Jump to content

Americans involved in torture can be prosecuted abroad, analysts say


Recommended Posts

Posted

Americans Involved in Torture Can Be Prosecuted Abroad, Analysts Say
By SOMINI SENGUPTA

UNITED NATIONS — The United States is obliged by international law to investigate its citizens suspected of engaging in torture, but even if it does not, Americans who ordered or carried out torture can be prosecuted abroad, by legal bodies including the International Criminal Court, legal experts say.

Whether they will be is another question. That’s largely a political determination. But calls for international prosecution, legal experts say, are likely to grow so long as the United States chooses not to prosecute its own.

“If I am someone implicated in the torture report, I am thinking twice about traveling to Europe anytime soon,” said Steve Vladeck, a law professor at American University in Washington. “It puts those governments in a sticky position if someone who is accused of torture presents themselves on that country’s soil.”

Three questions arise from the United States Senate’s release of an internal investigation into the interrogation tactics of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Full story: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/11/us/politics/americans-involved-in-torture-can-be-prosecuted-abroad-analysts-say.html

-- The New York Times 2014-12-11

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Now wouldn't the hit-the-fan.gif.pagespeed.ce.6UelFDbFNJL if some international court grabbed a US citizen and tried to prosecute him? We're not into that European-lose-your-sovereignty-to-a-group shit.

"Ring, ring ring." "Hello USA, this is the UN." "Oh really? Get lost."

Why would that be? It can't be because American consider themselves above international law, is it?

What is international law, and where does it get any authority over a sovereign nation?

The concept of international law resides in the minds of the brainwashed.

  • Like 1
Posted

First one US don't ratified ICC

Second, US don't extradite his citizen.....

Third former president bush is protect by law

It will be difficult

Eazy peazy if they set foot in the wrong country.

Pull them out of the immigration line and straight to the Hague.

Or even more ominous- off to a black prison where they will be asked to provide information. Politely, of course.

  • Like 2
Posted

First one US don't ratified ICC

Second, US don't extradite his citizen.....

Third former president bush is protect by law

It will be difficult

So if I don't recognize Thai traffic laws, no policeman can give me a ticket for traffic violations?

Thanks for informing us about that.

Thailand is a sovereign nation and when you're on its soil you are subject to its laws. You don't have an equivalent there.

Who is going to go onto US soil and grab a US citizen and enforce its "laws" on the USA? Who is going to kidnap a US citizen who's abroad and subject him to some imagined "international law" if the US won't allow it? It would be an act of war.

Posted

First one US don't ratified ICC

Second, US don't extradite his citizen.....

Third former president bush is protect by law

It will be difficult

Eazy peazy if they set foot in the wrong country.

Pull them out of the immigration line and straight to the Hague.

Or even more ominous- off to a black prison where they will be asked to provide information. Politely, of course.

The Hague would be committing an act of war. I don't recommend it.

Posted

Now wouldn't the hit-the-fan.gif.pagespeed.ce.6UelFDbFNJL if some international court grabbed a US citizen and tried to prosecute him? We're not into that European-lose-your-sovereignty-to-a-group shit.

"Ring, ring ring." "Hello USA, this is the UN." "Oh really? Get lost."

Why would that be? It can't be because American consider themselves above international law, is it?

What is international law, and where does it get any authority over a sovereign nation?

The concept of international law resides in the minds of the brainwashed.

Tell that to Goering or Speer or Doenitz or the guys they found in S. America.. Oh, wait- you can't.

There was no current and functioning nation with any interest in defending them. They weren't US citizens.

Try that on a US citizen, especially a former president or member of the cabinet, and stand by for incoming fire.

  • Like 2
Posted

First one US don't ratified ICC

Second, US don't extradite his citizen.....

Third former president bush is protect by law

It will be difficult

So if I don't recognize Thai traffic laws, no policeman can give me a ticket for traffic violations?

Thanks for informing us about that.

Thailand is a sovereign nation and when you're on its soil you are subject to its laws. You don't have an equivalent there.

Who is going to go onto US soil and grab a US citizen and enforce its "laws" on the USA? Who is going to kidnap a US citizen who's abroad and subject him to some imagined "international law" if the US won't allow it? It would be an act of war.

Did it come up with you that those tortures happened on foreign soil, so are subject to the law of the country where they took place.

  • Like 1
Posted

First one US don't ratified ICC

Second, US don't extradite his citizen.....

Third former president bush is protect by law

It will be difficult

Eazy peazy if they set foot in the wrong country.

Pull them out of the immigration line and straight to the Hague.

Or even more ominous- off to a black prison where they will be asked to provide information. Politely, of course.

Maybe they will be offered some water as well.

Do you think you are funny or clever? The US never signed on to this UN/Hague crap and NO nation or international body would have the guts to kidnap one of its citizens unless it was a terrorist group which was prepared to die.

Posted

What is international law, and where does it get any authority over a sovereign nation?

The concept of international law resides in the minds of the brainwashed.

Tell that to Goering or Speer or Doenitz or the guys they found in S. America.. Oh, wait- you can't.

There was no current and functioning nation with any interest in defending them. They weren't US citizens.

Try that on a US citizen, especially a former president or member of the cabinet, and stand by for incoming fire.

So what you're saying, is that there is International Law, but American military power over rides it? Slippery slope there.

It's not a slippery slope at all. The US never ratified this "international law" and isn't and never has been subject to it.

What is it that makes people think that because some countries decide to have "international law" that one country which doesn't agree with it is forced to be subject to it? Do we have a one-world order where someone can force all countries to follow some supreme international leader? Who would that be?

Posted

First one US don't ratified ICC

Second, US don't extradite his citizen.....

Third former president bush is protect by law

It will be difficult

So if I don't recognize Thai traffic laws, no policeman can give me a ticket for traffic violations?

Thanks for informing us about that.

Yes, if you are, lets say an army general and the police stops you, the policeman will understand immediately that all was just a misunderstanding.

Same as with the USA...Just remember the case of Victor Bout who was given to USA against Thai and International law.

Posted

Now wouldn't the hit-the-fan.gif.pagespeed.ce.6UelFDbFNJL if some international court grabbed a US citizen and tried to prosecute him? We're not into that European-lose-your-sovereignty-to-a-group shit.

"Ring, ring ring." "Hello USA, this is the UN." "Oh really? Get lost."

Why would that be? It can't be because American consider themselves above international law, is it?

yes it can.....how many wars did the USA start and how many laws did they break? If you have the biggest gun you are the law.

  • Like 2
Posted
Have Bush W and Cheney gone overseas in last say 5 years? What's their record compared to other ex presidents and Vp?

I suspect they might not want to test their chances of getting a warm welcome.

Yes. Bush and Cheney are in England right now, just making sure that the British aren't doing the goose step and speaking German. After all, the US wouldn't want to have lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers killed and wounded in WWII for nothing, would it?

Posted

Now wouldn't the hit-the-fan.gif.pagespeed.ce.6UelFDbFNJL if some international court grabbed a US citizen and tried to prosecute him? We're not into that European-lose-your-sovereignty-to-a-group shit.

"Ring, ring ring." "Hello USA, this is the UN." "Oh really? Get lost."

Why would that be? It can't be because American consider themselves above international law, is it?

yes it can.....how many wars did the USA start and how many laws did they break? If you have the biggest gun you are the law.

The US didn't break any laws that it is subject to. Your "international law" is pie in the sky.

Posted

Have Bush W and Cheney gone overseas in last say 5 years? What's their record compared to other ex presidents and Vp?

I suspect they might not want to test their chances of getting a warm welcome.

Yes. Bush and Cheney are in England right now, just making sure that the British aren't doing the goose step and speaking German. After all, the US wouldn't want to have lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers killed and wounded in WWII for nothing, would it?

Deliberate misinformation masquerading as a bad joke?

  • Like 2
Posted

Don't hold your breath, not going to happen. This is old news and the Obama justice department already said it will not happen and they will not honor any foreign request on this.

Posted (edited)

It developed the nickname of the "Hague Invasion Act" because it implies that the US would go so far as to invade the Hague, the site of the ICC, if need be.

The law enacted in 2002, requires the US to "to protect...the maximum extent possible, against criminal prosecutions carried out by the International Criminal Court" any members of the Armed Forces or elected or appointed officials

I never knew.......

There I was thinking I could be no further disillusioned

than I have become in recent years.

seriously what happened??

"The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force.

She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."...

John Quincy Adams... July 4th 1821

Edited by mania
  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...