[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1145030209.16066.12.camel@E067729>
Date: Fri Apr 14 21:55:49 2006
From: red at criticalintegration.com (Redvers Davies)
Subject: Gary McKinnon
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 21:07 +0100, n3td3v wrote:
> which they said NO to. Like the United States said NO to the United
> Nations, when the United Nations told the United States not to attack
> Iraq.
One of the advantages of being a soverign nation is that you can ignore
other countries and organisations.
I'm sure you would be the first to complain if the UN decided to try to
ban security scanning and exploit software from all member nations (as
they have been trying to do with small-arms).
Surely it is up to any country to decide its own domestic and foreign
policy.
Remember the fundimental cause of WWI was a chain-reaction of treaties.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists