PDA

View Full Version : Did the USA abduct an Iranian scientist?


GonzoTheGreat
07-13-2010, 12:34 PM
It seems that the answer is yes (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/middle_east/10609461.stm).
A missing Iranian nuclear scientist, who Tehran says was kidnapped a year ago by the CIA, has taken refuge in the Iran section of Pakistan's US embassy.

A spokesman from Pakistan's Foreign Office, Abdul Basit, told the BBC that Shahram Amiri was seeking immediate repatriation to Iran.What happened? Well, this is how it started:
In the first, initially broadcast by Iranian television, a man purporting to be Mr Amiri says he was kidnapped by the US while on pilgrimage in the Saudi Arabian city of Medina and that he is now living in the US state of Arizona.

At the time the Iranian government described the video as evidence that he was being held in the US against his will.

In the second, posted hours later on YouTube, a similar-looking man claiming to be the scientist says he is happy in the US, living in freedom and safety.Based on what we now know, it seems as though the US government abducted someone, locked him up, then blatantly lied about the situation and finally botched it so badly that their lies are now exposed. The Iranian government on the other hand seems to have been truthful in this matter.

Since all this is directly about the alleged Iranian nuclear weapons program, it would seem to reinforce the impression that there too the USA is telling lies, while Iran is being honest.
I've said it before: I do not like it when fanatical mullahs are more trustworthy than my supposedly freedom loving allies.

JSUCamel
07-13-2010, 12:38 PM
I do not like it when fanatical mullahs are more trustworthy than my supposedly freedom loving allies.

If Joe, a compulsive liar, says the sky is blue, and Bob tells his wife she doesn't look fat in that dress, that doesn't mean Joe is more trustworthy than Bob in general. It just means in this particular instance, Joe told the truth and Bob didn't. Just sayin'.

GonzoTheGreat
07-13-2010, 12:50 PM
If Joe, a compulsive liar, says the sky is blue, and Bob tells his wife she doesn't look fat in that dress, that doesn't mean Joe is more trustworthy than Bob in general. It just means in this particular instance, Joe told the truth and Bob didn't. Just sayin'.Maybe, but for the last couple of decades, it has been the case that the Iranians were more trustworthy than Saddam (not that that's saying much), and the USA has been proven less honest.
This is just another example of the same pattern.

All in all, the Americans claimed that this guy's testimony was yet more evidence of the Iranian weapons program. The Iranians claimed that that was just a pack of lies. Based on what we now know, the Americans definitely lied, and the Iranians may still have been speaking the whole truth all along.
Considering the stakes (a really big war in the Middle East, with possibly millions of dead and gasoline prices quadrupling), I think that knowing who to trust, and who not to trust, is important.
The fact that our first assumption when hearing a statement by the US government should be "they are blatantly lying" is not a happy thought.

Sei'taer
07-13-2010, 12:51 PM
Swweeet! We abducted someone? That's awesome! Except why didn't they do it the usual way and shove probes up his butt and tell him we were aliens? SOmebody screwed that all up.

Tamyrlin
07-13-2010, 12:54 PM
We are supposed to accept that some Iranian scientist escaped? Damn, this is gonna make a good movie!

ShadowbaneX
07-13-2010, 01:01 PM
I find it amusing that Gonzo posted something somewhat serious and it's everyone else that's trolling him this time.

Basel Gill
07-13-2010, 02:38 PM
Sounds like another season of 24 in the works.

Basel Gill
07-13-2010, 03:08 PM
In response to the initial post, it appears the answer is "inconclusive" might be more accurate. Right now it's just he said/she said. Although Mr. Amir's story is certainly plausible, you don't have to look too far back in time (Major Hassan at Fort Hood) to even find a US citizen of muslim descent who apparently had a sudden change of heart. One also has to consider what damage this could do to potential diplomatic relations in the future with Iran and that maybe this is what they would like to happen...with the help of a new zealot and some bad PR?

All I'm saying is that maybe the facts should become more evident before the evil, horrible US is burned in the court of public opinion again.

Tamyrlin
07-13-2010, 03:23 PM
If this is the basis of a new government reality series.

GonzoTheGreat
07-13-2010, 04:17 PM
In response to the initial post, it appears the answer is "inconclusive" might be more accurate. Right now it's just he said/she said. Although Mr. Amir's story is certainly plausible, you don't have to look too far back in time (Major Hassan at Fort Hood) to even find a US citizen of muslim descent who apparently had a sudden change of heart.This could be. But it does raise the question of how (and why) he was taken away from his pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia, if he had not been abducted to begin with.

One also has to consider what damage this could do to potential diplomatic relations in the future with Iran and that maybe this is what they would like to happen...with the help of a new zealot and some bad PR?On the one hand, perhaps. On the other hand, the idea that such a zealot would manage to abduct himself, smuggle himself into the USA, and then get the US government to declare that he is there entirely voluntarily, while Iran is screaming about the abduction whenever someone seems willing to listen, all without said US government noticing anything at all is not really believable. I think that at least some American officials knew about this case before this guy walked into the Pakistani embassy. (I know that I knew about it, because I'd seen articles on the Iranian squeaks about it.)

Basel Gill
07-13-2010, 04:44 PM
No, I was simply postulating that he could have "defected" (participated in his own "kidnapping") and then had a change of heart once here. Anything is possible, the article I read on MSN news link today is less assuming about the facts than the one you linked.

Again, the US could be a gigantic pile of festering dog shit, but it also could just be that someone wants it to look that way...

Sinistrum
07-13-2010, 07:05 PM
I find it amusing that Gonzo posted something somewhat serious and it's everyone else that's trolling him this time.

You say that as if there were any other reasonable response to this.

GonzoTheGreat
07-14-2010, 04:03 AM
You say that as if there were any other reasonable response to this.Sinistrum, are you comfortable with the idea of your government apprehending anyone (whether or not a US citizen) without any legal justification at all, whenever they like, and then keeping that person locked away from legal help for as long as they want?

I suspect that the answer to that question is "no". Yet in what way would you say this situation is different from what I just sketched?
You could of course try to hide behind the fact that in this case, it wasn't a US citizen. However, if a person isn't allowed any legal representation, then it could just as easily happen to US citizens, since they then wouldn't be able to ask a court to release them.

Basel Gill
07-14-2010, 09:31 AM
I would be extremely uncomfortable with that scenario. However,

-I understand that often times events occur in the name of "national security" that may or may not jibe with our sense of right or wrong and also may or may not be necessary as I am sure we are not privy to ALL aspects of world events

-I also understand that all the facts here are not yet available and as with many other recent debates of policy, the back and forth is essentially over a "hypothetical" rather than an actual problem (see Arizona immigration law) and the situation here being "hypothetical" since all the facts are not available or are not proven as of yet

-If the story of Mr. Amir proves to be true, then the US government should endure the egg on its face and fess up, but I believe that in this instance, there will be a certain amount of uncertainty that will never be accounted for

Kimon
07-14-2010, 10:48 AM
Sinistrum, are you comfortable with the idea of your government apprehending anyone (whether or not a US citizen) without any legal justification at all, whenever they like, and then keeping that person locked away from legal help for as long as they want?

I suspect that the answer to that question is "no". Yet in what way would you say this situation is different from what I just sketched?
You could of course try to hide behind the fact that in this case, it wasn't a US citizen. However, if a person isn't allowed any legal representation, then it could just as easily happen to US citizens, since they then wouldn't be able to ask a court to release them.

This may seem callous, but given the man's profession the reason as to why he was abducted by the CIA is hardly ephemeral, nor is it exactly unprecedented. What makes the situation truly embarrassing is not so much the initial act, but the botching of events by the CIA that followed, allowing this fiasco to become a matter or public knowledge and international degradation.

Neilbert
07-14-2010, 10:57 AM
-I understand that often times events occur in the name of "national security" that may or may not jibe with our sense of right or wrong and also may or may not be necessary as I am sure we are not privy to ALL aspects of world events

Yes, much like during World War 2, with the Japanese internment. Sometimes people must sacrifice their liberties for the sake of the nation as a whole.

-If the story of Mr. Amir proves to be true, then the US government should endure the egg on its face and fess up, but I believe that in this instance, there will be a certain amount of uncertainty that will never be accounted for

Lol, you think?

GonzoTheGreat
07-14-2010, 11:17 AM
Yes, much like during World War 2, with the Japanese internment. Sometimes people must sacrifice their liberties for the sake of the nation as a whole.The negro slaves brought over from Africa might be a better example. After all, the guy in question isn't a US citizen, is he, so it is not his nation for which he was asked to sacrifice his freedom.

Basel Gill
07-14-2010, 11:39 AM
If his story is true, I didn't say I thought that is was ok to do that to him, simply that I'm sure it happens and I'm sure no one here is in a position to do anything about it.

Where does one draw the line in these instances? Assume for a minute that this guy was definitively shown to be developing a long range nuclear weapon for Iran. Also assume that the potential at improving relations is actually less likely than even we are told via the press and that say the CIA learned that if they kidnap this guy that their progress could be essentially halted for say 10 years, maybe enough time to actually improve relations, or give Ahmadinijad time to croak or whatever...

It's alot of "ifs", but that's what intel is about isn't it? If a deed seeming shitty on the surface effectively avoids nuclear conflict, then is it ok?

I see some of the parallel with Japanese detention camps, but I would say this is a bit different. The Japanese were American citizens who were illegally detained because of their race and not because of their deeds often with zero red flags in their background.

This guys sounds a bit different than that, not to mention that there isn't a whole camp full of guys like him unless you seriously equate that to Guantanamo Bay...

Anyway...my other post sounded like a review of the obvious. Thanks for pointing that out Neil :rolleyes:...but there does seem to be a tendency to assume that the US actions in many recent instances are the targets of ridicule while nations that support blatant terrorism get a pass. Let's just wait and see what the facts tell us when more are available...

Sei'taer
07-14-2010, 12:11 PM
The negro slaves brought over from Africa might be a better example. After all, the guy in question isn't a US citizen, is he, so it is not his nation for which he was asked to sacrifice his freedom.


Not really all that good. Most of the slaves were brought over and sold here by European countries...one being The Netherlands. If another country captured him and then turned him over to the US then is it okay with you?

I have to be honest with you and say that I think it's pretty cool that Obama is willing to work behind the scenes to figure out what's going on in Iran. He doesn't really seem much interested in the rest of the world on the open stage, so if I have to take it, I'll be happy with that.

I do find it odd that the man who interred all those citizens of Japanese descent is thought to be one of the greatest presidents ever.

GonzoTheGreat
07-14-2010, 12:17 PM
Not really all that good. Most of the slaves were brought over and sold here by European countries...one being The Netherlands. If another country captured him and then turned him over to the US then is it okay with you?According to the Iranian claims, he was captured by Saudi, drugged into unconsciousness, and then woke up on a plane to the USA. So it seems that the analogy is still pretty good.
And my answer hasn't changed either: no, I am not okay with it.

How about you?

PS The majority of transported slaves were sold to the Europeans by Africans. And the Dutch had about 5% of the total slave trade. Not sure how that's relevant here, but it might be.

Ivhon
07-14-2010, 12:52 PM
According to the Iranian claims, he was captured by Saudi, drugged into unconsciousness, and then woke up on a plane to the USA. So it seems that the analogy is still pretty good.
And my answer hasn't changed either: no, I am not okay with it.

How about you?

PS The majority of transported slaves were sold to the Europeans by Africans. And the Dutch had about 5% of the total slave trade. Not sure how that's relevant here, but it might be.

/derail

Im sorry. The preferred term is now "transatlantic triangle trade."

/rerail

Sinistrum
07-14-2010, 01:56 PM
Yes because pretending to be reasonable when you've already jumped the gun on you reasons for posting this in OP is so going to get me to play ball on this one Gonzo. Nice try but the bottom line is that we know exactly dick-all about this situation in terms of concrete fact, and yet you're already grandstanding about the evils of the U.S. And here I thought Obama was supposed to be the savior of the U.S. from the European perspective.

I will say that I might be ok with my government kidnapping and confining certain people who are foreign nationals. For example, if they were to live in the Netherlands and make an obnoxious ass out of themselves on the internet on a regular basis. ;)

Isabel
07-14-2010, 02:14 PM
I will say that I might be ok with my government kidnapping and confining certain people who are foreign nationals. For example, if they were to live in the Netherlands and make an obnoxious ass out of themselves on the internet on a regular basis. ;)

And there goes the freedom of speech....

Seriously, if governments would arrest all people who are annoying they would have a new day job.

Neilbert
07-14-2010, 03:15 PM
The negro slaves brought over from Africa might be a better example. After all, the guy in question isn't a US citizen, is he, so it is not his nation for which he was asked to sacrifice his freedom.

Either were the Japanese.

Neilbert
07-14-2010, 03:29 PM
Where does one draw the line in these instances? Assume for a minute that this guy was definitively shown to be developing a long range nuclear weapon for Iran.

I'm ok with Iran having nukes, and if I were Iran/Iranian I would want nukes. When two of your neighbors get invaded by the Superpower not wanting nukes is pretty stupid. Would you rather be Kim Jong Il or Saddam? Not the best example, but it illustrates the point.

Also assume that the potential at improving relations is actually less likely than even we are told via the press and that say the CIA learned that if they kidnap this guy that their progress could be essentially halted for say 10 years, maybe enough time to actually improve relations, or give Ahmadinijad time to croak or whatever...

The problem with this is that "improve relations" is really mostly code for let Western businesses come in and set up shop.

It's alot of "ifs", but that's what intel is about isn't it? If a deed seeming shitty on the surface effectively avoids nuclear conflict, then is it ok?

Given that North Korea India and Pakistan all have nukes, and there hasn't been a nuclear conflict, I think the burden to prove that there would be a nuclear conflict is both incredibly significant and on you.

I see some of the parallel with Japanese detention camps, but I would say this is a bit different. The Japanese were American citizens who were illegally detained because of their race and not because of their deeds often with zero red flags in their background.

So it is different because the Japanese were American citizens?

This guys sounds a bit different than that, not to mention that there isn't a whole camp full of guys like him unless you seriously equate that to Guantanamo Bay...

When I see a cockroach in my kitchen I don't squish it and think "problem solved".

Anyway...my other post sounded like a review of the obvious. Thanks for pointing that out Neil :rolleyes:...but there does seem to be a tendency to assume that the US actions in many recent instances are the targets of ridicule while nations that support blatant terrorism get a pass. Let's just wait and see what the facts tell us when more are available...

An American complaining about others blatantly supporting terrorism and getting a pass is truly lolworthy.

The facts might be available in 50 years, but probably not before then. The facts don't get released because they tend to be harmful to those who would release them. You never see an instance where a police officer is accused of brutality, there is no video evidence or the video evidence is 100% controlled by the department, the department does an investigation and either turns over video or prosecutes the officer based on their findings. You never see that happen. Ever.

Sinistrum
07-14-2010, 04:06 PM
And there goes the freedom of speech....

Seriously, if governments would arrest all people who are annoying they would have a new day job.

Yup, a private citizen making a snarky joke completely torpedos free speech. :rolleyes: I think you actually need to look up the definition of the concept before you start attempting to use it to get self-righteous and indignant. I think if you were familiar with it and perhaps didn't live in a country where you can serve up to two years in prison for simply speaking your mind you might realize that what I said epitomizes free speech. So spare us all the histrionics and hyperventilating please. If I were actually interested in serious discussion on this topic, or serious in what I said that sparked this panicky response from you, I would be attempting to refute the muppets article and not just making fun of him. As it stands now, I'm not interested in taking this topic seriously and my responses will be in kind.

Basel Gill
07-14-2010, 04:09 PM
I'm ok with Iran having nukes, and if I were Iran/Iranian I would want nukes. When two of your neighbors get invaded by the Superpower not wanting nukes is pretty stupid. Would you rather be Kim Jong Il or Saddam? Not the best example, but it illustrates the point.



The problem with this is that "improve relations" is really mostly code for let Western businesses come in and set up shop.



Given that North Korea India and Pakistan all have nukes, and there hasn't been a nuclear conflict, I think the burden to prove that there would be a nuclear conflict is both incredibly significant and on you.



So it is different because the Japanese were American citizens?



When I see a cockroach in my kitchen I don't squish it and think "problem solved".



An American complaining about others blatantly supporting terrorism and getting a pass is truly lolworthy.

The facts might be available in 50 years, but probably not before then. The facts don't get released because they tend to be harmful to those who would release them. You never see an instance where a police officer is accused of brutality, there is no video evidence or the video evidence is 100% controlled by the department, the department does an investigation and either turns over video or prosecutes the officer based on their findings. You never see that happen. Ever.

Anyway, I wasn't trying to stir it up here. My main point was that folks might want to at least let MORE facts get confirmed first, since all facts will never come out.

This next statement will inevitably be a set up for ridicule, but screw it...if US and similar nations are really that awful, move. Go to Iran or North Korea or whatever. I'm sure they'd love to have you. The difference is, you're allowed to leave here.

GonzoTheGreat
07-14-2010, 04:17 PM
Either were the Japanese.Yes, they were. Either they were US citizens* detained by the US government in time of war, or they were Japanese citizens detained in the USA at a time that the USA was at war with Japan. In both cases it was their country (USA or Japan) which 'asked' this sacrifice.

* In which case their detention was rather illegal, I'll admit. But that is an internal matter for US citizens. From what I remember, somebody said "oops, sorry", so everything's all right again.

Kimon
07-14-2010, 04:49 PM
Here's a link to today's New York Times article on this fiasco.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/world/middleeast/15iran.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hpw

Frankly, I don't think we should discount the possibility that we might actually be the ones telling a version of events closer to the actual truth here. After all, if we really did abduct this guy, how was it that he was able to walk into the Pakistani Embassy rather than say rotting in some cell, or alleyway, in Medina.

Of course, if we really did abduct this guy, apparently he was so useless in the amount of intel that he could provide that we apparently just left him in Tuscon (presumably), and didn't bother to even keep an eye on him.

Sei'taer
07-14-2010, 09:19 PM
The facts don't get released because they tend to be harmful to those who would release them. You never see an instance where a police officer is accused of brutality, there is no video evidence or the video evidence is 100% controlled by the department, the department does an investigation and either turns over video or prosecutes the officer based on their findings. You never see that happen. Ever.

I'm not saying that what you say isn't usually correct. But never is such a strong word to use. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16383539/)

Isabel
07-15-2010, 12:17 AM
Yup, a private citizen making a snarky joke completely torpedos free speech. :rolleyes: I think you actually need to look up the definition of the concept before you start attempting to use it to get self-righteous and indignant. I think if you were familiar with it and perhaps didn't live in a country where you can serve up to two years in prison for simply speaking your mind you might realize that what I said epitomizes free speech. So spare us all the histrionics and hyperventilating please. If I were actually interested in serious discussion on this topic, or serious in what I said that sparked this panicky response from you, I would be attempting to refute the muppets article and not just making fun of him. As it stands now, I'm not interested in taking this topic seriously and my responses will be in kind.

Gosh, So threatening to arrest, abduct and illegaly detaining people (like Gonzo and me) who annoy you because of our opinions, isn't interfering with freedom of speech?

BTW, i am perfectly fine with the freedom of speech in the Netherlands.

Sinistrum
07-15-2010, 12:49 AM
Gosh, So threatening to arrest, abduct and illegaly detaining people (like Gonzo and me) who annoy you because of our opinions, isn't interfering with freedom of speech?

And who, precisely, is doing all of that?

BTW, i am perfectly fine with the freedom of speech in the Netherlands

I'm sure you are and will continue to be up until the point where someone tries to slap that ridiculous label of "hate speech" you are so fond of on something you've said and attempts to get you locked up for it.

Terez
07-15-2010, 03:00 AM
Oh, but she would never say anything hateful about anyone.

Neilbert
07-15-2010, 09:13 AM
I'm not saying that what you say isn't usually correct. But never is such a strong word to use. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16383539/)

Your article doesn't explain why the murderers went to trial and were convicted. I couldn't find it quickly, and I'm not going to put too much effort searching for something I don't believe exists. :p

From another article:

Sgt. Arthur Kaufman and retired Sgt. Gerard Dugue, who helped investigate the shootings, were charged with participating in the alleged cover-up. Charges against them include obstruction of justice.

Oh yeah and further down the money shot I was looking for:

The charges, unsealed Tuesday, are the culmination of a two-year probe by the federal government. An internal police investigation found no wrongdoing by officers. A state grand jury convened to look into the matter charged seven officers with murder or attempted murder, but a state judge threw out all the charges in 2008.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100714/ap_on_re_us/us_katrina_bridge_shootings

Never is a strong word, but I've still never seen a police department turn one of their own over to justice without overwhelming external evidence against them.

Neilbert
07-15-2010, 09:20 AM
I'm not saying that what you say isn't usually correct. But never is such a strong word to use. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16383539/)

Your article doesn't explain why the murderers went to trial and were convicted. I couldn't find it quickly, and I'm not going to put too much effort searching for something I don't believe exists. :p

From another article:

Sgt. Arthur Kaufman and retired Sgt. Gerard Dugue, who helped investigate the shootings, were charged with participating in the alleged cover-up. Charges against them include obstruction of justice.

Oh yeah and further down the money shot I was looking for:

The charges, unsealed Tuesday, are the culmination of a two-year probe by the federal government. An internal police investigation found no wrongdoing by officers. A state grand jury convened to look into the matter charged seven officers with murder or attempted murder, but a state judge threw out all the charges in 2008.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100714/ap_on_re_us/us_katrina_bridge_shootings

Never is a strong word, but I've still never seen a police department turn one of their own over to justice without overwhelming external evidence against them.

This next statement will inevitably be a set up for ridicule, but screw it...if US and similar nations are really that awful, move. Go to Iran or North Korea or whatever. I'm sure they'd love to have you. The difference is, you're allowed to leave here.

You sound like the kind of person who buys a new house when their lawn gets overgrown.

PS: I know people who have been to Iran, strangely enough they were allowed to return. People should leave the US and travel if only just to see what it is like outside the bubble.

Sei'taer
07-15-2010, 09:49 AM
Your article doesn't explain why the murderers went to trial and were convicted. I couldn't find it quickly, and I'm not going to put too much effort searching for something I don't believe exists. :p

From another article:



Oh yeah and further down the money shot I was looking for:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100714/ap_on_re_us/us_katrina_bridge_shootings

Never is a strong word, but I've still never seen a police department turn one of their own over to justice without overwhelming external evidence against them.


This article is a little more in-depth. (http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2010/07/prosecutors_will_seek_detentio.html) I figure they'll try to get the death penalty. That gives them wiggle room for going down to life, since Holder doesn't believe in the death penalty.

Basel Gill
07-15-2010, 10:18 AM
Yup Neil, I do, nothing like having to mow the grass. :rolleyes:

Look, I was simply saying that if a person sincerely believes that the US is such a horrible, evil place then apply to be a citizen elsewhere. The "you" in my statement was not you specifically, but a general "you". If you don't like the place, leave the space for people who do, and there are plenty of them.

As for travel, some of the destinations I would most like to visit are those in what some would call oppressed, socialist, dangerous or "muslim" countries. On my top 5 would include St. Petersburg, Istanbul, Jerusalem, anywhere in China and Indonesia. I would also have to add Germany for the food and beer. :)

The US in undoubtedly a "bubble" and to a great degree ignorant of the state of the rest of the world. However, even with the state of affairs as they are, I cannot think of anywhere I'd rather live. There are still an abundance of positives about this country that many take for granted and dismiss. EVERY country that ever existed has made mistakes and engaged in actions that others deemed deplorable. That does not negate the country as a whole anymore than a poor aspect of one's character negates a person's value as a human being.

Neilbert
07-15-2010, 10:54 AM
This article is a little more in-depth. (http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2010/07/prosecutors_will_seek_detentio.html) I figure they'll try to get the death penalty. That gives them wiggle room for going down to life, since Holder doesn't believe in the death penalty.

We might be talking past each other but my point is that people with authority can not be trusted to police their own. An external agency bring cops to justice after their own force cleared them of all wrongdoing in an internal investigation does not contradict this.

Look, I was simply saying that if a person sincerely believes that the US is such a horrible, evil place then apply to be a citizen elsewhere.

Yes, and what you said is not incredibly realistic for a variety of reasons, including that applying for citizenship is a complicated process with no guarantee of success. If a person sincerely believes that the US is evil, I don't see how running from it and not trying to change it would be consistent with such a moral viewpoint.

As for travel, some of the destinations I would most like to visit are those in what some would call oppressed, socialist, dangerous or "muslim" countries. On my top 5 would include St. Petersburg, Istanbul, Jerusalem, anywhere in China and Indonesia. I would also have to add Germany for the food and beer.

I really want to try authentic German beer. :)

Isabel
07-15-2010, 11:31 AM
German beer? Why German beer??? As far as I know German beer isn't that famous. Belgian beer is more famous in the Netherlands and dutch beer (supposedly) isn't that bad.

Neilbert
07-15-2010, 11:33 AM
IDK why I want to try German beer, I just do.
But yeah, Belgian beer is amazing. I love Fat Tire and ... everything else made by the new belgian brewing company.

Basel Gill
07-15-2010, 11:34 AM
Authentic German beer would make my year, in a beergarten with hot chicks in lederhosen....whoops TMI...anyway.

I understand that it is not realistic, I guess that it just gets under my skin a bit to hear people trash the country that honestly preserves their right to trash the country better than most. Doesn't make much sense does it? People pissing me off should indicate an abundance of freedom...anyway...

Basel Gill
07-15-2010, 11:35 AM
I do loves me some Trappist Ale! Belgian beer is a legend unto itself.

Sei'taer
07-15-2010, 04:49 PM
We might be talking past each other but my point is that people with authority can not be trusted to police their own. An external agency bring cops to justice after their own force cleared them of all wrongdoing in an internal investigation does not contradict this.

We were...but I'm all caught up now.

Just as an aside and in relation to this side discussion, (and I think from some earlier posts I know the answer) You do feel it is our job to police our gov't and make changes when necessary?





I really want to try authentic German beer. :)

It's 99 degrees ouside today...don't know the heat index, but I need a really cold beer right now.

Ieyasu
07-15-2010, 07:00 PM
It's 99 degrees ouside today...don't know the heat index, but I need a really cold beer right now.


I don't think Germany is where you want to go for a cold one...

Neilbert
07-15-2010, 08:15 PM
Just as an aside and in relation to this side discussion, (and I think from some earlier posts I know the answer) You do feel it is our job to police our gov't and make changes when necessary?

Absolutely.

Terez
07-16-2010, 10:54 AM
I don't think Germany is where you want to go for a cold one...
I believe that was his point.