2
   

The US must accept the International Court of Justice

 
 
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 02:30 am
The US must accept the International Court of Justice in The Hague!!!

To accept the International Court of Justice in The Hague ( http://www.icj-cij.org ) is the only way to prevent future US-administrations from committing war crimes all over the world to spread violently their false "western democratic values".

THE GAME IS OVER FOR THE NATIONAL INSECURITY AGENCY AND ALL OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS TO UNDERMINE EASTERN DEMOCRACIES!!!

Be aware of these government criminals after they were forced to stop their worldwide atrocities. Maybe the US detention camps were built for these guys...

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland ( http://www.bis.org ) the central bank of central banks must immediately STOP to support the current War Criminals and future Administrations in the White House with credits for their sick aims of war on terror... while destroying their local economy... lets make it crystal clear so that the BIS Bankers will understand: [email protected]


Best wishes from Switzerland

lwwb
Roger
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 951 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 06:30 am
It would be an interesting topic. Yet, somehow, I've got this feeling that SeC isn't really interested in discussion....
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 07:56 am
old europe wrote:
It would be an interesting topic. Yet, somehow, I've got this feeling that SeC isn't really interested in discussion....

Solve uses A2K in the same fashion as a graffitist uses a blank wall, and to much the same effect.
0 Replies
 
Solve et Coagula
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 11:08 am
First of all i have to appologize for my fault:

Its not about the International Court of Justice The Hague, its all about the International Criminal Court The Hague... This is the website: http://www.icc-cpi.int/home.html&l=en

I am happy to discuss this issue with you guys... what you think?

Best wishes from Switzerland

lwwb
Roger
0 Replies
 
NickFun
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 11:31 am
The US only recognizes organizations when it is politically expedient for them to do so. It is doubtful that the current administration would allow themselves to be put on trial for crimes against humanity (or any other crime for that matter). A crime which, in my opinion, the US is guily of.
0 Replies
 
Solve et Coagula
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 12:19 pm
U.S.: 'Hague Invasion Act' Becomes Law
U.S.: 'Hague Invasion Act' Becomes Law

White House "Stops at Nothing" in Campaign Against War Crimes Court

(New York, August 3, 2002) A new law supposedly protecting U.S. servicemembers from the International Criminal Court shows that the Bush administration will stop at nothing in its campaign against the court, Human Rights Watch warned today.
Related Material

U.S. President George Bush today signed into law the American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002, which is intended to intimidate countries that ratify the treaty for the International Criminal Court (ICC). The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague. This provision, dubbed the "Hague invasion clause," has caused a strong reaction from U.S. allies around the world, particularly in the Netherlands.

In addition, the law provides for the withdrawal of U.S. military assistance from countries ratifying the ICC treaty, and restricts U.S. participation in United Nations peacekeeping unless the United States obtains immunity from prosecution. At the same time, these provisions can be waived by the president on "national interest" grounds.

"The states that have ratified this treaty are trying to strengthen the rule of law," said Richard Dicker, director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch. "The Bush administration is trying to punish them for that."

Dicker pointed out that many of the ICC's biggest supporters are fragile democracies and countries emerging from human rights crises, such as Sierra Leone, Argentina and Fiji.

The law is part of a multi-pronged U.S. effort against the International Criminal Court. On May 6, in an unprecedented move, the Bush administration announced it was "renouncing" U.S. signature on the treaty. In June, the administration vetoed continuation of the U.N. peacekeeping force in Bosnia in an effort to obtain permanent immunity for U.N. peacekeepers. In July, U.S. officials launched a campaign around the world to obtain bilateral agreements that would grant immunity for Americans from the court's authority. Yesterday, Washington announced that it obtained such an agreement from Romania.

However, another provision of the bill allows the United States to assist international efforts to bring to justice those accused of genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity - including efforts by the ICC.

"The administration never misses an opportunity to gratuitously antagonize its allies on the ICC," said Dicker. "But it's also true that the new law has more loopholes than a block of Swiss cheese."

Dicker said the law gives the administration discretion to override ASPA's noxious effects on a case-by-case basis. Washington may try to use this to strong-arm additional concessions from the states that support the court, but Dicker urged states supporting the ICC "not to fall into the U.S. trap: the law does not require any punitive measures."

Human Rights Watch believes the International Criminal Court has the potential to be the most important human rights institution created in 50 years, and urged regional groups of states, such as the European Union, to condemn the new law and resist Washington's attempts to obtain bilateral exemption arrangements.

The law formed part of the 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States.

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/08/aspa080302.htm
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 12:53 pm
http://www.rawstory.com/images/new/bush_rose_garden.jpg
0 Replies
 
Solve et Coagula
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 01:33 pm
The American Servicemembers' Protection Act (ASPA)
The American Servicemembers' Protection Act (ASPA) is a United States federal law introduced by United States Senator Jesse Helms as an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act and passed in August 2002 by the Congress. The stated purpose of the amendment was "to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party".

The amendment is intended to weaken the position of the International Criminal Court in The Hague as it allows the U.S. government to save U.S. citizens from extradition to the ICC, and also authorizes "any necessary action", as Helms put it, "to free U.S. soldiers improperly handed over to that Court". This led opponents of the act to dub it The Hague Invasion Act.[1][2]

Furthermore, it contained prohibitions on the U.S. providing military aid to countries which had ratified the treaty establishing the court; however, there were a number of exceptions to this, including NATO members, major non-NATO ally, and countries which entered into an agreement with the United States not to hand over U.S. nationals to the Court. ASPA also excluded any military aid that the U.S. President certified to be in the U.S. national interest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague_Invasion_Act
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The US must accept the International Court of Justice
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/16/2019 at 03:15:19