Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama May Place U.S. Under International Criminal Court
humanevents.com ^ | 02/10/2009 | Thomas P. Kilgannon

Posted on 02/16/2009 10:49:57 AM PST by shielagolden

Obama May Place U.S. Under International Criminal Court

Waterboarding. Abu Ghraib. Detaining terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Dissing Hans Blix. These, as seen by the Left, are the cardinal sins of George W. Bush’s administration. Set aside the fraternity party-like nonsense that took place at Abu Ghraib and what’s left are actions taken to protect U.S. interests.

But self-loathing Americans whose minds are confined in the cult of globalism don’t see it that way. Each of these “offenses” has at least one thing in common: they hurt the feelings of foreigners. Insensitivity to the outside world, U.S. internationalists argue, is a stain on Uncle Sam’s reputation from which we must repent.

With that in mind, one more “offense” must be included in the list of Bush’s sins. It occurred May 6, 2002, when John Bolton, on orders from the President, withdrew the U.S. from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Oh, there were terrible tantrums in Turtle Bay that day! Globalists were dismayed because Mr. Bush’s rejection of the ICC was a vote for American sovereignty -- a refusal to cede authority to international government and a court that is not bound to the principles of the U.S. Constitution, far less our laws.

That could change under the Obama administration.

Two weeks ago, hope returned to the House of Hammarskjold when U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, in a closed Security Council meeting, voiced support for the ICC. She said it “looks to become an important and credible instrument for trying to hold accountable the senior leadership responsible for atrocities committed in the Congo, Uganda and Darfur.”

The mere mention of the International Criminal Court by the U.S. Permanent Representative drew her colleagues’ attention. “What she said on human rights and international law I could have written myself,” French ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert told Bloomberg News. Costa Rica’s Jorge Urbina said Rice’s speech “raises expectations” that the United States will submit to the authority of the ICC.

Urbina is on point. Sen. Obama said little about the ICC during his campaign for the White House. But in his first weeks as President, his actions speak less to constituents in Peoria and the Bronx than to admirers in Paris and Brussels. Obama’s trans-American constituent service includes his decision to shutter “Gitmo” and grant his first presidential interview with Al Arabiya television.

In his inauguration speech, Obama declared that “America is ready to lead once more.” He said American power “does [not] entitle us to do as we please.” In the parlance of the Left, these suggest submission to international authority, which was raised again last week when Ben Chang, spokesman for National Security Advisor General James Jones, echoed Rice’s comments about the Court. In the context of an ICC indictment for Sudanese President Omar Bashir, Chang told the Washington Times, “We support the ICC in its pursuit of those who’ve perpetrated war crimes.”

So, what will ICC engagement mean for the United States? To answer that, one must read “A Strategy for U.S. Engagement with the International Criminal Court,” written by David Scheffer and John Hutson and issued by the Century Foundation. Scheffer was instrumental in the formation of the ICC and served as Ambassador at Large for War Crimes in the Clinton administration. Hutson was the Navy’s Judge Advocate General from 1997-2000.

The report is stunning in its frankness, heartbreaking in its eagerness to sacrifice American citizens for some nebulous “global good.” The authors’ complaints begin with the Bush administration’s unwillingness to subject Americans to ICC indictments. They explain:

Any path toward support of the ICC will require examining long-standing concerns about the exposure of U.S. military service personnel and American political and military leaders to the court, whether or not the United States is a state party to the Rome Statute. (emphasis added)

A cornerstone of the ICC is that its jurisdiction extends only to those nations that ratify the Rome Statute. By subjecting the U.S. to the ICC even as a non-participant, the authors have turned the Rome Statute into a “living document.” It should be noted that the ICC itself is doing the same. Last week, Lois Morena Oncampo launched an investigation to determine if Israel can be prosecuted for attacks on Gaza. Israel is not a party to the ICC.

Scheffer and Hutson continue, stating the implications to the U.S.

“If the United States were to join the ICC,” they write, “one would have to accept at least the theoretical possibility that American citizens (particularly political and military leaders) could be prosecuted before the ICC on charges of committing atrocity crimes.” And without the protections afforded by Constitutional and laws.

What do Scheffer and Hutson mean when they suggest U.S. “political leaders” can be prosecuted by the ICC for “atrocity crimes"? See paragraph one.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: 0bama; agenda; bho; bho2009; bho44; bhoforeignpolicy; blameamericafirst; bo; court; criminal; democrats; dhimmicrats; icc; iffbcb; international; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-214 next last

1 posted on 02/16/2009 10:49:58 AM PST by shielagolden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

Triple investments in lead.


2 posted on 02/16/2009 10:51:37 AM PST by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

Placing American citizens under foreign criminal jurisdiction is a violation of the 11th Amendment isn’t? Please advise.


3 posted on 02/16/2009 10:51:43 AM PST by txnativegop (God Bless America! (NRA-Endowment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

This has to be stopped. Period.


4 posted on 02/16/2009 10:52:16 AM PST by deannadurbin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

If he does, then he deserves a civil war in return.


5 posted on 02/16/2009 10:52:28 AM PST by reagan_fanatic (Dissent Is Patriotic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden
Lincoln's election tore this country apart.

Obama wants to be just like Lincoln.

6 posted on 02/16/2009 10:53:20 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Obama must be the Antichrist. No one else would work so hard to destroy the US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

I said he’d last till July 23. Perhaps not


7 posted on 02/16/2009 10:53:47 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 . The original point of America was not to be Europe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reagan_fanatic
I came to the same conclusion...he'd be asking for a revolution if he carries this out.

NEWS FLASH - Yo, B.O. I wouldn't go there if I were you...

8 posted on 02/16/2009 10:54:57 AM PST by NordP (CONSERVATIVE AGAIN IN 2010 ..... Now, is it 2012 yet ???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

Run away from this ICC idea, screaming!

These internationalists would like nothing better than to have an American scalp-or-two on their mantlepiece.


9 posted on 02/16/2009 10:55:10 AM PST by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

BHO will enforce ICC law against Sudan. US soldiers will be sent to Africa to be human shields for black Africans and they will serve under African commanders.


10 posted on 02/16/2009 10:55:21 AM PST by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

I do not think that would be constitutional.


11 posted on 02/16/2009 10:56:03 AM PST by The Great RJ ("Mir we bleiwen wat mir sin" or "We want to remain what we are." ..Luxembourg motto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

I’ve said the False Prophet will send US troops to Africa.


12 posted on 02/16/2009 10:57:27 AM PST by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ

The constitution can be amended amigo


13 posted on 02/16/2009 10:58:24 AM PST by shadeaud (Time to smell the roses and not the stench coming from D .C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: unkus
In the mind of the black supremacist Obama, US soldiers are only good for sacrificing their lives to save the lives of black Africans.
14 posted on 02/16/2009 10:59:07 AM PST by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

Let’s just say Obama is a puppet with George Soros pulling the strings..When will people learn this..Obama does what the commie commander tells him to do..


15 posted on 02/16/2009 10:59:25 AM PST by PLD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unkus
Triple investments in lead.

You tried buying powder or primers lately ... sold out.

16 posted on 02/16/2009 10:59:43 AM PST by tx_eggman (I own two rare photos. Houdini as he locks his keys in his car and Norman Rockwell beating a child.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bert
I said he’d last till July 23. Perhaps not

What is the significance of July 23rd?

I am concerned about how July 4th will be (officially) celebrated this year. I don't mean how it will be celebrated across America: in citizens' town squares and backyards. I mean, how will it be celebrated in our nation's Capital.

17 posted on 02/16/2009 10:59:47 AM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

And then international war crimes charges against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld would be opened.


18 posted on 02/16/2009 10:59:50 AM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shadeaud

The constitution can be amended amigo
______________________________

The Constitution means nothing to these evil people.


19 posted on 02/16/2009 10:59:59 AM PST by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

May?

What’s this may business?

It’s only a matter of time.


20 posted on 02/16/2009 11:00:02 AM PST by Quix (POL BOSSES say fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

If this happens, I predict a mass exodus from the military. Those that stay in the military will not shoot. We loose.


21 posted on 02/16/2009 11:00:59 AM PST by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

It’s time to shine the light on this guy’s past that will get him kicked out of office.


22 posted on 02/16/2009 11:02:39 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden
God help our military and protect them from this man's wicked schemes.
23 posted on 02/16/2009 11:03:11 AM PST by 444Flyer (Don't beLIEve Obama..................Repent Nimrod!...............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

ARGGHHH! QUIT FRACKIN’ UP OUR COUNTRY YA JERK!


24 posted on 02/16/2009 11:04:23 AM PST by visualops (portraits.artlife.us or visit my freeper page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden
Obama May Place U.S. Under International Criminal Court

Obama does this and his government is in for a world of hurt.

25 posted on 02/16/2009 11:04:41 AM PST by Centurion2000 (01-20-2009 : The end of the PAX AMERICANA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

Another socialist, globalist idea heading to fruition, I fear.

ANY attempt to abrogate US sovereignty should be met with a most vigorous opposition. I hope the Pubbies have it in them to mount such opposition. They will certainly be able to count on every freedom loving conservative in the country, I would hope, also.

Time to reclaim the country...


26 posted on 02/16/2009 11:05:31 AM PST by PubliusMM (RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2013: Change we can look forward to.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman

You tried buying powder or primers lately ... sold out.
___________________________

Orders are being filled as fast as possible. There is a huge back log.


27 posted on 02/16/2009 11:05:34 AM PST by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

I can’t believe how quickly we’re going down the sh*tter. This is so sad.


28 posted on 02/16/2009 11:06:08 AM PST by prismsinc (A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
"Obama wants to be just like Lincoln."

Yes. Especially the part about suspending Habeas Corpus, imposing martial law - stuff like that.

Coming soon. You betcha.

29 posted on 02/16/2009 11:06:22 AM PST by ChicagahAl (Don't blame me. I voted for Sarah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

Just one more thing for the next President to rescind.


30 posted on 02/16/2009 11:07:44 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

Is Obama turning Clinton over to the ICC on the war crimes charges?

They’ve been waiting 10 years for him.


31 posted on 02/16/2009 11:08:29 AM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden
That could change under the Obama administration.

Oh...Mr. 0bama had best hope it does not. That would be a most egregious "misunderestimization" of the average American's love for his country and hatred of the U.N.

32 posted on 02/16/2009 11:08:36 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (All the oil's in Texas...but all the dipsticks are in Washington, DC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ

constitutional means only what the current members of the supreme court want it to mean. I have no confidence that 5 of the current court members are even literate. They will sign off on this just as soon as it gets to them.


33 posted on 02/16/2009 11:08:39 AM PST by rigelkentaurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

We can expect Jim Robinson and etc. to be extradited to Europe and Canada for daring to criticise islam.


34 posted on 02/16/2009 11:08:43 AM PST by MahatmaGandu (Remember, remember, the twenty-sixth of November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden
"...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself..."

Given that anything you say "can and will be used against you" and given that United States Courts, prosecutors, Congress, etc. aren't going to be able to provide immunity from the ICC for anything said and given that we won't know what will come under the authority of the ICC, not just now but in the future, I guess we can't answer any questions asked by United States Courts, prosecutors, Congress, etc.

Of course, considering the Linda Trip thing and the Lautenberg Amendment, that's pretty much true already.

35 posted on 02/16/2009 11:09:43 AM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

If you’re going to try anybody in this place for war crimes it has to be about Kosovo.


36 posted on 02/16/2009 11:10:08 AM PST by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

A new meaning to “Sold down the river.”


37 posted on 02/16/2009 11:11:24 AM PST by oyez (People! You're being pimped!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

sigh...
bookmark for later.


38 posted on 02/16/2009 11:12:07 AM PST by IrishCatholic (No local Communist or Socialist Party Chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

I will never submit to the jurisdiction of any international court.


39 posted on 02/16/2009 11:15:19 AM PST by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden
Wouldn't this require a treaty of some sort? Obama would need 2/3rds of the Senate to consent.

-PJ

40 posted on 02/16/2009 11:15:36 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (You can never overestimate the Democrats' ability to overplay their hand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden
I knew it. I just knew this would happen. Clinton signed the ICC treaty in the late 1990's, but the majority Republican senate refused to ratify the treaty. One of the first things President Bush did after his January 20, 2001 inauguration was to REVOKE CLINTON'S SIGNATURE. President Bush removed the U.S. as a signatory to the ICC treaty.

However, anyone who understands that Obama is an avowed Marxist, and that the current Congress is loaded with far Left Dems, could see this coming a mile away.

Elections have consequences. Conservatives must learn to play the game of politics effectively, starting with the fact that you never, ever, EVER win by losing.

In a nutshell, here's Obama's message:


41 posted on 02/16/2009 11:16:07 AM PST by Wolfstar (Elections have thousands of consequences. Some minor, some major...and some that can kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

Foreign born, non-citizen President.........giving America away.....


42 posted on 02/16/2009 11:16:16 AM PST by illiac (If we don't change directions soon, we'll get where we're going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

Given the ground situation that would be a joke. African militaries are pathetic, with the exception of the Egyptians and some ‘Arab’ units in North Africa.
However American soldiers have served under foreign commanders before in the world wars.


43 posted on 02/16/2009 11:16:22 AM PST by SeminoleSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: shielagolden

When Average Americans start going up in front of the ICC for hate-crimes like DARING to speak against the gay lifestyle, standing against Obamaunism, etc,etc, many Americans will begin to realize what they have done.

But, just like many Germans learned, it will be too late to do ANYTHING about it.


44 posted on 02/16/2009 11:16:53 AM PST by tcrlaf ("Hope" is the most Evil of all Evils"-Neitzsche)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ
I do not think that would be constitutional.

Yeah, well, I didn't think McCain-Feingold was constitutional either.

45 posted on 02/16/2009 11:17:01 AM PST by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rigelkentaurus

constitutional means only what the current members of the supreme court want it to mean. I have no confidence that 5 of the current court members are even literate. They will sign off on this just as soon as it gets to them.

_______

I must disagree.

The Constitution means what We The People say it means.

The Constitution belongs to us, not to the courts, the feds, the congress or any other usurper.


46 posted on 02/16/2009 11:17:47 AM PST by KittenClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: shadeaud
The constitution can be amended amigo

Never happen with this, no way

47 posted on 02/16/2009 11:19:37 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Obama says we should listen to our enemies, but not to Rush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: txnativegop
Placing American citizens under foreign criminal jurisdiction is a violation of the 11th Amendment isn’t? Please advise.

If a President signs a treaty, and if the senate ratifies it, then that treaty becomes the law of our land.

United States Constitution, Article VI, 2nd paragraph
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

48 posted on 02/16/2009 11:20:19 AM PST by Wolfstar (Elections have thousands of consequences. Some minor, some major...and some that can kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: deannadurbin
This has to be stopped. Period.

It would have to be stopped in the Senate. Good luck with that given the current makeup of the Senate.

49 posted on 02/16/2009 11:21:21 AM PST by Wolfstar (Elections have thousands of consequences. Some minor, some major...and some that can kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeminoleSoldier

The commander of the current UN mission in Sudan is from Nepal, a nation ruled by elected maoist communists.


50 posted on 02/16/2009 11:22:15 AM PST by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-214 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson