Now we are handing over Brits to the Americans - British Hacker

[alexa]

I edited that post before you've sent yours.
But this right is not as strong as the right of the nation that is being harmed.

It is the responsibility of a State to protect it's citizens.

 

[Laila]

I edited that post before you've sent yours.
But this right is not as strong as the right of the nation that is being harmed.

Oh sorry, my bad

It is very simple to me, he broke UK law. He should be answerable to British law, not American

 

[Laila]

It is the responsibility of a State to protect it's citizens.

This is Labour we are talking about.
It doesn't give two hoots about the citizens otherwise why would Blair agree to such a lopsided treaty with US

 

[alexa]

This is Labour we are talking about.
It doesn't give two hoots about the citizens otherwise why would Blair agree to such a lopsided treaty with US

It is however the States responsibility. One of the things we need to take care of and make sure stays like that. The treaty will need to be changed or ended.

 

[paris]

Wait a a second Paris you stated that France and the United States didn't have any treaty and I have shown you that they do have one.

As for that scum Polansky please noted when the Treaty was signed that will explain why this Scum was never sent back tot eh United States to face Justice.

Personally I would love to see Dog The Bounty Hunter show up in France to catch his arse and bring him back to LA for Justice.

IIRC that treaty stipulates that France will not extradite its own citizens to the US, and the same goes for US citizens to France. So again what is that extradition treaty for, French fries?:lol:

 

[Laila]

It is however the States responsibility. One of the things we need to take care of and make sure stays like that. The treaty will need to be changed or ended.

True.

Conservatives may scrap the treaty and rightly so.
A act of Parliament overrules any treaty signed by the head of Government

 

[Laila]

Pretty pdfs, but then why is Roman Polansky free in France? Whatever agreement we have is very limited, perhaps if Gary McKinnon was French he would feel better today, really if the UK cant protect him now, I hope the EU will!

The EU will most likely protect him (well i hope so) when the case is referred to EUCoHR

 

[Tashah]

Beyond the lifetime of current information usability, you mean.

The probability factor can be beyond the lifetime of Sol for example. "Current information" a billion years hence would still have no usability relevance under this particular schema.

 

[Apocalypse]

This is Labour we are talking about.
It doesn't give two hoots about the citizens otherwise why would Blair agree to such a lopsided treaty with US

Let's take it to the extreme;
A crazy wacko steals one of the many unprotected nuclear warheads Russia holds.
He then decides to launch this nuke towards Britain.
Where should this guy be trialed?

Also, let's assume for the protocol that this crazy wacko is a disabled crazy wacko, and that he launched the nuke towards Britain because he thought that UFOs are living there.

 

[Apocalypse]

The probability factor can be beyond the lifetime of Sol for example. "Current information" a billion years hence would still have no usability relevance under this particular schema.

I see you have some background in computers and information.
I will agree with you, but let's keep that statement theoretically true.

 

[alexa]

Let's take it to the extreme;
A crazy wacko steals one of the many unprotected nuclear warheads Russia holds.
He then decides to launch this nuke towards Britain.
Where should this guy be trialed?

Also, let's assume for the protocol that this crazy wacko is a disabled crazy wacko, and that he launched the nuke towards Britain because he thought that UFOs are living there.

That has criminal intent. This has intent to harm. That is the big difference.

Edit: But I'm not particularly bother where he is tried. The need here is to protect people's lives

 

[Red_Dave]

The crime occured on British soil.
He broke our laws when he did this.

Which laws?

 

[Apocalypse]

That has criminal intent. This has intent to harm. That is the big difference.

He had no intent to arm the British people, he is a disabled wacko, what does he know about human lives and the number of people who would die from such an attack?
That's you, that's how your arguments look like. :mrgreen:

 

[Laila]

Which laws?

Computer Misuse Act of 1990.

 

[alexa]

He had no intent to arm the British people, he is a disabled wacko, what does he know about human lives and the number of people who would die from such an attack?
That's you, that's how your arguments look like. :mrgreen:

No the scenerio you presented was of a person who had intent to harm. Society needs to be protected from such people. He would do best in a secure mental hospital.

Someone so lacking in basic knowledge as you are now presenting would not have the intellectual capability to do the crime you suggest.

 

[Laila]

That's you, that's how your arguments look like.

Not really.
You are comparing apples and oranges.

He has harmed no one, placed anyones life in danger, stole nothing
And you are comparing this to a nut with a apparent Nuke?

 

[Red_Dave]

Computer Misuse Act of 1990.

Does that apply to overseas computers though?

 

[Tashah]

I see you have some background in computers and information. I will agree with you, but let's keep that statement theoretically true.

It remains theoretically true, yet pragmatically moot

 

[Laila]

Does that apply to overseas computers though?

I believe so.
He would be tried and yes, he would most likely face jail sentence.

Gary's lawyers have already said that Gary would admit to offences under the UK's Computer Misuse Act if he faced a British court.

 

[Apocalypse]

Someone so lacking in basic knowledge as you are now presenting would not have the intellectual capability to do the crime you suggest.

Same goes for this British hacker.

 

[alexa]

Same goes for this British hacker.

Not at all so. There are for a start all kinds of rumours that the US knows of Aliens so it is not really so silly to go looking for them in the Pentagon - though it was naieve not to realise what the response might be, so his vulnerability was shown in not hiding his footprints.

As to his ability to hack, did you not see Rainman? I would have thought hacking would be something a person with Aspergers could be particularly good at.

(I have to go out now, will look back later )

 

[Apocalypse]

Not really.
You are comparing apples and oranges.

He has harmed no one, placed anyones life in danger, stole nothing
And you are comparing this to a nut with a apparent Nuke?

You have apparently missed the 'let's take it to the extreme' line.

 

[Laila]

You have apparently missed the 'let's take it to the extreme' line.

I know but your example is not relevant in this case

Did he harm anyone? No.
Did he sell information on to terrorists? No.
Did he delete important information? No.
Did he leak secrets onto the internet? No.
Did he cause any form of damage that cannot be reversed? No.

 

[Apocalypse]

Not at all so. There are for a start all kinds of rumours that the US knows of Aliens so it is not really so silly to go looking for them in the Pentagon - though it was naieve not to realise what the response might be, so his vulnerability was shown in not hiding his footprints.

So you justify his act by claiming that there are rumors of America hiding UFOs and that he is not to be blamed for searching for those UFOs in the Pentagon's database?
In fact, one could say that he is just an innocent child who went on an adventure.

 

[Apocalypse]

I know but your example is not relevant in this case

Did he harm anyone? No.
Did he sell information on to terrorists? No.
Did he delete important information? No.
Did he leak secrets onto the internet? No.
Did he cause any form of damage that cannot be reversed? No.

Did he hack into the Pentagon?