• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dutch court blocks extradition to U.S. over torture concerns.....

I didn't know they started it at all. I just thought it was for this one case. Either way now.....going forward. They have decreed we tortured and by our own admittance. Up until the Feinstein Report and when we sent that letter. We had no comment.

Well, what they actually "decreed" is that they can't rule out possibility that it wouldn't happen. Which is... you know... the same thing they've been stating since the beginning. There is no reason to believe the US would have made an otherwise convincing argument for why the dutch should release him into the US. Specially considering the US failed to make such an argument for... well... nearly 2 years now.
 
Heya Skipper. :2wave: Were the Dutch denying extradition then? Are they now?

Not to burst your bubble, but denying extradition to the US is almost a norm these days and it has nothing to do with the report. The US has a nasty habit of not upholding agreements with countries and hence extraditing their citizens is not something they take lightly.
 
Good afternoon MMC

I have to ask, if the man was in the hands of the Pakistani ISI, how is it that he was not handed over to the US when the Pakistanis were finished with him and how did he manage to find his way to the Netherlands? Seems to me another example of the Pakistanis not being the best of US friends.

Exactly right. The Pakistani government is the biggest frontman for these terror cells. They get caught red handed all the time. Oh yea..and they hid Bin Laden for the better half of a decade.
 
So instead of blaming the people that actually did the illegal torturing you blame the people who exposed it? That's some pretty backwards logic there. The responsibility for this hangs solely on the shoulders of the people who tortured detainees and the politicians who approved of it.

Also, considering we actively imprison suspects indefinitely without ever giving them a trial to determine their guilt, the Dutch would be damning him whether he is guilty or not. At least the Dutch seem to have a set of moral standards. We don't care if he's guilty or not we just want blood.



Does refusing to admit your crimes make them non-existent?


Did they not charge him with conspiracy to commit murder. That's not an Unlawful combatant charge is it? What other connections to AQ was needed again? Didn't any of the Pakistani testify?
 
Did they not charge him with conspiracy to commit murder. That's not an Unlawful combatant charge is it? What other connections to AQ was needed again? Didn't any of the Pakistani testify?

Even if they did charge him, that doesn't mean that he'll be getting a trial, much less within any reasonable time frame. We locked up Bradley Manning in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day for 11 months, and continued to hold him for years without trial. People accused of terrorism have a habit of just "disappearing" or being indefinitely detained at Guantanomo without trial.

The fact is, the US doesn't have a stellar record of respecting the human rights of people it thinks are terrorists. We've done this so long that now people have lost our trust.
 
Even if they did charge him, that doesn't mean that he'll be getting a trial, much less within any reasonable time frame. We locked up Bradley Manning in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day for 11 months, and continued to hold him for years without trial. People accused of terrorism have a habit of just "disappearing" or being indefinitely detained at Guantanomo without trial.

The fact is, the US doesn't have a stellar record of respecting the human rights of people it thinks are terrorists. We've done this so long that now people have lost our trust.

Yeah, but aren't the Dutch acknowledging he was working with AQ? That he did kill plot to kill US or NATO troops.

Do you think it is smart to let him walk freely there? Even though he wont be, as I am sure they will be keeping an eye on this guy. At least for their own safety.
 
Not to burst your bubble, but denying extradition to the US is almost a norm these days and it has nothing to do with the report. The US has a nasty habit of not upholding agreements with countries and hence extraditing their citizens is not something they take lightly.

I agree with you here. The USA cant be trusted on this basis.
 
Well now.....what do you think of that. They will not extradite a supporter of AQ, and we are not talking about Cheerleading supporter. Fruits of Feinstein's releasing of the Torture Report.....huh? What say ye?

Fruit of the fact we tolerated torture in the first place, in my opinion. There is a price to be paid for moral turpitude.
 
Fruit of the fact we tolerated torture in the first place, in my opinion. There is a price to be paid for moral turpitude.
I'd be more inclined to trust Americans and their morals rather than anyone resembling a terrorist.
 
I'd be more inclined to trust Americans and their morals rather than anyone resembling a terrorist.

All sorts of criminals I'd trust rather than a terrorist, too, but that doesn't mean I'm going to let them babysit my kids.
 
The Netherlands is a nation of laws and I see no reason why they should break their own law for the sake of appeasing the US.
 
"People who are intolerant of others, and..."
 
Fruit of the fact we tolerated torture in the first place, in my opinion. There is a price to be paid for moral turpitude.

Which Country hasn't? Which people haven't? Been going on since the beginning of time. What makes us any different with human nature? Other than the PC world.

He is their problem now.....let them deal with him.

But now should he leave there and go out and cause some more Mayhem. Kill or cause a whole bunch of people to be killed.

Which Dutch Judge will give us his own head on a Silver Platter?
 
Are people still labouring under the delusion that nobody knew until Feinstein's report? Seriously?

Apparently so. Many folks are laboring under many illusions created by the government and media. :doh
 
I'd be more inclined to trust Americans and their morals rather than anyone resembling a terrorist.

Most of my friends who I've asked about torture support it. Many of those friends are Christian. The morals of the average American are not quite as golden as you might believe.
 
If nothing else we can have our spec ops suicide him where he is. No problem.

Drone strikes-r-us. Pakistan, Netherlands, wherever terrorists are getting refuge. They're versatile.
 
Most of my friends who I've asked about torture support it. Many of those friends are Christian. The morals of the average American are not quite as golden as you might believe.
So the average American is similar to a terrorist?

How did you phrase that question to your friends? And how many of them were Christian?
 
A Dutch court on Tuesday blocked the extradition of a man accused of having fought against U.S. troops in Afghanistan, saying it could not be ruled out that the CIA had been involved in his torture after his arrest in Pakistan. Dutch court documents showed the suspect, a Dutch-Pakistani dual citizen named Sabir Khan, was tortured after his arrest by Pakistan's ISI security service. He faces charges in New York of conspiracy to commit murder and of supporting al Qaeda.

The court said the Netherlands could not transfer him because Dutch and international law prohibits the extradition of torture victims to countries that played a role in abuse. "This letter does not rule out the possible involvement of the CIA," the court in The Hague said in a statement. "Since it cannot be ruled out that it was the CIA which requested the arrest, the judge again forbids" his extradition.....snip~

Dutch court blocks extradition to U.S. over torture concerns




Well now.....what do you think of that. They will not extradite a supporter of AQ, and we are not talking about Cheerleading supporter. Fruits of Feinstein's releasing of the Torture Report.....huh? What say ye?

Lots of countries won't extradite someone who's in jeopardy of a death penalty sentence, either. Just the way it is.
 
Perhaps Holland would like to become the new Gitmo.

For a price, they might. A couple years ago they were looking at closing a prison- instead they take prisoners from Belgium on a contract basis.
 
So it begins with the Dutch.... :thumbdown:

It is too simple to state that. The Dutch government cannot extradite him at this moment in time. This is because this was a ruling in a "kort geding" (preliminary relief proceedings) which is a preliminary court case which normally is followed by a more extensive court case about the extradition question.

The court, in a previous court case ordered the Dutch government to investigate the circumstances of the original arrest which lead to the torture of Khan.

This court case has been going on for years, it went all the way to our version of the Supreme Court. And as said it all boils down to the international treaty (of which the Netherlands is a participant) that forbids governments from extraditing suspects if it can be suspected that the country who asks for the extradition was involved in the torture of the suspect.

All in all a very difficult case. At first the court ruled in favor of the government but on appeal the court decided that, in part due to the known involvement of the CIA with the ISI, there are too many unanswered/un-investigated questions left for them to decide to approve the extradition. As said, this is in no means final. Extradition is still a possibility.

This is part of the court ruling (translated):

The circumstances mentioned in the letter from October 15 2014, that the Pakistani government had their own reasons to arrest the plaintiff, does not give the court reason to change it's opinion. The only thing that is different from the previous court proceeding is that this letter states that the plaintiff was also suspected of crimes on Pakistani soil, but this does not change the fact that the Pakistani government did not want to proceed with criminal proceedings against the plaintiff and instead extradited him to the Netherlands. This letter does not change the previous ruling from the court that this could indicate that it was the US all along, and not Pakistan, who asked/had grounds for his arrest in the first place. The court also notes that it has not been given a sufficient explanation as to why, within three days of his arrest, the US asked for extradition of the plaintiff and that the US petitioned the Netherlands for extradition of the plaintiff three months before the suspect was even transferred to the Netherlands. The fact that his extradition was asked so quickly after his Pakistani arrest and the fact that his extradition request precedes his actual transfer to the Netherlands by three months, has not convinced the court that the Dutch government has done a sufficient investigation, as mandated by this court, into the circumstances of the plaintiffs arrest in Pakistan.


3.7.

Concluding, based on the previous (all of the previous, not just the part I have just translated for you) is that the court is of the opinion, that the uncertainty as to whether or not there was a possible involvement of the US in the torture of the plaintiff still remains. This means that the extradition of the plaintiff to the US is still deemed unlawful. Now that the Government, at the hearing has indicated that it does not think that the question whether or not the CIA was involved has any relevance and that the state has not offered to ask further questions about this to the US government, and there has been no indication or evidence that the US government by their own volition has offered further information regarding the arrest, means that this court sees no reason to give the State the opportunity to further investigate this before the court gives it's ruling. The primarily requested ban on extradition, made by the plaintiff is here by awarded.
 
Feinstein did us no good. But not explaining, what we were doing and why it was legal and had to be done was at least as bad.

It was not Feinstein only, the connection between the CIA and the ISI was also documented by NGO's like Amnesty. And I would think most secret services know about the connection between the CIA and ISI too.
 
This example of Dutch courage will lead to their own downfall moreso than it will effect American intelligence or the safety of the American people. Now what will the self-destructive Dutch do with this guy?

He was jailed for some time (after his arrival from Pakistan) but he has since been released, his passport taken from him and he has to report to the police in Rotterdam every day.

And I am sorry, but this whole issue could have been avoided if the US has just asked Pakistan to extradite the man to the United States, instead of doing it through the Netherlands.
 
It was not Feinstein only, the connection between the CIA and the ISI was also documented by NGO's like Amnesty. And I would think most secret services know about the connection between the CIA and ISI too.

ISI - Pakistan? What does that have to do with it? The probability of a person extradited by a European nation to the US being tortured was always remote, but is now less likely than were they extradited to some European countries.
But the Obama/Feinstein idiocy as intellectually corrupt as the broad brush allegations were have made sensible action more difficult for the court.
 
Back
Top Bottom