U.S. captures Benghazi suspect in secret raid
 

that guy is wearing sandals :helpme :1orglaugh

'An armed man waves his rifle as buildings and cars are engulfed in flames after being set on fire inside the US consulate compound in Benghazi late on Sept. 11, 2012.'

consulate? it was a safe house.

I was half expecting to see a photo of Hillary Clinton after I clicked the link.

The article says "He is en-route to the US" but didn't say where - most likely Gitmo.

At a certain point in time this is nothing more than kidnapping isn't it? This guy attacked the US Embassy in Libya, and broke the law in Libya. He needs to be arrested in Libya, detained in Libya, charged there, and put on trial there. He hasn't broken any US laws, nor does the US have the right to just grab someone in a foreign country.

Right?

I mean, if someone attacked the Norwegian embassy in the US, Norway doesn't have the legal right to invade the US and kidnap a US citizen. If this happened the US would be up in arms over it.

you don't follow things much, right?

The US reserves the right to capture and hold people all over the world indefinitely with no trial - either on ships or in secret prisons

think about it what you want - but that's an undeniable fact

Even if what you said is true, which it isn't, what is Libya going to do about it? Yeah, thought so.

In your Norway example, we would already have that guy in custody, whereas Libya is in no position to do anything about it. And if Norway wanted said person, they would go through the proper channels and something would be worked out. Again a position that Libya is not in.

From another article:

So we just kidnapped someone from another country and we plan on charging him under US law? US law now applies to people of other countries.

Is there a loophole here I am missing? The US ebmassy is considered "US land", so maybe he did break US law and can be charged as such?

I do follow things. But in the past we have taken them from combat zones where the US military is operating. I am okay with this. But sending in the SEALs to kidnap someone who did not break US law and then to charge him here is another thing altogether.

which suggest the entire basis for international law no longer exists:

'International humanitarian law prohibits abduction as well as the taking of hostages.'

It further goes on to say: 'They must be treated humanely, and their lives and dignity protected and respected, as required by international humanitarian law.'

however, i had some trouble finding this

Doesn't look much lime any consulates I've seen.

Even Haiti has better consulate.

Well, if someone walks into the French Embassy in Washington DC and shoots someone dead, US law does not apply - because the Embassy is French soil.

So perhaps the US can press charges, but it depend on how they got him. It's possible he was arrested locally and handed over, or perhaps the US had permission to arrest him.

:(

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar

Let me guess though. If you had to run into an Embassy in another country to get away from some bad guys you sure as shit would be saying that the Embassy/Property is Sovereign right? Just like those embassy's claim in the US and around the world?

Oh come on Rockhard.. You were in the Military weren't you? You should understand that any country's embassies are considered their own soil no matter what county it's in. This is not US exclusive, it's all countries, even embassies here in the US are considered their own country's soil. Meaning if you attack one, it's the same as attacking the actual country.

It's been real fun watching the right wing news machine try to spin this into bad news. So fun.

I originally did not think about this. The embassy that was attacked was in fact US Soil.

But still, we sent in Delta Force (US Army) to grab him.... Isn't that still kidnapping?

Rochard, send the guy an invite if you're so worried about his rights being violated.

People forget - the U.S. ABDUCTED a sitting president, Manuel Noriega, after he failed to follow the tugs on the puppet string. Another shining example of the US forcing "democracy" down everyone's throats. Imperialism at it's worst.

yeah, noriega was a shiny fucking beacon of humanity at it's best

So that's the litmus test for due process? Whether you go to church on Sunday?

And he was shiny enough for the US to have him on their payroll for many, many years. :thumbsup

due process doesn't apply to noriega.

Regardless of what payroll you think he was on, using him as example in this case is moot.

You and rochard seem to think anti-american violence is defined geographically in the 21st century, it's not.

US embassy is us soil, yeah we have the right

Where at? I watched some Fox news last night, they are saying it's convenient that they did this right as the Lois Lerner Emails were supposedly lost. Never heard where they think it's a bad thing, or is this just happening in your head?

Since we all live on computers here, who believes they lost those emails? LOL

It's not moot to me. And I'm not trying to define anything. Just pointing out that the US respects international law in a situational convenient fashion. :thumbsup

And now, if you'll excuse the time zone, my Wednesday is finished, but I'll be sure to retort later this Thursday morning.

Moral of the story is do not fuck with the USA, take anyone who does and do whatever you want to them. Fuck their rights, If they did something against us then that is their mistake.

People really need to learn their place in the world. a small thin week man shouldn't walk up and hit an MMA fighter and expect nothing to happen.

And I'm just pointing out how wrong it is to use removing noriega as an example of what america does without regard. Just like how wrong it is to think the OP dude (and noriega) have due process rights.

That's how ridiculous they are at FOX news. They couldn't say how great it is that he's been captured...it's just some ploy to interrupt their constant scandal coverage. What can they say about Benghazi now?

The Drudge report has been using Benghazi as their headline machine for a long time now. If you search for the word the word Benghazi anywhere on the front page today...it's not there. This thing is over for those tools, time to shift back to the IRS or VA, which does have some validity -- but as far as our elected officials go, they should try to actually govern, instead of getting whipped into a headhunting frenzy by the right wing media.

But in fact it is... Just like the guy from WikiLeaks. There is an arrest warrant out for him, he is in the UK, but he is someone's embassy so he cannot be arrested.

So now the US has the legal right to walk into any country and just grab people and take them to another country and put them on trial?

He was on US soil when he committed the crime. But then two years later Delta Force just swoops in from it's black helicopters and drags him out of his house in Libya? And you are okay with that?

Figures you would watch FOX news on a regular basis.

I agree. They should go after the real person to blame for Benghazi- Hillary Clinton.

Figures you don't, considering that the Brookings Institution rates them the most trusted news source, way above MSNBC.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5479859.html

You base everything on excuses, never debating the facts!

New poll numbers are in for Obama, they are pretty low

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/poll-d...114026503.html

How is she to blame? Did she work on the security for the complex before the attack? Did she authorize the CIA activity there at the site?

Wouldn't that be Congress who does that?

It's the MOST trusted because MOST people watch Fox because MOST people are idiots.

We're going to have to agree to disagree (not like it's the first time). The last thing I want is for the US to be plaintiff, judge and jury - which they will be in this case. And therein lies the whole problem with rendition and Gitmo. There's no oversight. Because there's no due process.

It's not like the government hasn't arrested the wrong guy before. It happens all the time. And where's the recourse? There isn't any. Just, sorry - better luck next time.

You know the Ben Franklin quote - I'd rather 100 guilty men go free instead of 1 innocent man be convicted, blah, blah, blah. Seems to me it works the other way around now.

Let me throw one more name out there: Daniel Pearl. He got the type of due process that the US Gov't has been dishing out for some time now.

Two wrongs don't make a right.