OK, the World Court has ruled...

[MechAg94]

Were they "denied" access to their consulate or did they simply not ask and the consulate wasn't informed?  That is sort of a big difference.

[De Selby]

OK. Does anyone here believe that the Nuremburg tribunals had even a remote basis in any law? Bottom line is that the law is whatever those who enforce it want it to be.

No, that's clearly not what happened at Nuremburg-they did rely on conventions and customs of European international law that had been built up for a good 500 years before the end of World War II.

International law in modern form was going strong by the 1700's-nothing new there. 

And one of those conventions and customs was to hang the losers?

Nope, and that's not why the Nazis were hung either-punishment for war crimes and crimes against humanity, those are the particular conventions we're talking about.

[De Selby]

Uh, yeah, but if one country can deny people access to consular visits, so can other countries-and you therefore have no such rights when you travel abroad.  That's important for those of us who are American and travel abroad-you know, to not be tossed in the can without even being able to let the folks back home know what's happening.

Do you really believe that most countries actually abide by this?

Yes.

[RevDisk]

Uh, yeah, but if one country can deny people access to consular visits, so can other countries-and you therefore have no such rights when you travel abroad.  That's important for those of us who are American and travel abroad-you know, to not be tossed in the can without even being able to let the folks back home know what's happening.

Do you really believe that most countries actually abide by this?

Some do, some don't.  Always check the State Dept web site when visiting foreign countries.  Usually accurate info.

[wmenorr67]

Uh, yeah, but if one country can deny people access to consular visits, so can other countries-and you therefore have no such rights when you travel abroad.  That's important for those of us who are American and travel abroad-you know, to not be tossed in the can without even being able to let the folks back home know what's happening.

Do you really believe that most countries actually abide by this?

Yes.

Name them.

[De Selby]

Uh, yeah, but if one country can deny people access to consular visits, so can other countries-and you therefore have no such rights when you travel abroad.  That's important for those of us who are American and travel abroad-you know, to not be tossed in the can without even being able to let the folks back home know what's happening.

Do you really believe that most countries actually abide by this?

Yes.

Name them.

Sure.

Here's an overview of how it works:

http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_639.html

And states that participate in this treaty...here are all 171:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:VBra1LXbtVwJ:untreaty.un.org/ENGLISH/bible/englishinternetbible/partI/ChapterIII/treaty31.asp+Vienna+Convention+on+Consular+Relations+%2Bratification&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=15&gl=us

(Need to post google cache to get around the sign-in requirements-it's a long list)

[Iain]

Were they "denied" access to their consulate or did they simply not ask and the consulate wasn't informed?  That is sort of a big difference.

Is not being informed of your rights the same thing as having them denied?

Dunno, suppose Miranda comes in there somewhere. It's an interesting thought.

i's should have been dotted and t's should have been crossed though. Hassle later could easily have been prevented.