Can someone post the Names of the SENATE AND HOUSE conferees ?

bump

bump

bump

bump

Staying out of the court would also mean that Americans would have no role in drawing up procedures to guarantee due process and no influence in the selection of neutral, able judges and fair prosecutors.
The excuse!
How Clintonian it sounds.

Well when the court gets stacked with little Hitlers and the American leadership gets indicted for the crime of cultural imperialism it'll be too late.

ONCE AGAIN the Congress and the Bush Administration show their complete contempt for the Constitution...and those sworn to defend that document.

redrock--Constitutional Terrorist

Word of the day for the Boston Globe:

veto

Main Entry: 1 ve·to
Pronunciation: 'vE-(")tO
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural vetoes

Etymology: Latin, I forbid, from vetare to forbid
Date: 1629
1 : an authoritative prohibition : INTERDICTION
2 a : a power of one department or branch of a government to forbid or prohibit finally or provisionally the carrying out of projects attempted by another department;
especially : a power vested in a chief executive to prevent permanently or temporarily the enactment of measures passed by a legislature b (1) : the exercise of such authority (2) : a message communicating the reasons of an executive and especially the president of the U.S. for vetoing a proposed law

What the B*stards on the panel are telling you is the future. It will be very easy to violate the provisions of our constitution by sending Americans abroad to be tried. Our own "leaders" turning against us.

Constitutional BTTT

Just one more betrayal to add to the list.

Staying out of the court would also mean that Americans would have no role in drawing up procedures to guarantee due process and no influence in the selection of neutral, able judges and fair prosecutors.

Even if the U.S. does join the World Court, what real power will the Americans have in drawing up procedures or guaranteeing due process -- none. The U.S. would only be 1 of 60 -- the other 59 being nations that don't follow our constitution. American citizens should never be subjected to any court that does not come under jurisdiction of the U.S. Constitution.

bump

So....bottom line...because we were attacked in NYC and the U.S.S. Cole we are pandering and being politikally korrect?

The House and Senate conferees were wise to spike the Helms amendment. The Bush administration should now change its tack and push for American ratification of the International Criminal Court, a wise action that would annul the hostile language that did pass.

The Bush administration should never "change its tack" by pushing for American ratification of the international criminal court(capital letters intentionally not used). Not supporting the Helms amendment may have been a geopolitical move given the situation we are in. We give up no sovereignty by not attaching the Helms ammendment similar to the way we don't give up our sovereinty by not having an ammendment for any s*bag organization taking one of our citizens hostage to a non-sonstitutional court.

The Bush administration should never "change its tack" by pushing for American ratification of the international criminal court(capital letters intentionally not used). Not supporting the Helms amendment may have been a geopolitical move given the situation we are in. We give up no sovereignty by not attaching the Helms ammendment similar to the way we don't give up our sovereinty by not having an ammendment for any s*bag organization taking one of our citizens hostage to a non-sonstitutional court.

However vigilance of all motives is always required.

Nope. We shall not sign over our sovereignty.

The practical reality is that sometime early in the coming year the requisite 60 countries will have ratified the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court, and the court will come into being. An American failure to participate might validate apprehensions, even among US allies, about this country's propensity to pursue unilateral policies. Staying out of the court would also mean that Americans would have no role in drawing up procedures to guarantee due process and no influence in the selection of neutral, able judges and fair prosecutors.

This is like saying you should join in the gang rape of your wife in order to have a "role and make the act neutral and fair".