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

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

Now wouldn't the 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."

Now wouldn't the 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?

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.

Now wouldn't the 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.

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.

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.

Now wouldn't the 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.

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.

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.

Now wouldn't the 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.

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.

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.

The report said about one man being water boarded 86 times and then kept inside a body sized box for 11 days.

I'm kind of speechless.

I think it's absolutely appauling what terrorists have done over the years, makes my skin crawl. Looking at the beheading activities and mass murders committed by Isil and the like makes you wonder how any human could do this sort of thing to another human.

......when I read about this US torture business, I feel numb.

Is this really 2014?......yes......humans haven't come far, barbaric vile creatures.

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.

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

Now wouldn't the 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?

They think they are. And from a few posts on that other cia torture thread, some Americans think one American life is more precious than the rest of us. Some of those posts are as offensive as the ISIS mob.

If some people want to justify torture then are these same people willing to listen to ISIS' justification for beheading people? All such acts are heinous and crimes against humanity and unjustifiable.

If the majority of Americans cannot see why they too must be accountable to the rest of the civilised world in relation to these acts of torture and force their government to be a responsible global power, then they do not deserve to be the world's sole superpower.

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?

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.

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.

-snip-

"...then they do not deserve to be the world's sole superpower."

Well then, why don't you just nominate your perfect country to be the world's superpower and the rest of us will sit back and let you spend the money and do the dirty work.

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.

Now wouldn't the 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.

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?

Now wouldn't the 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.

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?

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.

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.

Relax, calm down. I'm the one who should be hopping up and down over this.

That's because you are assured the Republican controlled Congress of 2002 and the then President George W. Bush took care of everything for your side of the argument, leaving the rest of us that have some measure of respect of international law and the ICC very red faced, as this kind of serious news reporting by serious journals attests....

The "Hague Invasion Act"

The talk of international courts reminded me of a lesser-known law in the US, the American Service-Members' Protection Act, known also as the "Hague Invasion Act."

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.

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 amendment passed in the senate 75 to 19 on June 6, 2002.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/09/1350608/-The-Hague-Invasion-Act-and-US-Accountability-for-Human-Rights-Abuses#

Dutch still wincing at Bush-era 'Invasion of The Hague Act'

Though largely symbolic, the law could be having lasting implications.

By Robert Marquand, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor FEBRUARY 13, 2009

• 
  Michael Kooren/AP

  View Caption

THE HAGUE — In 2002, Congress passed a law enabling United States forces to unilaterally storm into peaceful Holland to liberate American soldiers held for war crimes.

Coming in the early days of the war on terrorists, and as the International Criminal Court was being formed here, the measure provoked controversy and seemed to the Dutch – stout US allies – an absurd example of America's "with us or against us" foreign policy.

The law is still on the books.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2009/0213/p05s01-woeu.html

Prominent Swiss Politician Calls For Arrest of Kissinger at Bilderberg

Dominique Baettig calls on federal authorities to apprehend former US Secretary of State

A prominent member of Switzerland’s largest political party has called upon federal authorities to arrest Henry Kissinger as a war criminal if he attends the 2011 Bilderberg conference of global power brokers which is set to begin on Thursday at the Hotel Suvretta House in St. Moritz.

Baettig is no fringe figure, he’s the equivalent of a US Congressman, representing the Canton of Jura on the National Council of Switzerland. His party, the Swiss People’s Party, is the largest party in the Federal Assembly, with 58 members of the National Council and 6 of the Council of States.

Baettig’s letter also calls for the apprehension of George W. Bush and French President Nicolas Sarkozy, but neither are likely to be attending the conference. However, Kissinger is a regular Bilderberg attendee and is almost certain to be present in St. Moritz.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/prominent-swiss-politician-calls-for-arrest-of-kissinger-at-bilderberg.html

Unfortunately Dr K didn't get busted but on numerous occasions the K has had to dash out of his 7-Star hotel in the middle of the night into the streets of some foreign capital because someone in the parliament got an arrest warrant to apprehend him for war crimes and was on the way with a platoon of police.

@ Publicus "Relax, calm down. I'm the one who should be hopping up and down over this."

And just when I was having so much fun.

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

So what ?