It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Helicopter mechanic Ryan Pate wrote the Facebook post while in Florida after arguing with employer Global Aerospace Logistics (Gal) over sick leave.
On returning to Abu Dhabi from Florida, he was arrested for breaking the country's strict cyber-slander laws.
B. Internationally
There is little dispute that nation-states can prosecute Internet users (or anyone else, for that matter), whatever their location, for revealing national secrets, falsifying official documents, or inciting war. These activities threaten national security, wherever they are committed, and therefore fall under international standards for jurisdiction. Similarly, it is a universal crime to publicly incite torture or genocide. These universal offenses may be prosecuted extraterritorially by any nation, regardless of the citizenship or location of the user.
These are easy cases, however. Nations may also be interested in enforcing non-universal laws extraterritorially; for example, In Germany, it is illegal to import distribute material espousing a Nazi or Neo-Nazi viewpoint. Such material is not difficult to find in USENet or on the World Wide Web. German authorities may be interested not only in interpreting German laws to classify Internet viewing as "importation" of material, but also (in part because of the difficulty of locating those who break an importation statute without leaving their own homes) in prosecuting those who make such material available to Germans via the Internet. If German authorities attempted to prosecute a U.S. citizen r resident for such an offense, however, they would be met with geat opposition by the U.S., which certainly would not enforce any judgment against the U.S. citizen in such a case, because the German statute violates U.S. Constitutional principles. Under U.S. law, because it would be prohibitively difficult to prevent German users from viewing such a site and therefore the result of such a prosecution would be to chill otherwise legal (if unpleasant) speech in the U.S. Under the current system, it is possible to envision that German courts may have jurisdiction over Americans who publish such material, even though the material may not be "purposefully directed" (one interpretation of the American standard ) toward Germany in the way a mailing of flyers would be.
originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: hounddoghowlie
Best not to talk too reckless online, when it comes to names, companies, or threats.
Especially if it's a Gulf State. That's double reckless.
Hopefully they're lenient with him.
Similarly, it is a universal crime to publicly incite torture or genocide. These universal offenses may be prosecuted extraterritorially by any nation, regardless of the citizenship or location of the user.
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Psynic
the rant your linking to is a death threat on a police officers, far from calling someone a sh@@bag, and backstabbers. he threatened no one just talked trash and was gonna quit.
Every nation has an obligation to exercise moderation and restraint in invoking jurisdiction over cases that have a foreign element, and they should avoid undue encroachment on the jurisdiction of other States. Although countries are given great discretion in deciding whether to exercise jurisdiction over conduct in other countries, international law dictates that a country exercising its jurisdiction in an overly self-centered way not only contravenes international law, but can also "disturb the international order and produce political, legal, and economic reprisals."
originally posted by: Psynic
originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: hounddoghowlie
Best not to talk too reckless online, when it comes to names, companies, or threats.
Especially if it's a Gulf State. That's double reckless.
Hopefully they're lenient with him.
One needn't go to the Middle East to find examples of Facebook rants landing people in jail.
It happened here in Ontariariario YESTERDAY!
toronto.ctvnews.ca...
originally posted by: Psynic
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Psynic
the rant your linking to is a death threat on a police officers, far from calling someone a sh@@bag, and backstabbers. he threatened no one just talked trash and was gonna quit.
Alleged death threat.
I have no idea what he actually said.
Do you?
originally posted by: Rocker2013
originally posted by: Psynic
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Psynic
the rant your linking to is a death threat on a police officers, far from calling someone a sh@@bag, and backstabbers. he threatened no one just talked trash and was gonna quit.
Alleged death threat.
I have no idea what he actually said.
Do you?
You do know that charges can only be brought when there is evidence, right?
What, you think they just made it all up to be able to arrest someone? How do they then prove it in front of a judge, if it gets that far?
He either made the threats or he didn't. If they arrested and charged him, they obviously have the evidence that he did do that.
So, logic and reason would suggest that this is a justified arrest of someone who made threats to murder. That is sane and sensible in all our countries. You don't get to make threats to kill and claim it's freedom of speech.
Seriously, what part of this are you not getting? It's baffling.