U.S. concerns about International Criminal Court being proved justified as Balkans tribunal considers Clinton indictment

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,722
6,201
126
Balt: "Ignoring the rest of your pseudo-philosophical babble for the moment, what makes you think that this international court system will be great? It hasn't proven itself so far....."

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Overlooking the over liner and excessively irrational conclusion jumping of your larger statement, I gave the answer in the psychobabble part, the rainbow. As an example of conclusion jumping, assuming you were still refering to me, where did i say anything about jumping in with both feet. I said very much the opposite.
_____________________________________________

Scipionix: "Right to trial by jury. Right to refuse to testify if the testimony will incriminate oneself. Right to protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. etc."

__________________________________________

Great, now the question I have, but not necessarily to you, is are these applicable or relevant to participation in an international court? And I would suspect that people in other countries wouldn't mind having those same rights.
 

Scipionix

Golden Member
May 30, 2002
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Great, now the question I have, but not necessarily to you, is are these applicable or relevant to participation in an international court? And I would suspect that people in other countries wouldn't mind having those same rights.
Why wouldn't they? How could we surrender our citizens to a court that does not recognize the same rights we do?

And yes, I'm sure they'd love to have those rights. That's why they should get their own Constitutionses and Bills of Rightses.
 

Scipionix

Golden Member
May 30, 2002
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: Yossarian451
How could we subject foreigners to the same courts. Good enough for them but not us?
We're against the ICC. What are you talking about?
 

Yossarian451

Senior member
Apr 11, 2002
886
0
0
If a leader such as sadam were to say "it is ok for me to kill a population of rebels, by my decreee". Then it would be y his right to do mass murder. Now international courts want to prosecute him. Is that just? BY your logic the court wouldn't acknowledge his right, by his decree, to kill them, so it would be unjust for us to try to put him on trial.
 

Yossarian451

Senior member
Apr 11, 2002
886
0
0
So we didn't justify actions against Slobodan Milosevic, hmm I seem to remember something about us, ohhh yah we said he is a war criminal.
 

Scipionix

Golden Member
May 30, 2002
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: Yossarian451
If a leader such as sadam were to say "it is ok for me to kill a population of rebels, by my decreee". Then it would be y his right to do mass murder. Now international courts want to prosecute him. Is that just? BY your logic the court wouldn't acknowledge his right, by his decree, to kill them, so it would be unjust for us to try to put him on trial.

Set up a special tribunal to try him.
 

Yossarian451

Senior member
Apr 11, 2002
886
0
0
Originally posted by: Scipionix
Originally posted by: Yossarian451
If a leader such as sadam were to say "it is ok for me to kill a population of rebels, by my decreee". Then it would be y his right to do mass murder. Now international courts want to prosecute him. Is that just? BY your logic the court wouldn't acknowledge his right, by his decree, to kill them, so it would be unjust for us to try to put him on trial.

Set up a special tribunal to try him.
But under who's jurisdiction, his, or ours, becasue it would be unjust, by your logic to do it under any laws but his.

 

Scipionix

Golden Member
May 30, 2002
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: Yossarian451
Set up a special tribunal to try him.
But under who's jurisdiction, his, or ours, becasue it would be unjust, by your logic to do it under any laws but his.[/quote]
I don't recall every saying anything about special tribunals.
 

Scipionix

Golden Member
May 30, 2002
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: Yossarian451
3 posts up ^

"Why wouldn't they? How could we surrender our citizens to a court that does not recognize the same rights we do?
And yes, I'm sure they'd love to have those rights. That's why they should get their own Constitutionses and Bills of Rightses."

What does that have to do with setting up special tribunals to try accused war criminals?
 

Yossarian451

Senior member
Apr 11, 2002
886
0
0
Your logic is absolutely flawed. You are merely trying to say we have supreme untouchable rights, I see there is no reasoning with you.
 

Scipionix

Golden Member
May 30, 2002
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: Yossarian451
Your logic is absolutely flawed. You are merely trying to say we have supreme untouchable rights, I see there is no reasoning with you.
fine then.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: glenn1
Okay, let me try it another way then.

Your point is that no man should be above the law, which i agree with.

My point is that ultimately, every person and/or group which is invested with authority (whether it be legal, political, moral, or spiritual) ultimately is responsible to someone or something... politicians have to answer to voters, citizens to the rule of law, businesses to their customers, ministers to God, and so on. To what higher authority is the ICC ultimately answerable to?
Hard to say, but I would say the member countries and the press(the people), it should have some failsafe that when enough countries oppose to a ruling it could be ruled invalid. The Press should report everything it can on how the court works and then the people should push their governments to oppose a ruling if there is need. This takes an awfuly long time though.


 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: ToBeMe
But Czar, allow me this.............I believe it has been mentioned before, but with no real answers...............If an International Criminal Court is formed and realized by all countries, with their word regining supreme, whom do they answer to when they become corrupt or begin to enforce their aggenda? Also, if this would happen and the ICC regins as the supreme rule of the land......................can a "World Government" be far behind? Surely that would not be something you relish..............
Answered the first on in my last post.
A "world government" will someday be used, we cant stop it, only delay it thats why we must try to create an enviroment for it so it will work well, try to rid it from the flaws current governments have.
When the settlers first came to america I highly doubt they ever thought that a unified government could be formed over such a big land. And I hightly doubt when the first states where formed that the people there belived that they would one day call itself an independant country along with all the other states.
I havent formed an opinion on if a World Government is a good thing or a bad thing, it has its merits and flaws for sure. I do realise though that someday there will be a World Government no matter what we do.
 
D

Deleted member 4644

To Whom It May Concern:

It has recently come to my attention that the Croatian World Congress (CWC) has demanded that former President Clinton be prosecuted for war crimes relating to ?Operation Storm?.

According to the Washington Times (July 8, 2002), ?The Croatian World Congress?said it believes neither Gen. Gotovina nor Clinton administration officials are guilty of war crimes. However, it said that if Mrs. Del Ponte insists on prosecuting Gen. Gotovina, then American officials should be prosecuted in the interests of "evenhanded justice" because they played a pivotal role in aiding the general's campaign in Operation Storm.?

I believe that the CWC is committing an act of egregious international recklessness by making this demand. In a climate of American unilateralism?especially in light of recent events surrounding the International Criminal Court?the CWC is merely adding fuel to the fire. You are simply giving the United States an excuse to continue its unilateral behavior and resist any international agreements.

Forgive me for saying this, but the states of the former Yugoslavia lost the trust of the world when its citizens began various campaigns of ?ethnic cleansing?. For this reason international courts were set up to prosecute those most culpable for these crimes. These courts were set up to show that the rule of law remains strong even in the face of governmental wickedness. If you attempt to manipulate these courts to prosecute Clinton, you will only lead the world further away from the rule of law. You know as well as I that the U.S. will do everything to destroy the courts before it allows Clinton to be prosecuted.

Pride is one of the greatest of human failings. Do not let your own pride destroy our hope for a global court system. I am sorry that Gen. Gotovina is being prosecuted. I know nothing about the man. But if he deserves protection or support?rally to his cause. If he is guilty?let the courts try him. Do no attack the honor of the court system just to prove a political point by indicting Clinton. ?Even-handed justice? will not be attained by prosecuting the innocent.

Thank you for you kind consideration,

Derek
Director, www.dailybruin.ucla.edu
Daily Bruin Editorial Board
UCLA, Los Angeles


THEIR REPLY:

Dear Mr. L:

Thank you very much for your email corespondence. While we are in agreement on the need for enforcement of international law, we cannot agree with the underlying premise of your argument, which appears to be that innocent individuals that come from countries who have "lost the trust of the world" should be sacrificed for the "greater good" of establishing the ICC, while individuals from the United States who were involved in the same activity should be "covered up" in order to protect that same "greater good."

The fact is that Operation Storm was a joint Croatian-U.S. operation. This fact was well known to Prosecutor Carla Del Ponte. Her press spokeswoman, Florence Hartmann, even wrote a book in 1999 in which she calls the United States the "godfathers" of Operation Storm and that the Operation was planned by U.S. generals. Yet she persisted in indicting Croatian General Ante Gotovina, not only with full knowledge of U.S. involvement but also with full knowledge that General Gotovina is innocent of the charges which she has brought against him.

Accordingly, your claim that the Croatian World Congress is committing an "egregious act of international recklessness" is misplaced. The true act of "egregious international recklessness" was committed by the person vested under international law with the power to make the decisions regarding when to bring (and not bring) indictments: Prosecutor Carla Del Ponte. The fact that Mrs. Del Ponte decided to bring an indictment against General Gotovina despite the fact that it was not well grounded in fact and despite the fact that she knew that the U.S. was intimately involved in the Operation is the true "egregious act of international recklessness." Accordingly, we would suggest that you also contact Mrs. Del Ponte's office and explain that it is she who has "given the United States an excuse to continue its unilateral behavior and resist any international agreements."

We trust that you will agree with us that any system of international justice must include fool-proof safeguards to ensure that the innocent are not convicted. The Croatian World Congress believes strongly that General Gotovina is innocent and that his indictment is an affront to international justice. No human being (even those that come from countries who have "lost the trust of the world") deserves to be sacrificed on the altar of "international justice."

We will always stand to protect the innocent.

Sincerely,

Croatian World Congress

 

rbhawcroft

Senior member
May 16, 2002
897
0
0
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
Here's aanother site HRW. I can't vouch for the veracity but there seems to be a lot of info. I guess the problem I am coming up with here is that this court can ignore the findings of our justice system and proceed on it's own. I don't like that even a little bit.

human rights watch is a nyc based big reputable org albeit a compaigning and research one, it was the first publisher to say only about 50 civilians were killed in jenin camp, so they are serious.
 

rbhawcroft

Senior member
May 16, 2002
897
0
0
america objecing to a international institution which will be policticised is a bit rich and is trypical of their control mania. The point is it is supposed to only act when gross injustices have been done, if you run your governemt and arfmy properly then you dont have anything to worry about, although various groups will try and use it against america.

clinton committed war crimes as far as im aware when he bombed that somali apsrin factory in 97 'monicagate' I think it was dubbed, why should he do that and get away with it he killed over 40 people.

in terms of fairness of prosecution well the hague has gone after the serbs even though many more croat and muslim and sloventian war criminals are living with impugnity. also america has installed the exwar lords in afghanistan who have already been murdering civilians, so when you interfere with other coutries without giving a sht about the locals why should we be worried about you coming under vindictive prosecution, when a you would have had to have a case to answer, and b the prosecutions would probably be western controlled anyway?
 

Scipionix

Golden Member
May 30, 2002
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: rbhawcroft
america objecing to a international institution which will be policticised is a bit rich and is trypical of their control mania. The point is it is supposed to only act when gross injustices have been done, if you run your governemt and arfmy properly then you dont have anything to worry about, although various groups will try and use it against america.

clinton committed war crimes as far as im aware when he bombed that somali apsrin factory in 97 'monicagate' I think it was dubbed, why should he do that and get away with it he killed over 40 people.

in terms of fairness of prosecution well the hague has gone after the serbs even though many more croat and muslim and sloventian war criminals are living with impugnity. also america has installed the exwar lords in afghanistan who have already been murdering civilians, so when you interfere with other coutries without giving a sht about the locals why should we be worried about you coming under vindictive prosecution, when a you would have had to have a case to answer, and b the prosecutions would probably be western controlled anyway?

Gross injustices like PA-sponsored suicide bombings?
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |