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

News from across the pond on the ICC>
1 posted on 04/12/2002 1:29:04 PM PDT by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: madfly
Trust the UN. (not)


2 posted on 04/12/2002 1:34:10 PM PDT by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly;All
No effect on the US. Never ratified by 2/3 of the US Senate.
RELATED THREAD
3 posted on 04/12/2002 1:34:22 PM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: erizona;hsmomx3;Homeschool_list;larryjohnson; KentuckyWoman; MHGinTN; carolina; joathome...
ping
4 posted on 04/12/2002 1:38:41 PM PDT by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly
Hopefully the UN will push the US just far enough that we finally desolve our membership and toss their sorry arses out of here.

The 2 destructive forces in America today are the Democrats and the United Nations referred to be me and some others as DEMNATION
5 posted on 04/12/2002 1:39:07 PM PDT by HEY4QDEMS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly
I trust we will not go along with this, and every indication appears we will not. I believe this will widen the gulf between the European Socialist Union and us. This will someday get nasty as long as our country does not continue along its socialist course. God forbid.
8 posted on 04/12/2002 1:42:29 PM PDT by GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly
You know the U.N. is La La Land, this group hasn't said a thing about what's happening in South Africa & are on the Palestinians side while they bomb & murder civilians. I don't think I want these people determining any outcome for me, no way no how.
10 posted on 04/12/2002 1:44:24 PM PDT by HELLRAISER II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly
Don't you just have the feeling that the EU/UN will somehow, someway take some action against the U.S. for not playing along with their conquer the world strategy?

They couldn't do it one way, so here they are now trying to make laws that will control the U.S. and it's population. This concerns me, as does their mutual condemnation of Israel for doing exactly what the U.S. is doing in Afghanistan. Declared war or not, Israel and any country has a right to protect their citizens from terrorist attacks. If that means going after the country that harbors terrorists, so be it. That's why we have a central government in the first place. Common logic tells me that we are in a head to head confrontation with the EU/UN and it will boil over someday.

17 posted on 04/12/2002 2:11:37 PM PDT by dstog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly
U.S. officials have said the widespread deployment of U.S. armed forces around the world could expose them to politically motivated cases brought before the ICC.

Sounds like it's time to bring our folks overseas back home. Forget peace keeping. Let them tear each other apart over there.
It's not like we haven't tried to keep peace, but the threat of court action against our military isn't worth it. Just bring them all home, and let the UN handle all the peace keeping and associated costs.
We shouldn't be there anyway.

19 posted on 04/12/2002 3:04:14 PM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly
But U.S. opposition remains strong and could pose serious challenges to the scope of the new court.

I saw in the newspaper where this administration, and particularly George W Bush, rescinded Clinton's signing of this travesty. A big plus for Dubya.

A ratification ceremony of 10 countries on 11 April marked the crossing of the 60-state threshold needed for the creation of the court, known as the ICC. UN diplomats and non-governmental organization activists now believe that by next year 100 countries will have ratified the Rome Treaty, which created the court.

Its jurisdiction will include genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The crime of aggression will also eventually come under the jurisdiction of the treaty, but there is still ongoing discussion about how to define aggression. The treaty does not cover terrorism, which the UN General Assembly is still struggling to define.

To some it might sound nice on papre and in theory, a grand world body where all nations come together to get all the bad guys in the world (Zarathustra builds to a crescendo in the background)..........but in reality, it's probably more like Hutus or Tutsis deciding who is the good guys and the bad guys on any given day. Depending on who is holding the reins of justice on that day..........maybe it will rain tomorrow, I don't know.

The crime of aggression will also eventually come under the jurisdiction of the treaty, but there is still ongoing discussion about how to define aggression.

Some will tell you that refusing to sell Japan scrap metal prior to the outbreak of WW2 would constitute 'aggression'. Seriously.

The treaty does not cover terrorism, which the UN General Assembly is still struggling to define.

In a word, disturbing. Very.

Many of the world's leading democracies have ratified the Rome statute, with the notable exception of the United States. U.S. officials have said the widespread deployment of U.S. armed forces around the world could expose them to politically motivated cases brought before the ICC.

Resentful, Third World socialist failures bringing their 'grievances' to bear against the United States in the form of some 'global' court............you think?

The United States has sought immunity for its military staff from prosecution and is now considering the unusual step of revoking the treaty signature of former President Bill Clinton.

Do it. Now. Immediately.

"The United States would have to commit an extreme act of incompetence to actually subject an American citizen to the jurisdiction of this court. You'd have to work through many acts of incompetence by the United States for that to happen, and I think that's because we negotiated very hard to get those safeguards in there," Scheffer said.

Thank you Clinton hack. Many of us see the Constitution as our safeguard, but of course you, like most if not all of Clinton's former flacks see the Constitution as a piece of 200 year old toilet paper.

This is a terrible idea........for Americans anyway.

22 posted on 04/12/2002 10:16:55 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly; all
"Those who commit crimes, war crimes, genocide, or other crimes against humanity will no longer be beyond the reach of justice. Humanity will be able to defend itself, responding to the worst of human nature with one of the greatest achievements -- the rule of law."
And the definition of "crimes" and "other crimes"?
http://www.un.org/law/icc/statute/elements/english/1_add2e.pdf
For the Adobe impaired...Adobe PDF Conversion

To all,
Article 6: Genocide...check
Article 7: Crimes against humanity...check
Article 8: War crimes...check
Hmmmm...where is the list of "crimes"? Or is Kofi doing something similar to what is in the Constitution?
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises...
The "crimes" are genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, just like the "taxes" are duties, imposts and excises.
Maybe I'm just stupid. Any help greatly appreciated.
Think about it...

23 posted on 04/13/2002 3:40:24 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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