Italian Courts Attack US Marines

[Cosmoline]

We do the exact same thing. Remember the hijacking of TWA 847? We have been claiming the authority to try the guy who killed a U.S. Navy Diver on that plane, despite the fact that it was a flight from Athens to Rome and that the Hijacking never touched American soil. We contend that the citizenship of the victim is all that we need to try the man who killed him. Complain all you want about the concept, but its a precedent that we set.

The rules regarding jurisdiction over international flights are different. These flights can cross many borders during the course of a flight, and the nations of the world agreed a long time ago not to attempt to flip through the criminal jurisdictions as the planes cross the invisible barriers. That's why the flight attendants don't snatch your cocktail away if you happen to be flying over a dry nation.

If you murder an American on a US airline during an international flight, you may well be subject to criminal jurisdiction in the US. Just as a drunk Russian who beats up crew members on a US airline flight from Magadan to Mexico may find himself dropped into US custody at the airport here in Anchorage. Though in this case Mohammed Ali Hammadi has still managed to avoid us and the fact that the murder took place on the ground in Greece is clearly causing other nations to be unwilling to hand him over.

 

[Old Dog]

I find myself totally in agreement with Cosmoline on all these issues. This is the big problem we face now -- the increasing acceptance within the U.S. legal community, and higher court judges as well, of applying standards of international (and in particular, European) law in U.S. jurisprudence ... We have already one SCOTUS justice who has no problem with this; we really, really cannot afford any more on this court.

 

[McCall911]

OK, then, add this to the collection of Italian court vs. U.S. stories:

http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-12-23-voa23.cfm

 

[Cosmoline]

Well there at least there is some jurisdictional basis, since the alleged kidnapping took place in Milan.

 

[LAK]

This has nothing whatsoever to do with the exercise of military force or Israel. The US, Israel and most other nations routinely kill their enemies overseas. This has been going on for as long as there have been nations. If Europe wants to come try to kill Marines or the President, let them try. I'm not worried about that. I am worried about a treaty that would let them do with a court what they could never do in the open with military force.

On the contrary, killing "enemies" overseas requires a declared state or war.

Don't get me wrong, I oppose this completely. But no one should be surprized at developements like this with existing abominations like a kangaroo "world Court" and a state like the state of Israel, the government of whom are apparently a law unto themselves.

If we didn't have traitors in Washington DC, both the majority in the U.S. Congress, and the WH, all this nonsense wouldn't be tolerated at all. As it is, expect plenty more.
------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[c_yeager]

Really the idea that the only people who have jurisdiction should be the Americans or the Iraqis is kinda dangerous. Now, I think that what *we* are doing is fine.

However, imagine this: France invades Belgium, kills off all the left handed people, and installs a puppet government. By the stated logic the only people who should have legal authority to prosecute would be the French themselves, or the puppet government that they installed. That doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

The thing is, we killed an Italian government official. It is perfectly understandable that they wouldnt want the government that is responsible for the action to be the one who decides that its OK. This sort of thing is probably the only legitimate use for a "world court" type of organization.