Italian judge issues EU arrest warrants for 22 CIA agents [article]

Zebra3

Italian judge issues EU arrest warrants for 22 CIA agents

12:30 Friday December 23rd 2005

An Italian judge has issued Europe-wide warrants for the arrest of 22 suspected CIA agents who allegedly kidnapped an Egyptian cleric in Milan two-and-a-half years ago.
The cleric - Abu Omar - was abducted while walking to his mosque in Milan in February 2003.

Thirteen months later, he telephoned his family and friends from Egypt saying he had been snatched by US agents and taken to his homeland, where he was severely tortured.

He was apparently rearrested shortly afterwards and hasn't been heard from since.

A judge in Milan had already issued Italian arrest warrants for 22 alleged CIA operatives suspected of carrying out the kidnapping.

The courts have now extended those arrest warrants to cover all 25 EU member states.

Prosecutors have also sought the extradition of the 22 suspects, but the Italian Government has requested more documentation before deciding whether to pass the request on the to United States.

Earlier this week, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, a key supporter of the so-called "war on terror", suggested the Government may not push the prosecutors' request, saying: "I don't think there is any basis in the case."

http://www.unison.ie/breakingnews/index.php3?ca=27&si=84331

patzer117

Zebra3 wrote:

Thirteen months later, he telephoned his family and friends from Egypt saying he had been snatched by US agents and taken to his homeland, where he was severely tortured.

To me this seems like the only reason that there could be an arrest warrant put out. Have the CIA agents broken any laws? Have they done anything out of the ordinary? He (possibly) makes a phonecall to some of his family, evidence of which somehow turns up in an italian court, and therefore those agents who arrested him are being charged? Seems a wee bit stupid to me... If he can't be found, then no evidence exists. With what are they being charged? The Italians obviously knew about the initial operation, and if he escaped, then nobody can prove the same agents have anything to do with his current situation.

Anyone else hear of this?

Zombrex

patzer117 wrote:

Have the CIA agents broken any laws?

They kidnapped an Italian citizen and removed him from the country. Thats a pretty big law broken right there.

patzer117 wrote:

He (possibly) makes a phonecall to some of his family, evidence of which somehow turns up in an italian court, and therefore those agents who arrested him are being charged? Seems a wee bit stupid to me...

Witnesses say they saw two men sprayed a chemical in his face and stuff him into a van. The police investigation has determined that the van headed to a US air base and that a flight most likely left carrying him to Egypt. The CIA agents have been identified using mobile phone records

http://www.guardian.co.uk/italy/story/0,12576,1519576,00.html

patzer117 wrote:

If he can't be found, then no evidence exists.

Evidence exists he was kidnapped. Evidence exist he was tortured. He can't be found cause he is being held illegally in another country.

patzer117 wrote:

The Italians obviously knew about the initial operation, and if he escaped, then nobody can prove the same agents have anything to do with his current situation.

The Italians didn't know about it, thats the point. The CIA normally carries out operations like this with the blessing of the local governments, but it has done a number of these kidnappings without consent of the local police and judical system, which breaks local laws.

seamus

Anyone else hear of this?

Dispatches did a pretty big programme about it. The Italian police were carrying out information gathering surveillance on the same guy at the time, but knew nothing of the American plan to kidnap him.

As Wicknight said:
"Witnesses say they saw two men sprayed a chemical in his face and stuff him into a van. The police investigation has determined that the van headed to a US air base and that a flight most likely left carrying him to Egypt. The CIA agents have been identified using mobile phone records"
The phone records determined that these men were in the same area as the kidnapped man at the same time, and then they disappeared at the same time that he did.
Eyewitness records link the same people too, and I'd call that pretty good reason to issue arrest warrants.

TerrorFirmer

Very, very interesting I must say.

Can anyone envision what will happen should the Italian government indicate to the US government anything regarding extradition....?

patzer117

Wicknight wrote:

They kidnapped an Italian citizen and removed him from the country. Thats a pretty big law broken right there.

Witnesses say they saw two men sprayed a chemical in his face and stuff him into a van. The police investigation has determined that the van headed to a US air base and that a flight most likely left carrying him to Egypt. The CIA agents have been identified using mobile phone records

http://www.guardian.co.uk/italy/story/0,12576,1519576,00.html


Evidence exists he was kidnapped. Evidence exist he was tortured. He can't be found cause he is being held illegally in another country.


The Italians didn't know about it, thats the point. The CIA normally carries out operations like this with the blessing of the local governments, but it has done a number of these kidnappings without consent of the local police and judical system, which breaks local laws.

I'll start off by saying i only read what was above and that the original link is (/was) broken, and the new link changes the state of things a good bit. However I still can't see anything to suggest that he is an Italian citizen, only that a kidnapping took place.

Evidence does not exist that he was tortured, only a witness to a phonecall, to what somebody else claims. that'd never hold up in a court of law.

By the way the CIA were operating it seems extremely likely that the Italians did know about it, and had its blessing - they aren't stupid enough to leave plenty of traces and not cover their tracks right?

lazydaisy

By ploughing through hundreds of thousands of mobile phone records, tracing hotel registrations and bugging phone conversations, the Italian police have built up a picture of the CIA's operation that offers several surprises.

Does this imply the Italians dont need get a bill passed through senate[like the US with Patriot Act] to snoop? They automatically have the right to do this? And evidence obtained this way is enough to get EU wide warrants?

sovtek

lazydaisy wrote:

By ploughing through hundreds of thousands of mobile phone records, tracing hotel registrations and bugging phone conversations, the Italian police have built up a picture of the CIA's operation that offers several surprises.

Does this imply the Italians dont need get a bill passed through senate[like the US with Patriot Act] to snoop? They automatically have the right to do this? And evidence obtained this way is enough to get EU wide warrants?

Possibly but CIA agents aren't Italian citizens so it's possible whatever legislation there is could only refer to Italian or EU nationals. Also members of another nations security agency coming into your sovereign nation without permission is a no no in just about every country.

sovtek

patzer117 wrote:

By the way the CIA were operating it seems extremely likely that the Italians did know about it, and had its blessing - they aren't stupid enough to leave plenty of traces and not cover their tracks right?

Or they might be very arrogant and feel that they can do anything they want...which would also explain the kidnapping and the torture...or they are very stupid and brutal and arrogant.
I wouldn't put my bets on most CIA agents being all that bright.
They are, after all, usually ex-military.

Nuttzz

sovtek wrote:

I wouldn't put my bets on most CIA agents being all that bright.
They are, after all, usually ex-military.

well thats a pretty broad generalisation, have you come across many CIA agents or do you just assume they are stupid because they work for the US government

Manic Moran

I firmly believe it's considered by the intel/counterintel services as a 'Grand Game.' A challenge, as it were, between friendly rivals.

Kidnapping is obviously illegal, even by friendly governments, and if the CIA agents in question ever get arrested, I don't see the US government breaking their backs to defend them. They shouldn't have gotten caught!

NTM

lazydaisy

sovtek wrote:

I wouldn't put my bets on most CIA agents being all that bright. They are, after all, usually ex-military.

I don't get it. Can you explain.

Zombrex

patzer117 wrote:

However I still can't see anything to suggest that he is an Italian citizen, only that a kidnapping took place.

Sorry you are right, he hold an Eygyptian passport as far as I know. I assume he is on some kind of visa to be inside the EU.

Of course a kidnapping taking place in Italy, even of a foreign citizen, is exactly the same crime. If you went to Italy and were kidnapped would you expect the Italian police to go "umm, not our problem, he's not Italian"

patzer117 wrote:

Evidence does not exist that he was tortured, only a witness to a phonecall, to what somebody else claims. that'd never hold up in a court of law.

He was released from an Egyptian prision and the first thing he does is call his wife to say he was tortured in a country that does torture prisions. It ain't much of a stretch.

patzer117 wrote:

By the way the CIA were operating it seems extremely likely that the Italians did know about it, and had its blessing

Yes becaues the CIA have never done anything covert or illegal in other countries :rolleyes:

If the CIA agents had the blessing of the Italian police services it wouldn't be possible to charge them with a crime since they could just turn around and say "hold on lads, you told us to do this"

Zombrex

lazydaisy wrote:

Does this imply the Italians dont need get a bill passed through senate[like the US with Patriot Act] to snoop? They automatically have the right to do this? And evidence obtained this way is enough to get EU wide warrants?

I am not an expert on Italian law, or on this case, but I would imagine that once a crime has been committed it is not that much of a problem to get phone records of someone you suspect did it.

The issue with things like the US Patriot Act is they allow snooping before a crime has been commited.

Hobbes

I thought this story wasn't new as I had seen it before but it appears it is. They just extended the number of people they want in connection with the kidnapping.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4619377.stm

Nox

patzer117 wrote:

Evidence does not exist that he was tortured, only a witness to a phonecall, to what somebody else claims. that'd never hold up in a court of law.

I totally agree.

What I don't get is the 22 kidnappers. What happened, did they take a school bus full of folks to kidnap ONE person? Did these 22 names come from the same phone call? Did the kidnap victim know these 22 people? Were any Egyptian torturer's named? If no Egyptians were named ... did the torturer's wear name tags?

I have lots of questions. Once we get past the victim ... is this judge trying to circumvent the fact that the US is not part of the ICC in an effort to try to back-door something?

This whole thing is a bunch of pesky noise.

Nox

Hobbes

22 Might of been the total number of people involved easy. From reports he was jumped on by a number of people and dragged into a van. Not 22 but by that they also had to get him out of the country and also administration involved.

This is nothing new TBH. There have been over 150 such operations since 9/11, a few with the permission of the country in question.

Which oddly enough if this didn't happen why are the CIA claiming they had permission to make the kidnapping?

Nox

Hobbes wrote:

22 Might of been the total number of people involved easy. From reports he was jumped on by a number of people and dragged into a van. Not 22 but by that they also had to get him out of the country and also administration involved.

Agreed ... where and how did they get the names? Did all this come from the telephone accuser?

Hobbes wrote:

This is nothing new TBH. There have been over 150 such operations since 9/11, a few with the permission of the country in question.

Yep. And something tells me that the phrase, "plausable deniability" fits in the equation somewhere.

Hobbes wrote:

Which oddly enough if this didn't happen why are the CIA claiming they had permission to make the kidnapping?

Hmmm ... ain't that an interesting question? I wonder if Italy has any fallout shelters left that aren't already full of politicos hiding from this fallout?

Nox

Hobbes

Nox wrote:

Agreed ... where and how did they get the names? Did all this come from the telephone accuser?

Witnesses to the actual kidnapping, doing an actual investigation to determine who they are, not to mention the Judge probably had a list of known CIA operatives that in Ireland.

Hmmm ... ain't that an interesting question? I wonder if Italy has any fallout shelters left that aren't already full of politicos hiding from this fallout?

Nox

Italy have already denied it and the CIA claim was before this fact. Not to mention Italy had the US ambassador over hot coals over it.

I mean this happened ages ago.

Manic Moran

If I recall correctly, the Italians have the snatch on tape. It's a good start to the identification proceedings.

NTM

Nox

Manic Moran wrote:

If I recall correctly, the Italians have the snatch on tape.

How convienient. Is the rest of the story that the Italians wanted him too? If that's the case ... what's the problem? Seems like some folks are trying to take some phoney moral high ground. O well, when it comes to some Euro's ... what else is new.

Nox

Manic Moran

Nox wrote:

How convienient. Is the rest of the story that the Italians wanted him too? If that's the case ... what's the problem? Seems like some folks are trying to take some phoney moral high ground. O well, when it comes to some Euro's ... what else is new.

Nox

In all fairness to the Italians, if the man was under observation, it would be logical to assume that they were hoping to garner more information from him, such as who he meets. The snatch ruined that operation.

Further, any government is going to be irked at foreign government operations in their country. I don't think it's that unreasonable to get pissed. I'm fairly sure the FBI would be equally unamused if the cases were reversed.

Finally, kidnapping (i.e. detention without warrant or arrest powers) is illegal on a civil/criminal level. If Italian police are constrained by laws, why the heck can't foreigners?

NTM

A Dub in Glasgo

Nox wrote:

How convienient. Is the rest of the story that the Italians wanted him too? If that's the case ... what's the problem? Seems like some folks are trying to take some phoney moral high ground. O well, when it comes to some Euro's ... what else is new.

Nox

Let me see if I get this... You ask what is the problem about a possible kidnapping and torture?.... interesting

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

well, he is american.

merry christmas everyone

Nox

Manic Moran wrote:

In all fairness to the Italians, if the man was under observation, it would be logical to assume that they were hoping to garner more information from him, such as who he meets. The snatch ruined that operation.

Possibly.

Here's another option (logical) to consider:

The Italians were stalling. Everyone ASSUMES that the CIA is lying when it states that the Italians knew about it. What happens (shock of shocks) if the CIA is telling the truth and the Italians are lying. This is a difficult concept for the Euros (and other non-Americans) to accept.

Manic Moran wrote:

Further, any government is going to be irked at foreign government operations in their country.

Yep ... especially if the operation were exposed and it showed that said Government was likewise involved.

Manic Moran wrote:

I don't think it's that unreasonable to get pissed.

Yep. But if and only if they were uninvolved. Seems to me that the CIA claims the Italians were. I will address allegations again later.

Manic Moran wrote:

I'm fairly sure the FBI would be equally unamused if the cases were reversed.

Yep, As would I be too. But that is also contingent on the Italians telling the truth and the CIA lying.

Manic Moran wrote:

Finally, kidnapping (i.e. detention without warrant or arrest powers) is illegal on a civil/criminal level.

Now we are down to semantics. Is it kidnapping when the Israeli's get Eichman from SA?

Manic Moran wrote:

If Italian police are constrained by laws, why the heck can't foreigners?

Now we have done a lap because we are right back to my first point ... were the Italians stalling? It has now been made public ... is this a feeble attempt at 'saving face'?

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Let me see if I get this... You ask what is the problem about a possible kidnapping and torture?.... interesting

ALLEGED TORTURE. I guess I'm the ONLY person here who remembers the AQ training manual where they are taught to claim torture. I've already discussed kidnapping. However, I will give you credit for using the word 'possible'.

Mordeth wrote:

well, he is american.

A tad bit of a cheap shot ... but then YOU are a Euro so I guess it's to be expected. If you Euro's can dump on the USofA, you will take any and all opportunities to do so. I hope you take the additional two seconds to think about some alternative possibilities to the story. The greatest possibility is that the CIA might be telling the truth. Another possibility is that the Milan judge may have his own agenda.

Nox

Manic Moran

Now we are down to semantics. Is it kidnapping when the Israeli's get Eichman from SA?


Umm. Yes. By any stretch of the definition.

Not saying it shouldn't have been done, but if the Mossad agents had gotten caught by the Argentinian security services, I wouldn't be calling for their release either.

NTM

Nox

Manic Moran wrote:

Now we are down to semantics. Is it kidnapping when the Israeli's get Eichman from SA?


Umm. Yes. By any stretch of the definition.

Not saying it shouldn't have been done, but if the Mossad agents had gotten caught by the Argentinian security services, I wouldn't be calling for their release either.

NTM

I don't get it. So the critera for kidnapping is whether you get caught? By the way ... I don't remember anyone calling Eichman's capture kidnapping.

Nox

A Dub in Glasgo

Nox wrote:

ALLEGED TORTURE.

Everything the in this thread is alleged which is one of the reaosns why the Italians are seeking people, yet you seem to know everything about the case How so?

I guess I'm the ONLY person here who remembers the AQ training manual where they are taught to claim torture.

I guess I'm the only person who remembers the CIA training manual where they are taught to deny everthing.

I've already discussed kidnapping.

and agree with it

However, I will give you credit for using the word 'possible'.

How nice of you :rolleyes:

A Dub in Glasgo

Nox wrote:

I don't remember anyone calling Eichman's capture kidnapping.

Nox

It was always known as a kidnapping. I don't remember anyone not calling it a kidnapping

lazydaisy

Mordeth wrote:

well, he is american.

What do you mean?

Nox

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

I guess I'm the only person who remembers the CIA training manual where they are taught to deny everthing.

You have a copy of that manual or is this just something you're making up?

Nox

Nox

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

It was always known as a kidnapping. I don't remember anyone not calling it a kidnapping

Apparently our memories are different.

Nox

micosavo

like most things, this could just be a face-saving effort on the part of the italians. Nothing more will be made of it. It will slowly shift away out of the greater public's awareness. I also doubt that the 22 will ever show up!

sceptre

Nox wrote:

I don't remember anyone calling Eichman's capture kidnapping.

Even the Jerusalem Post has referred to the event as the Eichmann kidnapping in a headline. Obviously the event was kidnapping.

Nox

sceptre wrote:

Even the Jerusalem Post has referred to the event as the Eichmann kidnapping in a headline. Obviously the event was kidnapping.

Noted. Thank you. I say again ... my memory is different.

Nox

Manic Moran

Nox wrote:

I don't get it. So the critera for kidnapping is whether you get caught? By the way ... I don't remember anyone calling Eichman's capture kidnapping.

Nox

It's a kidnapping regardless of if you're caught or not.

Real-world issues indicate that governments are going to be running covert ops in other countries whether those other countries like it or not, including 'friends.' US in Italy, Israel in Argentina, British in Ireland, wherever. Sometimes they may be justified, let's say in the Eichman case if Argentina wouldn't extradite.

My issue with the CIA/Italian case isn't that the CIA kidnapped someone. It's one of the things they exist for, after all. It's the fact that there's no point protesting when they get caught doing it. You play with fire, you're going to get burned if you're not careful. Well, guess what? The CIA evidently weren't careful enough.

NTM

monument

Manic Moran wrote:

My issue with the CIA/Italian case isn't that the CIA kidnapped someone.

So, you'd have no problem with another state's agents droping by and picking you up?

Hobbes

Nox wrote:

How convienient.

Yes, especially considering he was under investigation by Italian police at the time, that would make it easy no?

ALLEGED TORTURE. I guess I'm the ONLY person here who remembers the AQ training manual where they are taught to claim torture. I've already discussed kidnapping. However, I will give you credit for using the word 'possible'.

What about those people who have been kidnapped and released later as innocent who also claimed tourture? One such (Canadian national) even had the scars to prove it.

I haven't read the AQ manual, but I have read some of the CIA stuff (When reading up on La Pensa). AFAIR a lot of the AQ manual learnt its tricks from that but then they did train them to begin with.

Of course if I was you I would never acknowledge that you read the AQ manual unless you want a holiday.

Manic Moran wrote:

My issue with the CIA/Italian case isn't that the CIA kidnapped someone. It's one of the things they exist for, after all.

So your basically saying that Kidnapping people from other countries without the permission of that said country is ok in your book? Or only that the US does it? Why stop there?

Manic Moran

It is a bit of a controversial opinion, isn't it?

There is little doubt that in a perfect world, such organisations/operations would have no great need to exist.
"Oi! Argentina! Send us Eichman please, he needs to stand trial."
"Certainly. Would you like him gift-wrapped? Just fill out this extradition form"

Of course the reality is slightly different.

"Oi! Argentina! Send us Eichman please, he needs to stand trial"
"No"
"Oh. Why not?"
"We don't want to"
"How about all those people he executed"
"Well, we don't think it's such a big deal."

A country's government exists to serve its people, not to pander to other countries' preferences. Therefore, it could be argued that they have a moral obligation to do whatever is necessary in order to do this. These operations can take less intrusive forms, such as spying, or pretty blatant ones such as assasination and kidnapping. Of course, excessive use of such policies will hurt the country using it, so it would not serve the people much, so it is a very fine balancing act. For the Italian case, I have absolutely no idea why the US didn't go through normal channels, I would have thought the Italians would be co-operative.

NTM

monument

It looks as if you are saying yes to my question ("you'd have no problem with another state's agents dropping by and picking you up?"), if that state could argue "that they have a moral obligation" to do so.

Are you saying such?

Nox

Manic Moran wrote:

For the Italian case, I have absolutely no idea why the US didn't go through normal channels, I would have thought the Italians would be co-operative.

Everyone still assumes the CIA is lying about Italian cooperation. And now it's the CIA's fault about the AQ manual. God, will there EVER be a time when something isn't the fault of the USofA?

O well.

Nox

Manic Moran

monument wrote:

It looks as if you are saying yes to my question ("you'd have no problem with another state's agents dropping by and picking you up?"), if that state could argue "that they have a moral obligation" to do so.

Are you saying such?

As a company-grade officer in a relatively unimportant unit, with no personal plans which would constitute a threat to any other country, and without a history of war crimes, I don't think I'm in any particular danger.

NTM

Nox

Manic Moran wrote:

I don't think I'm in any particular danger.

What about an agent from ... Nox?

Nox

A Dub in Glasgo

Nox wrote:

Everyone still assumes the CIA is lying about Italian cooperation. And now it's the CIA's fault about the AQ manual. God, will there EVER be a time when something isn't the fault of the USofA?

O well.

Nox

And you are assuming that the Us have no case to answer, why is that?

monument

Manic Moran wrote:

As a company-grade officer in a relatively unimportant unit, with no personal plans which would constitute a threat to any other country, and without a history of war crimes, I don't think I'm in any particular danger.

I'd say these people were thinking the same...

Hobbes wrote:

What about those people who have been kidnapped and released later as innocent who also claimed tourture? One such (Canadian national) even had the scars to prove it.

Nox

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

And you are assuming that the Us have no case to answer, why is that?

Very easy for me to ignore this question since I started asking about the Italians first. No one here even acknowledged that the Italians might be wrong and by implication even YOU make the US guilty.

But then I shouldn't expect Euro's to ever do anything wrong. After all, everything is the fault of the USofA.

But then, if you look back I have already stated that I happen to believe that the CIA had indeed coordinated with the Italians. I also questioned the motives of the judge in Milan.

Now YOUR turn ... why is it that the Italians are truthing and the US is lying? If the Italians were indeed monitoring the guy and the US kidnapped him on their surveilance cameras ... why has it taken so long for this to be brought out?

I know, a vast CIA conspiracy.

By the way ... I still haven't seen any reasonable answer as to HOW the judge came up with the names of the 22. If he got them from the Italians who were watching the Arab ... he didn't do a very good job of investigating why they were quiet for so long.

O well.

Nox

Manic Moran

I guess I'll just have to continue doing exactly what I'm doing: Taking my statistical chances.

NTM

A Dub in Glasgo

Nox wrote:

Very easy for me to ignore this question since I started asking about the Italians first. No one here even acknowledged that the Italians might be wrong and by implication even YOU make the US guilty.

They might be wrong. The last time I checked, the Italians were looking for suspects to a crime. How is that the same as the convicted persons of a crime? You would even deny the Italians the chance to try people.

But then I shouldn't expect Euro's to ever do anything wrong. After all, everything is the fault of the USofA.

?

But then, if you look back I have already stated that I happen to believe that the CIA had indeed coordinated with the Italians. I also questioned the motives of the judge in Milan.

Do you agree that a person was kidnapped then? What about torture

Now YOUR turn ... why is it that the Italians are truthing and the US is lying? If the Italians were indeed monitoring the guy and the US kidnapped him on their surveilance cameras ... why has it taken so long for this to be brought out?

No idea, I would rather the legal system decided that than some anonoymous folk on an internet discussion board.

I know, a vast CIA conspiracy.

By the way ... I still haven't seen any reasonable answer as to HOW the judge came up with the names of the 22. If he got them from the Italians who were watching the Arab ... he didn't do a very good job of investigating why they were quiet for so long.

O well.

No idea, I would rather the legal system decided that than some anonoymous folk on an internet discussion board.

Nox

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

They might be wrong. The last time I checked, the Italians were looking for suspects to a crime.

Warrant for arrest = looking for suspects? Please excuse me while I take time out to laugh.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

How is that the same as the convicted persons of a crime?

I don't understand your question here.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

You would even deny the Italians the chance to try people.

Not at all. I have asked multiple questions that should have been answered LOOOONG before warrants were issued. I return to questioning the motives of the judge.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Do you agree that a person was kidnapped then?

I sure do think they got him. My question is whether the Italian gov was involved.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

What about torture

Possibly ... but without proof (hearsay from a third party phonecaller is hardly proof) then all you have is words.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

No idea, I would rather the legal system decided that than some anonoymous folk on an internet discussion board.

I had to get up from the floor on this. Indeed, both of us are as you describe, but please explain to me the point. WE will decide nothing. WE are both wasting keystrokes across the pond ... spitting on each others opinions and attitudes. Now please tell me that YOU are not enjoying the intercourse. Because, if you are not, you can go to the bank on the fact that Nox will not waste any more of your time making you respond to me ... nor will Nox waste time on you. I must admit that the group of Euro's I've come across on this board (while typical Euro in attitude) have been far more cogent in expressing themselves. That means that so far ... I am enjoying the intercourse.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

No idea, I would rather the legal system decided that than some anonoymous folk on an internet discussion board.

See above retort from me ... it applies to your duplicate answer.

Nox

The Corinthian

Nox wrote:

Noted. Thank you. I say again ... my memory is different.

Sounds like someone who does not like to concede any point - or that should not be trusted at face value, given his dubious memory. Take your pick.

Now YOUR turn ... why is it that the Italians are truthing and the US is lying

Three reasons, firstly the Italians have no reason to lie if the US is telling the truth. The US, wanting to gain custody of a suspect in a foreign jurisdiction without local permission (i.e. if Italy is telling the truth), do.

Secondly, the US has a history of going after their man in a foreign jurisdiction without local permission (remote controlled planes in Yemen come to mind).

Finally, the US has been behaving in a manner on the international stage that has caused tremendous damage to her credibility to it morally and politically (Abu Ghraib, non-existence of WMD, Calipari, etc.). And as you’ve noted yourself, this is not only an attitude held by Europeans - so you’ll have to concede that there must be a reason for it (if your memory allows).

In fairness however, there may well another side to the story. Certainly, such a kidnapping would be politically embarrassing to Berlusconi’s government and, while he is prone to exaggerate on this point, there are more than a few left-leaning judges in Italy.

However, this is probably not enough to dispel the general suspicion that it is the US that is telling the porkies - Boy who cried wolf, et al.

Nox

The Corinthian wrote:

Sounds like someone who does not like to concede any point - or that should not be trusted at face value, given his dubious memory. Take your pick.

I have fewer than 30 posts. I have admitted to errors, and this can be confirmed. I reject this tripe.

The Corinthian wrote:

Three reasons, firstly the Italians have no reason to lie if the US is telling the truth. The US, wanting to gain custody of a suspect in a foreign jurisdiction without local permission (i.e. if Italy is telling the truth), do.

Hmmm ... Guess I can answer this one with your own words:

In fairness however, there may well another side to the story. Certainly, such a kidnapping would be politically embarrassing to Berlusconi’s government and, while he is prone to exaggerate on this point, there are more than a few left-leaning judges in Italy.

No reason to lie ?????????

The Corinthian wrote:

Secondly, the US has a history of going after their man in a foreign jurisdiction without local permission (remote controlled planes in Yemen come to mind).

This is a true statement ... however, I fail to see how this is a reason why the Italians would not lie. What the Italians are lying about is whether they were complicit in the act.

The Corinthian wrote:

Finally, the US has been behaving in a manner on the international stage that has caused tremendous damage to her credibility to it morally and politically (Abu Ghraib, non-existence of WMD, Calipari, etc.).

Hmmm ... Abu Ghraib. Military members have faced Courts Martial. Seems to me that you Euro's don't seem to get it. WMD's - 24/7 Predator aircraft moniter a portion of the Syrian Desert. Another fact you Euro's forget. Ever wonder why the expenditure of resources? Calipari - If this is the Italian Commie journalist who claims the US tried to assasinate her ... there was a Joint Italian American commission on that. Guess you folks don't care about that either. etc - I would make no difference what I would respond to ... your mind is made up ... I won't confuse you with the facts. But, it appears that your major point is US credibility. None of your points go to credibility. All of your points are Euro-hype generated to demean the US and then you turn right around as an excuse why the US isn't credible.

The Corinthian wrote:

However, this is probably not enough to dispel the general suspicion that it is the US that is telling the porkies - Boy who cried wolf, et al.

I don't get the wolf bit ... but I do agree with your "general suspicion". ABSOLUTELY NOTHING will dispell that. Something tells me you Euro's are even buying Saddam's allegation of torture.

Last item ... there's no reason for you to use an intentionally insulting tone (a la your first paragraph) with me. If my presence or my opinions are offensive to you ... so state. I'll leave.

Nox