Gunslinger Girl WI: Girl Picked Up By American Social Workers

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 13:16

What if one of the girls, while on a mission abroad in Berkeley, California, is mistreated by her handler in a way that the Alameda Department of Children & Family Services gets wind of it. Due to , the handler is unable to talk/shoot his way out, so the girl is picked up by social workers. Due to some injury, they take her to a hospital where it is discovered that the girl is a cyborg. A raid upon the hotel room of the handler reveals the true purpose of the Italian Social Welfare Agency. The social workers immediately send proof to the California Highway Patrol and the State Attorney General's office, who are completely shocked. They tell Governor Jerry Brown, who holds a press conference to reveal this to the news media. What happens now?

by ChaosKin640 Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 13:29

The handler in question phones back to Italy that his cyborg may likely have been compromised, they send additional fratello support, who proceed to take back the cyborg and kill everyone with knowledge of her true identity. It would never, ever get as far as what you describe. Not to mention the fact that the cyborg herself would identify those attempting to seperate her from her handler as a threat and kill them.

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 13:52

ChaosKin640 wrote:The handler in question phones back to Italy that his cyborg may likely have been compromised, they send additional fratello support, who proceed to take back the cyborg and kill everyone with knowledge of her true identity. It would never, ever get as far as what you describe. Not to mention the fact that the cyborg herself would identify those attempting to seperate her from her handler as a threat and kill them.

Killing social workers and police officers who work with them would be taken very seriously by the California Highway Patrol and would probably result in FBI intervention. Also, I said that the girl was injured; let's assume she's unconscious or something. And I said that due to some handwaved reason, the handler can not talk or shoot his way out. What happens then?

by ChaosKin640 Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 14:16

The agency would be more concerned about securing their assest (the cyborg), as opposed to whatever repricusions came of killing American social workers. Whatever needs to be done to maintain operational security would be done.

But, let's for the sake of argument, that it is a wost-case scenario, and they can't silence the parties involved before word got out. In that case, Minister Petris would very quickly get in touch with her American counterpart to have the entire matter swept under the rug. Remember, the American government is at least partially aware of the SWA's true mandate, as per the technology trade that happened between them, mentioned in ch.59 of the manga.

On an unrelated note, I see that you're new to the forum. You should head over to the introduction threat to post some sort of formal greeting.

by Awinnell Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 14:23

the girls all seem to travel on diplomatic papers,the handler and cyborg would have to be set free and returned to the Italian Embassy,once their identities were made known

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 14:26

ChaosKin640 wrote:The agency would be more concerned about securing their assest (the cyborg), as opposed to whatever repricusions came of killing American social workers. Whatever needs to be done to maintain operational security would be done.

But, let's for the sake of argument, that it is a wost-case scenario, and they can't silence the parties involved before word got out. In that case, Minister Petris would very quickly get in touch with her American counterpart to have the entire matter swept under the rug. Remember, the American government is at least partially aware of the SWA's true mandate, as per the technology trade that happened between them, mentioned in ch.59 of the manga.

On an unrelated note, I see that you're new to the forum. You should head over to the introduction threat to post some sort of formal greeting.

Yeah, the reason I chose California is that Petris can't act THAT quickly, especially since a state is dealing with this, not the feds and that Governor Jerry Brown and State Attorney General Kamala Harris would be very much inclined to expose the whole thing to the public. Alameda County was chosen because Berkeley is one of the most liberal cities in the U.S, and also one of the most open in city government- Alameda County Department of Children and Family Services is staffed by very left-wing people who would definitely leak this to the media, and the local media would ask lots of questions if something went wrong with the social services operation. You can speculate on two scenarios: one in which they sweep the entire thing under the rug (but how?) and one where the governor exposes the whole thing to the public.

Also, thanks for welcoming me! Smile

Awinnell wrote:the girls all seem to travel on diplomatic papers,the handler and cyborg would have to be set free and returned to the Italian Embassy,once their identities were made known

Yeah, I was thinking about this, too. But I believe that California state law allows detention of diplomats if they commit human rights abuses such as child abuse. It might be unconstitutional for a state to interfere in diplomatic affairs, but the liberal Democrats in charge of the state would fight any attempt by the feds to stop the state investigation, especially after the girl gets examined by doctors and is revealed to be a cyborg.

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 14:34

Puget Sound wrote:What if one of the girls, while on a mission abroad in Berkeley, California, is mistreated by her handler in a way that the Alameda Department of Children & Family Services gets wind of it. Due to , the handler is unable to talk/shoot his way out, so the girl is picked up by social workers. Due to some injury, they take her to a hospital where it is discovered that the girl is a cyborg. A raid upon the hotel room of the handler reveals the true purpose of the Italian Social Welfare Agency. The social workers immediately send proof to the California Highway Patrol and the State Attorney General's office, who are completely shocked. They tell Governor Jerry Brown, who holds a press conference to reveal this to the news media. What happens now?

2 Words: Diplomatic Immunity.
The State Department will be on the Gov's ass, he would need handrails the next time he goes to the bathroom and hover above the bowl because he would have no ass to sit down on.

The moment the Social services department and/or the police, the handler has the right to 1 free phone call. That phone call will invoke hell on earth as the Italian Embassy gets on Obama's ass about California capturing Italian Agents. Meanwhile, Jean Croce arrives to various offices and retrieves his people, including the cyborg, Diplomatic Immunity will be the only two worlds he says as he shows Italian Government Agent ID to those in question. Soon after that, there will be a mass firing of people involved and anyone associated with them.

Once the State Dept. gets involved, people are going to be waking up underneath the San Francisco Bridge not know who they are of how they got there but to do understand that they like being there.

But the problem is horrific to anyone holding the cyborg. The cyborg is programmed to escape and return to the handler or to base when it cant find the handler. In Solution's Resolution, Jose and Henrietta were arrested while on a mission in New York City. Besides breaking various handgun and firearms laws, they were arrested. Jose was questioned all night but Henrietta managed to escape, killing a couple of officers and innocent bystanders along the way. She made it to the base within 12 hours of getting caught. Jean got Jose out on "Diplomatic Immunity" and has their weapons returned.

The team would have back up in case this were to happen, including Dr. Bianchi and the medical staff to intercept injured cyborgs enroute to the hospitals. Such a scenario is not possible. Not without a massive Italian and Federal government interception of the facts.

-Enuff Said!

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 14:59

Puget Sound wrote:Yeah, the reason I chose California is that Petris can't act THAT quickly...

Are you joking?!!
Both the Italian Government and the Federal Government will pounce of California before 'Jerry Brown' can answer his phone and say "Hello!" There will be black vans parked in front of the affected offices before the minute hand on the clock strikes 12! And Men in sunglasses and suits will fill these offices that people will think that the Men's Warehouse has a 99.9% off sale!

The government, both Italy's and the USA Federal branch action will be swift and decisive! Least to say, Jean walking in with proper creditals and telling them "Diplomatic Immunity" will be having heads rolling! One does not mess with the State Dept.

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 15:17

ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:Yeah, the reason I chose California is that Petris can't act THAT quickly...
Are you joking?!!
Both the Italian Government and the Federal Government will pounce of California before 'Jerry Brown' can answer his phone and say "Hello!" There will be black vans parked in front of the affected offices before the minute hand on the clock strikes 12! And Men in sunglasses and suits will fill these offices that people will think that the Men's Warehouse has a 99.9% off sale!

The government, both Italy's and the USA Federal branch action will be swift and decisive! Least to say, Jean walking in with proper creditals and telling them "Diplomatic Immunity" will be having heads rolling! One does not mess with the State Dept.

The reason I set it in Berkeley is that people there would definitely notice the feds suddenly pouncing into local affairs. There would be extensive media coverage and way too many leaks for people to not figure out something is up. President Obama comes under massive fire from human rights organizations and child welfare organizations for using diplomatic immunity to cover up what appears to be a case of child abuse. Both Democrats and Republicans condemn the president, with liberals going for human rights and Tea Partiers protesting the violation of states' rights.

Note that I said that the girl is unconscious or something else so that the authorities don't have to deal with her. And killing cops WILL get you high to the FBI's list of criminals they must catch now; not to mention that the local police would do everything in their power to get the murderers.

Mass firings in California state government would cause massive backlash from both the public and the unions. I don't think Governor Brown wants to piss off a major part of his base... Besides, the media would smell the political reasons behind any firings and immediately call foul.

But let's just say that the worse-case scenario happens and Governor Brown exposes the entire program to the world. What happens then?

by Awinnell Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 15:21

if the perpetrators have diplomatic immunity the most that could be done to them regardless of the severity of the crime is a protest to the government in question and ejection of the ambassador and his staff,so yeah they could kill cops and walk away from it

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 15:23

Awinnell wrote:if the perpetrators have diplomatic immunity the most that could be done to them regardless of the severity of the crime is a protest to the government in question and ejection of the ambassador and his staff,so yeah they could kill cops and walk away from it

I believe that California state law allows detention of diplomats if they commit human rights abuses such as child abuse. It might be unconstitutional for a state to interfere in diplomatic affairs, but the Democrats in charge of the state would fight any attempt by the feds to stop the state investigation, especially after the girl gets examined by doctors and is revealed to be a cyborg.

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 15:31

Puget Sound wrote:
Awinnell wrote:if the perpetrators have diplomatic immunity the most that could be done to them regardless of the severity of the crime is a protest to the government in question and ejection of the ambassador and his staff,so yeah they could kill cops and walk away from it

I believe that California state law allows detention of diplomats if they commit human rights abuses such as child abuse. It might be unconstitutional for a state to interfere in diplomatic affairs, but the Democrats in charge of the state would fight any attempt by the feds to stop the state investigation, especially after the girl gets examined by doctors and is revealed to be a cyborg.

1) Such laws only detain the person until one of his kind comes to pick him up, irregardless of what crimes he may have committed.
2)Such Democrats will find themselves in jail faster than they can open their mouths and protest the actions being taken. As for their rights, they lost their rights at this point.

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 15:35

ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:
Awinnell wrote:if the perpetrators have diplomatic immunity the most that could be done to them regardless of the severity of the crime is a protest to the government in question and ejection of the ambassador and his staff,so yeah they could kill cops and walk away from it

I believe that California state law allows detention of diplomats if they commit human rights abuses such as child abuse. It might be unconstitutional for a state to interfere in diplomatic affairs, but the Democrats in charge of the state would fight any attempt by the feds to stop the state investigation, especially after the girl gets examined by doctors and is revealed to be a cyborg.
1) Such laws only detain the person until one of his kind comes to pick him up, irregardless of what crimes he may have committed.
2)Such Democrats will find themselves in jail faster than they can open their mouths and protest the actions being taken. As for their rights, they lost their rights at this point.

I'm relatively sure it's normal detention with no release until a court says so...

For one thing, that would be illegal under the Constitution and would be ruled so by the Supreme Court. Secondly, that would mean massive political protests- the Democrats just lost their liberal and left-leaning libertarian wings, and the Republicans just lost the Tea Party and their libertarian wing. There's no way Obama would authorize anything like that.

Okay, let's say the worse-case scenario happens and Brown reveals the whole affair to the public. What happens?

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 15:52

Puget Sound wrote:
ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:Yeah, the reason I chose California is that Petris can't act THAT quickly...
Are you joking?!!
Both the Italian Government and the Federal Government will pounce of California before 'Jerry Brown' can answer his phone and say "Hello!" There will be black vans parked in front of the affected offices before the minute hand on the clock strikes 12! And Men in sunglasses and suits will fill these offices that people will think that the Men's Warehouse has a 99.9% off sale!

The government, both Italy's and the USA Federal branch action will be swift and decisive! Least to say, Jean walking in with proper creditals and telling them "Diplomatic Immunity" will be having heads rolling! One does not mess with the State Dept.

The reason I set it in Berkeley is that people there would definitely notice the feds suddenly pouncing into local affairs. There would be extensive media coverage and way too many leaks for people to not figure out something is up. President Obama comes under massive fire from human rights organizations and child welfare organizations for using diplomatic immunity to cover up what appears to be a case of child abuse. Both Democrats and Republicans condemn the president, with liberals going for human rights and Tea Partiers protesting the violation of states' rights.

Note that I said that the girl is unconscious or something else so that the authorities don't have to deal with her. And killing cops WILL get you high to the FBI's list of criminals they must catch now; not to mention that the local police would do everything in their power to get the murderers.

Mass firings in California state government would cause massive backlash from both the public and the unions. I don't think Governor Brown wants to piss off a major part of his base... Besides, the media would smell the political reasons behind any firings and immediately call foul.

But let's just say that the worse-case scenario happens and Governor Brown exposes the entire program to the world. What happens then?

You obvious do not know what you are talking about. No one in the state government is above the federal government. There are FBI agents walking all over Berkley and no body knows about them until they spring into action. Out of every 100 or so people, there are at least 1 - 2 agents, and a team of 5 somewhere that the general public do not know about. Not just FBI, but add CIA, AFT, NSTB, the SS (Secret Service) and many others. Like I said, there will be so many suits coming out of everywhere, people are going to think that someone was giving suits away from the back of a van!

Such a worst case scenario will not happen as it can not happen. Assassinations of individuals by governments occur all the time, and they are hidden as another events. Furthermore there is cooperation between the governments involved. There is no IFs or BUTs, and definitely no MAYBEs. Things will happen so fast, the state government will not know what happened until after the fact when its printed on some history book 20 years later. Those fired will have a lovely later of "thanks but you been laid off" from Jerry Brown. The cover up will be so deep that the Berkley Sewer system wont be able to handle it. All contingencies will be covered, especially the media.

I'm telling you as a retired agent of an agency I will never say, you do not know what is going on, and such a scenario as you stated can not, will not happen. People will be fired because of it, people will be killed when it happens. And the SWA will be there, complete with a medical staff to intercept and repair a wounded cyborg. As far as I am concerned, Jerry Brown can go kiss my ass! And he can post that on his newspapers front page. People dont remember how f'ed up he ran California the last time he was there in the '70s

by Awinnell Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:03

detention of Diplomats is tricky at best,the only way for it to happen is if the Diplomats country waives his immunity,whilst the State could investigate the alleged abuse they cannot detain a diplomat except in regard of violation of local vehicular law and only if he is driving a non embassy vehicle

The Romanian chargé d'affaires in Singapore, Silviu Ionescu, was allegedly behind a drunk-driving hit-and-run accident in December 2009 that resulted in the death of a 30 year old man and seriously injured two others. He left Singapore for Romania three days after the accident. The Romanian foreign ministry suspended Ionescu from his post

A coroner's inquiry in Singapore, which included testimony by the Romanian embassy driver, concluded with the coroner holding Ionescu solely responsible for the accident. An Interpol Red Notice was subsequently issued for his arrest and possible extradition [1] notwithstanding the fact that Romania had not waived his diplomatic immunity and had commenced criminal proceedings against him in Romania.
The Singapore government argued that by reason of Article 39(2) of the Vienna Convention, Ionescu was no longer protected by diplomatic immunity

The deputy ambassador of the Republic of Georgia to the United States, Gueorgui Makharadze, caused an accident in January 1997 that injured four people and killed a sixteen-year-old girl.

He was found to have a blood-alcohol level of 0.15%, but was released from custody because he was a diplomat
.
The U.S. government asked the Georgian government to waive his immunity, which they did and Makharadze was tried and convicted of manslaughter by the U.S. and sentenced to seven to twenty-one years in prison. However after serving three years of his sentence, he was returned to his home country where he spent two more years in jail before being paroled.

An American Marine serving his embassy in Bucharest, Romania, collided with a taxi and killed the popular Romanian musician Teo Peter on December 3, 2004.
Christopher Van Goethem, allegedly drunk, did not obey a traffic signal to stop, which resulted in the collision of his Ford Expedition with the taxi the rock star was travelling in.

Van Goethem's blood alcohol content was estimated at 0.09% from a breathalyser test, but he refused to give a blood sample for further testing and left for Germany before charges could be filed in Romania.

The Romanian government requested the American government lift his immunity, which it has refused to do. In a court-martial, he was acquitted of manslaughter and adultery but was convicted of obstruction of justice and making false statements.

A Russian diplomat accredited to Ottawa, Canada, drove his car into two pedestrians on a quiet residential street in January 2001, killing one and seriously injuring the other.

Andrei Knyazev had previously been stopped by Ottawa police on two separate occasions on suspicion of impaired driving. The Canadian government requested that Russia waive the diplomat's immunity, although this request was refused. Knyazev was subsequently prosecuted in Russia for involuntary manslaughter, and sentenced to four years in prison. His appeal of the sentence was denied and he served time in a penal colony.

An American diplomat, Consul General Douglas Kent, stationed in Vladivostok, Russia, was involved in a car accident on October 27, 1998, that left a young man, Alexander Kashin, crippled. Kent was not prosecuted in a U.S. court. Under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963, diplomatic immunity does not apply to civil actions relating to vehicular accidents. However, on 10 August 2006, a U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that since he was using his own vehicle for consular purposes, Kent may not be sued civilly

The Burmese ambassador in Sri Lanka in 1979 shot his wife as she got out of the car after seeing a player in a night-club band of whom she was enamoured. As recalled by Gerald Hensley, then Vice-Dean of the Diplomatic Corps in Sri Lanka; Hensley was based in Singapore and accredited from New Zealand as High Commissioner to Sri Lanka as well:

The next morning the neighbours in Cinnamon Gardens (Colombo) were surprised to see the ambassador stacking wood on the back lawn and, connoisseurs of cremation, quickly grasped that he was building a pyre.
When the police were called the ambassador opened the metal front gates just enough to say that there was no trouble and to remind them that his house was Burmese territory.
Then he went back to work. The houses around his long back garden were now alive with fascinated spectators as he emerged with the body of his wife, placed it on the pyre and set it alight.

He was well connected at home but after an awkward interval he was recalled.

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:05

ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:
ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:Yeah, the reason I chose California is that Petris can't act THAT quickly...
Are you joking?!!
Both the Italian Government and the Federal Government will pounce of California before 'Jerry Brown' can answer his phone and say "Hello!" There will be black vans parked in front of the affected offices before the minute hand on the clock strikes 12! And Men in sunglasses and suits will fill these offices that people will think that the Men's Warehouse has a 99.9% off sale!

The government, both Italy's and the USA Federal branch action will be swift and decisive! Least to say, Jean walking in with proper creditals and telling them "Diplomatic Immunity" will be having heads rolling! One does not mess with the State Dept.

The reason I set it in Berkeley is that people there would definitely notice the feds suddenly pouncing into local affairs. There would be extensive media coverage and way too many leaks for people to not figure out something is up. President Obama comes under massive fire from human rights organizations and child welfare organizations for using diplomatic immunity to cover up what appears to be a case of child abuse. Both Democrats and Republicans condemn the president, with liberals going for human rights and Tea Partiers protesting the violation of states' rights.

Note that I said that the girl is unconscious or something else so that the authorities don't have to deal with her. And killing cops WILL get you high to the FBI's list of criminals they must catch now; not to mention that the local police would do everything in their power to get the murderers.

Mass firings in California state government would cause massive backlash from both the public and the unions. I don't think Governor Brown wants to piss off a major part of his base... Besides, the media would smell the political reasons behind any firings and immediately call foul.

But let's just say that the worse-case scenario happens and Governor Brown exposes the entire program to the world. What happens then?

You obvious do not know what you are talking about. No one in the state government is above the federal government. There are FBI agents walking all over Berkley and no body knows about them until they spring into action. Out of every 100 or so people, there are at least 1 - 2 agents, and a team of 5 somewhere that the general public do not know about. Not just FBI, but add CIA, AFT, NSTB, the SS (Secret Service) and many others. Like I said, there will be so many suits coming out of everywhere, people are going to think that someone was giving suits away from the back of a van!

Such a worst case scenario will not happen as it can not happen. Assassinations of individuals by governments occur all the time, and they are hidden as another events. Furthermore there is cooperation between the governments involved. There is no IFs or BUTs, and definitely no MAYBEs. Things will happen so fast, the state government will not know what happened until after the fact when its printed on some history book 20 years later. Those fired will have a lovely later of "thanks but you been laid off" from Jerry Brown. The cover up will be so deep that the Berkley Sewer system wont be able to handle it. All contingencies will be covered, especially the media.

I'm telling you as a retired agent of an agency I will never say, you do not know what is going on, and such a scenario as you stated can not, will not happen. People will be fired because of it, people will be killed when it happens. And the SWA will be there, complete with a medical staff to intercept and repair a wounded cyborg. As far as I am concerned, Jerry Brown can go kiss my ass! And he can post that on his newspapers front page. People dont remember how f'ed up he ran California the last time he was there in the '70s

Actually I do know what I'm talking about. If there were really that many agents, 9/11 and many other things would have been stopped dead in their tracks. Besides, 2 out of every 100 people would equal the military draft rate during WORLD WAR 2. There simply wouldn't been enough resources to keep that many people on the payroll. Even East Germany, one of the most notorious surveillance regimes, didn't have that many agents undercover. The evidence shows that our intelligence community regularly fights each other; in fact, this was one of the things that led to intelligence showing that 9/11 was going to happen soon being ignored.

And assassinations usually only work if they are carried out in unstable countries. Too many people would see in stable democratic countries.

There's a federalism clause in the Constitution. Child abuse definitely falls under the states' aegis. The Supreme Court would rule any attempted force-firing of state government employees by the federal government as unconstitutional, and the media would be very suspicious of any mass firings. The unions would have a field day with that, too. And WikiLeaks, among MANY other things, proves that the federal government is very leaky.

And Brown turned the state around from a deficit into a big budget surplus. It was only after Proposition 13 passed and wrecked any ability for the states and local governments to save money for bad times when things started getting bad.

Okay, let's say the worse-case scenario happens and Brown reveals the whole affair to the public. What happens?

by **Nachtsider** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:08

The SWA simply detonates the nukes they planted there several years beforehand.

Problem solved.

by Awinnell Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:09

even if it did happen,people see stuff on tv all the time that they don't believe even with proof,two days after it was announced most people either would have forgotten it or wouldn't care,the US government would likely make an offer to the Italian government to help fund the project in return for technology and data,

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:11

Puget Sound wrote:
ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:
Awinnell wrote:if the perpetrators have diplomatic immunity the most that could be done to them regardless of the severity of the crime is a protest to the government in question and ejection of the ambassador and his staff,so yeah they could kill cops and walk away from it

I believe that California state law allows detention of diplomats if they commit human rights abuses such as child abuse. It might be unconstitutional for a state to interfere in diplomatic affairs, but the Democrats in charge of the state would fight any attempt by the feds to stop the state investigation, especially after the girl gets examined by doctors and is revealed to be a cyborg.
1) Such laws only detain the person until one of his kind comes to pick him up, irregardless of what crimes he may have committed.
2)Such Democrats will find themselves in jail faster than they can open their mouths and protest the actions being taken. As for their rights, they lost their rights at this point.

I'm relatively sure it's normal detention with no release until a court says so...

For one thing, that would be illegal under the Constitution and would be ruled so by the Supreme Court. Secondly, that would mean massive political protests- the Democrats just lost their liberal and left-leaning libertarian wings, and the Republicans just lost the Tea Party and their libertarian wing. There's no way Obama would authorize anything like that.

Okay, let's say the worse-case scenario happens and Brown reveals the whole affair to the public. What happens?

You're relatively sure, and you're wrong. Its a normal detention with no release until a court say so and you're wrong. There is no way Obama would authorize that, and you're wrong. Obama is quite aware of the trade of information and agents on both sides of the fence; thus if he does not protect Italian Agents here, Italy wont protect US agents there, and perhaps arrest them and put them on espionage charges. This is something that the US Government dont want. People getting fired is minor to what the mess up of such people in detaining such agents.

Over here in NYC in the 1980s, a Russian Embassy worker killed his date, He was held for 24 hours and released. No court saw him. He went back to Russia. In another case, in NYC (again) In the 1990s An Arabian Ambassador assistant killed his wife and daughter, because the daughter was dating a black kid from school. The kid the girl was dating- he was killed in a drive by! Too coincidental for me! The assistant was not arrested and only questioned by the police. He even admitted to the crime! Was he arrested? NO!!! The NYPD tried to arrest them, they were either fired or demoted, and no questions were asked about it. Another case in 2005, A Russian (those bastards get away with a a lot!), a driver for the Ambassador stepped out of the car with diplomatic plates and beaten the shit out of a police officer with a tire iron for giving him a parking ticket. The officer was reprimanded and the ticket forgotten. And these were low level people. Imagine what is done with a high level agent?

You just do not know what is done in the name of Diplomacy, and what they get away with. "Diplomatic Immunity" is a powerful set of words as it cripples entire agencies, forces people from not doing their work, and it makes files from locked file cabinets disappear.

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:15

Nachtsider wrote:The SWA simply detonates the nukes they planted there several years beforehand.

Problem solved.

Nuclear terrorism of that sort is very unlikely (see Physics For Future Presidents- http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/physics10/pffp.html ). Besides, how would you know where to plant the bombs in advance?

Awinnell wrote:even if it did happen,people see stuff on tv all the time that they don't believe even with proof,two days after it was announced most people either would have forgotten it or wouldn't care,the US government would likely make an offer to the Italian government to help fund the project in return for technology and data,

They would care, like they did with Abu Ghraib and all sorts of other things. And this would be verified by many medical experts, with all the information being freely available to the public.

by **Nachtsider** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:18

Come now. I'm sure you knew I was being facetious.

The way I see it, the American President is fully aware of what the SWA are up to, and immediately will put the kbosh on any attempt at exposing them.

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:19

ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:
ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:
Awinnell wrote:if the perpetrators have diplomatic immunity the most that could be done to them regardless of the severity of the crime is a protest to the government in question and ejection of the ambassador and his staff,so yeah they could kill cops and walk away from it

I believe that California state law allows detention of diplomats if they commit human rights abuses such as child abuse. It might be unconstitutional for a state to interfere in diplomatic affairs, but the Democrats in charge of the state would fight any attempt by the feds to stop the state investigation, especially after the girl gets examined by doctors and is revealed to be a cyborg.
1) Such laws only detain the person until one of his kind comes to pick him up, irregardless of what crimes he may have committed.
2)Such Democrats will find themselves in jail faster than they can open their mouths and protest the actions being taken. As for their rights, they lost their rights at this point.

I'm relatively sure it's normal detention with no release until a court says so...

For one thing, that would be illegal under the Constitution and would be ruled so by the Supreme Court. Secondly, that would mean massive political protests- the Democrats just lost their liberal and left-leaning libertarian wings, and the Republicans just lost the Tea Party and their libertarian wing. There's no way Obama would authorize anything like that.

Okay, let's say the worse-case scenario happens and Brown reveals the whole affair to the public. What happens?
You're relatively sure, and you're wrong. Its a normal detention with no release until a court say so and you're wrong. There is no way Obama would authorize that, and you're wrong. Obama is quite aware of the trade of information and agents on both sides of the fence; thus if he does not protect Italian Agents here, Italy wont protect US agents there, and perhaps arrest them and put them on espionage charges. This is something that the US Government dont want. People getting fired is minor to what the mess up of such people in detaining such agents.

Over here in NYC in the 1980s, a Russian Embassy worker killed his date, He was held for 24 hours and released. No court saw him. He went back to Russia. In another case, in NYC (again) In the 1990s An Arabian Ambassador assistant killed his wife and daughter, because the daughter was dating a black kid from school. The kid the girl was dating- he was killed in a drive by! Too coincidental for me! The assistant was not arrested and only questioned by the police. He even admitted to the crime! Was he arrested? NO!!! The NYPD tried to arrest them, they were either fired or demoted, and no questions were asked about it. Another case in 2005, A Russian (those bastards get away with a a lot!), a driver for the Ambassador stepped out of the car with diplomatic plates and beaten the shit out of a police officer with a tire iron for giving him a parking ticket. The officer was reprimanded and the ticket forgotten. And these were low level people. Imagine what is done with a high level agent?

You just do not know what is done in the name of Diplomacy, and what they get away with. "Diplomatic Immunity" is a powerful set of words as it cripples entire agencies, forces people from not doing their work, and it makes files from locked file cabinets disappear.

Actually, the media reports on that, and diplomats accused of doing actual crime usually get their diplomatic immunity revoked, according to a pretty high up State Department friend I have. And there are MANY politicians, especially in the Tea Party and the left-wing of the Democrats who would latch on to such an incident and use it to hammer the government (and already have).

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:21

Nachtsider wrote:Come now. I'm sure you knew I was being facetious.

The way I see it, the American President is fully aware of what the SWA are up to, and immediately will put the kbosh on any attempt at exposing them.

You can't in this age of wide open media. See WikiLeaks and many, many other incidents. And why would Obama support an agency illegal under European Union and international law running around and telling him what to do? The groups that fight have no relevance to the U.S at all. In fact, they could help the U.S as they are far-right-wing and would probably be sympathetic to U.S concerns.

by **Nachtsider** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:24

You honestly think Padania are the only group they fight?

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:28

Puget Sound wrote:Actually I do know what I'm talking about. If there were really that many agents, 9/11 and many other things would have been stopped dead in their tracks. Besides, 2 out of every 100 people would equal the military draft rate during WORLD WAR 2. There simply wouldn't been enough resources to keep that many people on the payroll. Even East Germany, one of the most notorious surveillance regimes, didn't have that many agents undercover. The evidence shows that our intelligence community regularly fights each other; in fact, this was one of the things that led to intelligence showing that 9/11 was going to happen soon being ignored.

And assassinations usually only work if they are carried out in unstable countries. Too many people would see in stable democratic countries.

There's a federalism clause in the Constitution. Child abuse definitely falls under the states' aegis. The Supreme Court would rule any attempted force-firing of state government employees by the federal government as unconstitutional, and the media would be very suspicious of any mass firings. The unions would have a field day with that, too. And WikiLeaks, among MANY other things, proves that the federal government is very leaky.

And Brown turned the state around from a deficit into a big budget surplus. It was only after Proposition 13 passed and wrecked any ability for the states and local governments to save money for bad times when things started getting bad.

Okay, let's say the worse-case scenario happens and Brown reveals the whole affair to the public. What happens?

Bub, dont you dare talk about 9/11. I was there and I did what I had to do. I seen friends die then and years later from exposure. Say a another word about 9/11 and I'll Ban you permanently.

With 320million people in the USA, about 3.2million make up its staff from the military and all other agencies, along with other private agencies that works with them. This is actually less than the real number of federal workers out there in all federal agencies through out the USA and I'm not counting the military.

Things happen around that you can not see. Things happen without your knowledge or awareness. That poor senator who was almost assassinated, you know how many cameras, cellphones and even the media was there recording the event? You know that everyone one of those devices were confiscated with the exception registered journalists and even they were told not to post the images. Government Registered Photo-Journalist have been around since the Civil war and when things like this happen, only they are allowed to record what happens and everyone else suffers. The confiscated equipment was returned, with the events they recorded erased. If it happens to you, you going to call your lawyer and demand satisfaction? He'll laugh at you first of all. He'll drop you off his clients list second.

People forget that the price of freedom is not free. It is a high price that we pay everyday.

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:30

Puget Sound wrote:
Nachtsider wrote:Come now. I'm sure you knew I was being facetious.

The way I see it, the American President is fully aware of what the SWA are up to, and immediately will put the kbosh on any attempt at exposing them.

You can't in this age of wide open media. See WikiLeaks and many, many other incidents. And why would Obama support an agency illegal under European Union and international law running around and telling him what to do? The groups that fight have no relevance to the U.S at all. In fact, they could help the U.S as they are far-right-wing and would probably be sympathetic to U.S concerns.

Right Wing, Left Wing mentality is for the birds.
Start flapping away!

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:30

Nachtsider wrote:You honestly think Padania are the only group they fight?

All we see is Padania and a bunch of political targets, from what I can remember (need to rewatch the series).

And besides, normal counterterrorism efforts with good intel would be much better at this then what happens in the show. The show is good, but the methods used would provoke a huge public backlash WHEN exposed, and aren't actually that effective in real life, anyone. Italy had a huge left-wing terrorist problem in the 70s and they solved it through good old-fashioned counter-terrorism units and good intel work.

by Awinnell Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:32

no, politicians care about how people perceive them,and how it affects their majority,not actual events
Abu Ghraib was seen as bad because it cast a bad light on US troops at home and by extension the US government,
but at the same time Internationally Guantanamo bay was treated as abuse of prisoners, but is still open as the majority at home in the US agree to it

by **Nachtsider** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:33

They went after the Mafia, too. The Cosa Nostra have American ties; it's not unreasonable to conceive a joint SWA-American anti-Mafia operation having taken place at some point in time.

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:34

Puget Sound wrote:
Nachtsider wrote:You honestly think Padania are the only group they fight?

All we see is Padania and a bunch of political targets, from what I can remember (need to rewatch the series).

And besides, normal counterterrorism efforts with good intel would be much better at this then what happens in the show. The show is good, but the methods used would provoke a huge public backlash WHEN exposed, and aren't actually that effective in real life, anyone. Italy had a huge left-wing terrorist problem in the 70s and they solved it through good old-fashioned counter-terrorism units and good intel work.

And at what body count?

As for Padania, Dante is not Padania. He and his men are mercs, in it for the money that Christiano is providing.

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:38

ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:Actually I do know what I'm talking about. If there were really that many agents, 9/11 and many other things would have been stopped dead in their tracks. Besides, 2 out of every 100 people would equal the military draft rate during WORLD WAR 2. There simply wouldn't been enough resources to keep that many people on the payroll. Even East Germany, one of the most notorious surveillance regimes, didn't have that many agents undercover. The evidence shows that our intelligence community regularly fights each other; in fact, this was one of the things that led to intelligence showing that 9/11 was going to happen soon being ignored.

And assassinations usually only work if they are carried out in unstable countries. Too many people would see in stable democratic countries.

There's a federalism clause in the Constitution. Child abuse definitely falls under the states' aegis. The Supreme Court would rule any attempted force-firing of state government employees by the federal government as unconstitutional, and the media would be very suspicious of any mass firings. The unions would have a field day with that, too. And WikiLeaks, among MANY other things, proves that the federal government is very leaky.

And Brown turned the state around from a deficit into a big budget surplus. It was only after Proposition 13 passed and wrecked any ability for the states and local governments to save money for bad times when things started getting bad.

Okay, let's say the worse-case scenario happens and Brown reveals the whole affair to the public. What happens?
Bub, dont you dare talk about 9/11. I was there and I did what I had to do. I seen friends die then and years later from exposure. Say a another word about 9/11 and I'll Ban you permanently.

With 320million people in the USA, about 3.2million make up its staff from the military and all other agencies, along with other private agencies that works with them. This is actually less than the real number of federal workers out there in all federal agencies through out the USA and I'm not counting the military.

Things happen around that you can not see. Things happen without your knowledge or awareness. That poor senator who was almost assassinated, you know how many cameras, cellphones and even the media was there recording the event? You know that everyone one of those devices were confiscated with the exception registered journalists and even they were told not to post the images. Government Registered Photo-Journalist have been around since the Civil war and when things like this happen, only they are allowed to record what happens and everyone else suffers. The confiscated equipment was returned, with the events they recorded erased. If it happens to you, you going to call your lawyer and demand satisfaction? He'll laugh at you first of all. He'll drop you off his clients list second.

People forget that the price of freedom is not free. It is a high price that we pay everyday.

I was only using 9/11 as an example.

Much of that 3.2 million is just regular enlisted/officers or civilian bureaucracy. And most civilian federal workers are bureaucrats, not police officers or FBI agents.

Um, government-registered journalists are only registered so that they can go into federal buildings for press conferences or ride along with military units and such. And photographers have hidden backup equipment for this kind of thing. Journalists WILL make a big deal about anything like this that happens, and so does the media.

Yes, we pay it through being informed and through encouraging open government so that well-meaning people don't go way too far and mess up stuff. We also pay it through having a good military, which, by the way, tries at least somewhat to be somewhat open to the public. Do you know why WikiLeaks' revulations about military mishaps in Iraq and Afghanistan weren't so surprising to most people? Because the military was honest about it beforehand.

Editorial on this: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/08/02/1286072/refreshing-military-candor-about.html

Whatever problems the U.S. Army may have, evasiveness isn’t among them. This is one straight-talking organization.

Its newly released study on the psychological health of its soldiers, “Health Promotion, Risk Reduction, and Suicide Prevention,” is brutally honest about a growing problem in the ranks.

The rate of suicide, drug dependence and high-risk behavior among soldiers has been pushing upward in recent years, the Army acknowledged.

The intuitive conclusion is that young men and women are snapping under the pressure of combat, but that appears to be only part of the problem – and probably the smaller part. The authors reported that only 21 percent of the soldiers who committed suicide had been deployed to combat zones more than once. The rest had been deployed only one time or not at all.

The Army pointed the finger right at itself. Some commanders – pressed to prepare their units for war – weren’t paying enough attention to their soldiers’ mental health. Standards had been lowered to meet recruiting goals. More recruits were entering the service with such baggage as drug abuse and criminal records. Fewer soldiers were being kicked out for misconduct.

Those are all command problems, though they appear largely driven by two wars that weren’t of the Army’s own making.

The first step toward a cure is an accurate diagnosis. The report suggests that today’s Army has a healthy capacity for open self-criticism, which bodes well for solutions.

There’s a connection here to the public’s unperturbed “So what else is new?” response to the 91,000 classified war documents recently posted on WikiLeaks.

Those reports – many of them raw battlefield dispatches – point to tactical errors, serious setbacks, Taliban successes and treacherous Pakistani “allies.” But Army commanders have been bluntly speaking of these problems all along. There were few surprises, hence no scandal. If anything, the leak underscored the military’s general candor and honesty about the war.

One can’t help but compare that honesty to the pathological deceit, collusion and fraud that have been exposed in the corporate cultures of some of America’s largest banks, securities firms and mortgage companies in the last couple of years.

An organization in which lying at the top is the norm – WaMu comes to mind – will rot from the inside out. An organization with an ethic of relentless honesty can be self-healing.

The Army’s officer corps undoubtedly has its share of people who will bend the truth to cover their backsides, but they don’t seem to be running the show.

If only such traditional ideals as “honor” and “duty” were as prevalent on Wall Street as they appear to be in the military.

Read more: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/08/02/1286072/refreshing-military-candor-about.html#ixzz1AwxG4crP

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:39

Awinnell wrote:no, politicians care about how people perceive them,and how it affects their majority,not actual events
Abu Ghraib was seen as bad because it cast a bad light on US troops at home and by extension the US government,
but at the same time Internationally Guantanamo bay was treated as abuse of prisoners, but is still open as the majority at home in the US agree to it

People didn't support the abuse at Gitmo. They just didn't want terrorists being housed in a prison in the mainland U.S.

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:41

Nachtsider wrote:They went after the Mafia, too. The Cosa Nostra have American ties; it's not unreasonable to conceive a joint SWA-American anti-Mafia operation having taken place at some point in time.

Why use kids when adults are more effective? Besides, the FBI wouldn't like the most of what would basically be child soldiers...

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:42

ElfenMagix wrote:
Puget Sound wrote:
Nachtsider wrote:You honestly think Padania are the only group they fight?

All we see is Padania and a bunch of political targets, from what I can remember (need to rewatch the series).

And besides, normal counterterrorism efforts with good intel would be much better at this then what happens in the show. The show is good, but the methods used would provoke a huge public backlash WHEN exposed, and aren't actually that effective in real life, anyone. Italy had a huge left-wing terrorist problem in the 70s and they solved it through good old-fashioned counter-terrorism units and good intel work.
And at what body count?

As for Padania, Dante is not Padania. He and his men are mercs, in it for the money that Christiano is providing.

The body count was pretty low for a counterterrorism effort of that scale.

And they were being paid by who?

by **Nachtsider** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:43

Surely you know these aren't just any kids? And surely you know the FBI hasn't always played it straight and narrow?

by Puget Sound Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:45

Nachtsider wrote:Surely you know these aren't just any kids? And surely you know the FBI hasn't always played it straight and narrow?

Adults are better then kids. They are smarter and can make more informed judgments on the situation. And today's FBI is a far different agency then the one under Hoover...

by **Nachtsider** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 16:55

I think this thread will go nowhere fast until we tell Puget Sound what he wants to hear.

The SWA are publicly, internationally exposed. Church bells ring of their own accord, holy statues weep tears of blood, rapine and massacre occur in the streets, and Italy literally implodes under the moral and political backlash, collapsing beneath the Earth's crust, never to be seen again by god or man.

Happy?

by **ElfenMagix** Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 18:05

He wont be happy with that answer.
Like those of the Flat Earth Society, and Hollow Earth Believers, you cannot change a man set wrong in his ways. You have to accept him as he is no matter how f'ed up in his views he might be. Only in death will he believe to be proven wrong.

Puget Sound, get the books. The anime only covers to to V3 if that. We are here already on Volume 12 waiting on 13. Things happen since V3. Characters have been moved and replaced. Even the story plot has changed.

You, like much of American Society have gotten too soft on how to deal with terrorists. "OH, lets arrest them and question their motives. Let look at their beliefs and study their cultures!" While you do that his friends are setting up another 9/11 to happen. Since 9/11/01, how many terrorist actions have they tried and failed? Hundreds. Unfortunately these go unmentioned, which is how I prefer it. It, lets say, the truth of Flight TWA came out in that a terrorist used a LAW Missle to shoot it down, how would the public's reaction take it? Two Towel Head Wearing Idiots in a row boat in the middle of Jamaica bay taking down a jetliner with a shoulder mounted mini missile?

Programs like Mythbusters and Crash Lab have been put on the air to pacify the masses on "This cant be done!" Like the shooting through a car door with assorted weapons to show the car to be bullet proof; they used a cheap Cadilllac of the 80's era where most of the metal is replaced with thin aluminum and high powered rounds sent through it. But I know that my '72 Plymouth Satellite saved my ass in a gun fight with gang idiots by deflecting and stopping the rounds they shot at me! Or with the issue of the cement mixer with dry cement, using dynamite to clear the barrel? Its done all the time. They dont want people to know that you can get dynamite on the cheap if you work for a construction firm! These government funded programs are there to calm the public's beliefs in that they are in actual danger from 10,000 things and a hand full of idiots that are around them!

Dont get me wrong. I am a very kind and accepting individual. But when it comes to idiocy, excuses and disinformation, I have to go buck wild because I know better. Been there and done that. You need to open your eyes and stand up to see what is going on around you. Not take as the word of god what Wikileaks, Wikipedia, Youtube and other conspiracy theorists puts out on the net. You need to see everything around out at both sides before you can make an educated decision about it. Anything else is a onesided point of view.

by Guest Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 20:31

This is one time I'm glad that the forum members do not discuss things in person as I think we are getting close to teh where do I hide the body discussion. Of which I'm sure Elfen knows plenty. You started with an innocent idea Pudget but man you sure know how to piss off two of the premier members of the forum in less than a day. Impressive but stupid. Well I'm staying clear of this one Time to Sleep

by Danjo3 Fri 14 Jan 2011 - 2:46

Puget Sound wrote:What if one of the girls, while on a mission abroad in Berkeley, California, is mistreated by her handler in a way that the Alameda Department of Children & Family Services gets wind of it.

While Britney would never be mistreated by Biff, she does spend a lot of time in that neighborhood. Yes Indeed

by Sponsored content