From: jtn@ADS.COM (John T. Nelson)
Subject: United States Condones kidnapping
Organization: Guest of Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc./Advanced Decision Systems
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 04:28:01 GMT



I posted this some time ago but apparently never made it out of my
site...


Well now the Supreme Court has ruled that it is not unconstitutional
for the government of the United States to kidnap individuals in
foreign countries to stand trial even though the United States may
already have an extradition treaty with that country.

This is ridiculous. It boils down to nothing less than state sponsored
terrorism, pure and simple. George Bush spits blood when terrorists in
the middle east kidnap OUR people for reasons that we view as less than
justifiable, but see how the self-cleansing rhetoric flies when
kidnapping becomes an expeditious means to see his foreign policy
ambitions fulfilled.

Kidnapping IS recognized internationally as a crime but in the twisted
reasoning of the Supreme Court (which is really just rubber stamping
the White House's interests) it is somehow perfectly legitimate because
the Constitution, and already existing extradition treaties, don't
prohibit it.  "Oh, the Constitution doesn't forbid it... well it must
be okay then!" The Constitution doesn't forbid the imprisonment and
public execution of anyone who wears a flowerpot on their head so it
must be ok!  Let's round up those perverts and kill 'em all today!

So let's take the specific case where we kidnapped Humberto
Alvarez-Machain, a Mexican doctor accused of participating in the 1985
kidnap and murder of DEA agent Enrique Camarena Salazar and his pilot.
Justice WIlliam Rehnquist noted that such abductions are not
dissallowed by the current extradition treaty we have with Mexico and
further that forcible abduction does not therefore prohibit his trial
in a court in the United States for violations of the criminal laws of
the United States.

In other words, the United States can now feel free to kidnap anyone it
judges to be a "bad boy", drag them back to the United States and try
them in a United States court of law according to Unnited States laws.
How would we feel if a state sponsored Islamic "court of law" decided
to abduct several highly placed citizens of the United States, ferry
them to the middle east and then proceed to try, sentence and execute
them? Would this not be identical to the sort of behavior we are
condoning for ourselves?  Can you imagine the uproar from the White
House if this happened? And consider for a moment... hasn't it
already?

Under the Supreme Court's interpretation, if the United States, for
example, thought it more expedient to torture or simply execute a
person rather than to attempt extradition, these options would be
equally available because they too were not explicitly prohibited by
the treaty we have with Mexico.

What a bunch of hypocrits our national leaders are! They will justify
ANY act, with any lame excuse (even a "war on drugs") simply to have
their way.  We've already shown what kind of "good neighbors" we are by
kidnapping former Panamanian leader Manuel Antonia Noriega, and
convicting him in our country according to our laws. Noregia by the
way, has been sentenced to 40 years impisonment and will serve it in a
foreign country.

Consider the negative impact this behavior has had... Mexico initially
severed all cooperation with the United States in the war against
drugs, but then turned about face probably after realizing that it was
probably in their interests to continue to cooperate with the DEA. It
is amusing that the drug enforcement folks thought this was a big
victory, only to discover it had almost torpedoed cooperation in
Mexico, and possibly in Canada too.

Well, I think its a monstorous decision and to be condemned. It goes
against all acceptable international norms of behavior. George Bush's
concurrence with the Supreme Court's ruling is equally monstorous. Is
this the precident President Bush is now setting for our country's
future? Brutalizing neighboring nations and sponsoring (through the
FBI and DEA) grossly deplorable acts?

It distresses me to see that the brand of Republican foreign policy in
this country always seems to boil down to the application of military
power (Gulf War, Invasion of Panama, kidnapping the leaders of soverign
nations, etc), covert military operations or sleazy little backroom
deals ("arms for hostages", arms sales and shipments to appease
military despots) . Our nuclear tipped prick is the biggest in the
world and George Bush is determined to use it. Hooray for the United
States of America!  Let's wave those flags and play some gaudy marshall
music!

I am amazed that the American people allow this sort of thing.
Actually, I'm not amazed. The country is no longer run "by the people
for the people." It is run by an elite upper crust hierarchy, fed by
the people for the benefit of the rich and the political elite. Just as
we can get away with terrorism in other countries, this politcal elite
can get away with ANYTHING in their own country despite what the
Consitution says, and the spirit in which it, and the Bill Of Rights,
were written.

- Hacker
--
Dark Hacker				hacker@black-silicon.mclean.va.us

"I am the very instantiation of object oriented evil!"
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:39874 ca.politics:6797 ba.politics:4527