Talk:CIA "rendition" confirmed in Europe

Condi Rice has confirmed that the US does "render" individuals and has stated that this is not contrary to US law -- perhaps a quote from her would be useful in this article... --Chiacomo ^(talk) 14:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

• i do not know if it's a good idea, as her goal as departement of state head is to counter strick the European report, and until now US law is NOT Europe law. Sorry madame, it is not a very good argument. no ??? ;). but i agree It's all politic, and difficult to have a clear view.

If you could find a transcript of the Condi Rice discourse or press release , i looked on [1] but found nothing ??? Jacques Divol

Just as a side remark. The fact that the U.S. uses rendition to move terror suspects from Europe to Egypt, Afghanistan, Jordan or Syria has been reported by news outlets for quite a while now and was, as far as I know, never disputed by the U.S. government. (Or maybe even confirmed by Rice, I don't know of this quote though.) At issue here is if the suspects were tortured at their destination. This is what would make this illegal under European law, as they would be complacent in torture if suspects changed planes in Europe (as has been documented), or even if planes just use European facilites and airspace.

Also the working definitions of "torture" differs vastly between Europe and the U.S., as for example this case illustrates. So when U.S. officials use the same words as European officials, they might carry a completely different meaning and cannot be compared easily.

The most explosive question in this context is the existence of these prisons in central europe, and the report did not have much new to add to this point.

In some sense this report does not really contain "news", but if you conduct an poll to see how many people acknowledge these findings you would most likely find (I have no data on this, but I doubt that you could state these things on wikinews without getting into a mayjor argument.) that this is "news" to the majority of U.S. readers. So not sure what to do with this.

--vonbergm 20:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I added to the "see also" section a link to one of our stories which adds another puzzle piece to the board which either makes the matter more confusing or more clear(depending on whether the puzzle is ever completed). It seems that at least one US request for asylum for harmless(as now determined by the USA) Guantanamos has been misinterpreted as being evidence of a "secret prison" e.g. "In news reports last week, Czech and foreign media conflated the two issues: the U.S. asylum request and The Washington Post's story." And the "elephant in the closet" question is; why would the americans not simply grant asylum to this batch of newly labeled "harmless" guantanamos in the USA? Neutralizer 22:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I zoomed into this story when I logged onto Wikinews, only to notice after looking into it, that there really isn't anything much new with this Marty report. And then I now notice there is discussion on this story. Think I'll try changing the report to a more active verb tense, (no that's not even right). -Edbrown05 05:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Nice job, the article is a lot better now compared to last time I checked. --vonbergm 05:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the story is in the European and US wishy washy positions on the issue, not so much the allegations for this story. -Edbrown05 06:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

headline

CIA rendition 'confirmed'? I think that treads over the line. -Edbrown05 06:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The original title on Council of Europe news page is : "Dick Marty: highly likely that European governments were aware of rendition affecting Europe". If you read the news you could read more than into the report (the words about media threaten) : http://www.coe.int/DefaultEN.asp.

Even if the facts was already reported into US or int media, here it's an OFFICIAL report from an International Agency, not just rumors Jacques Divol 09:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Marty says all kinds of stuff... the trouble with paraphrasing is it can lead to quotes supporting a POV out of context to reality. CIA rendition 'confirmed'? -Edbrown05 05:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

a good coop job !

My first draft was .... ugly ? thanks for this much better version ! Jacques Divol 09:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

sovereignty of host countries

This citation

US Department of Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff has stated regarding the US government that "the government acts in accordance with the law and with respect to the sovereignty of host countries in which it operates,”

might need to be put into perspective, for instance by citing the abduction of two people in Italy, without the Italian authorities being notified ([2], [3], [4], [5], etc.). Rama 09:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

good point; Chertoff's quote is a joke when compared with behaviour and the "sovereignty disregard" issue(e.g.abductions in Italy) would make a great feature but the trick is not turning it into an op-ed? Neutralizer 13:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

One could add more detail about several obductions from Marty's report, although this is not "news" and the article makes a general reference that these partices happen. Chertoff's statement illustrates the difference in use of language and application of law between Europe and the US. If someone in Europe would practice certain interrogation techniques and rendition practices that Chertoff dems "lawful", they would get arrested and convicted by European governments for torture and kidnapping. And this is what the "CIA prison affair" is all about. --vonbergm 17:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Prisons and Rendition

Isn't there a bit of confusion here. CIA Secret Prisons are run by the CIA for the purpose of secret interrogation I believe. They are also generally confirmed high ranking officials, while rendition(techinically would include CIA, but not what this article is refering to) would be the rendition to countries like Syria and Uzbekistan for toture. I might be confused, but that was my general impression. 12.220.94.199 03:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Imo, it is an exercise in futility to try to understand or apply the various military/governmental jargon that come from the pentagon/Washington. Terms like "rendition" or "unlawful combatant" are simply attempts to confuse average people and deflect the reality of the situations they describe. The term for that is the everpresent CIA strategy of "constructive confusion". At least, that's how it seems to me. But here is a definition of Rendition for what it's worth. Neutralizer 19:58, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Marty's report, which is discussed in the article, addresses several separate (but subtely linked) issues. One is the question of existence of secred CIA prisons in Europe. Another is the rendition and abduction of terror suspects by the CIA, sometimes of European citizens and while using infrastructure (airports, airspace) in Europe. When European infrastructure is used, or European citizens are involved, the respective European countries would be complacent to torture and violating European law. The main focus of the article is on this aspect of Marty's report as this part is based on solid evidence. --vonbergm 22:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)