I think we should outline publically what we do to extract information, hopefully it will frighten people, and if some one else calls it torture...who gives a fuck. Let them whine. But for christ sake we must be consistent and apply or policies consistently. Always keeping in mind the eye for an eye factor. 3. Yes I think the charges are valid and the CIA agents involved should be forced to answer for the laws they violated in soveriegn italy. I was just set to read an article on this. I doubt it will change my points of view...but who knows. -bear |
Quote:
|
I'll put a fiver on the CIA.
|
Quote:
Apart from the bit about supporting torture. That I don't like. Mr Mephisto |
yeah, 1 and 3 from j8ear are plausible..2 is just out there...
i'm sorry, i just don't think torture is a good method for getting information. Seriously, you may get a TON of info, but 10% may be valid if you're lucky. I firmly believe there are other methods than torture. Now, i will admit that a part of me would love to allow torture, but i just know it's wrong. |
Quote:
exactly, I can grab a random guy from the street and when I'm finished with him he will happily admit that he is the AlKaida member who planned 9/11. Perhaps some of you should read "Cautio criminalis" a book that was published in Europe in 1631 |
Quote:
Quote:
|
i'm not saying they would take everythign at face value, but let's say the guy spouts out little stuff at first that turns out to be true, then, begrudgingly more stuff..then a bit more...then the info accuracy drops considerably until you honestly can't trust anything out of that person's mouth..then it's even worse when HE starts believing the lies, 2+2=5 and shit like that...
torture is effective at gaining info, just not that effective at gaining accurate info, imho. |
The CIA should have been shut down years ago. The US does not need a secret police force.
From CIA.gov Quote:
|
Quote:
Spying is illegal, 'covert operations' are illegal, bribery is illegal, and guess what the CIA does? Part of the criticism of Clinton was he tried to run the CIA like you would a law enforcement agency, which crippled our intelligence gathering ability. God help us if the CIA starts obeying foreign law, we might as well close shop. Now just because someone says the CIA did this, doesn't mean I believe them, but if the story is 100% true, the only fault I have with it is that they got caught. CIA shouldn't be that sloppy. |
Quote:
|
no country person or entity is above the law. kidnapping is illegal, no doubts about it. the CIA has been doing this for years, its baout time someone raised their voice about it.
the way i see it, the CIA is just a legalised thug agency...my closest analogy would be the Mafia. The sole purpose is to wreak havoc and destabalise countries, governments and economies. how the fuck does that work? isnt that what Al Qaeda did to the US on 911? (to wreak havoc, destabalise the goverment and economy?) and what would the US do if one of its citizens was kidnapped by another foreign country? (apart from kidnapping their own citizens aka jose padilla) The way i see it, Al Qaeda was a legitimate entity in afghanistan, endorsed by the then current afghan leadership. the CIA is a legitimate entity in the US endorsed by the current US leadership. There is no difference. They are both terror organisations. |
Quote:
http://www.mirrors.org/historical/20...tc/wtc_005.jpg There is no difference. :rolleyes: |
To equate the CIA and al-Queda is offensive in the extreme.
It's comments like this that give the "left/liberals/Democrats/anti-war lobby" (take your pick) a bad name. Mr Mephisto |
Quote:
And yeah... the CIA exists to run planes into buildings... /ignored |
To add to Seaver, recent examples include S. Korea, Israel, and France - And they're our allies too!
|
Wait, I read the post wrong - The aforementioned (as far as I know) did not kidnap anyone (except for Israel). I was referring to regular espionage. And don't forget corporate too.
|
and you think that kidnapping is all that the CIA does? the CIA has been destabilising governments,at the whims of whatever adminstration has been in power.
as for what al qaeda did, there is no justification..but what the CIA has done is kill a lot more than 3000 people. heres a book for you all to read.. Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II. by William Blum Table of Contents Introduction 1. China - 1945 to 1960s: Was Mao Tse-tung just paranoid? 2. Italy - 1947-1948: Free elections, Hollywood style 3. Greece - 1947 to early 1950s: From cradle of democracy to client state 4. The Philippines - 1940s and 1950s: America's oldest colony 5. Korea - 1945-1953: Was it all that it appeared to be? 6. Albania - 1949-1953: The proper English spy 7. Eastern Europe - 1948-1956: Operation Splinter Factor 8. Germany - 1950s: Everything from juvenile delinquency to terrorism 9. Iran - 1953: Making it safe for the King of Kings 10. Guatemala - 1953-1954: While the world watched 11. Costa Rica - Mid-1950s: Trying to topple an ally - Part 1 12. Syria - 1956-1957: Purchasing a new government 13. Middle East - 1957-1958: The Eisenhower Doctrine claims another backyard for America 14. Indonesia - 1957-1958: War and pornography 15. Western Europe - 1950s and 1960s: Fronts within fronts within fronts 16. British Guiana - 1953-1964: The CIA's international labor mafia 17. Soviet Union - Late 1940s to 1960s: From spy planes to book publishing 18. Italy - 1950s to 1970s: Supporting the Cardinal's orphans and techno-fascism 19. Vietnam - 1950-1973: The Hearts and Minds Circus 20. Cambodia - 1955-1973: Prince Sihanouk walks the high-wire of neutralism 21. Laos - 1957-1973: L'Armée Clandestine 22. Haiti - 1959-1963: The Marines land, again 23. Guatemala - 1960: One good coup deserves another 24. France/Algeria - 1960s: L'état, c'est la CIA 25. Ecuador - 1960-1963: A text book of dirty tricks 26. The Congo - 1960-1964: The assassination of Patrice Lumumba 27. Brazil - 1961-1964: Introducing the marvelous new world of death squads 28. Peru - 1960-1965: Fort Bragg moves to the jungle 29. Dominican Republic - 1960-1966: Saving democracy from communism by getting rid of democracy 30. Cuba - 1959 to 1980s: The unforgivable revolution 31. Indonesia - 1965: Liquidating President Sukarno ... and 500,000 others East Timor - 1975: And 200,000 more 32. Ghana - 1966: Kwame Nkrumah steps out of line 33. Uruguay - 1964-1970: Torture -- as American as apple pie 34. Chile - 1964-1973: A hammer and sickle stamped on your child's forehead 35. Greece - 1964-1974: "Fuck your Parliament and your Constitution," said the President of the United States 36. Bolivia - 1964-1975: Tracking down Che Guevara in the land of coup d'etat 37. Guatemala - 1962 to 1980s: A less publicized "final solution" 38. Costa Rica - 1970-1971: Trying to topple an ally -- Part 2 39. Iraq - 1972-1975: Covert action should not be confused with missionary work 40. Australia - 1973-1975: Another free election bites the dust 41. Angola - 1975 to 1980s: The Great Powers Poker Game 42. Zaire - 1975-1978: Mobutu and the CIA, a marriage made in heaven 43. Jamaica - 1976-1980: Kissinger's ultimatum 44. Seychelles - 1979-1981: Yet another area of great strategic importance 45. Grenada - 1979-1984: Lying -- one of the few growth industries in Washington 46. Morocco - 1983: A video nasty 47. Suriname - 1982-1984: Once again, the Cuban bogeyman 48. Libya - 1981-1989: Ronald Reagan meets his match 49. Nicaragua - 1981-1990: Destabilization in slow motion 50. Panama - 1969-1991: Double-crossing our drug supplier 51. Bulgaria 1990/Albania 1991: Teaching communists what democracy is all about 52. Iraq - 1990-1991: Desert holocaust 53. Afghanistan - 1979-1992: America's Jihad 54. El Salvador - 1980-1994: Human rights, Washington style 55. Haiti - 1986-1994: Who will rid me of this turbulent priest? 56. The American Empire - 1992 to present Notes Appendix I: This is How the Money Goes Round Appendix II: Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-1945 Appendix III: U. S. Government Assassination Plots Index |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Some terrorist who we know is planning to kill Americans... grab and bag him as far as I care. It'd be a good idea to go to their government first with the justification, but you'd be screaming murder if say, he had connections and got let off. The mafia exists today because of this, what if he had connections which kept him sheltered and immunity to kill us? I'm not saying this is the case, but how agered would you be if that occured? You'd be screaming for Bush's resignation. |
The 'ends-justify-the-means' argument is the same one used by the terrorists.
Please try and be self consistant - or - simply wrap yourself in your flag and don't try to make intelligent justifications for breaking foreign laws - there are none. What would be justified would be to state that you are a proud citizen of the United States of America, and will back anything that your government does in order to further its interests. Using your own arguments, it is perfectly reasonable for a citizen of a foreign government to break the laws in the US, as long as it is in the interests of their own nation... |
Quote:
I dont back anything the government does, if you read any of my posts I have many disagreements with our government and our current administration. However, if grabbing some guy in Italy saves dozens/hundreds/thousands of innocent lives.. then so be it. As for the breaking of international intelligence laws... show me ONE country that doesnt do this. Even Switzerland has an intelligence agency. |
I'm not arguing with you, I'm just pointing out that you either are on the side of moral absolutism, or national absolutism.
"Just because you dont agree with them does not take away the justification." You are right about there being justifications for breaking foreign laws - but then you have to agree that foreigners are equally justified in taking action against the US when it is in their percieved interest. It is practical to have an intelligence agency - however, it is impractical to have that agency perform acts that blow its own cover. It makes collecting future intelligence much more difficult, and in the long run is liable to put thousands more lives in jeopardy. A good intelligence operation should be invisible. |
Quote:
Much of the work the CIA does is gathering and compiling for meaningful analysis of public information. MOre work is done from air survailance, and other more clandestine sources. Only a portion of their intel comes from black bag sources...and certainly only a small fraction comes from kidnap and torture operations. The fact that the intelligence community is still short on arabic translators really sort of gives me the idea that they aren't using the non-international incident causing intel sources to the best of their abilities. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Well played, host. It needed to be said. Perhaps this can be the alpha of people around here opening their eyes about the matter, instead of refering back to something as fact despite it's never being substantiated. I know the way ustwo will respond to this (more 9/11 conspiracy bs), but others will not be so quick to ignore what is as plain as the nose on their faces.
|
Quote:
"The investigation was enormously helpful in figuring out who and what to look for as we worked to prevent attacks. It allowed us to see where we as a nation needed to close gaps in our security. And it gave us clear and definitive proof that al Qaeda was behind the strikes." |
Quote:
Quote:
his April, 19, 2002 speech. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:17 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project