Oh Oh: To the Hague

[malaise]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/18/nirq118.xml

<snip>
Tony Blair faces the prospect of an International Criminal Court investigation for alleged coalition war crimes in Iraq.

The court's chief prosecutor told The Sunday Telegraph that he would be willing to launch an inquiry and could envisage a scenario in which the Prime Minister and American President George W Bush could one day face charges at The Hague.

[helderheid]

1. first the lap dog...

[ixion]

3. then the 'lap', as it were

[ixion]

2. if we're ever to restore international credibility

it's the only way.

[oblivious]

4. If only I could recommend a thousand times.

[malaise]

10. LOL

Heard this on WJ early this morning.

[goclark]

47. Oblivious, I'll help with another R !

I can't wait to see them in the Hague!

[Cooley Hurd]

5. Shrub and his poodle - TO ZE COOLAH!

:rofl:

K&R!:kick:

[CrazyOrangeCat]

6. !

:spray:

[jazzjunkysue]

7. ...But, there's no oil in the Hague?!?

(The only thought that crosses the little failed oil driller's mind.)

[malaise]

8. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

The snake oil is running out.

[Vinca]

9. A war crimes trial will be the only justice for Bush.

Impeachment would be nice, but amounts to a slap on the wrist and a footnote in a history book. Conviction at a war crimes trial would more properly suit the end results of the Bush years and he might actually face punishment Poppy can't buy him out of.

[intheflow]

56. Very true.

The Republicans made sure that impeachment was reduced to a trite, petty carnival side show when they went after Clinton for Lewinsky--hardly an offense with international consequences, just a silly historical footnote. But to have the world court after them for their tyranny and fascism... Bush might end up in the history books as the first US leader to be executed. That pretty much places him in historical line with Hussein. I hope they can bring Cheney up on war crimes, too.

[loudsue]

76. Yes! Don't forget Cheney! AND Rumsfeld! They are so much a part of this.

It's also those generals & footsoldiers for the two of these heads of state that are as heinous as any who ever lived.

Boy I hope this happens!

:kick::kick::kick:

[Swamp Rat]

77. Shout it from the rooftops loudsue!!

:D

[seemslikeadream]

11. SEND THEM ALL!

malaise




BANDULU

[Hubert Flottz]

13. I agree they are ALL guilty!

All the enablers in congress too.

[malaise]

20. Sweet post

This seemslikeadream :D

[DemReadingDU]

21. Yes, they are all guilty!

[madokie]

12. My first read this morning and what a read it was too

the road to peace goes thru the Hague.

[acmavm]

14. There's no way that this story could ever be recommended enough

times.

Picturing bush**, blair, and the neocons in the dock at the Hague is like imagining finding the pot of good at the end of a rainbow.

[Amonester]

39. K&R and yes!

Or also, picturing bu$che, bliar, and the neocon$ in the dock at the Hague is like imagining being a witness to the Nuremberg Trials, take 2 (although it's sad we have to go through this process again because some greedy f**ks can't learn anything from History which they R supposed to master...). :puke:

:thumbsup:

[depakid]

15. One can only hope

Bush, Cheney, Gonzales- the whole lot of them belong before The Hague.

[BlackVelvet04]

16. Well......

"America has refused to accept the court's jurisdiction and is unlikely to hand over any of its citizens to face trial. However, Britain has signed up and the Government has indicated its willingness to tackle accusations of war crimes against a number of British soldiers."

[mile18blister]

26. What if we signed up in the future?

What control would the Dems need to join the ICC? Would we need both Congress and the White House? Crimes against humanity fall into a special category. I'm no lawyer, but I can't believe we there'd be any Constitutional problems if we signed up and shipped the whole BFEE to the Hague. I don't enjoy living in what has become a rogue nation, and I want the whole world to know it.

[merh]

31. according to the article, Iraq is considering signing on

so we could too, and our war criminals would be subject to the jurisdiction of the Hague.

[wryter2000]

34. Welcome to DU

:hi:

[Mechatanketra]

64. We would need both the Senate and the WH.

Since participation with the ICC is a matter of international treaty, it would have to be signed by the President and approved by the Senate (not by Congress as a whole).

One thing is, tho ... AFAIK, there's no statute of limitations on war crimes.

[WritersBlock]

17. Very interesting that Saddam wanted to join the ICC....

From the OP's link:

"Days before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Saddam Hussein approached lawyers in Britain about signing up but was overtaken by events. Had he succeeded, the actions of the US in Iraq would fall within the court's jurisdiction."

That sure doesn't sound like a course of action that would be taken by someone who was hiding WMDs & posing enough of a threat to justify invading his country, since he would have rendered himself subject to its jurisdiction as well. Funny how we never heard about this before. Wouldn't have fit in with the buildup, though, would it?

I hope Condi, Donnie, Dickie, Paul, and several others of the PNAC ilk will join Tony & Georgie in the dock!

[merh]

30. Even more interesting is this from the article:

-snip-

Mr Moreno-Ocampo said it was still possible for an investigation to be launched into coalition actions in Iraq if that country signed up.

Hamid al-Bayati, Iraq's ambassador to the UN, said Iraq was actively considering joining.

-snip-

[bear425]

18. I keep getting this message on my screen:

Error: You've already recommended that thread.

[Nimrod2005]

19. Praise the Lord!!! About Fu#@8$ing time!!!

[Pavulon]

22. Pretty sure

the us is a non signatory and non participant in the ICC.

Even so I can pretty much assure you that the Prime Minister of the UK will not be tried in the ICC.

[alfredo]

25. Bringing down indictments against bush and blair would be

terrific even though neither one will be handed over for trial.

They will spend the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders. Both will wear the brand "War Criminal."

[Ghost in the Machine]

27. War Criminal...

[alfredo]

55. We are a nation of laws, not men. We are also supposed to be

an example of civility. It is obvious now that we are not above creating a Pinochet, a Franco, or worse.

[mopinko]

53. correct

[Vidar]

23. K&R.

[Lars39]

24. Hot damn!

It's a start. :bounce:

[barbtries]

28. that would be terrific

better late than never. can they throw in rumsfeld wolfowitz rice feith etc etc etc?

[The Doctor.]

32. Rumsfeld already connot visit Germany.

At least not as himself.

The rest of the world should follow suit and file charges against all these assholes. Make sure they know damn well they are considered criminals.

[never cry wolf]

29. Oh, please, please, please make it so.... K & R

[wryter2000]

33. Wouldn't it be interesting?

A former US President not being able to go to Europe for fear of being arrested for war crimes. Not that he'd want to go to Europe, but still...

[femrap]

35. And the rolling stone begins to

accelerate down the hill....this is good.

[bvar22]

36. K&R

I would also like to see the executives of every Security Contractor in Iraq sitting in the dock with the other War Criminals.
Propagandists for the 3rd Reich were also convicted at Nuremburg.

Justice!

[immoderate]

68. They could double as witnesses...

Using mercenaries is a war crime. :)

--IMM

[Raksha]

70. Propagandists??? Does that mean our current crop of media whores

would also be eligible? There's no doubt in anyone's mind that they enabled Bush's war, every step of the way. And they are still doing it. If they could also be prosecuted for war crimes, that's what I would call JUSTICE!!!

[petgoat]

73. Dahr Jamail says the news media that whipped up war fervor

violated the Nuremberg principles and could be tried.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. GB recognizes the court

and has extradition treaties....

Sorry...

I can laugh a little...

That will make Tony sweat a tad, and how much do yuo wanna bet he's moving to America after he's out of office

[sutz12]

38. Is Paraguay a member of the ICC?

That's where the new Bush compound is going in, right?

[mile18blister]

46. Paraguay is a member.

Here's the link to member list.

http://www.icc-cpi.int/statesparties.html

[jaybeat]

40. Music, sweet music (nt)

[leftofthedial]

41. I have zero faith in the concept of justice

unless that indeed does happen

[rosesaylavee]

42. Justice will be served

either there or here - makes no matter to me where just so IT IS served.

[sellitman]

43. I hit the recommend button 1000 times.

In the hope.......

[madokie]

44. I hear music in this here news, yessiree

[Jack Rabbit]

45. El señor Moreno-Ocampo has my full support in his endeavor

This is long overdue.

As an American citizen, I will not lift a finger to shield any Bush junta official from international justice.

That includes the White House squatter himself.

[malaise]

59. The world can't wait n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

48. A lot of "memories are getting hazy" about now.

Goddam! I hope this happens.

[Forkboy]

49. We could start a pool on how many times someone will say,"I don't recall."

It'll be like Iran/Contra all over again! :popcorn:

[Prophet 451]

50. Huzzah!

I'm a Brit and the smarmy bastard (who I never liked or voted for) should be awaiting trial even now.

[Seldona]

51. Bush admitted himself that 30k died in 'Shock and Awe,'

if I remember correctly. And that was just civilians killed in the initial invasion. Wish I had saved the video, cannot remember what bingo caller show it was. But he spoke of the 30k civilians he ordered killed with that shit eating grin on his face. Made me sick.

But it is hardly surprising. Richard Perle admitted the invasion was illegal. That was shocking.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html

This is a sad day for America and the UK. There is no doubt in my mind that if this administration were investigated they would be charged. The evidence is there to convict as well.

My question is if future president were to sign on to this court, would that open this administration to an investigation then? Can't imagine there is a statute of limitations on war crimes.

[understandinglife]

52. "It Is Tribunal Time In The United States of America" ...

"We the People ...." must hold Bush and his neoconster minions accountable, firstly. Happy for the ICC to do so, as well.


Peace.

[LeftishBrit]

54. I just wish...

Nasty little worm. He would thoroughly deserve it. So would Bush, of course.

I just don't think that it's ever going to happen.

Channel 4 recently produced a fictional play about Tony getting sent to The Hague - obviously reflecting the fantasies of quite a few Brits.

[baby_mouse]

57. Ahhhhhh....

I hear horns...

[earth mom]

58. There is a God if this is so. eom

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

60. Take notes, Pelosi.

THIS is what we're talking about.

You can take your table and shove it.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

61. Washington Times Headline: Hague court could try Bush, Blair

I bet that made a couple of repugs nervous when they saw that headline. :rofl:


Link to WA Times article: http://washingtontimes.com/world/20070318-121749-6686r.htm

[malaise]

62. So where's the rest of MSM? n/t

[Lone_Star_Dem]

63. I assume they're changing their pants

Considering how complacent they were to bush regarding lying us into this war.

[malaise]

65. Valid point

Hope they're shaking in their collective boots tonight.

[ooglymoogly]

66. If only it could happen this planet might have a chance. nt kr

[mod mom]

67. Clinton signed but * unsigned (to protect his sorry criminal ass):

United States "Unsigning" Treaty on War Crimes Court

(New York, May 6, 2002) - The Bush Administration's decision to effectively withdraw the U.S. signature from the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court is an empty gesture that will further estrange Washington from its closest allies, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter.
? The administration is putting itself on the wrong side of history. 'Unsigning' the treaty will not stop the court. It will only throw the United States into opposition against the most important new institution for enforcing human rights in fifty years ?
Kenneth Roth  
Executive Director of Human Rights Watch  
  
In an unprecedented diplomatic maneuver, Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman is expected to announce today that the Bush administration does not consider itself bound by President Clinton's December 31, 2000 signature on the treaty to create a permanent war crimes tribunal.  
 
"The administration is putting itself on the wrong side of history," said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. "'Unsigning' the treaty will not stop the court. It will only throw the United States into opposition against the most important new institution for enforcing human rights in fifty years."  
 
The International Criminal Court treaty has already received more than the requisite number of 60 ratifications, and its jurisdiction will commence after July 1, 2002, with or without the U.S. signature. The court will try people accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. All of Western Europe and virtually every major U.S. ally are strong supporters of the court. The only states still actively opposing the court are the United States and Libya.  

-snip
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2002/05/06/usint3903.htm

[file83]

69. If they find Bush guilty, what do you reckon will be the punshment?

[grace0418]

71. Cool, I got to give this the 100th recommendation.

Tony first, then on to the real criminals!

[nicknameless]

72. We'd have a far greater chance for justice if the Hague tried the cabal.

These career criminals are only in power now because of the lack of justice in the US.
First nixon's pardon, then the iran-contra pardons.
Many of the same people are involved in the current war crimes.
Talk about a revolving door.

[Senator]

74. Pelosi Must Impeach To Stay Out of "The Cue"...

...as the Brits put it.

And there is no statute of limitations on war crimes. No crony judges to stop the process. No one to terrorize into compliance. No where to send the suitcases full of currency. You can even bomb The Hague to rubble and the court will simply reconvene elsewhere.

The touted "Unsigning" by the never-elected, never-legitimate bushcheney regime is just more evidence -- in this instance of "consciousness of guilt."

And I can't imagine Blair playing the Scooter Libby role. The name of the game for him will be mitigation of punishment. As it will be for Silvio Berlusconi, John Howard, Leszek Miller, those who approved secret prisons, indicted CIA kidnappers, perhaps even Rumsfeld and others.

It's also possible that Pelosi and the DC LieberDems could "cut in the line." Failure to impeach and stop the ongoing torture and war crimes may well be where such a court might start to build a case against the bigger fish.

--

[ClayZ]

75. 'twould be a day to celebrate!