As you know Sandy the Blogger has been somewhere between Earth and the clouds (the National Weather Service could have hired Sandy as a hurricane tracker this week!) since the fabulous speech by Ambassador (now National Security Adviser) John Bolton on the ICC. It was one of the best speeches by a US government official in recent times.
But why was this speech made now? Cui bono? Yes it was the eve of 9/11 and Yes it was a delayed reaction to a (I did not know and that is naughty on me!) suggestion by the ICC Prosecutor’s office that a file be opened on alleged human rights abuses in Afghanistan.
But in hearing the speech again yesterday AM I realized that there was one other reason for this new position: Neo-cons were worried the Court might come after them for starting future wars all over – which in the past they are unquestionably guilty: Kosovo, Iraq, Libya, Syria and maybe other places. And tactics of war might be called into question as well. Now Aggression is a war crime the ICC could investigate (under certain conditions).
Now it is tempting to say about the neo-cons: Sic the ICC on them – they deserve it! BUT the Constitution is still the Supreme Law of the Land (next to the Bible most dear – I think the Ambassador was thinking something like that when he was speaking on the secular sovereignty of our Constitution! So exciting!) and although rights are inalienable and come from God as the Declaration of Independence asserts, it is also true that governments protect those rights. The US Constitution is the best way in this world today to protect those rights. The International Criminal Court is a threat to our rights. It must be abolished.
One more item: It ought to be a condition of our intervention, say in Afghanistan: Either your country tears up the ICC or it signs the bilateral treaty authorized by the Rome Statute exempting US troops from its terms. I prefer the first one. Either one but one or the other ought to be non-negotiable.
About Elwood Sanders
Elwood "Sandy" Sanders is a Hanover attorney who is an Appellate Procedure Consultant for Lantagne Legal Printing and has written ten scholarly legal articles. Sandy was also Virginia's first Appellate Defender and also helped bring curling in VA! (None of these titles imply any endorsement of Sanders’ views)
- Web |
- More Posts (2717)
Twitter: David Jackson
says:
Concerning the many military engagements and wars over the last half century one only needs to follow the money and see who gains. This group is beyond traitorous. They have caused unimaginable suffering, death, and resources. Look to the central banks cabal with the Rothschild family at the head and many other well known names like The Bush family, Clintons, Soros, Rockefeller and many more.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SandySanders2
says:
Thanks for coming by David and while I am not sure of the details of your analysis I do agree there are unnecessary wars and conflicts – even secret wars such as Yemen and Niger. We need a Constitutional President and Constitutional Congress and Constitutional warmaking rules. The War Powers Act could be a good start but needs amendment. Sandy
Twitter: Foggybottomline
says:
What rights, exactly, come from God?
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SandySanders2
says:
The Declaration of Independence asserts:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”
Rights come from God – I am a follower of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior but even the secular Declaration says each person has rights from their Creator – and governments protect rights. Thanks for coming by again R. Stanton Scott. Sandy
Twitter: Foggybottomline
says:
Thanks. But really asking for your views on what specific rights the Creator endows on human beings that no government can take away.
“Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness” covers a lot of ground.
Religious belief seems an obvious one. Self-defense. Speech and association. What about freedom f movement or travel? Control of one’s own body?
If rights come from God, by what authority to States establish borders and prohibit crossing them? By what authority does government treat citizens differently from non-citizens?
Conservatives claim Creator-endowed rights when arguing that a higher authority than government exists, but often back away from this claim when making contradictory claims about State sovereignty.
Interesting thought experiment, at the very least.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SandySanders2
says:
It is an intriguing thought experiment. Worthy of more thought and a better response than this. I’ll mull this over the weekend.
Thanks for coming by again.
Sandy
Twitter: https://washingtondc.adlist24.com/escorts
says:
This site is also good
https://washingtondc.adlist24.com/escorts