[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > That's a minor factual detail, and we care somewhere between diddly and squat > regarding the facts of the case. ;)
I didn't know they were based in Germany. > The US government of late has shown little moral or ethical qualms about > imposing its law and morality on people and actions in other sovereign states, > while reserving its right to pick-and-choose regarding its own behavior. > > Remember, we're the bunch that detained a lot of people for things they did > in their own country to repel an invading army (namely, us), and then stuffed > them into Guantanamo Bay so that we wouldn't have to actually accord them > their Geneva Convention rights as prisoners-of-war. We've also seen fit to > skip the whole idea of "habeas corpus" for our *own* citizens (see "Hamdi v. > Rumsfeld" and "Rumsfeld v. Padilla") and even the concept that you should be > allowed to know what law you're violating (see "Gilmore v. Ashcroft"). > > So be afraid. Be very afraid.... > > (OK, you can have the soapbox back now... ;) Actually, many countries, I believe, recognize the right of citizens to sue foreign entities, who's in-country assets can then be seized. But yeah, don't talk to me about Guantanamo. Today I happen to be wearing my nice anti-Bush t-shirt ;) _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
