It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CIA off the hook again on torture.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:
CX

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 03:46 AM
link   


A US court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by a German citizen who says he was kidnapped and beaten by the CIA.
Khaled el-Masri aimed to sue former CIA chief George Tenet and other officials for their alleged role in the "extraordinary rendition" programme.

Mr el-Masri says he was picked up in Macedonia in 2003 and flown to Kabul, Afghanistan, where he alleges torture.

The judge did not rule on the truth of the allegations, but said letting the case proceed might endanger security.

news.bbc.co.uk...


So whether or not the guy was tortured is'nt important! Where do you draw the line on how much the CIA can get away with in the name of security?

Maybe they mean letting the case continue would have meant letting the world know that the CIA does in fact torture!

I may be jumping the gun here, if so could someone explain to me how it would threaten security to take the CIA to court over this? If other agencies and high up officials can be taken to court for wrongdoing, why not with this?

CX.

[edit on 19/5/06 by CX]

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 19/5/2006 by Mirthful Me]




posted on May, 19 2006 @ 07:53 AM
link   


...Khaled el-Masri...


Guilty!


In all seriousness, just because a suspect claims he was tortured does not mean he was. Whats his background? What kind of information do we have from other sources that speak to his background? Any previous criminal record?

But all we have here is a guy talking to the BBC claiming his side of the story, but of course its presented here as fact without question. Did the BBC do any digging to collaborate the story?

Agendas....


CX

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Except it's not just a guy talking to the BBC about his side of the story. This was actualy going through the courts and it was dismissed before they could even consider whether or not it was true. That is wrong.

I agree people can make up stories like this, but surely if the charges are serious as in this case, they should be given the right to prove it in court. If he's lying, the CIA would have nothing to worry about would they?

Where do you draw the line on what can be dismissed due to security risk?

What if just for sake of the topic, this guy was tortured by the CIA? Would you agree that it's ok for them to be just allowed to sidestep this one?

CX.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 10:50 AM
link   
For those that haven't gone to the link, the case was dismissed with the judge's comments "private interests must give way to the national interest in preserving state secrets".

I'm sure the dismissal will be appealed, and will eventually end up at the SCotUS. Hopefully they'll look at it. I hate to think we're headed for a government that can publicly get rid of problematic cases by declaring needed evidence "a matter of national security." Not so much because that's a big change for any government, but if they can do it publicly without outcry, it makes me depressed for how little we US citizens value our founder's ideals any more.

I have a son, he's three months old now, and things like this really make me worried that the country I love will no longer be anything remotely like it should be when he's an adult.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc


...Khaled el-Masri...


Guilty!



Obviously not. That's why they let him go. After illegally kidnapping and torturing him.

Oh, you were only joking, right? Hilarious. It speaks volumes that you find this funny.



In all seriousness, just because a suspect claims he was tortured does not mean he was. Whats his background? What kind of information do we have from other sources that speak to his background? Any previous criminal record?


In all seriousness, just because it's the CIA, should we believe them when they say it's worth kidnapping and torturing someone? After all, what is the proportion of people who have actually been charged and found guilty of ANYTHING in Guantanamo Bay? Pretty low, I think you'll find.



But all we have here is a guy talking to the BBC claiming his side of the story, but of course its presented here as fact without question. Did the BBC do any digging to collaborate the story?


Well, see, the thing is, the rest of the world is pretty clear that despite all the denials, the US is keen on kidnapping people of other countries and sending them off for torture. It's been going on for a while, we've all heard about it, so it's not a surprise.


Agendas....


Any Muslim has an agenda, right?

Well, whether he had one before or not, I doubt he could be blamed if he has one now.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Had to go and check the thread I posted on this a week or so ago... and it's a case of mistaken identity.

"Guilty!" indeed. THEY GOT THE WRONG GUY. Agenda, my foot.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join