| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
 Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:45 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
|
| We all know that governments are corrupt though - it's not exactly news is it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mandy
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| faceless wrote: | | We all know that governments are corrupt though - it's not exactly news is it? |
I agree. Governments being honest WOULD BE news. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skylace
Admin
Joined: 29 Apr 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| All this new law does is give the same rights to bloggers that other journalist have not to be forced to reveal their sources. Like Woodward and Bernstein with Deep Throat. It is allowing bloggers to be protected the same way they are. I don't see what it has to do with bombings anywhere in the world. It's just extended a law to cover more people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
major.tom
Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Location: BC, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Mandy wrote: | I hate to be the one who is disagreeing. If you are not an America. but passing through American territory, then US laws apply. Therefore if you were extradited to US (as UK is very willing to do), you would be protected by these laws.
US laws applies to all people once they are on US controlled territory (including Guantanamo).
The US likes to apply "extra-territoriality", i.e. they have a tendency to extend their law to other countries (e.g. via free-trade / or bilaterial agreements). |
I agree that U.S. law *should* apply on U.S. controlled territory, but this is not what happens in practice. Note that (to my knowledge) there are no Americans held at Guantanamo. And the "trials" set to take place are not criminal trials based on U.S. law but closed military hearings.
In the case of Maher Arar, he was only traveling through a U.S. airport on his way home to Canada. But U.S. law did not protect him. He was told quite explicitly that they could do what they wanted with him because he was not American.
My emphasis was on the difference between the letter and application of the law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mandy
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
major.tom, Thanks for the clarification. In that case, I do agree with you. Any non-American trying to correctly use US law against a US citizen can forget it. The US justice system is, to borrow a phrase, institutionally racist.
e.g. Maher Arar tried to sue the US government in US court {since US laws did apply to him, irrespective of what he was told}, but the US government claimed "national security" exemption to disclosing material facts. You can call this selective enforcement, or selective us of the "I can do anything wild card by the US government" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
Couchtripper - 2005-2015
|
