mlah The “culture” that has evolved here isn’t conducive to sissies

June 19, 2005


Filed under: Politics — mlah @ 2:12 pm

Some random pic of Aruba

Natalee Holloway.

let’s forget the fact that people go missing daily in the u.s.. and let’s forget the fact that the only the thing that makes her different is that she’s a hot chick. well, let’s not forget it, let’s just put it to the side for the moment. there are a lot of arguments about why she gets the spotlight, not just the media spotlight, but the laser like determination of the nearly the entire u.s. executive branch. fbi and state department too.

i want to say something about the notion that we should have the fbi in there at all.

i’m a texan. again. i live in texas and am subject to texas laws.

when people come visit texas. i expect them to abide by texas laws.

when some asshat from california comes here and nreaks in a home and gets blown to hell by an angry homeowner, i’m pleased.

do you think that the relatives of said asshat should be able to sue the homeowner in california? the theoretical disputed act took place in texas.

i say no. the deed happened in texas, so the court proceedings take place in texas.

and i say this because i believe the flipside is true.

when i go to some other state, like michigan, and some asshat spews filth and i give him a righteous ass whippin, i’m subject to michigan laws reagrding the serving up of ass whippins.

i expect the same courtesy from others.

it’s pretty simple really. when in rome, do as the romans. so when i am in idaho, idahoans make the laws. i have to respect them.

put this on a grander scale.

holland is an older country than we are, and somehow for centuries they have pretty much managed to stay a distinct and separate country, (pretty much). but it is very clear they are a nation.

when i go to holland, dutch law is supreme. when the dutch come to texas. we write the rules.

aruba is part of the dutch antilles. i do not know exactly what level of autonomy the dutch give the islands. but it is very clear. aruba ain’t texas. and it ain’t new york, jersey or vermont.

natalee went to aruba. they have jurisdiction. they write the rules. they should conduct the trial.

the fbi has NO jurisdiction there. if the dutch choose to invite the fbi in, in whatever capacity they choose, they may accept or decline.

but the dutch make the rules.

the fbi are guests of the dutch.

all of this being said, i hope miss holloway is ok, but fear the worse.


  1. Eh. I say “You fuck with a citizen of Rome, Rome fucks with you.”

    That is- the United States takes care of its own.

    It would be different if Natalie went over and started blowing Arubans away with a glock while laughing like a deranged lunatic. Then I’d say “Give her to the Arubans”.

    Does this mean that I think the FBI should be involved? I don’t know. I do think that this lady’s getting preferential treatment on the basis of being a blonde bombshell, but eh. She’s a citizen of Rome, and she’s been fucked with. If Aruba can catch the jerks that did it, wonderful. But if it can’t, should we just bow to their investigative inferiority and say “Tough luck, blondie”?

    Or do we say “You fuck with a citizen of the United States, and the FBI’s gonna hunt down your ass.”?

    Personally I like the latter message. It’s got a nice ring to it.

    Comment by Moonbatty — June 19, 2005 @ 5:57 pm

  2. if we send in anyone based on ineffectiveness. to take care of business they were too inept to finish, the cia has jurisdiction.

    same organizations. by u.s. theatres of operations, the fbi is stateside. the cia is extranational.

    the notion of having the cia hunt down someone’s ass is acceptable to me. but that should be after the fact.

    holland is sovereign.

    Comment by mlah — June 19, 2005 @ 6:06 pm

  3. I’ve been surprised to hear that the FBI has been in Afghanistan and other countries in the “War on Terror”. Yes, the CIA makes sense, and they are there, but the FBI?
    And in this case, even the State Dept makes sense, because that’s what our ambassadors are connected to, if I’m not mistaken. And I think I’ve heard of them attempting to intervene sometimes, when, say, one of our citizens gets arrested in another country.
    The CIA doesn’t get into police-type investigations, do they? I thought they stuck to being a hidden hand behind the political stage.
    We’re the cops of the world, of course, so nothing surprises me anymore.

    Comment by f-in_cheney — June 19, 2005 @ 10:09 pm

  4. FBI is our crime fighting organization, and has international ties with their counterparts abroad. There are FBI representatives to such organizations as Interpol, and you might even find some FBI guys stationed abroad at our embassies (or at least, some of the major ones), if I recall correctly. When there are US citizens involved in crimes committed abroad, the FBI generally dispatches a team to ensure our national interests are taken care of, as well as protect the rights of our citizens if necessary. In this case, the involvement of the FBI is given such press precisely because the victim is a hot young Southren Belle.

    The FBI has been cooperating with many of our allies in the War on Terror, such as Yemen and Afghanistan, in their capacity as forensic investigators and as representatives of the US so that we can make sure our legal point of view wrt the miscreants is well voiced (say, to make sure that we get first dibs if the host nation decides to throw the small fish back into the pond). CIA and other spooky types are not there to enforce the law, or stand up for US law enforcement purposes. FBI is simply applying their expertise where and when needed.


    Comment by yup — June 20, 2005 @ 7:52 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress