So far, it’s Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Switzerland and the EU Parliamentary Committee, with more due.
An Italian judge indicted U.S. and Italian intelligence agents to stand trial for abducting an Egyptian cleric in 2003, setting up the first public trial over the U.S. policy of so-called "extraordinary rendition.’’
Judge Caterina Interlandi indicted 25 alleged Central Intelligence Agency agents, including former Milan station chief Robert Lady, as well as Italy’s former intelligence chief Nicolo Pollari and his deputy, Marco Mancini.
The Swiss govt is also investigating this, since the flight flew over their air space. Last month a German Court issued an arrest warrant for more Americans involved in such activity, and Spain and Portugal are also investigating.
The EU issued a detailed report into what it said were “at least” 1,245 secret CIA flights in Europe.
USA agents are really going to be arrested, tried and jailed in foreign countries for following George Bush’s illegal orders??!
These extraordinary renditions started during the 90s during the Clinton administration. Are they still a bad thing?
I suppose that Clinton and Bush would say they’re only a bad thing if you get caught, hence that’s why they’re covert. Since we know about them they were obviously not covert enough and were used too often.
Of course the policy is bad. I was being snarky and it’s fun to get a Clinton dig in.
I don’t understand why they needed to grab the guy inside Italy. That’s really really pushing the boundaries and breaking right through. What were they thinking?
I can understand, to a degree, going after known and active terrorists hiding in countries around Indonesia and places like that. But even then it is extremely questionable and needs oversight. To go after someone in a European country is craziness and out of control. We have proper relations with countries like that and those countries have proper laws against terrorists. I can’t see them willfully harboring a terrorist. There are proper and legal ways to get someone if that is the case. Someone in the CIA has too much Rambo and Spy vs. Spy in them.
The US and most of the EU can agree on what is a terrorist. Most terrorists willing to act against the US are willing to do the same to EU countries. I’m sure that the US and Italy would have a common agreement of what an international terrorist is. It’s in both countries best interest to put a stop to an Al-Qaeda style terrorist.
I haven’t followed the story close enough to know why the cooperation between Italy and the US broke down in investigating and going after the Egyptian cleric that was in Italy. Seems we would have a common interest in the guy if he was a bad guy.
So the guy who’s now heading up the police in my province, and planted a bomb in a bar frequented by policemen back in the Apartheid days was a ‘freedom fighter’ and not a terrorist?
To what extent is our definition of terrorism dependant on who wins and who gets to write the history?
It’s more along the lines of a common enemy rather than which side gets to write the history books. Islamic terrorists or radicals are a common enemy to both the US and most of the EU (certainly the old-school EU).
Not every freedom fighter has a cause that is moral and just.
Fighting against Apartheid was moral and just. I don’t see what’s moral and just about killing infidels or unbelievers.
I’m sure.
As I’m sure it makes perfect sense, and is considered not only moral and just but also a moral obligation, to the people doing such killing.
And should they ‘win’, and have their morals and ethics become the ruling ethic, they will be seen as freedom-fighters and the US forces in Iraq as terrorists.