Log in

View Full Version : US commando raids: Kerry defends al-Liby capture


SosbanFach
October 7th, 2013, 03:16 PM
US Secretary of State John Kerry has defended the capture of an alleged al-Qaeda leader, Anas al-Liby, calling him a "legal and appropriate target".

He is a suspected mastermind of the 1998 US embassy attacks in Africa.

His son, Abdullah al-Raghie, said his father was seized by masked gunmen and that some of them were Libyans.

Mr Kerry's comments come after Libya called on the US to explain the raid on its territory, one of two by US commandos in Africa on Saturday.

Mr Kerry said Anas al-Liby, who has been on the FBI's most wanted list for more than a decade with a $5m (£3.1m) bounty on his head, would face justice in a court of law.


Anas al-Liby is suspected of masterminding the 1998 US embassy attacks in Africa
"With respect to Abu Anas al-Liby, he is a key al-Qaeda figure, and he is a legal and an appropriate target for the US military," Mr Kerry told reporters on the sidelines of an Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (Apec) summit in Indonesia.

'Kidnap'
Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zeidan's office said he had asked for clarification on the raid and stressed Libya was "keen on prosecuting any Libyan citizen inside Libya".

"The Libyan government has been following the reports of the kidnap of one of the Libyan citizens wanted by the authorities in the United States," said a Libyan government statement issued on Sunday.

"As soon as it heard the reports, the Libyan government contacted the US authorities to demand an explanation."

Citing surveillance camera footage, Mr Liby's son, Abdullah al-Raghie, said his father was seized in Tripoli early on Saturday by masked gunmen armed with pistols, as he was parking outside his house.

He said that those he could see taking his father looked Libyan and spoke a Libyan dialect.

He claims the Libyan government was implicated in his father's disappearance - a claim Tripoli denies.

Mr Liby's brother, Nabih, on Sunday told reporters his brother was innocent, describing the US operation as an "act of piracy".

Anas al-Liby - real name is Nazih Abdul-Hamed al-Ruqai - is believed to have been one of the masterminds behind the 1998 US embassy attacks, which killed more than 220 people in Kenya and Tanzania.

The 49-year-old has been indicted in a New York court in connection with the attacks.

On Saturday, US commandos also carried out a raid in southern Somalia, but failed to capture their target.

He is alleged to have been involved in plotting a number of attacks in Kenya.

Al-Shabab has said it carried out last month's attack on the Westgate shopping centre in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi.

When asked on Sunday whether Somalia had been aware of the raid, Prime Minister Abdi Farah Shirdon Saaid said: "Our co-operation with international partners on fighting against terrorism is not a secret."

Mr Kerry said the operations in Libya and Somalia showed that the US would never stop "in its effort to hold those accountable who conduct acts of terror".


Source (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24426033)

________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________
________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________

I imagine that this will be quite a divisive topic, but what is your opinion of this event? Personally, I find it a somewhat concerning prospect that the US government considers itself to be within its rights to kidnap foreign nationals from foreign soils, with seemingly no permission from the relevant authorities. It seems to be a fairly decided breach of international law, and in my eyes displays a certain arrogance in its disregard. One almost begins to question who the real terrorists are...

Stronk Serb
October 7th, 2013, 03:49 PM
Both are terrorists. The US is turning into a police state.

sqishy
October 7th, 2013, 05:05 PM
Both are terrorists. The US is turning into a police state.

I generally agree.

If you go to a cop there and ask for help, like if someone's been severely injured around the corner/ in some ambulance emergency situation, they are allowed to take you down to the ground and arrest you. And it does happen a lot.

1 example, but a good one at that.

TheBigUnit
October 8th, 2013, 07:16 AM
i totally support the raids but john kerry reminds me of joe biden for some reason :p

thatcountrykid
October 12th, 2013, 02:22 PM
I generally agree.

If you go to a cop there and ask for help, like if someone's been severely injured around the corner/ in some ambulance emergency situation, they are allowed to take you down to the ground and arrest you. And it does happen a lot.

1 example, but a good one at that.

No offence but that is bull. They will help the person first but they will question and investigate the reporting party and they will be arrested and investigated further if they are a suspect.

sqishy
October 12th, 2013, 02:27 PM
No offence but that is bull. They will help the person first but they will question and investigate the reporting party and they will be arrested and investigated further if they are a suspect.

I beg to differ. Horse manure.

thatcountrykid
October 12th, 2013, 04:33 PM
I beg to differ. Horse manure.

Explain then.

sqishy
October 12th, 2013, 06:30 PM
Explain then.

They are allowed to do it. Not that it happens all the time. But it has happened before. If someone goes for immediate help from a police officer and the police officer sees it as suspicious, there is nothing stopping the officer from arresting the person.

thatcountrykid
October 13th, 2013, 08:01 AM
They are allowed to do it. Not that it happens all the time. But it has happened before. If someone goes for immediate help from a police officer and the police officer sees it as suspicious, there is nothing stopping the officer from arresting the person.

Man that is exactly what i said. Just because you call first doesnt mean your innocent. They will investigate the injured person but will investigate the reporting person because they may have caused it.

sqishy
October 13th, 2013, 08:16 AM
Man that is exactly what i said. Just because you call first doesnt mean your innocent. They will investigate the injured person but will investigate the reporting person because they may have caused it.

Seems we are on the same side then.

thatcountrykid
October 13th, 2013, 05:13 PM
Seems we are on the same side then.

I wouldnt say that.

sqishy
October 13th, 2013, 05:15 PM
I wouldnt say that.

Best we agree to disagree and draw a line.

thatcountrykid
October 13th, 2013, 07:54 PM
Best we agree to disagree and draw a line.

Fine with me.