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

Skip to comments.

Letter: U.S. Withdrawal from ICC
NewsMax.com ^ | Monday May 6, 2002 | NewsMax.com

Posted on 05/06/2002 10:13:45 AM PDT by jgrubbs

Letter: U.S. Withdrawal from ICC

NewsMax.com
Monday May 6, 2002
UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR
ARMS CONTROL AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
WASHINGTON

Dear Mr. Secretary-General:

This is to inform you, in connection with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted on July 17, 1998, that the United States does not intend to become a party to the treaty. Accordingly, the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature on December 31, 2000. The United States requests that its intention not to become a party, as expressed in this letter, be reflected in the depositary's status lists relating to this treaty.

Sincerely,

John R. Bolton





The Honorable
Kofi Annan
Secretary General of the United Nations
The United Nations
New York

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE ORIGINAL LETTER


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: criminalcourt; icc; nwo; un; unlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last

1 posted on 05/06/2002 10:13:46 AM PDT by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
That's some mighty fancy letterhead at the State Dept.

Does that not seem odd?

2 posted on 05/06/2002 10:17:41 AM PDT by StriperSniper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
this is why we elected george w. bush.
3 posted on 05/06/2002 10:18:11 AM PDT by contessa machiaveli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StriperSniper
It is odd... Also, the date seems stamped on. The United States has very
rigid standards for diplomatic correspondance. Last I knew (1996) you were
still required to use a daisy wheel printer for official diplomatic correspondance.
4 posted on 05/06/2002 10:23:22 AM PDT by max_rpf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Here's some more info on John R. Bolton
This looks like it's just the fist step in the process. Great news.
5 posted on 05/06/2002 10:23:56 AM PDT by Hillarys Gate Cult
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs; ALL
SQUEEZE HERE.
6 posted on 05/06/2002 10:24:32 AM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: max_rpf
It does show contempt... :)
7 posted on 05/06/2002 10:24:33 AM PDT by max_rpf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Sounds excellent. I can not believe there is not an editoral to go along with the release of the letter. The lib pres must be so dumbfounded they cant find words.

We don't need to get out of the UN, just neuter it and put all the whining, anti-western culture, "give us a handout while we bomb and protest against you", third world nations back on a short leash.

8 posted on 05/06/2002 10:27:08 AM PDT by Magnum44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs

9 posted on 05/06/2002 10:27:24 AM PDT by P8riot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snow Bunny; Billie; FallGuy; JohnHuang2; Mama_Bear; Victoria Delsoul; daisyscarlett; Iowa Granny...
Dear Mr. Secretary-General:

This is to inform you, in connection with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted on July 17, 1998, that the United States does not intend to become a party to the treaty. Accordingly, the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature on December 31, 2000. The United States requests that its intention not to become a party, as expressed in this letter, be reflected in the depositary's status lists relating to this treaty.

Sincerely,

John R. Bolton
10 posted on 05/06/2002 10:28:55 AM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StriperSniper
Looks like your typical Adobe file on stuff like this. Cheap to do and looks cheap when you print it out!

This could be a real slap in the face to coffee anan!

11 posted on 05/06/2002 10:34:19 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Thanks for the good news ping!
12 posted on 05/06/2002 10:35:18 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: P8riot
Nicely done and well said.
13 posted on 05/06/2002 10:35:32 AM PDT by lds23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs, sonofliberty2, HalfIrish, NMC EXP, OKCSubmariner, Travis McGee, t-shirt, DoughtyOne, SLB
This is just one more victory to chalk up for the conservative "unilateralist" Rumsfeld led faction of the Bush Adminstration against the liberal globalist Powell faction! Now, Bush needs to follow this up by firing Powell and appointing Rummy as the Acting Secretary of State until a suitably conservative replacement for Powell can be found! Bolton would do a fine job I should think. We could put Powell-protege Richard Armitage in a lower ranking less policy sensitive position. Once Bolton became Secretary of State, he could demote all the other Powell appointees which were mostly career diplomats, who tend to be more liberal and Communist dictator/terrorist appeasing, rather than political appointees. Powell has led Bush to make some very bad foreign policy decisions. Firing his butt would do wonders for US foreign policy except for Iraq where the Rummy war faction has got it 100% wrong in pushing for yet another US invasion of that hapless country.

MR. PRESIDENT, WE CONSERVATIVES HEREBY REQUEST, NAY DEMAND THAT YOU FIRE COLIN POWELL FOR POLICY PRESCRIPTIONS UNBECOMING AN AMERICAN POLICYMAKER AND APPOINT JOHN BOLTON TO REPLACE HIM AS YOUR SECRETARY OF STATE!!!
14 posted on 05/06/2002 10:35:39 AM PDT by rightwing2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
FINALLY, SOME GOOD NEWS.
15 posted on 05/06/2002 10:36:34 AM PDT by conserve-it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Thanks Tonk. There are several threads re: this issue. The funniest news from one poster was the "fact" that we never signed.
16 posted on 05/06/2002 10:38:21 AM PDT by Angelique
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
...100% wrong in pushing for yet another US invasion of that hapless country.

Why is the country hapless I ask??? The correct answer is the government....

17 posted on 05/06/2002 10:40:42 AM PDT by smith288
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
BUMP!
18 posted on 05/06/2002 10:43:17 AM PDT by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub; jgrubbs; All
Thanks, Tonk!

WE NEED A KOFI BREAK!
DUMP THE U.N. NOW ! !

19 posted on 05/06/2002 10:46:15 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: max_rpf
In government correspondence the date is always rubber-stamped on after it's been signed. No signature, no date.

And who's complaining about the cheap letterhead? What does the U.N. deserve? Gilt edge?

20 posted on 05/06/2002 10:48:48 AM PDT by Procyon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: contessa machiaveli
this is why we elected george w. bush.

When's he gonna terminate the American Heritage Rivers Initiative?

21 posted on 05/06/2002 10:50:05 AM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
It just makes me want to stand up and cheer.
22 posted on 05/06/2002 10:50:26 AM PDT by Bahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub;all
Good first step... next--

American Policy Center on-line Declaration of Independence from the U.N.

23 posted on 05/06/2002 10:52:32 AM PDT by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #24 Removed by Moderator

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
HURRAH!
25 posted on 05/06/2002 11:02:06 AM PDT by Colt .45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
bttt!
26 posted on 05/06/2002 11:03:48 AM PDT by MaeWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Accordingly, the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature on December 31, 2000.

An anti UN bump.

27 posted on 05/06/2002 11:19:57 AM PDT by Brownie74
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
How about shutting down the kangaroo tribunal in the Hague and releasing Slobodon Milosevic? I mean, I've never yet read anything which described hypocrisy as a good thing...
28 posted on 05/06/2002 11:24:27 AM PDT by medved
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Accordingly, the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature on December 31, 2000.

IOW, we just "unsigned" the treaty.

Or put another way, "the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature conducted at the behest of a lying, perjurous, adulterous, traitorous, masagonistic criminal that was occupying the White House at the time."

29 posted on 05/06/2002 11:29:42 AM PDT by Chairman_December_19th_Society
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Well...from all appearances it is dead...

"As a member of the Agriculture Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee Hinchey submitted written questions to Veneman after an April budget hearing. He noted that the administration's budget plan zeroed out NRCS's participation in the Heritage Rivers Initiative and asked Veneman what would happen to the two river navigators. Veneman responded that the contract for the navigator position on the Upper Susquehanna/Lackawanna project would not be extended and that the NRCS employee currently assigned as river navigator for the Hudson would now take responsibility for both rivers and would be limited to working on USDA-authorized programs. "The response from Secretary Veneman and the language in USDA's budget request made it clear that the Bush Administration sought to eliminate the American Heritage Rivers Initiative,"

Source

See also:

Heritage Rivers Initiative Advisory Committee, American; termination: EO 13225 (Under "H", a .pdf file)

From the WH website:

Sec. 3. The following Executive Orders, or sections thereof, which established committees that have terminated and whose work is completed, are revoked:

(a) Sections 3 and 4 of Executive Order 13134 pertaining to the establishment and administration of the Advisory Committee on Biobased Products and Bioenergy, superseded by the Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee established pursuant to section 306 of the Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000 (Title III of Public Law 106-224);

(b) Executive Order 13080, establishing the American Heritage Rivers Initiative Advisory Committee;

WH Press Release

30 posted on 05/06/2002 11:44:02 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: medved
"How about shutting down the kangaroo tribunal in the Hague and releasing Slobodon Milosevic?"

He was not re-elected to office by his own people.
They then sent him there.
If they want him back it's up to them to do that.
The US has more important things to do than worry about an old time Commie.
His own people can't stand him,
why should we waste our time trying to get him back to a country that does not want him?

After graduating in 1964, Milosevic joined the Communist Party,
the customary avenue to power in communist Yugoslavia.
He moved steadily up the career ladder as a business administrator, eventually assuming the leadership of the state-owned gas company before being appointed director of Beobanka, one of the major state-run banks.
He also married Mirjana Markovic, a professor of Marxist sociology at the University of Belgrade, who he had met while they were both at high school.
A fanatical communist, Markovic played a major role in her husband's rise to power, always insisting that "Slobo's picture will one day hang like Tito's."

They have two children, daughter Mira and son Marko, both of whom have made fortunes on the back of their father's political career.
31 posted on 05/06/2002 11:45:25 AM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
This kind of thing keeps up, pretty soon we'll start seeing the kind of "leaks" that plagued the Reagan administration, with one faction trying to one-up the other through leaks to the Wash Post.
32 posted on 05/06/2002 12:02:09 PM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Thank you for this ping Tonk! :)
33 posted on 05/06/2002 12:08:02 PM PDT by MistyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
AMEN to that!!!!
34 posted on 05/06/2002 12:09:17 PM PDT by MistyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Where did this letter come from? It looks completely phoney, who is John Bolton, why is his title not with his signature? By what authority does John Bolton inform the U.N. of anything?

This is bogus.

35 posted on 05/06/2002 12:29:44 PM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
"Where did this letter come from? It looks completely phoney, who is John Bolton, why is his title not with his signature? "

From link in Post 5

John R. Bolton
Under Secretary, Arms Control and International Security
Term of Appointment: 05/11/2001 to present
36 posted on 05/06/2002 12:44:10 PM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: StriperSniper
I find it odd as well. One could make much nicer stationary simply using Microsoft Word.
37 posted on 05/06/2002 12:50:11 PM PDT by Rodney King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Interesting. Thanks for the flag.
38 posted on 05/06/2002 12:59:18 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
This is suppose to be reassuring? Something very formal signed by the President, or the Senate would be reassuring, but some little note on bathroom paper from a flunky in the Justice Department just doesn't impress, it leaves far to much wiggle room to be backed away from by both the President and the Senate.
39 posted on 05/06/2002 1:08:29 PM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
BUMP!
40 posted on 05/06/2002 1:15:31 PM PDT by Tauzero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
"This is suppose to be reassuring? Something very formal signed by the President, or the Senate would be reassuring, but some little note on bathroom paper from a flunky in the Justice Department just doesn't impress, it leaves far to much wiggle room to be backed away from by both the President and the Senate."

He's with the State Dept, not the Dept of Justice.
Why waste good money on the UN with fancy staionerey?
It's a slap in the face to them.
No wiggle room at all, US Senate HAS to ratify all treaties by 2/3 rd vote.
Even klintoon never sent it to the Senate.
41 posted on 05/06/2002 1:22:36 PM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: P8riot
Dear U.N.,

There is a nice town in Switzerland which already has your offices there and would love to have you permanently. You have our blessings to get the F*** out and reside there from now on.

Sincerely,
The United States of America
42 posted on 05/06/2002 1:22:54 PM PDT by Nuke'm Glowing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie;All
PRESS RELEASE BY STATE DEPT.
43 posted on 05/06/2002 1:30:14 PM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
John Bolton is not just some flunky. He and Bob Barr, representing USA to the gun grabbing UN NGO (forget the formal title), basically told the NGO to get flushed--that we weren't going along with anything they came up with that violated the rights of US citizens to keep and bear and the rights of US gun manufacturers to sell their valuable and legal product when and as they wished. It was wonderful. You would have loved it.

The NGO was left in the embarrassing position of expressing their disappointment that they wouldn't be able to achieve their goals at the current time. Unfortunately they set it up for review again--can't remember for sure--couple of years or 5 years from then. I guess they're hoping we have another treasonous administration by then which would go along with them.

44 posted on 05/06/2002 2:10:36 PM PDT by Sal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
P.S. I understand that you meant it would be better if President Bush wrote the letter or even the Sec. State than someone who only works for them.*** It's just that I think so much of John Bolton after the gun thingie (which I'm pretty sure you agree with) that I hate to hear him called a flunky. 8^) This is such a major victory!

***OTOH the fact that X42's attempt to slip this little sovereignty buster through could be casually undone by a little note from the UNDERsecretary... It's a big slap at the UN and an even bigger one at the scumbag. I'm bookmarking this one.

45 posted on 05/06/2002 2:17:28 PM PDT by Sal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Sal
Ooops. I can't figure out how to bookmark anymore. I'd appreciate advice from anybody who knows because I sure want to keep this one.
46 posted on 05/06/2002 2:20:13 PM PDT by Sal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Sal
Right ABOVE the first post
Bookmark Discussion
47 posted on 05/06/2002 2:29:32 PM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
Bolton also spoke at a U.N. meeting against their gun-grabbing desires. He is a real person and fairly powerful. Considering that Powell said we are withdrawing from this treaty, I think this is pretty legit.
48 posted on 05/06/2002 2:33:45 PM PDT by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
Again, Powell himself has said we are backing out of the treaty. Why Bolton...I don't know. But that is who wrote the letter and it IS BACKED BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION NO MATTER WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO THINK.
49 posted on 05/06/2002 2:35:12 PM PDT by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MistyCA
:O)
50 posted on 05/06/2002 3:06:25 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 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