What Are Usa & Eu Views On Belgium

[0blivion]

If innocent ,why fear a trial?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by 0blivion@1 July 2003 - 21:12
In response to JPAUL,
Crimes against humanity is a crime where ever you may be ,even in outer space(read: also UK).
We are not talking about petty crime, but about mass murder.
It is not about what happend in iraq or elsewhere, it's ABOUT the US undermining international law in it's own benefit for no apparent good reason.
What is it saying to the world of dictatorships out there, "it's ok to ignore international treaties because the US does so too" .
How much respect can the rest of the world bring up for an institusion wich is openly being fought by the americans.
And what is America afraid of anyway, that they are going to commit mass genocide in the near future??

My apologies if you picked me up wrong.

I was replying to a specific thing which had been posted and not the topic in general.

However I have to disagree with your overall point. Basically, who decides

a, what is a crime against humanity

b, how is it proven

c, what court has jurisdiction,

d, what judicial system should be used (e.g. inquisatorial or accusatorial)

If the USA does not feel that the way these matters are being dealt with internationally is correct then they have every right (indeed obligation) to protect their citizens from them.

I would certainly hope that my Government would not allow me to be extradited and tried in a country where the penalty, for theft, may be the amputation of my hand.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by 0blivion@1 July 2003 - 23:50
If innocent ,why fear a trial?

Depends on the court

[0blivion]

It's under UN rule, it doesn't even have the death penalty.
It has a group of judges who are randomly chosen from all UN countries (also america)whom are well respected for their knowlidge in international law.

You make it sound like someone might be led to the slaughter.

a) since the second world war agreements have been made on this matter.

B) by evidence and testamony

c) the United Nations (also considerd the institution that's keeping the world at peace and where the US has veto right) it's court abide by the agreements made between everyone that were agreed uppon.

d) î look at c î

The agreements have been there since the second world war

If what happend in yugoslavia happend in the us, the us would NOT extradite the head honcho! why?
why do people find this normal?

[Rat Faced]

If the USA does not feel that the way these matters are being dealt with internationally is correct then they have every right (indeed obligation) to protect their citizens from them.

I would certainly hope that my Government would not allow me to be extradited and tried in a country where the penalty, for theft, may be the amputation of my hand.

I agree on all counts.

However, the USA is a founder member of the ICC, and is largely responsible for the rules of conduct it follows, so I cant see how they could now object to these rules of Justice.

The thing that happened is a change of administration.

This means the USA is a signatory of the ICC, however the US Government refuses to ratify the treaty it (under the previous administration) was in large part resonsible for writing.

Countries are expected to respect treaties signed under previous administrations....if this was not the usual practice, then there would be no point to having them in the 1st place, unless every country was ruled by Absolute Monarchy, a Tyrant etc etc...ie there were very few changes of administration.

[jetje]

Originally posted by j2k4@2 July 2003 - 00:46
Isn't it a trifle odd the I.C.C., under NATO auspices, is attempting to bill the U.S. $77.5 million dollars as it's share of the cost for a new $352 million-dollar facility in which to try all the members of the U.S. government and it's military the I.C.C. has indicted for war-crimes?

Perhaps if we don't pay the bill, then....

did they ever pay then???

[j2k4]

Originally posted by jetje+2 July 2003 - 13:16--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (jetje @ 2 July 2003 - 13:16)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@2 July 2003 - 00:46
Isn&#39;t it a trifle odd the I.C.C., under NATO auspices, is attempting to bill the U.S. &#036;77.5 million dollars as it&#39;s share of the cost for a new &#036;352 million-dollar facility in which to try all the members of the U.S. government and it&#39;s military the I.C.C. has indicted for war-crimes?

Perhaps if we don&#39;t pay the bill, then....

did they ever pay then??? [/b][/quote]
I sure hope not.

Sorry to be so obstinate about this, but I think NATO is seriously passe and needs to be junked, whereas the U.N. is merely doomed to eternal fecklessness.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by j2k4+2 July 2003 - 20:46--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 2 July 2003 - 20:46)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by jetje@2 July 2003 - 13:16
<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4

@2 July 2003 - 00:46
Isn&#39;t it a trifle odd the I.C.C., under NATO auspices, is attempting to bill the U.S. &#036;77.5 million dollars as it&#39;s share of the cost for a new &#036;352 million-dollar facility in which to try all the members of the U.S. government and it&#39;s military the I.C.C. has indicted for war-crimes?

Perhaps if we don&#39;t pay the bill, then....

did they ever pay then???

I sure hope not.

Sorry to be so obstinate about this, but I think NATO is seriously passe and needs to be junked, whereas the U.N. is merely doomed to eternal fecklessness. [/b][/quote]
Well tell it to feck off then.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by JPaul+2 July 2003 - 16:20--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JPaul @ 2 July 2003 - 16:20)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by j2k4@2 July 2003 - 20:46

Originally posted by jetje@2 July 2003 - 13:16
<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4

@2 July 2003 - 00:46
Isn&#39;t it a trifle odd the I.C.C., under NATO auspices, is attempting to bill the U.S. &#036;77.5 million dollars as it&#39;s share of the cost for a new &#036;352 million-dollar facility in which to try all the members of the U.S. government and it&#39;s military the I.C.C. has indicted for war-crimes?

Perhaps if we don&#39;t pay the bill, then....

did they ever pay then???

I sure hope not.

Sorry to be so obstinate about this, but I think NATO is seriously passe and needs to be junked, whereas the U.N. is merely doomed to eternal fecklessness.

Well tell it to feck off then. [/b][/quote]
Done.

Thank you, JPaul.

[djflypson]

the belgium law is no more ...
they fear the USA will bring NATO&#39;s location in Brussels somewhere else.

money talks