But no, apparently not, as the US says it has right to kidnap British citizens. The only funny thing about this is the potential fora beautiful recursive loop, as they kidnap a British citizen, and the UK kidnaps the criminals who committed a kidnapping in the UK, and those desperate felons who kidnapped US citizens are then kidnapped back, until one country or the other runs out of kidnappers to send abroad.
After all, it may be legal under US law, but the kidnapping's still a very serious crime in the UK, so whoever does it is fair game to be dragged back in front of a UK court, right? Or does the US not recognise the rights of other countries to act in the same way they do? It would be nice if the US agreed that their agents would be bound by the laws of their allies (such as the UK) while in territories governed by said allies, but that wouldn't really go with the themes of this Administration - it would admit that there are some times and places where US law is not the be all and end all of the law.
Of course, if other people do decide to take this decision as good and legal, the CIA might be in for an uncomfortable time - as might Donald Rumsfeld, what with war crimes charges hanging over his head. But as with so many US positions at the moment, this is clearly only intended to benefit the US, and no one else gets to use these rules against America - that would be wrong.
(Discovered via Warren Ellis' blog.)