Posted on 06/24/2002 4:31:55 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:06:58 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The abusive behavior of the U.N.'s Bosnian War Crimes tribunal with regard to an American journalist prefigures what it is to come after the new International Criminal Court comes into being in July, and only confirms the wisdom of America's refusal to sign on to the ICC.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Ha, journalists have to the group in America, which supports the ICC more than anyone. They couldn't have picked a worst person to undermine American support for their stupid treaty.
Your PC printer is "the press" under the First Amendment. Therefore you are a journalist, if you want to be one. So journalists, logically, have no superior civil rights, your right to be equal to the journalist is in fact what the First Amendment's freedom of communication clause is about.People who declaim "the people's right to know" are papering over the fact that you have a right to make up your own mind and--having done so--to be wrong at the top of your voice, if you so choose. So I'm "entitled to know" only what your published opinion is. What I take to be the truth, only I can decide. An actual "right to know the truth" would imply a duty to suppress error--turning the First Amendment's "freedom" neatly on its head.
So what we see here is the terrible example of a journalist claiming a priveledge which truly is illegitimate here, against a foreign court whose writ does not run here. If the court's writ runs where the journalist actually lives (Paris, I think) then the journalist had better accept that. I certainly see no reason for America to oppose, in effect, the action of a French court in France over the matter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.