N400QX
Topic Author
Posts: 1981
Joined: Sun May 06, 2001 9:51 am

Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 2:51 am

Let Milo Go

The U.N. would love to see some present and former American officials tried for the same sort of crimes as Milosevic.

by MICHAEL LEDEEN
National Review
July 3, 2001 8:25 a.m.



I hate Slobodan Milosevic, and I was all in favor of marching into Belgrade and removing him from power. But I do not revel in his arrest and his impending trial in The Hague at a "war crimes tribunal" created by the United Nations, because I know that lots of folks at the U.N., on bad days even a majority of the Security Council, would love to see some present and former American officials tried for the same sort of crimes in the same docket.

I would hate that, even if it were Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright, hauled up for aiding and abetting genocide in North Korea. And I would hate it even more if it were, as some of the America-haters are urging, George Bush the Elder and his evil henchmen Powell and Cheney, for genocide in Iraq. If you think such events are utterly fanciful you're not spending enough time online with the new New Left. If that crowd has its way, one A. Greenspan will stand trial for mass murder.

That's why all those folks who are gushing and cooing over the wonderful expansion of the "rule of law" had best remind themselves that dreams-come-true often have unintended consequences, although in this case they are certainly not unimagined. The United States refused to sign the Genocide Convention for more than a generation precisely because of such fears, and those resisting included some fairly cautious souls from both parties, from Hubert Humphrey to Jacob Javits and Clifford Case, for example. When we finally signed, we stipulated reservations strong enough to convince several of our close allies that we hadn't really agreed to anything. We insisted that no American can stand trial without the formal approval of the U.S. government, and that in no case can any American be tried for something that is not criminal according to the Constitution. The wise Americans who insisted on such reservations had the same nightmare visions I do. And they insisted that the "rule of law" is best exemplified by the Constitution, and we're not going to expose American citizens to somebody else's view of what is criminal.

The kidnapping of Milosevic and his delivery to The Hague tribunal seems to me utterly unnecessary, because he was going to be tried by his own countrymen (the Genocide Convention, for example, requires enforcement by the nations involved, and permits the creation of special tribunals only when the law is flouted). The seizure of Milosevic was probably carried out to favor one side in the intense internal political struggle between Milosevic's successors in Serbia and the virtual country called "Yugoslavia" (Serbia plus Montenegro), and, more ominously, to show the world that the U.N. — or, in this case, the countries offering financial aid to Serbia — can enforce its will.

Never mind that Milosevic was removed from power by the Serbs (you may recall that, as in Iraq, we shrank from the dirty deed, preferring to leave the scene and hope that good things would happen), and that a duly elected Serbian Government has insisted on its authority over the former tyrant. This is quite different from the situation in Africa, where Rwanda simply lacks the resources to try their own mass murderers; Serbia is able and willing to try Milosevic. We are denying Serbia the same rights we have claimed for ourselves, and it's quite remarkable that so few chatterers and, so far as I can tell, not a single member of the American government, has spoken against the clear violation of Serbian sovereignty. Richard Holbrooke, in a remarkable essay in the Washington Post, regrets only that this happy turn of events was produced by Congressional meddling in foreign policy. Not even Henry Kissinger, who is likely one day to be indicted by one of these self-righteous tribunals (if Lou Lapham and Christopher Hitchens have their way), has denounced it. Is no one concerned that the U.N. — the same bunch that declared Israel guilty of racism, and that removed us from their human rights institutions — may kidnap our citizens and drag them before some self-appointed judge?

The current trend toward trying fallen dictators is thus far limited to the former rulers of small countries, and has a distinct political tinge to it. No one is clamoring for the trial of former Communist tyrants from the Soviet Union or Central/Eastern Europe. The fashionable intelligentsia cheers when Pinochet gets gobbled up, but no one demands that Gorbachev or other Soviet Communists stand trial, as simple intellectual consistency demands. And don't hold your breath waiting for the International Court of Justice to indict Fidel Castro or the vicious regime in Beijing (although you may recall that Fidel was so upset by the indictment of Pinochet that he cut short a trip to Spain and hightailed it back to Havana before some local judge brought charges).

All this is simply one more example of the global victory of the legal class. The lawyers and judges are asserting their supremacy over all possible competitors for power, from the businessmen to the politicians and the generals and colonels. They have claimed the authority to decide who gets indicted, and who enforces "the rule of law," here and everywhere. The politicians, who mostly come from the legal class, aren't inclined to contest the issue. The military, at least north of the Equator, accepts civilian rule. Who is left to defend us against the impending assault of politicized lawyers with a grudge against America?

Maybe we should enlist the trial lawyers. Somebody should tell them that if this trend continues, all the fees from the "patients' bill of rights" boondoggle will go to some attorneys in Brussels or the Netherlands. Then we might get to see a real fight.
-------------------------------------------------

I agree and it would be very scary if the United States signed on to this damn international court. But the government has never had too much regret when they go against the Constitution.

 
UA767-223
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu May 03, 2001 11:30 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 3:18 am

I guess all those mass graves had nothing to do with it?

 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 3:27 am

While Kissinger has questions to answer, a 'War Crimes' trial would be excessive. Not even Capt. Calley, if he is still alive, the officer ultimitely reponsible for the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam, would be a candidate. We are talking about systematic, state-directed genocide here.
It's so easy, safe in a country which has not known war on, or near it's soil since the 1860's, to be dismissive of such an important event, which in Europe at least, has broad support across the political divides.
There are many others who should be there, but the fact they are not, should not stop the attempts to bring these scum to trial.
There's some tyrants who are very worried now, after all, not many thought that Slobbo would end up in the slammer.
The Hauge is a suitable setting, Holland has a fine legal tradition.
The US is not the only nation of laws.
As for a trial in Serbia, there are many dangers, after all. Slobbo controlled all aspects of the state for many years. It's unlikely that all of his cronies have been rooted out.
Or he could to vunerable to assassination.
All this nonsense talk of 'leftist plots', ever heard of rights AND responsibilities? Works for nations as well as citizens.

 
9A-CRO
Crew
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2000 3:53 pm

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 3:49 am

first of all - Slobo was prosecuted in Serbia not for war crimes, but for financial malversations (and this was not "Al Capone trial" way to get him prosecuted for war crimes using other crimes as excuse) SECOND - why should american officials have "GOD" status - if crimes are commited in othere country these should be prosecuted - if in country of origin then OK, but if not then there should be International court
When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward...
 
mbmbos
Posts: 2566
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 4:16 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 4:20 am

I agree with you, Tomislav. American officials who commit crimes against humanity should face the same scrutiny.
 
DG_pilot
Posts: 810
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 1999 10:21 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 4:31 am

""Slobbo controlled all aspects of the state for many years. It's unlikely that all of his cronies have been rooted out.""

Another downfall of socialism/communism.
 
AA767Boy
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 7:54 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 4:42 am

He's just a BAD BAD man!
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 8:35 pm

All this shows is that you have to remain powerful to protect both your citizens and your leaders....

Let those defense dollars roll.

Seriously though, the soverginty issues are serious ones and I don't think the US is as willing to part with theirs as some European nations seem to be.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
ryanb741
Posts: 5058
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 6:36 pm

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 8:53 pm

I can see parallels with this and with the US refusing to hand over the officer accused of rape in Okinawa.....
I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:06 pm

No....

In the case of the happenings on Okinawa, the US and the Japanese government have a SOFA. Which stands for Status of Forces Agreement. This agreement governs the conduction of personel in that country and sets the rules for who is in charge when a crimial matter come up.

There is no such agreement between NATO, The US, or the UN and Serbia.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
airsicknessbag
Posts: 4626
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:54 pm

>>>Let Milo Go

Would you have said the same about a certain Mr. Adolf H.?

Daniel Smile
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 10:49 pm

First I have to argue with absurd notion that President Clinton or President Bush being "charged" with such idiocy. The author misses one, big, important difference between Clinton and Bush on one side, and this scumbag Milosovich on the other: Milosovich murdered his own people in cold blood. Clinton and Bush didn't exterminate anyone. And his potshot at President Bush over Iraq was just sour grapes. Mr. Bush stated clearly from the beginning that we weren't in Kuwait to occupy Iraq, and he was true to his word.

As for this assertion that he was "kidnapped", it seems to me that he was arrested by his own people, and they are the one that sent him to the U.N. If they wanted to exact their own justice, why didn't they keep him? I think they'd rather have the U.N. make a martyr of this lunatic, then having to do it themselves.

As for executing Milosovich, I think he'd get the easy way out. I think the U.N. should lock him up in a 3 x 5 cell for the rest of his life, like a caged animal. Let him go berserk in there.

And, of course, N400QX doesn't like this court: it's made up of all those foreigners at the U.N. N400QX, what is your view on Milosovich? Why are you so against him facing some kind of justice for being the Hitler-wannabe that he is?
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:17 pm

Alpha 1

Before Milosovich was disposed they did swear out murder and genocide charges against klinton, Albright, And the General in charge of NATO.

Likewise I belive that Lybia did hold a trial against several Reagan officals including Cap Wienbuger and others for murder regarding that air raid against them in 1983?

So it isn't that far fetched of an idea.

All this goes to show is that if you go to war you must WIN otherwise stuff like this happens.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:30 pm

Another reason why I have no respect for you L-188. You can spell Milosovich's name right, but then you purposely spell Mr. Clinton's wrong. Grow up a little and get over your childish behavior. That kind of stuff impresses no one.
 
mbmbos
Posts: 2566
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 4:16 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:53 pm

The editorial is sensational and manipulative. It's not even worth arguing many of the author's suppositions.

The U.S. must come to terms with justice, however. The U.S. cannot continue to act as judge and jury for the rest of the world. We are no more "God's chosen people" than the citizens of Chad. Other nations have begun to embrace this notion. It's time Americans started thinking about this.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 4:27 pm

Alpha 1.....

Believe it or not......Impressing you is not the most important thing in my life at the moment.

Actually to get Milo's name right I had to look up on an earlier post  Laugh out loud
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Guest

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 7:46 pm

Actually, not to be nitpicky, but it is Milosevic.

But anyway, to those people who are against Milosevic being tried for crimes against humanity, let me ask you this.

In 1945, after the end of World War 2, Adolf Hitler is captured. Who will try him? After all, he has not broken any German laws. He also has not broken any laws of other country's, because after all, he was on German soil the whole time. Also, in Germany at the time, there was no way on earth that Hitler would have had a trial which was not biased by people with views for and against his.

The International Court of Justice has proven itself to be bipartisan, and as such, have no problem with an Australian, American, Nigerian, Antiguan, or whoever, being tried in front of it.

To those American who are against such "international courts", who would you rather have your servicemen who fought and were captured in Vietnam tried in front of? A North Vietnamese court, or the International Court of Justice????
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 9:36 pm

I don't give a damn about you impressing me, but you have absolutely no class. You can call that mass murderer by his right name, but you have the arrogance, because of your petty hates not even to spell Mr. Clinton's name right. I guess you have more respect for a man who has committed genocide. You need to grow up, and get over Clinton.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 10:01 pm

Interesting.....

Aviatsiya:

Would you have allowed Austrailian troops been prosecuted by an international war crime tribunal or a North Vietnamese court for any "war crimes" Aussie troops commited in Nam?

I didn't think so.

International courts have a history of convicting or aquiting with the prevailing international setiment. Not what is right or wrong.

Alpha 1

See there you just proved my point to Aviatsiya. You allready have the man convicted and hanged. That is because that is the prevailing setiment put on the news. He is only charged, he has not been convicted.

I don't think the man is innocent but I do believe that is guilt has allready been pre-ordained by the "international court" This is just window dressing.


Avit: I hope I spelled your name right.....Johans forum doesn't display previous posts if you go back and correct something........I rewrote this about twice.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 10:07 pm

You don't even get what I'm talking about, L-188, do you. You show more respect for this mass-murderer, and that's what he is, than a president of your own country who you harbor these petty hatreds against. You are an arrogant man.

I think all the mass graves in Serbia are make him guilty. Or, is it simply becasue a bunch of foreigners are going to stand judgement on him that makes you give him some benefit of the doubt? Your mistrust of anything "international" is right out of the far right-wing's handbook in this country. It would be very funny if it were't so idiotic.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 10:15 pm

Hey....I never said Milo wasn't guilty....In fact I believe the opposite.

But

1. He is due his day in court.
2. He is not being tried by his countryman aka his peers
3. One could make the argument that he was ransomed by the current Serbian government. Basicly sold to the war crimes tribunal for international aid.

What is so wrong about being tried by a "jury of your peers?" I don't believe an international jury could ever be made up of your "peers"

OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 10:17 pm

Oh I forgot number four

I belive that the outcome of this tribunal is allready pre-determined.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 10:40 pm

So, do you believe that at Nuremburg, it was a sham to try Goering and Co. the way they did? Because it, too, was an international tribunal, that, under your definition was not made up of their "peers". Frankly, I don't think Serbia has the balls to try the man themselves, that's why they handed him over.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 10:47 pm

I'm siding with Alpha here (surprise!). Milosovic would have gotten off, or maybe probation or something ridiculous like that had he been tried in Yugoslavia. The Tribunal will be fair, I expect.

It is unfortunate that the Serbian government bent the rules (or actually broke them) to send Milosevic to the Hague. If that aid conferance had been held a month or two later, he would probably have been sent anyway, legal and clear. As it is, now the newly democratic government of Yugoslavia is about to collapse over the issue.

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 11:12 pm

I would have to call Nuremburg a rigged event also.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 11:14 pm

I dont' want to call it that but that is the conclusion I have to come up with.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 11:20 pm

You're getting out there with N400QX here, L-188.  Smile
It wasn't rigged. That's the conservative, anti-internationalists in you talking there. The evidence against the scumbags at Nuermberg was so overwhelming that it didn't have to be "rigged". Hitler killed himself instead of facing any justice, because old scrambled-brians knew, despite his approaching insanity, that he and his henchmen had committed monstrous crimes against humanity. That's why fat old Herman killed himself after the trial concluded-because he knew he was guilty as hell.

Same with Milo. He'd rather take his own life, like a coward, than to face the collective judgment of humanity. It's like with Hitler-the evidence will be overwhelming. Serbia is just afraid, and rightly so, of making him a martyr, and also of exposing more and more of their own people as criminals against humanity.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 11:30 pm

I said I didn't like calling it that.....

But I do have to wonder if one of them had been wrongfully accused how would they have faired againtst a three judge panel of which every member was from a coutry that you where just a few months ago taking shots against.

I don't think that is an illigitimate question.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Thu Jul 05, 2001 11:36 pm

Legitimate question........Boy, I must be getting tired!
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Guest

RE: Let Milo Go

Fri Jul 06, 2001 12:45 pm

Would you have allowed Austrailian troops been prosecuted by an international war crime tribunal or a North Vietnamese court for any "war crimes" Aussie troops commited in Nam?

Ummm....actually....I would have no problem with this. If they do have a case to answer, I would rather that they be tried under a system which has been set up by the international community (of which Australia and Vietnam are members of), than be tried under a system where they are not guaranteed a fair trial.

The same goes with all the other members of the United Nations. All member states have signed certain protocols which they are bound to abide by under international laws, and I have no problem in someone getting a fair trial in The Hague....especially if the truth and severity of their crimes are truly realised.

As to international courts having a history of judging in favour of the "winner", I tend to disagree. Even though the two Libyans charged with the PA103 bombing were tried under Scottish law, in front of Scottish judges, it was an "international court" to some extent, and was without biase.

What has to asked is 'why wouldn't an international court work' and 'why don't some nations want it'? And I am not talking about issues of sovereignty, but deeper issues which some people seem to have.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

Looking At Another "world Court"

Fri Jul 06, 2001 4:34 pm

I pulled this gem off the CNN site. It is basicly about how the Belgians are taking it upon themselves to prosecute (or persecute, depending on your view) people for actions commited anywhere in the world.

I don't they should have the power to do that.


Belgium's legal trap for world leaders

July 5, 2001 Posted: 12:52 PM EDT (1652 GMT)

By CNN's Brussels Bureau Chief Patricia Kelly

BRUSSELS, Belgium (CNN) -- The Brussels law courts are an imposing site, dominating part of the city.

It is where the trial of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who is visiting Europe this week, would take place if prosecutors decide there is enoguh evidence to take him to court on charges of genocide.

The investigation follows a complaint lodged by 23 Palestinians that Sharon should be prosecuted for alleged crimes against humanity.

It is the first step in a unique Belgian legal practice that could result in the arrest of Sharon in connection with the deaths by Christian militias of Palestinian refugees in the Lebanese camps of Sabra and Shatila in 1982.

Belgium is the only country which allows its courts to prosecute anyone in the world for war crimes, wherever they were committed.

Ariel Sharon was Israel's minister of defence at the time of the killings. He is not the only person being investigated under this complaint.

Attorney Luc Walleyn said: "Of course not only Israelis were involved in that. This massacre was executed by Lebanese Phalangists.

"The responsibility of the Israelis is that they discussed the whole matter together with the Phalangist leaders and they decided to ask the Phalangist militia to clean up these camps so during three days the Israeli army was surrounding the camp, was controlling the camp, knew what was happening there and they just let it done because they had the same purpose, to eliminate the Palestinian presence."

In Israel, immediately after the massacre, a national commission of inquiry -- the Kahan committee -- found Sharon indirectly responsible for what happened at Sabra and Shatila.

The committee's report said it was impossible to justify what it described as Sharon's "disregard of the danger of a massacre."

Sharon was forced to resign his post as minister of defence.

Ran Ichay, spokesman, for the Israeli mission said: "You know Israel didn't wait 20 years for a Belgian court.

"This case was investigated in Israel right after the massacre was committed by Lebanese forces in the refugee camps.

"We think the legal aspects of this issue do not exist anymore because they were verified in Israel and re-verified in the United States in '86 in the law suit against the Time magazine."

Sharon successfully sued Time magazine in a New York court for publishing an article claiming Sharon knew in advance the massacre would happen. He received a public apology from the magazine and was paid damages.

First step against Sharon
Nevertheless, a Belgian prosecutor has decided the case against Sharon should go beyond the first step of establishing whether the complaint against him is worth investigating.

The second step would be more an information step, Joannes Thuy, justice ministry spokesman said.

"The prosecutor is gathering information about the person against whom the complaint is brought and about the crimes he has committed or not," Thuy added.

The third step would be arrest and the trial itself.

Thuy was unable to give a timescale for such a possibility, saying it "depended on the length of the current investigation."

"Perhaps it is necessary to send a commission to Israel to investigate several things there."

If Belgium decides to prosecute, Israel's prime minister could find himself the subject of an international arrest warrant within a matter of months.

Israel's Foreign Minister Shimon Peres defended his prime minister.

He told a Flemish television station following a meeting between himself and Belgium's Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, last month: "We are fighting for our life. and Sharon was one of the best fighters. So what is their claim? Could they avoid war? Could they prevent it?"

Peres added that he thought a law suit would be bad for Belgium.

"I think it is a terrible mistake, terrible mistake. I am not referring to the legal side, I am referring to the moral side."

The legal case could make it awkward for Belgium, now holding the presidency of the European Union, to push forward peace efforts in the Middle East, something denied by Israel.

Ichay added: "It is a political issue now and there's no way we think it's going to contribute to the European efforts to play a positive role in the Middle East peace process."

Instead, the Belgian parliament is likely to be asked to consider several amendments to the law.

Philippe Mahoux, Belgian socialist senator, said: "It needs reflection, maybe find a formula that allows serving heads of state not impunity but something like temporary immunity while they're serving as head of state, that allows them to be prosecuted when their mandate has expired.

"It's a hypothesis, it's the only one I see. All others would have the effect of altering the fundamental basics of our law and I don't think that's possible."

He added: "I don't think we should change the law's universal jurisdiction. We should ensure its continuity.

"In other words, I think for crimes of this nature wherever they are committed, whatever the nationality of the perpetrator, whatever the nationality of the victims we have to be able to prosecute without regard to territorial limits."

Law in practice
The first case to be tried under Belgium's war crimes law led to the conviction last month of four Rwandans, including two nuns, for their role in the 1994 genocide that left up to 800,000 compatriots dead.

They received sentences of between 12 and 20 years. Plenty more cases are in the pipeline.

Among the complaints lodged in Belgium are some against Iraq's President Saddam Hussein, Iran's former president Ali Akbar Rafsanjani and Chile's former leader General Augusto Pinochet.

The case against the late Congo President Laurent Kabila was dropped when he was assassinated.

Belgian investigators are also looking into allegations against the presidents of Chad, Guatemala and the Ivory Coast.

The foreign minister of Morocco is also on their list. Some government officials say they believe it is only a matter of time before the law is used to lodge complaints against senior U.S. and European politicians.

Belgians want the rest of Europe to follow their lead, but until they do, the law is costing the government dear. Six investigating magistrates are assigned full time, following up on the complaints.

The Rwandan trial cost the state 10 million Belgian francs (more than $200,000) and that doesn't include the cost of keeping those found guilty behind bars.


OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Looking At Another

Fri Jul 06, 2001 9:59 pm

Now THAT, L-188, is one I will agree with you on! Seems like Belgium wants to play "World Cop" in a way the the U.S. wouldn't even consider. If Belgium would go through with such lunacy, you'll quickly see their government leaders as "persona non grata" throughout the world. I can just see it now: "Israel goes to War with Belgium after Sharon is arrested on visit". Where would they fight, do you think?

Sheer lunacy.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Fri Jul 06, 2001 10:40 pm

Yes....I am against that world cop mentality.

I just don't see a difference between what Belgium is doing and what the International Tribunal is doing.

The only difference is that a group of countries is holding the court instead of one. But it is still a group trying to enforce it's will on the citizens of another country.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Fri Jul 06, 2001 11:32 pm

But, the diff in the case of our friend Slobodon is that his country turned him over of their own free will. They had to be pressured into it, but the fact remains he was turned over by his country to face a trial in another. The problem with what the Belgians are doing is that taking up cases brought by individuals who may have an ax to grind with this or that world leader.

In any event, if Belgium would be so dumb as to actually arrest Sharon when he visits, they'd isolate themselves in the world community. I think that the EU wouldn't even back them on this one.
 
N400QX
Topic Author
Posts: 1981
Joined: Sun May 06, 2001 9:51 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Sat Jul 07, 2001 1:35 am

Whew-- I forgot about this thread and I have a lot of catching up to do... I'll be back later.
 
AgnusBymaster
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2001 8:11 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Mon Jul 16, 2001 7:02 pm

N400QX---Neither you, nor the article, address this point:

Which is more important---denying the possibility of a fair trial to a man who is either directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of thousands of people and the ruination of a country's economy and infrastructure, or stopping the "global legal class" from "another victory?"

Milosevic is too evil a man to set an example with. He needs to be brought to justice through what ever means possible.
 
Joona
Posts: 1214
Joined: Sun May 06, 2001 2:02 am

RE: Let Milo Go

Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:54 pm

Milosevic needs to be executed immediately, today, right now. Does he need justice? Did those thousands of people killed by him get justice? No. So why should Milosevic get any justice?

Slobodan Milosevic is just one murderer, who should be killed. A bullet in the head or something. I don't care if he suffers or not, but the main thing is, HE MUST DIE.

Joona
1740 days idle. Beat that.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Pyrex and 28 guests