Birtherism has turned into a joke. Health care reform will send old people to death camps is getting stale. So what’s a right wing fanatic to do? I suspect — no make that I strongly suspect — that this will be next big brouhaha to arise from the Real Americans about how much Obama and the Democrats hate America: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s remarks in Kenya (you can see their little pinwheel hats spinning already at the mention of that country) that it is regrettable the US is not a member of the International Criminal Court — you know, the one that prosecutes people for war crimes:
NAIROBI, Kenya, August 6 — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday it was “a great regret” that the United States was not a member of the International Criminal Court, an institution that has long been treated warily by the Pentagon. […
Clinton said it was “a great regret but it is a fact” that the U.S. government was not a member of the court. “But we have supported the court and continue to do so.”
She added: “I think we could have worked out some of the challenges that are raised concerning our membership by our own government, but that has not yet come to pass.” […]
In December 2000, Clinton’s husband, then-President Bill Clinton, signed the treaty setting up the International Criminal Court, despite what he called “concerns about significant flaws.” But he did not submit it to Congress for ratification. Months later, the Bush administration in effect withdrew that signature. The Obama administration has not made any move to join the court.
The Pentagon has long worried that the international war crimes court could unfairly target American military personnel stationed around the globe. Some legal experts, however, say the U.S. government had won important concessions to ensure protection of American servicemen and servicewomen.
Here’s how the AP headlines the story, by the way:
Clinton suggests US could join war crimes court
A headline bound to stir up the right wing juices, doncha think? Of course, she said no such thing. She was simply giving a diplomatic response to the anger many in the international community feel that the US refused to join the Court, and then launched an illegal, aggressive war (i.e., committed a war crime) against Iraq which has resulted in the death and displacement of millions of people. Personally, I doubt this will happen on Obama’s watch or any other President’s either, but it would be nice if Dick Cheney and Dubya were wetting their collective pants about now considering the possibility of standing in the dock at The Hague on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity, wouldn’t it?
Ironically, now that we have actual war criminals in our midst, we’re less likely than ever to ratify the treaty. We might get one vote for it in the Senate. Maybe.
Yes. But if ever we needed a real Justice Department to step up, now would be the time.
Frankly, to date, Holder and Obama have been big disappointments in this regard. Maybe if they pass health care this year, next year they can indict Yoo, Rummy, Cheney and Bush. But the odds are too long to even put them on the board, I’m afraid.
I believe that the REAL attack on Obama will be detainee abuse. The rest of this stuff is ‘nipping at the heels’ garbage. It is creating the infrastructure for THE issue.
I think that issue will be war crimes. Let’s not forget, defending or ignoring war crimes IS a war crime. Obama has now officially made Bush’s torture policies his own.
Right now the Republicans will not cross that line because they would be attacking and threatening their own. But towards 2011 they will become desperate, and Bush and Cheney and their minions will be ‘the past’, and there will no longer be a reason to protect them. Then some foreign court or country will put out a report that includes Obama in its conclusions. Obama has made this inevitable with his endorsements of Bush’s actions.
That is when the wolves will try to pull him down. Because at that point Obama will be committing crimes. Yes, they have always ignored international law, but since when have the republicans been consistent? It’s where all this is leading.
And Obama is helping them do it.
nalbar
Your logic eludes me.
Sorry, I did my best.
nalbar
I have a bag of popcorn waiting for this….
Gods, just the image of it in my mind brings a smile to the face….
Anyone else unable to access Twitter and Facebook today?
Twitter’s struggling with a massive DOS attack…
As of 11:00pm, Facebook works fine.
Accountability was never going to happen. Congress made sure of that in 2002 : see Wikipedia entry American Servicemen Protection Act
Here are some search results on this item – which I have followed for years. Smirking Chimp and The Existentialist Cowboy have an excellent supply of vitriol on the matter.
From http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_06/009042.php ( variations of this thread went on for years : complete with trolls )
Opit reference me in a post about torture becasue as a former interrogator I have fairly strong views about what is and isn’t torture and how effective it is as an interrogation technique. I refered him to some posts on my blog that directly deal with the topic. I don’t think I am going to throw myself into this sommnet fest this far along with a whole lot of arguements. I’ll just wait for the topic to come up again (which of course it will) amybe opit or someone will point me this way a little earlier inthe game.
I will say this though. Back in first post he writer quote Spencer Ackerman saying “Remember that as an Iraqi detainee, the Geneva Conventions apply to you. ” Actually under the laws of land warfare the average Iraqi insurgent is not entitled to Geneva protection. There are very specific guidelines for who is and who isn’t. If I had my copy with me I could cite the section but I don’t. So look it up yourself.
Posted by: exmi on June 21, 2006 at 10:08 PM |
http://exmi.blogspot.com/
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/4894
Major Charles Birney confirms torture was carried out to get false al Qaeda link
http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2009/02/you-can-forget-prosecutions-for-torture-orders-now.html
http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourview/2008/01/torture_watchlist_wrongly_name.html
http://suzieqq.wordpress.com/2009/04/11/does-the-bush-cia-team-fear-prosecution-for-torture/
http://www.groupnewsblog.net/2009/06/rip.html
( Obama and Bagram ! )
The commonly referenced ‘conspiracy theorists’ are aware of the irony of such a term of disinformation – as it is code referring to conditioning to be suspicious of scientific method. So it should be fun to just jump in, right?
http://www.global-elite.org/node/1326
KUBARK : The CIA’s 1963 Torture manual
.
Hillary Clinton has signalled a significant shift by the US in favour of the international criminal court, the world body that pursues war criminals but was strenuously opposed by the Bush administration.
The US is at present not only not a member but government officials are theoretically banned from any engagement with the ICC whatsoever.
So far 110 countries have ratified the Rome statute. Those who have not signed, apart from the US, include Russia, China and Israel.
One of the most prestigious international legal bodies in the US, the American Society of International Law, published a report in March from its own taskforce, which unanimously recommended that the Obama administration officially engage with the ICC and give serious consideration to joining the court.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Too bad Obama can’t threaten Republicans with “If y’all don’t sign on to healthcare for all, I’ll be having me a bit of a talk with the ICC to see just what we can do about that last president here.”
Sigh!
If only.
Unfortunately, there are too many Blue Dogs within the compound to make that threat work.