Beyond Torture: The CIA's Shameful Kidnapping of a 12-Year-Old Girl

[ksen]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...l-thing-the-cia-is-trying-to-suppress/375706/

Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi was in power at the time. For years, he'd been hunting opponents of his brutal regime, including the father of Khadija al-Saadi, the 12-year-old. Her family fled to the United Kingdom and later to China. Around this time, Tony Blair's government and the Bush administration were both trying to cut deals with the dictator, hoping to make him an ally in the war on terrorism. And Dick Cheney was still insisting that America had to operate "on the dark side."

That's how the CIA and MI6, its British equivalent, happened to participate in this particular rendition. The family, including our 12-year-old protagonist and her two brothers, age 11 and 9, were kidnapped and forced onto a plane in Hong Kong.

The parents were separated from their kids, she recalled in an essay brought to Gawker by an international human-rights group, Reprieve, that helps document renditions:

The guards took us to see our mother once on the 16-hour flight. She was crying, and told us that we were being taken to Gaddafi's Libya. Shortly before the plane landed, a guard told me to say goodbye to my father, at the front of the plane. I forced myself ahead and saw him with a needle in his arm.

I remember guards laughing at me. Then I fainted.

jesus h Christ

check please

 

[barbos]

I presume her father was a "terrorist", kids were just unfortunate to have him as father.
By the way, was he a terrorist? Qaddafi was a brutal SOB, does not mean his "opposition" were better.
Irony here is the fact that his regime got much milder and they were doing better and better economically when shit hit the fan.

 

[ksen]

Why do you presume her father was a terrorist? fwiw his name is Sami Al-Saadi and you can look him up online. The worst thing I can find about him is that he was a leader in the opposition to Qadaffi.

And even if he were a terrorist how does that justify the us and uk kidnapping him and his entire family and giving them over to arch-terrorist Qadaffi?

 

[Underseer]

Why do you presume her father was a terrorist? fwiw his name is Sami Al-Saadi and you can look him up online. The worst thing I can find about him is that he was a leader in the opposition to Qadaffi.

And even if he were a terrorist how does that justify the us and uk kidnapping him and his entire family and giving them over to arch-terrorist Qadaffi?

Only a terrorist would oppose Qadaffi, therefore the father was a terrorist, therefore the CIA was justified in kidnapping children and turning them over to that champion of freedom otherwise known as Qadaffi.

Why do you hate freedom? More importantly, why do you love terrorists? [/cosnervolibertarian]

 

[barbos]

Why do you presume her father was a terrorist? fwiw his name is Sami Al-Saadi and you can look him up online. The worst thing I can find about him is that he was a leader in the opposition to Qadaffi.

And even if he were a terrorist how does that justify the us and uk kidnapping him and his entire family and giving them over to arch-terrorist Qadaffi?

Well, according to CIA everyone who is opposing the guy you like or installed in power is a a terrorist, just ask ukrainian terrorists, they will confirm it.

 

[Lumpenproletariat]

Y'do what y'gotta do.

We should trust the CIA unless you can prove that what they did was cruel and unnecessary and served no national security or intelligence need.

Kidnapping a child is mild compared to some other rough tactics the CIA has done. (They didn't torture her, did they?)

And usually what they did was necessary. They have a messy job. Not everything they do is nice and pretty. Unless you can prove otherwise, we should assume it was necessary.

 

[ksen]

Hey, look who's all of a sudden for big government!

 

[Nexus]

Unless you can prove otherwise, we should assume it was necessary.

No we shouldn't.

 

[NobleSavage]

We should trust the CIA unless you can prove that what they did was cruel and unnecessary and served no national security or intelligence need.

Kidnapping a child is mild compared to some other rough tactics the CIA has done. (They didn't torture her, did they?)

And usually what they did was necessary. They have a messy job. Not everything they do is nice and pretty. Unless you can prove otherwise, we should assume it was necessary.

Considering the CIA's track record, I assume just the opposite.