Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tomakaze
"he(Bush) "unsigned it" as in, delayed implementation. look it up."
---

Sorry, your statement is not accurate. Bush didn't just delay it, he said he had no intention of sending it to the Senate, so he didn't "just delay" its implementation, as you say, but you are partially right in the sense that another president MAY send it to the Senate and it could still be approved.

"While President Clinton signed the U.N.-ICC treaty, it was never submitted to the Senate for ratification and President Bush announced last July that he had no intention of sending it to the Senate. As Press Secretary Ari Fleischer put it July 2, 2002, President Bush "thinks the ICC is fundamentally flawed because it puts American servicemen and women at fundamental risk of being tried by an entity that is beyond America's reach, beyond America's laws, and can subject American civilians and military to arbitrary standards of justice."

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-beichman042503.asp



91 posted on 05/19/2003 9:51:11 AM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]


To: FairOpinion
re: "While President Clinton signed the U.N.-ICC treaty, it was never submitted to the Senate for ratification a
 
fair enough, I know I'm a suspicious bastard lol.
But since when has a detail like that ever stopped them from screwing us? the 16th ammendment was never properly ratified, but look at what we labor under now.
94 posted on 05/19/2003 2:20:20 PM PDT by tomakaze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson