Trump Silences Human Rights Group

@no1marauder said
You are wrong:

"The Court may exercise jurisdiction in a situation where genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes were committed on or after 1 July 2002 and:

the crimes were committed by a State Party national, or in the territory of a State Party, or in a State that has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court; or
the crimes were referred to the ICC Pr ...[text shortened]... l court."

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/09/02/qa-international-criminal-court-and-united-states#5

The US is not under the jurisdiction of the UN either.

@mott-the-hoople said
The US is not under the jurisdiction of the UN either.

Actually it is, but that is non-responsive to my point.

You were wrong; man up.

@vivify said
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/01/human-rights-lawyers-sue-trump-administration-for-silencing-them

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/sep/02/us-sanctions-international-criminal-court-fatou-bensouda

Human rights lawyers sue Trump administration for 'silencing' them

Prominent US human rights lawyers are suing the Trump administration over an execu ...[text shortened]... souda, or face the risk of personal sanctions possibly including the seizure of her family’s assets.

Something kind of interesting -- this really is not without precedent at all.

The US is not in the ICC, and there is regular bickering between the two:

The court was created to hold accountable perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity in cases where adequate judicial systems were not available. The U.S. has not joined the ICC because of concerns the court might be used for politically motivated prosecutions of American troops and officials.

Subsequent U.S. administrations have reiterated that stance, although some, including President Barack Obama’s, have agreed to limited cooperation with court. The Trump administration, however, has been openly hostile to the tribunal and lashed out against Bensouda along with others for pursuing prosecutions of Americans.

https://www.breitbart.com/news/new-us-sanctions-on-international-tribunal-prosecutor-aide/

It seems that there is a lot more history here and we cannot just answer this off the cuff.

@mott-the-hoople said
you people are ignorant. The icc is a voluntary member tribunal...the US doesnt belong, therefore they have no right targeting US citizens. got it now?

Is it too complicated for you? If you haven’t signed up then surely they cannot target your citizens so why is the US sanctioning it’s employees?
Take your time but remember not to let your cake go stale while your eating it.

@mott-the-hoople said
you agree with Trump then?

Which time? He contradicts himself.

@mott-the-hoople said
you people are ignorant. The icc is a voluntary member tribunal...the US doesnt belong, therefore they have no right targeting US citizens. got it now?

IF the ICC has no jurisdiction over US citizens, then who cares if they target them?

Got it now?

@suzianne said
IF the ICC has no jurisdiction over US citizens, then who cares if they target them?

Got it now?

You have to wonder who’s military he’s acting on behalf of.

@earl-of-trumps said
@vivify - And not from a right-wing source that grovels over Trump.

Try to find a left-wing source that doesn't grovel over Trump

Most all "left-wing" ANYthing doesn't grovel over Trump. You're acting like groveling over Trump is the default position, when it is not.

@mott-the-hoople said
when they target US citizens it is the responsibility of he US to protect its citizens from political attacks.

When who targets US citizens?? The ICC cannot target US citizens because it has no jurisdiction. I just told you that.

@mott-the-hoople said
fond of soros are you?

You're the one with the hard-on for him.

@philokalia said
Something kind of interesting -- this really is not without precedent at all.

The US is not in the ICC, and there is regular bickering between the two:

[quote]The court was created to hold accountable perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity in cases where adequate judicial systems were not available. The U.S. has not joined the ICC because of concerns ...[text shortened]... aide/

It seems that there is a lot more history here and we cannot just answer this off the cuff.

“ Subsequent U.S. administrations have reiterated that stance, although some, including President Barack Obama’s, have agreed to limited cooperation with court. The Trump administration, however, has been openly hostile to the tribunal and lashed out against Bensouda along with others for pursuing prosecutions of Americans.”
Ahh now that makes sense, Obama cooperated with the ICC so Trump sanctions them. I wonder if Trump will ever get over his twisted man crush regarding Obama?

@kevcvs57 said
How galling is it that a country that constantly takes upon itself the right to sanction other countries for various perceived misdemeanours now attacks the one international body that might ask its military to live up to the moral standards it sanctimoniously demands of others.
It looks like the death throes of an empire to me, if trump gets another 4 yrs the US will be universally vilified as an international ogre.

It is Trump who is the galling ogre. He doesn't represent the whole population.

@mott-the-hoople said
when they target US citizens it is the responsibility of he US to protect its citizens from political attacks.

You seem to be under the impression that Trump's executive order now provides American citizens with some new protection against political attacks by the ICC which they did not have before. This is not so. American citizens were always immune from ICC prosecution. What Trump's executive order does to make it much harder for anyone, but especially for Americans or people who have any financial connection with America, to assist the ICC to prosecute anyone else (such as field commanders who committed crimes against humanity during the breakup of Yugoslavia or who recruit child soldiers in African civil wars).

@suzianne said
IF the ICC has no jurisdiction over US citizens, then who cares if they target them?

Got it now?

The US still cares if their citizens are subject to harassment by the ICC.

It's the job of the President to represent the interests of all US citizens in the international arena.

@kevcvs57 said
“ Subsequent U.S. administrations have reiterated that stance, although some, including President Barack Obama’s, have agreed to limited cooperation with court. The Trump administration, however, has been openly hostile to the tribunal and lashed out against Bensouda along with others for pursuing prosecutions of Americans.”
Ahh now that makes sense, Obama cooperated with t ...[text shortened]... so Trump sanctions them. I wonder if Trump will ever get over his twisted man crush regarding Obama?

He agreed to limited cooperation.

It would be interesting to see in what he cooperated.

I do not know if the Democrats would be particularly interested in facilitating the extradition of American soldiers to The Hague to get sentenced for war crimes, considering that this function is already being performed by our own DOD.