After four days of voting and 33 ballots, the nations
that have ratified the treaty establishing the new
International Criminal Court finished choosing 18
judges who will preside over cases of genocide, crimes
against humanity, and war crimes. The number of women
is unprecedented for an international court.

-------> snip <-------

The United States is vehemently opposed to the court, objecting to the possibility that Americans could be subject to its jurisdiction even if it is not a party to the pact. Washington argues that the court could be used for frivolous or politically motivated prosecutions, especially of American troops.

-------> snip <-------


Full Article (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?newslett=1&click_id=3&art_id=qw1044691920813B255&set_id=1)

It is quite interesting and I think it says a lot about our American arrogance so well known across the globe. Over 70 countries were supportive of the ICC, in fact many of those countries are run by questionable types of Governments, yet most realized the necessity of an international criminal court with sets of international laws for which all countries will be accounted for. Yet the US believes that US military, including US in blue-helmets should be exempted from such a court.
…The typical “above the law” US mentality!
:rolleyes:

I wouldn't sat it is 'typical' US arrogance. I believe the Bush administration believes that as the self-appointed policeman of the world, states might constantly try and bring charges against US troops. Stupid, I agree. However, not typical. The Clinton administration I believe supported it and would have signed it, but Bush rescinded that tacit US approval. However, there is a movement in the US pushing for US ratification of the ICC, the USAforICC organization. All US citizens can show their support for it below by sending an e-mail to your representatives.

http://www.usaforicc.org/

Critics, mostly European, of U.S. `unilateralism'' are having another conniption, this time over U.S. skepticism about the International Criminal Court. (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/printgw20020711.shtml)

The U.S. does have some founded fear in the court being used for political purposes. (Duh, it's politics)
Many nations have spoken against or for another nation/people in order to make gains for themselves. We need not look further than the French.

Given the number of war criminals the US is harboring, I can understand why the Bush administration withdrew from the ICC.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

I searched for an hour trying to find a descent reason for withdrawing and I could not find one. I think we just dont want an authority higher than us.

I Concur. They plan to conquer, especially in the area of ideas, morality, and legality.

I think we just dont want an authority higher than us.
Certainly not an authority that answers to no one but itself and makes up the rules as it goes: precisely that which others accuse the US of perpetrating on the world. ;)

ICC has no power to "make up rules as it goes". ICC is conceived to uphold the most basic and universal limits on human behavior, and apply them to politicians, yes and in some cases to soldiers. The Busheviks simply want the international criminals whom they direct or embody to do their work unimpeded.

Like in personal behavior, you can get a good idea of someone's outlook if you know who s/he hangs out with.

Those nations standing "shoulder-to-shoulder" (as Busheviks like to say) with the United States in opposition to the ICC are:

China, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya and Sudan

What's that tell you?

Want to learn more?
http://www.iccnow.org/Introduction.html

The United States is vehemently opposed to the court Very good. :D

Over 70 countries were supportive of the ICC, in fact many of those countries are run by questionable types of Governments, yet most realized the necessity of an international criminal court with sets of international laws for which all countries will be accounted for. *cough* Most of them sit on the U.N. too. Whooey. And I fail to see why it is necessary to create an international criminal court.

Yet the US believes that US military, including US in blue-helmets should be exempted from such a court.
The typical above the law US mentality!Well, law is defined as

"a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority"

And among sovereign nations, there is no controlling authority, and hence no laws. Neither will I support such an organization.

All US citizens can show their support for it below by sending an e-mail to your representatives. I'd rather not thank you very much. We don't want to um, stick our noses in other countries' businesses now do we?

I searched for an hour trying to find a descent reason for withdrawing and I could not find one. I've searched for hours trying to find a decent reason for signing it and I could not find one.

Those nations standing "shoulder-to-shoulder" (as Busheviks like to say) with the United States in opposition to the ICC are:

China, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya and Sudan

What's that tell you? So is China, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya, and Sudan all evil now?

Jarrek

And I fail to see why it is necessary to create an international criminal court.

Of course you don't. You have the US to do the job for you.

Well, law is defined as
"a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority"
And among sovereign nations, there is no controlling authority, and hence no laws. Neither will I support such an organization.


Are you saying you now oppose the War on the basis that the USA is the defacto controlling authority over the sovereign nation of Iraq? Or are you just a little mixed up?


Try thinking harder.
Dee Cee

The US & Israel have killed more civilians in the past 35 years than all of Arab terrorism in the past 100 years added together! :D

TheAZCowBoy,

So, let me get this straight, a court, that applies to all, that is responsible for prosecuting crimes against humanity, genocide, and war crimes, is a bad idea? Is this because noone *coughUScough* can veto a deciscion? So that a punishment, once decided, will actually have to be enforced??

This is international criminal law, if the evidence isn't there, a conviction cannot happen. The only way parties can be prosecuted, is if one of the parties involved brings the case before the ICC or a case is referred from the UN security council.

My god, international justice not run by the United States of America. What a horrible idea!!

America would settle out of court:)
Don't think we'll see the Chimp take the stand anytime soon!
Dream on.
Dee Cee

So, what you ICC supporters are saying is: neither the US, nor anyone else, has the Democratic right to decline participation in, and subjugation to, the ICC?

That just because the ICC exists for some that it must exist for all, with no freedom of self-determination for anyone?

How fascist can you get?

Good point Mr. G. Keep in mind that we're not prohibiting other countries from joining the ICC. What is wrong with that?

My god, international justice not run by the United States of America. What a horrible idea!! Let's compare that. You dislike someone quite a bit. One night, he is murdered and some evidence points your way. You have a solid alibi though. The jury panel is made up of the victim's family and friends who all HATE you with a passion, has previously sent you death threads, and has even planted a bomb in your car that destroyed your car when it exploded (you were hurt, but nothing fatal). The judge is a coke addict. Would you like that?

So, are you trying to say, Jerrek, that everyone on the ICC hates the US?

You are trying to block people from joining the ICC by denying them aid, and are trying to bully countries into signing impunity agreements with you, including ICC member states.

Originally posted by Mr. G
So, what you ICC supporters are saying is: neither the US, nor anyone else, has the Democratic right to decline participation in, and subjugation to, the ICC?

That just because the ICC exists for some that it must exist for all, with no freedom of self-determination for anyone?

How fascist can you get?


TAC: "Subjugation to justice, whaaaaaaaaa?!"

Calling the world community "fascist, huh?!"

You sound like Slob Milosevic on the witness stand at the Hague just a few months ago! :eek:

Did I hear you right Bubba, "Fascist?"

You sound like the Nazi's at Nuremberg, "arrogant to the end!"

Until the US allows the world community to "help" set the standards in International justice--and quits f*****g around with the nations of the world, like the obnoxious bully that it has become as its head has grown bigger and bigger, ( Could Ceasar's Rome have been any worse? ) it can expect to follow the footsteps of that 1/2 acre of ZioNazi hell, it continous to support "against the wishes and logic of world opinion" then it runs the danger of being called--and treated like--the Israeli "pariah" it emmulates by its arrogant behavior, as we sit here and debate and while the 800 lb. gorilla proceeds to destroy an impotent little nation ( Iraq ) without approval or the concurrence of the world community ( i. e. the UN ).

If justice is to prevail throughout all civilized countries of the planet without the danger and/or fear of the scurrilous US veto--and that obnoxious US habit of interfering with the ebb and flow of world justice--the US 800 lb. gorilla has to be put "back in its cage." :rolleyes:

After all, JUSTICE WASN'T INVENTED IN AMERICA! :mad:

TheAZCowBoy,

Why is it that the same people who support economic globalization, are against political and legal globalization? We should all treat people equally, and not based on ethnic, religious or nationalistic bias. Nationalists are truly harmful to society. An international court is a GOOD thing. It holds people responsible for thier actions. Only the guilty have anything to fear, and if your guilty, and don't wish to join for that reason, then you'll get no sympathy from me, and I'll keep on pushing for you to be brought to justice. No one is above the collective will of humanity.

Originally posted by Mr. G
Critics, mostly European, of U.S. `unilateralism'' are having another conniption, this time over U.S. skepticism about the International Criminal Court. (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/printgw20020711.shtml)

TAC: You hang with angel's and chances are you will try and emmulate them and maybe even end up in heaven one day. If you hang around with the neighborhood thugs from the other side of the tracks--chances are that you will end up screwed, tattood and in some steel cage somewhere doing hard time.

And so it is with the US. It has financed Israeli terrorism for so long that it now feels justifed in calling Israel's mass murderer Arik Sharon a "Man of Peace" and it's troops begin to act like the IDF killers of Jenin. ( In Jenin, if one remembers, the baby faced IDF killers used chidlren and adolescents as "human shields" as they went house to house killing, maiming, manhandling, demolishing and creating havoc for the unarmed and highly terrified residents of that little Palestinian hamlet )--today, we see on CNN US soldiers sacking Saddam's palaces--filling their pockets with "solveniers" taken from Saddam's palaces.

And in a shocking surprise to the world--who have always believed that the IDF is an honorable and honest army, the IDF military was also "LOOTING and stealing personal property. Gold jewlery, TV's appliances, VCR's, Stereos, even family cash savings being horded for family emergencies were stolen from the Palestinian victims of this IDF progrom at the point of an Uzi.

Yassir folks, many of the Zionist CHOSEN have metamorphed from the original "world's eternal victims, " to the "world's eternal thugs and gangsters!" Indeed, this is a sad thing to see happen to the HOLOCAUST survivors given ther proprensity to "market" Jewish victimhood like some hot commodity, not to mention, their Holocaust Industries that bring in million$ into the Zionist coffers for "buying & selling" US Congressmen.

Some call this sick ZioNazi behavior "Chutzpah," while others call this the beginning of the end for Israel and its 54 years of intransigence and Aztec bloody behavior.

Is it any surprise that the long awaited Jewish Massiah has not arrived--and that indeed, the only thing they have to look forward to these days are their ill begotten material gains--and having to look over their shoulders--wherever they go--especially in Europe where there are "WANTED POSTERS, plastered everywhere with many current US/Jewish leaders profiles on them! :D

TheAZCowBoy,

So, are you trying to say, Jerrek, that everyone on the ICC hates the US? Yes.

You are trying to block people from joining the ICC by denying them aid, and are trying to bully countries into signing impunity agreements with you, including ICC member states. You have a funny definition of "bullying."

Nationalists are truly harmful to society. Haha. No. Substantiate that statement.

Only the guilty have anything to fear, and if your guilty, and don't wish to join for that reason, then you'll get no sympathy from me, and I'll keep on pushing for you to be brought to justice. So because I fear the ICC and don't want to join up, I'm now guilty of some horrible crime against humanity right?

AZCowboy, your posts are as coherent as sugar is bitter, and intelligible as heiroglyphs.

Afghanistan
Albania
Andorra
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Barbados
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Cambodia
Canada
Central African Republic
Colombia
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cyprus
Democratic Republic of Congo
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
East Timor
Ecuador
Estonia
Fiji
Finland
France
Gabon
Gambia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Jordan
Latvia
Lesotho
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Malawi
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Mauritius
Mongolia
Namibia
Nauru
Netherlands
New Zealand
Niger
Nigeria
Norway
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Poland
Portugal
Republic of Korea
Romania
Saint Vincent and The Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Sierra Leone
Slovakia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Trinidad and Tobago
Uganda
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Venezuela
Zambia

For anyone who want a list, those are the countries, that according to Jerrek, hate the US.
I really didnt know that you were supposed to support the people you hate in war. Guess Spain and Britain have it right, thank god for that!

So because I fear the ICC and don't want to join up, I'm now guilty of some horrible crime against humanity right?

Your just another scared American Jarrek.

You should lighten up, the real world is generally not as bad as you think. I should know, I live there.:)
BTW How many guns do you own?;)

One day it will all make perfect sense.
Dee Cee

I don't know how old you are, but I think I have seen more of the world in terms of diversity. So your point that I don't know and you do is moot.

And I own four guns.

Your just another scared American Jarrek
Do tell what is scaring us Americans.

The fact that someone can come up with such a retarded idea as an ICC that will be seated by judges that are all but impartial. That is scaring me.

So, how many Saddam regime criminals have so far been indicted by ICC, or are pending for indictment?

That's what I thought.

What about Zimbabwe's Mugabe? ...


That's what I thought.

"The fact that someone can come up with such a retarded idea as an ICC that will be seated by judges that are all but impartial. That is scaring me."

So then how were the Nazi war criminals to be prosecuted? By the US, France and Britain (and other Allied nations)? Jeez, that doesn't sound a bit bias at all!

How should any war criminal be prosecuted? If there are war criminals in America should it be up to the States to prosecute them? That doesn't seem to be working very well.

Where's Shwarzkopf?
Where's Reagan?
Weinberger?
Fuck, shouldn't the States be prosecuting every American that fucked over South America and Indonesia and such?

If there are war criminals in America should it be up to the States to prosecute them? That doesn't seem to be working very well. And of course, the ICC has an excellent record so far with Mugabe on trail, Saddam on trail, Idi Amin on trial (yes he is still alive), North Korea's dude on trail, and so forth.

Fuck, shouldn't the States be prosecuting every American that fucked over South America and Indonesia and such? Eh? Indonesia? What?

So then how were the Nazi war criminals to be prosecuted? By the US, France and Britain (and other Allied nations)? Jeez, that doesn't sound a bit bias at all! So then you support the idea of judges that are not impartial right?

"And of course, the ICC has an excellent record so far with Mugabe on trail, Saddam on trail, Idi Amin on trial (yes he is still alive), North Korea's dude on trail, and so forth"

So what you're saying is.... since it hasn't worked entirely so far....we should give up? You're apparently saying that the US can do more good by not getting involved than my trying to change the way things work? Wow. That's pretty lazy.


"Eh? Indonesia? What?"

Do a little history homework: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB62/


"So then you support the idea of judges that are not impartial right?"

The idea behind the ICC that I think works best is that in a case of bringing up an accused, the judges will be from nations who are closest to unbias. That is, if Israel and Palestine had accused members I wouldn't send a judge from the States or from Lebanon. The best case scenario would be to find a nation which does not benefit at all. This likely will be hard to find.

However, I again ask my questions, which you refused to answer.......

How should any war criminal be prosecuted? If there are war criminals in America should it be up to the States to prosecute them?

So what you're saying is.... since it hasn't worked entirely so far....we should give up? You're apparently saying that the US can do more good by not getting involved than my trying to change the way things work? Wow. That's pretty lazy. Nice choice of words. Hasn't worked "entirely." How about you name one significant milestone of the ICC?

Actually, why do you so desperately want the United States in the ICC? Can't it function without the U.S.? Bring all those murderous tyrants to justice, and once we can see the ICC works perfectly the United States might be convinced to join. What is wrong with that for the time being? There are bigger fish to fry than Americans ya know?

Do a little history homework: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB62/ My apologies, you said Indonesia and I didn't immediately associate it with East Timor. Let me do some reading up on that.

The idea behind the ICC that I think works best is that in a case of bringing up an accused, the judges will be from nations who are closest to unbias. What an honorable thought.

The best case scenario would be to find a nation which does not benefit at all. This likely will be hard to find. Try impossible, but I'd give you a go on "hard." So how exactly do we go by and choosing impartial judges if say, an American is on trial given the left's most trusted and loved topics are "anti-Americanism rising all over the world?"

How should any war criminal be prosecuted? If there are war criminals in America should it be up to the States to prosecute them? Define war criminal first, and then I will answer your question.

Who determines what countries are most unbaist? America says its mostly unbaist. Iraq said it. Russia said it. etc etc etc

We can do it by democratic vote! Yes, that's it! So if a situation arises say, in the middle east and Israel is on trial, then we do a vote among all the people of that area (Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, etc.) on who is the most "neutral" and who can be the judge. :D

Do you see Iraq and Zimbabwe on the list? No, because they are not member parties. Nothing has been referred by the UN, therefore the court's hands are tied.

The reason I would like America on the court is for accountability, so they can't do whatever they hell they want. If they commit crimes, they too should be punished.

Do you people realise that the ICC was only officially formed in July of 2002? Its still trying to organise itself. Its kinda hard to prosecute if you have no judges or lawyers.

So what would happen if the United States sign up and no one else? None of the really bad guys?

Nah, no thanks. Come back in a few decades.

Well, since the US doesn't want on board, and given that hte ICC can't prosecute for crimes committed before July 1, 2002, I would assume that the US has many more humanitarian/war crimes up its sleeve. So ya, we'll come back in a few decades, once they're done. If they don't destroy the Earth, first.

Jerrek-outta curiosity (nothing to do with this thread) are American or Canadian?

Both. I was born in a country where I can't go back to. My parents traveled a lot and I've been to many countries. No where a place that I could call home until I came to North America. I have accepted citizenship in Canada and in the United States and I consider myself both. I held tri-citizenship with my country of birth, but I've renounced that a while ago. Whether they accepted that or not is an open question, but I hold no allegiance to them.

I've never been in any one country longer than about 5 years. I think we've finally settled down now though, at least until my brother, sister, and I get through school and college. I've seen many a stange cultures and lived in many of them, from the west, to the middle east, to the far east.

And I am fluent in Arabic. :) I can read it too, but my handwriting is rather ... well, let's just say it could use some practice. Regardless of the way you may interpret some of my posts, I love the Arabic people, I love their culture for most part, and I love their food, music, and entertainment. They are a great people suffering under the yolk of an oppressing government.

Ah ... *dreams of times long past*

Here... a message for you :p

http://home.cogeco.ca/~johannj/personal/arabic.jpg

I hesitate to ask, but what does it say?

So Jarrek is an arab schoolboy!
I can see where the stone throwing habit came from.
Dee Cee