|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
3MB
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:01 pm Post subject: Re: Bush 6 Indicted, Get a Reprieve |
 |
|
| bacasper wrote: |
That's really ignorant - of the law, not to mention naive. So Spanish prosecutors at the highest levels are just bumbling stupid idiots with no common sense? Notice that the Spanish Attorney General who intervened did so not because those indicted were not on Spanish soil, but because in his opinion the complaint should focus on those who did the actual torture (who also happened to NOT be on Spanish soil). |
The Spanish are trying to score politically. Are they fools? More like Don Quixote, really.
| Quote: |
| Sometimes laws apply to behavior abroad. In Nazi Germany, it was a crime to criticize the homeland from abroad. In modern day America, it is a crime to have sex with a minor abroad EVEN IF legal there. The principle is known in the law as "extraterritoriality." Look it up. |
Gee, do you really not see the FUNDAMENTAL difference here? I mean the very basic, fundamental difference. Aside from the lunacy of comparing what Bush did with pedophiles on sex vacations in Thailand. I mean something so fundamentally different. Im really debating with myself if I should let you in on it or wait to see if you are bright enough to pick up on it yourself.
Just think about it. In both the examples you gave, the perp would be extradited back to HIS country. It would either be a German going back to Germany or an American going back to America. YOU are proposing that a nation send its own citizens to a country that has no jurisdiction over the person they wish to convict. Would you assume to tell us that it woud be just dandy for, let's say North Korea to demand that the US extradite an American citizen who criticized KJI, despite the said person never having been in North Korea? Or a less extreme example, should Canada now demand the extradition of Americans who are not Canadians, never have been in Canada and may never go there for breaking Canadian gun laws? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:43 pm Post subject: Re: Bush 6 Indicted, Get a Reprieve |
|
|
| 3MB wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
That's really ignorant - of the law, not to mention naive. So Spanish prosecutors at the highest levels are just bumbling stupid idiots with no common sense? Notice that the Spanish Attorney General who intervened did so not because those indicted were not on Spanish soil, but because in his opinion the complaint should focus on those who did the actual torture (who also happened to NOT be on Spanish soil). |
The Spanish are trying to score politically. Are they fools? More like Don Quixote, really.
| Quote: |
| Sometimes laws apply to behavior abroad. In Nazi Germany, it was a crime to criticize the homeland from abroad. In modern day America, it is a crime to have sex with a minor abroad EVEN IF legal there. The principle is known in the law as "extraterritoriality." Look it up. |
Gee, do you really not see the FUNDAMENTAL difference here? I mean the very basic, fundamental difference. Aside from the lunacy of comparing what Bush did with pedophiles on sex vacations in Thailand. I mean something so fundamentally different. Im really debating with myself if I should let you in on it or wait to see if you are bright enough to pick up on it yourself.
Just think about it. In both the examples you gave, the perp would be extradited back to HIS country. It would either be a German going back to Germany or an American going back to America. YOU are proposing that a nation send its own citizens to a country that has no jurisdiction over the person they wish to convict. Would you assume to tell us that it woud be just dandy for, let's say North Korea to demand that the US extradite an American citizen who criticized KJI, despite the said person never having been in North Korea? Or a less extreme example, should Canada now demand the extradition of Americans who are not Canadians, never have been in Canada and may never go there for breaking Canadian gun laws? |
Sorry you are unable to grasp the concept of extraterritoriality. Maybe Kuros can explain it to you.
How about the ESL teacher who had never been to Germany who was extradited there because of a website he hosted in Australia? Here is the thread on it. You may need me to add that he is NOT German.
Now if you want me to say such laws are insane, that much I'll agree with. Regardless of what you or I or anyone may think about that, it IS the law as it stands now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:53 pm Post subject: Re: Bush 6 Indicted, Get a Reprieve |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| 3MB wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
That's really ignorant - of the law, not to mention naive. So Spanish prosecutors at the highest levels are just bumbling stupid idiots with no common sense? Notice that the Spanish Attorney General who intervened did so not because those indicted were not on Spanish soil, but because in his opinion the complaint should focus on those who did the actual torture (who also happened to NOT be on Spanish soil). |
The Spanish are trying to score politically. Are they fools? More like Don Quixote, really.
| Quote: |
| Sometimes laws apply to behavior abroad. In Nazi Germany, it was a crime to criticize the homeland from abroad. In modern day America, it is a crime to have sex with a minor abroad EVEN IF legal there. The principle is known in the law as "extraterritoriality." Look it up. |
Gee, do you really not see the FUNDAMENTAL difference here? I mean the very basic, fundamental difference. Aside from the lunacy of comparing what Bush did with pedophiles on sex vacations in Thailand. I mean something so fundamentally different. Im really debating with myself if I should let you in on it or wait to see if you are bright enough to pick up on it yourself.
Just think about it. In both the examples you gave, the perp would be extradited back to HIS country. It would either be a German going back to Germany or an American going back to America. YOU are proposing that a nation send its own citizens to a country that has no jurisdiction over the person they wish to convict. Would you assume to tell us that it woud be just dandy for, let's say North Korea to demand that the US extradite an American citizen who criticized KJI, despite the said person never having been in North Korea? Or a less extreme example, should Canada now demand the extradition of Americans who are not Canadians, never have been in Canada and may never go there for breaking Canadian gun laws? |
Sorry you are unable to grasp the concept of extraterritoriality. Maybe Kuros can explain it to you.
How about the ESL teacher who had never been to Germany who was extradited there because of a website he hosted in Australia? Here is the thread on it. You may need me to add that he is NOT German.
Now if you want me to say such laws are insane, that much I'll agree with. Regardless of what you or I or anyone may think about that, it IS the law as it stands now. |
That article about the teacher is not relevant.
Holocaust denying is illegal in most EU member states and an extraditable offence. He was arrested in BRITAIN which is PART OF THE EU. Had the silly twit stayed in Australia he might still be free. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3MB
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
You really arent that smart, are you bacasper?
As was pointed out, he wasnt arrested in AUSTRALIA he was arrested in the EU. Meaning he was PHYSICALLY where he broke the rules. Granted, maybe he didnt break the rules in the EU but the extradition in this case is within an EU on an EU arrest warrant. The other difference is that he isnt a UK citizen, therefore the extradition is a totally different matter than a country extraditing its own citizen. Please, do yourself a favor and stop making a fool of yourself. Or grow a brain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
3MB, your constant resort to ad hominems and straw men underscore the paucity of your argument (at best).
The issue is whether someone could ever be extradited to a place he has never been if that jurisdiction issues a warrant for his arrest. The answer is an unqualified "yes" as evidenced by the case of the English teacher who had never been in Germany but was extradited from England to Germany. It doesn't matter that it was an EU warrant, he still had to be extradited.
It's like if you are arrested on an Interpol warrant in Canada based on an application from the US. You would still have to go through all the procedures constituting an extradition.
Anyway, focusing on whether the six actually get extradited to Spain is missing the point, which is that a groundswell is building for these men to face justice. It is happening in the US as well where hopefully we'll see some responsibility and retribution for torture done in our names. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
3MB, your constant resort to ad hominems and straw men underscore the paucity of your argument (at best).
The issue is whether someone could ever be extradited to a place he has never been if that jurisdiction issues a warrant for his arrest. The answer is an unqualified "yes" as evidenced by the case of the English teacher who had never been in Germany but was extradited from England to Germany. It doesn't matter that it was an EU warrant, he still had to be extradited.
It's like if you are arrested on an Interpol warrant in Canada based on an application from the US. You would still have to go through all the procedures constituting an extradition.
Anyway, focusing on whether the six actually get extradited to Spain is missing the point, which is that a groundswell is building for these men to face justice. It is happening in the US as well where hopefully we'll see some responsibility and retribution for torture done in our names. |
It's not always an unqualifed yes. Since you used Canada as an example you might want to read up on Canadian law regarding extradition especially as it regards sending them to countries with the death penalty. Read what the Supreme Court has said.
www.cbc.ca/news/background/crime/extradition.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Enrico Palazzo
Mod Team
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 3MB wrote: |
You really arent that smart, are you bacasper?
As was pointed out, he wasnt arrested in AUSTRALIA he was arrested in the EU. Meaning he was PHYSICALLY where he broke the rules. Granted, maybe he didnt break the rules in the EU but the extradition in this case is within an EU on an EU arrest warrant. The other difference is that he isnt a UK citizen, therefore the extradition is a totally different matter than a country extraditing its own citizen. Please, do yourself a favor and stop making a fool of yourself. Or grow a brain. |
I don't think saying another poster is stupid fits into the Terms of Service (the TOS). Will you kindly refrain from calling posters stupid?
Thank you, for your understanding. Come to think of it, your post sounded abusive. Was that really necessary?
Only, you can follow the TOS....
'Rico... |
|
| 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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
