Thread: Victor Bout - Russian Businessman (?) facing 25 years in US prison

Originally Posted by Hanna

I don't know much more of this and I dislike the sale of weapons in general, about as much as I dislike the idea of kidnapping people and dragging them off to a foreign country to face trial.

That pretty much covers my opinion on the matter. It's not only about Bout. This case creates a very dangerous precedent. US made it clear that it can 'legally kidnap' people in other countries just because they think that person is dangerous. And the jury found him guilty, oh I can imagine how it was depicited in the 'totally unbiased' American media. If we accept the axiom that 95% of all the people in the world are idiots, that means that 11 out of 12 juriors were totally susceptible to anything the prosecutor would say. I wonder what would US do if some other country did that to an American...

Technically, what US did is an act of war.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Technically, what US did is an act of war.

+10
It's more than a dangerous precedent - arresting foreign citizens on foreign ground and prosecuting them under American law is becoming routine. Pretty much the same happened to Kim Schmitz (the founder of Megaupload and its associated websites). The only reason US is able to do it is because they bullied most of the world into obeying, I wish there were a way to oppose it.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

+10
It's more than a dangerous precedent - arresting foreign citizens on foreign ground and prosecuting them under American law is becoming routine. Pretty much the same happened to Kim Schmitz (the founder of Megaupload and its associated websites). The only reason US is able to do it is because they bullied most of the world into obeying, I wish there were a way to oppose it.

It's happened to several British people lately - and then I am not talking about the type of British citizens who take their holidays at Chez Bin Laden in Pakistan.... Whose Britishness could be questioned, although in my view their rights as citizens count too.

The cases that are beginning to cause a stir are to do with middle class, white people who simply did something that annoyed the USA, but does not even warrant prison in the UK.

This can be accommodated under a law that was intended for handling radical terrorists. Pretty convenient outcome of 9/11...

Remains to be seen what happens with Julian Assange, who is STILL awaiting the court order about extradition to Sweden which has caved in to US pressure before, about freedom of the press. The terrorist extradition law could be applied to him too.

Neither the UK nor Sweden would like to breach their own laws in connection with Assange, in order to please the USA. On the other hand, there is a lot at stage. Meanwhile Assange is still under house arrest in an allround ridiculous and pathetic miscarriage of justice.

A British retired man sold some battery parts that ended up in Iran, and for this he will to go to prison in Texas, where he might be put in a "chain gang" - a sort of medieval way of keeping prisoners working and chained together at the same time. A Retired British Business Man Being Extradited To The US Worries He Will Have To Join A Prison Gang - Business Insider

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

+10
It's more than a dangerous precedent - arresting foreign citizens on foreign ground and prosecuting them under American law is becoming routine. Pretty much the same happened to Kim Schmitz (the founder of Megaupload and its associated websites). The only reason US is able to do it is because they bullied most of the world into obeying, I wish there were a way to oppose it.

Well, go ahead and see you at a trial!

I ain't sure about the Megaupload guy, but those selling dangerous stuff to terrorists, including those like Iranian government, etc. should go to jail for a long term, no matter what country it is. They simply have to stop trading that stuff until it's too late.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Well, go ahead and see you at a trial!

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about. "Democracy" in action.

I ain't sure about the Megaupload guy, but those selling dangerous stuff to terrorists, including those like Iranian government, etc. should go to jail for a long term, no matter what country it is. They simply have to stop trading that stuff until it's too late.

Yes, they should go to jail. But there's no legal reason for them being prosecuted in the US and under American law. It's not universal, and there are still other countries around with their own laws, if you forgot. I could understand if this man would have been prosecuted in Russia or even in Thailand, since he operated on their territory, but Americans barging into the picture is too much.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about. "Democracy" in action.

Yes, they should go to jail. But there's no legal reason for them being prosecuted in the US and under American law. It's not universal, and there are still other countries around with their own laws, if you forgot. I could understand if this man would have been prosecuted in Russia or even in Thailand, since he operated on their territory, but Americans barging into the picture is too much.

Well, as long as it doesn't concern U.S. national security, they could be dealt with somewhere else. Selling weapons to terrorists that are most likely going to use them to attack the U.S. is a completely different matter. I think it's just so obvious and clear, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Well, as long as it doesn't concern U.S. national security, they could be dealt with somewhere else. Selling weapons to terrorists that are most likely going to use them to attack the U.S. is a completely different matter. I think it's just so obvious and clear, isn't it?

No, it's not. The fact the US made some enemies does not give them the right to stomp all over the world abusing their power. The US is becoming the greatest Orwellian-type dictatorship of all, and in the light of this I see their so called fight for freedom as hypocrisy. Which is sad.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

The US is becoming the greatest Orwellian-type dictatorship

Sorry, didn't notice that. It treats its citizens millions of times better than many of the countries you would put up with do. Some of which would really remind me of Oceania.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about. "Democracy" in action.

Yes, they should go to jail. But there's no legal reason for them being prosecuted in the US and under American law. It's not universal, and there are still other countries around with their own laws, if you forgot. I could understand if this man would have been prosecuted in Russia or even in Thailand, since he operated on their territory, but Americans barging into the picture is too much.

Exactly. My opinion is that Russia should have dealt with him, if it needed to be done. It's another question why Russia hasn't, and there could be many reasons I suppose.

But I don't think there is ANY rationale that the USA arrests a Russian citizen, in Thailand, for selling weapons to non-Americans (the FARC guerilla).The FARC guerilla were considered a liberation army not so long ago, similar to the ANC in South Africa, for example, and received foreign aid from many respectable countries. The quarrel there is an internal matter for Columbia to solve - that country is not some kind of paragon of virtue and there is a good reason why the FARC exists, it is their methods that are questionable.

I don't see what Columbia's affairs have to do with the USA either. The only "American citizens" that would be affected would be CIA advisors or elite soldiers who are there meddling in Columbia's affairs. (his supposed crime was "plotting to kill American citizens").

Wait until China arrests an American who meddling in their sphere of interest, brings him to Beijing and sentence him for terrorism, to serve 25 years in a Chinese prison (probably not that much worse than a chain gang in Texas)... Maybe that would make people reflect a bit on the illogical and creepy precedent set by this sentencing. But with people's skewed perspective of reality it would more likely lead to a big political drama and biased media reporting.

And like I said, something like this recently happened to a British man too, and a school boy who hacked a US defense system for fun.

Here is an interesting entry about Victor Bout from Wikipedia

Viktor Anatolyevich Bout (Russian: Виктор Анатольевич Бут) (born 13 January 1967, near Dushanbe, Tajik SSR, Soviet Union) is a convicted arms smuggler and political prisoner.^[1]

Having graduated from the Military Institute of Foreign Languages,^[22][27][28] he is said to be fluent in six languages.^[29] These include Persian and Esperanto, which he mastered already at the age of 12,^[30][31] and in the early 1980's he was member of the Esperanto club in Dushanbe.^[32] Bout's personal website states that he served in the Soviet Army as a translator, holding the rank of Lieutenant.^[6]

Language genius and Esperanto club member turns terrorist arms dealer... how sad. He'll be a broken man when he gets out of prison in the USA. Assuming he even survives. I guess it's another fallout of the events in the 90s, in the ex USSR. Under different circumstances he would probably have been a really nice and legitimately accomplished person.

His main crime seems to be that he ignored existing embargos and shipped equipment to whoever could pay. His main fortune was made from shipping and not from weapons sale.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

+10
It's more than a dangerous precedent - arresting foreign citizens on foreign ground and prosecuting them under American law is becoming routine. Pretty much the same happened to Kim Schmitz (the founder of Megaupload and its associated websites). The only reason US is able to do it is because they bullied most of the world into obeying, I wish there were a way to oppose it.

I agree with you gRomozeka. My opinion here is not because of what's right or wrong, but rather because of what country should be responsible for it. I understand the way it went down, "sting op" and all that. In my opinion that's all the more reason why Russia, as one of the world's biggest powers and sometimes in some ways the biggest (space flight comes to mind, just saying), should have been consulted before anything was decided upon properly.

I also get the feeling that this is not so much just America's doing, as "advised" by those forces in the UN who are chiding Russia for not being "part of the club." I think some people will disagree on this last part because it's a pretty out-there connection to make, but it helps me understand the motivations better - unless, and I doubt it, America's security entities were actually *afraid* of Bout's ability to provide weaponry (I doubt it because he's just one more marketeer in a packed bazaar), it seems to me to be the only motivation capable of galvanizing major action (any action against Russia by US is a major one, given our history) like this one.

I'm sure a lot of people are more morally-compuncted by this news than I am; I just think it's like this: The amount of people that died from Bout's weapons would PALE in comparison to the amount that would die if US and Russia conflicted, even in a small way. So it's the better of two evils to channel Paunchus in this case - "Looking the other way a little bit can save the world," as they say.

luck/life

Originally Posted by Ramil

That pretty much covers my opinion on the matter. It's not only about Bout. This case creates a very dangerous precedent. US made it clear that it can 'legally kidnap' people in other countries just because they think that person is dangerous. And the jury found him guilty, oh I can imagine how it was depicited in the 'totally unbiased' American media. If we accept the axiom that 95% of all the people in the world are idiots, that means that 11 out of 12 juriors were totally susceptible to anything the prosecutor would say. I wonder what would US do if some other country did that to an American...

Technically, what US did is an act of war.

Well... include me in that 95% and as for how he was depicted in the American media... I actually don't recall hearing about this entire thing until Hanna brought it up. I just Googled his name and interestingly enough, according to the New York Times, Bout's lawyers did not even present ONE witness.

Now the last case I remember where someone went up against the US Government in New York and rested without producing a single witness on their behalf, was Robert Altman and the BCCI case... he won, but in the media and I believe in the eyes of the world, he was guilty and it didn't matter that he won.