Paul J. Adam wrote:

Gee, how long had they allowed him to live and operate from Iraq prior to
that? A period of some *years*...

Same as Brennan, Artt and Kirby in the US, in other words.

With the major difference of course that unlike the H-Block 4, Nidal spent no
time in any Iraqi prisons and there was no system working to hand him over to
any country that had indicted him. So I guess its not really like the H-Block 4
at all is it?

Okay, it is a change of subject: Brennan, Artt and Kirby weren't
*alleged* terrorists, they were *convicted* terrorists who ran to the US
after killing their way out of prison.

And what happened to them when their identity was discovered? They were
arrested and jailed and at least Artt is there to this day! Nidal didn't
illegally enter Iraq, he did so with the aid of the Iraqi government. Once in
Iraq he was given everything he needed to live and was sheltered from several
nations where he was sought on various charges. To compare the H-Block 4 to
Nidal is just plain ridiculous and insulting. What assistance were any of the 4
given to enter the U.S. from the U.S. government? Once discovered, how were
they treated as opposed to Nidal?

Is harbouring convicted terrorists a hostile act, or casus belli? Or
not?

Its a hostile act and what the H Block 4 went through cannot be considered
harboring...not even close. Amazing how a Brit demands the immediate
extradition of wanted UK terrorists, yet has an issue with the U.S. holding
onto a British subject wanted for terrorism by the U.S.

He allowed them residence and refused to extradite them, true: so he was
no worse than the US.

The U.S. allowed the H Block 4 residence *in prison* or at the least on
electronically monitored house arrest. Your comparison is ridiculous.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"