That doesn't sound right... so if I'm a leader and go in and order a bomb drop on an area known to be inhabited by noncomattants and civilians, then my country has to request my prosecution?
Something doesn't sound right with that... if I'm fighting for my country and someone from the enemy decides to try and ruin me by providing false information or points the finger at the wrong person, wouldn't the other country have to be the prosecutor? Regardless, once the information is out the world press will take it and run until refuted, disputed or proved inaccurate. Also, the legal system in the US requires a stance of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a fully qualified trial including the possibility of a decision made by a jury of peers. True, the media of today tends to skew the public opinion on cases but legally that is the stance. What are the rules for the ICC? Hatton Larry Lyons wrote: > Why? the ICC only comes into play when the violator's country requests > prosecution; has a sham trial, or the absolutely refuses to deal with the > case. In spite of Ashcroft's best efforts given our open democracy here I > cannot see how there could be any sort of trumped up charges against US > personnel that would get beyond the most preliminary steps. > > larry > > -- > Larry C. Lyons > ColdFusion/Web Developer > Certified Advanced ColdFusion 5 Developer > EBStor.com > 8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 204 > Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795 > tel: (703) 393-7930 > fax: (703) 393-2659 > Web: http://www.ebstor.com > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. > -- > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 12:25 PM >>To: CF-Community >>Subject: Re: Bush: U.S. personnel will never face global court >> >> >>(Remembers the last time Howie drug up good news and added a negative >>twist to it) >> >>On the speech issue, it's a regional inconcsistency... see the above >>thought bubble. I've used the word (incorrectly as it may seem to >>y'all) in that context all my life. >> >>As far as the US stance on the ICC, I'm in total agreement >>with it. I >>saw the thread about it going back and forth and didn't >>comment on it, >>but on the surface it reeks of possibilities for loopholes and >>corruption. Then again, at the moment there are a total of >>four people >>there and they don't even have a building yet, but it seems >>to me like >>any attempt to actually make use of it will be a >>self-defeating purpose. >> >>Hatton >> >>Howie Hamlin wrote: >> >> >>>[On a side note - I think it's interesting that CNN changed >>> >>the word from "drug" to "dragged" in their rendition of the >> >>>quote (which is, of course, the correct word). When is >>> >>this nincompoop going to get a handle on speaking English?] >> >>>MILWAUKEE, Wisconsin (CNN) -- President Bush, facing >>> >>criticism from European allies, remained defiant about the United >> >>>States' refusal to back the new international war crimes >>> >>court, pledging Tuesday he will never allow American diplomats >> >>>and soldiers to be dragged before it. >>> >>>"The International Criminal Court is troubling to the >>> >>United States," Bush told reporters following a tour at a >> >>>Milwaukee church. "As the United States works to bring >>> >>peace around the world, our diplomats and our soldiers could be >> >>>drug into this court, and that's very troubling -- very >>> >>troubling to me." >> >>> >>http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/07/03/bush.international.c >> > ourt/index.html > >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
