NATO's Canadian Commander in Libya, Charles Bouchard Must Stand Trial for War Crimes

116 posts / 0 new
Last post
NDPP
NATO's Canadian Commander in Libya, Charles Bouchard Must Stand Trial for War Crimes

NATO's Libya Generals Should Be Hauled to Court, Says Dennis Kucinich

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61920.html

"NATO commanders who authorized the Libya bombing campaign should be 'held accountable' to international law or hauled before the world court for civilian deaths, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) said Tuesday.

'If members of the Qadhafi regime are to be held accountable, NATO's top commanders must also be held accountable through the international criminal court for all civilian deaths resulting from their bombing.

Otherwise we will have witnessed the triumph of a new international gangsterism."

Lt Gen Charles Bouchard has final authority and approval for all NATO targeting in Libya. War Crimes charges now!

DaveW

I'd say give him a medal:

 an effective support for a beleaguered insurgency, which as of March 19 was collapsing in Benghazi, and which Seif Ghaddaffi said would be rushed "by all means necessary""

thank you, Gen . Bouchard, for your service to the people of Libya

Fidel

Is it just me or do advocates for NATO terror make you nauseous, too? 

NDPP

it is a testament to the effectiveness of our liberal intelligentsia and the Canadian mainstream media - not to mention Babble driving off those who actually pay attention to such things. DaveW is as described 'the usual social democrat'...yes, it makes me sick. Especially since if people bothered to actually read a few of the many, many postings in these 16 threads, 2+2 really does make 4 not 5 and certainly not 'humanitarian intervention' or 'protecting the civilian population of Libya. I'm beginning to think Voltaire was right:

"Of one thing only can we be sure - we shall remain stupid"

Bouchard is hardly mentioned by the media here - notice that? Usually they make way too much of any canucklhead hometown boy makes good, they wouldn't shut up about 'scumbags' Hillier - but on Chuck the bucher, they've gone curiously quiet. I hope his mass murdering ass has to answer some day. I think it behooves Canadians to try.

Fidel

NDPP wrote:
DaveW is as described 'the usual social democrat'...yes, it makes me sick.

It's called politicking in Ottawa. Opposition party knows it's a phony majority dictatorship, and that Steve will toadie to Uncle Sam as viciously as humanly possible. The sharp opposition politico pretends to see the government's POV, and then withdraws support for a number of very well thought out reasons. The NDP knew all along they would withdraw support for the US-led  NATO military action in Libya, because the NDP knew from recent observations how U.S.-led quagmires wind up being long and protracted military occupations of defenceless, oil-rich countries. It was inevitable, and the NDP knew that our vicious toadies in phony majority power would be flip-flopping on their own lick and a promise that Canada would exit from Libya ASAP. And so here we are and probably looking at civil war in Libya for a long time as NATO's al-Qaeda mercenaries will likely squabble and duke it out amongst themselves in a Darwinian battle to the finish, just like 1990s Afghanistan and 2000s Iraq. It doesn't require a politician to figure out the Gladio gang's agenda. Just like it didn't take a politician to figure out that al-Qa'eda is really al-CIA'duh and al-MI6'duh and probably covert French government support all along, right?

Only one party in "The Harper Government of Canada" was actually required to do NATO's bidding not two, a cold fact of our mathematically absurd electoral system invented before electricity. It necessitates political maneuvering, and the NDP didn't have to get faked out into positioning themselves as the Bolshevik party of Canada secretly working to create Soviet communism in Ottawa. Or at least, we can be sure that the phony newz services would surely have blown it out of proportion describing it in cold war era terms of left vs right, and that Jack had suspicious ties to Vladimir Lenin's fourth cousin, or something pretty close to it. Yeah, they are always up for some good ol' cold war propaganda that they did so well for 70 years non-stop. But you know what? The NDP didn't play their game. 

Are the NDP "concern trolling" the Harpers in Ottawa for political gain? It looks that way to me. You say it's because the NDP wants to empower the same governnment they seek to replace. Who's right here? But if you want a better democratic process, then make sure to vote for the democratic opposition NDP, the pro democracy opposition party fighting for a modern electoral system for all Canadians.

Quote:
I'm beginning to think Voltaire was right:

"Of one thing only can we be sure - we shall remain stupid"

He can say that again. And here's another: 

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. And Elvis bin Laden was their Emanuel Goldstein. They may only be 24 percenters in phony majority power in Ottawa, but our corrupt stoogeaucrats don't see millions of Canadians not voting, or millions of wasted votes as strikes against their undemocratic ways. N-No, they count millions of non-votes and millions more wasted votes to their credit, their strength and numerical advantage every four years. We owe it to Libyans and all those in oil-rich and Zbigniew Mackinderan-strategically situated countries on NATO's list for a good shellacking to try our damndest not to feed the plutocracy's strength with our ignorance or voter apathy. Just like the NDP forces our stooges in power to show up for House votes lest the fat-cats are caught with their pants down during a count, so do Canadians have to make an effort to show up on election day every four years. I refuse to let strangers speak for me whether it's here, there, or at the ballot box.

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

DaveW wrote:

I'd say give him a medal:

 an effective support for a beleaguered insurgency, which as of March 19 was collapsing in Benghazi, and which Seif Ghaddaffi said would be rushed "by all means necessary""

thank you, Gen . Bouchard, for your service to the people of Libya

Lets send him to Syria and Iran next to murder citizens of those countries since they prefer death to living under dictators.  Yes the dead in Tripoli are thanking Butcher Bouchard for having murdered them in their beds.  

Do-War for PM!!! Bomb the crap out of all who don't believe NATO is a force for good.

Babble seems to have morphed into a third way Blairiite site.  If only Canada had leaders like Tony we would be well on our way to dismantling anything that hints of a social contract and into the freedom loving world of private contracts  between corporate rulers and the masses.

Hoodeet

Refreshing to see some passionate arguments against the militarist "third-way" social democrats.  Lenin (no - I'm no great fan of his policies, but many of his political writings still make perfect sense) is proven right over and over again - social democrats can be worse enemies than conservatives and fascists because they're such mealy-mouthed fake critics who aspire to the brass ring of power which is greased especially for them but they're too damn dumb to notice they're being manipulated and edged toward the right to isolate them from the base and from the committed left, so they shut up on crucial issues whenever the brass ring swings into view; some of them would  sell their grandmother to the fascists if it meant distancing themselves from the "Red" label.

Funny thing is so many fancy themselves to be latter-day Winston Smiths.   

Hoodeet

And yes, I would enthusiastically support bringing those mad bombers up on charges of war crimes.  But it's no more likely the case would go forward than Ms Diallo's case against M. Strauss-Kahn did, with Cyrus Vance Jr. as the prosecutor!

Hoodeet

post deleted.

bekayne

Fidel wrote:

Are the NDP "concern trolling" the Harpers in Ottawa for political gain? It looks that way to me. You say it's because the NDP wants to empower the same governnment they seek to replace. Who's right here? But if you want a better democratic process, then make sure to vote for the democratic opposition NDP, the pro democracy opposition party fighting for a modern electoral system for all Canadians.

So, for example, do you think Tommy Douglas should have "concern trolled" on the War Measures Act?

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

can someone define "concern trolling"  you guys have lost me.

Frmrsldr

DaveW wrote:

thank you, Gen . Bouchard, for your service to the people of Libya

Is it just me,

or is waging a War of Aggression on the people of Libya

and then offering thanks to the war criminals on behalf of the Libyan people

paradigmatic of Western arrogance?

Todrick of Chat...

NDPP wrote:

NATO's Libya Generals Should Be Hauled to Court, Says Dennis Kucinich

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61920.html

"NATO commanders who authorized the Libya bombing campaign should be 'held accountable' to international law or hauled before the world court for civilian deaths, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) said Tuesday.

'If members of the Qadhafi regime are to be held accountable, NATO's top commanders must also be held accountable through the international criminal court for all civilian deaths resulting from their bombing.

Otherwise we will have witnessed the triumph of a new international gangsterism."

Lt Gen Charles Bouchard has final authority and approval for all NATO targeting in Libya. War Crimes charges now!

 

 

Every Canadian politician that voted to support NATO/UN's illegal war against the county of Libya should be prosecuted as war criminals also. Our elected politicians got us into this illegal war and they should be held accountable for their actions.

They all should receive life sentences for the innocent civilians that have been killed since the start of this illegal war.

The every member of  the Conservatives, the NDP the Liberals and the Bloc parties are all guilt of war crimes, we should be demanding justice against them all.

Frmrsldr

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Every Canadian politician that voted to support NATO/UN's illegal war against the county of Libya should be prosecuted as war criminals also. Our elected politicians got us into this illegal war and they should be held accountable for their actions.

They all should receive life sentences for the innocent civilians that have been killed since the start of this illegal war.

The every member of  the Conservatives, the NDP the Liberals and the Bloc parties are all guilt of war crimes, we should be demanding justice against them all.

That's a pretty tall order.

Let's not forget the Afghan war as well.

NDPP

NATO's Libya War: A Nuremberg Level Crime  -  by Stephen Lendman

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/08/natos-libya-war-nuremberg-level-cr...

"Libya is an ongoing atrocity, a Nuremberg level crime, one of history's greatest. Unspeakable war crimes are being committed to 'protect the people of Libya.' Included are civilians being terror-bombed daily to break their morale, cause panic, weaken their will to resist and inflict mass casualties and punishment.."

This is what General Bouchard, must be made to answer for. It would be a further obscenity for Canadians to remain silent, when such as the above has been perpetrated in their name. Surely this silent complicity must end. How much more of these butcheries (Iraq, Afghanistan)  are you prepared to simply watch?

Bouchard is OUR war criminal. Bouchard is YOUR war criminal. What are you going to do about that?

'Before NATO Intrusion, Libya Was African Switzerland (and vid)

http://rt.com/news/interview-libya-nato-intrusion-127/

"NATO's presence in Libya little resembes a humanitarian mission with houses, hospitals and schools being hit..."

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

Frmrsldr wrote:

That's a pretty tall order.

Let's not forget the Afghan war as well.

 

No shit... You guys would end up in jail before any of those guys do... sorry.

WillC

Frmrsldr wrote:

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Every Canadian politician that voted to support NATO/UN's illegal war against the county of Libya should be prosecuted as war criminals also. Our elected politicians got us into this illegal war and they should be held accountable for their actions.

They all should receive life sentences for the innocent civilians that have been killed since the start of this illegal war.

The every member of  the Conservatives, the NDP the Liberals and the Bloc parties are all guilt of war crimes, we should be demanding justice against them all.

That's a pretty tall order.

Let's not forget the Afghan war as well.

Don't forget anyone who helped any of them get elected, worked in the campaign, donated money, etc.  I just wish we had an public ballot, so we could put anyone who voted for them in jail as well. 

Our gulags need feeding.

Hoodeet

One tactic to undermine a rational line of thought is reductio ad absurdum, which WillC does quite well.

Of course we can't extend prosecutions beyond the top leadership, which is responsible for the war crimes.

That would result in situations like Guatemala or El Salvador or Colombia, where the rank-and-file grunts who were conditioned and sometimes coerced to torture and massacre get long prison sentences while the top generals and politicians walk away scot-free.    Justice stops at the hatchet-men. 

The more logical line if you want to go beyond the generals is not to blame voters but to follow the trail to the corporate interests (arms manufacturers, banks, whoever) that encourage such policies.

However, it is essential to stay focused and not to let the ad absurdum arguments or the hyperboles derail us from Bouchard and his bosses.

 

Todrick of Chat...

Bouchard is just a pawn, he takes his orders from the 307 elected politicians that voted for this illegal war, not only one but twice in parliament.   

The politicians and the political party leaderships need to be punished first and foremost. I say given them harsh 50 year sentences, strip them of their pensions and salaries.

Once that is done, we will go after the pawns.

NDPP

Canada's Lt. General Charles Bouchard approved the targets - let's start there. The question of how we were abandoned by our 'representatives' who knew as well as I do all polls indicated the Canadian people were AGAINST this war, and the previous two, is another issue entirely. NATO's Canadian butcher-boy must be made to answer. Silence is complicity. Perhaps it is appropriate given her sole 'no' vote against this slaughter, that Elizabeth May MP, be tested as to the courage of her convictions?

[email protected]

Erik Redburn

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Bouchard is just a pawn, he takes his orders from the 307 elected politicians that voted for this illegal war, not only one but twice in parliament.   

The politicians and the political party leaderships need to be punished first and foremost. I say given them harsh 50 year sentences, strip them of their pensions and salaries.

Once that is done, we will go after the pawns.

 

Ahahaha.  Good one.

NDPP

NATO'S Planned Bloodbath in Tripoli

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/08/natos-planned-bloodbath-in-tripoli...

"Ongoing ruthlessly for over six months against Libyans alone, it rages lawlessly out of control because the justice humanity cries for is denied. Unless gotten, people everywhere won't be free. The stakes are that high."

Frmrsldr

Frmrsldr wrote:

That's a pretty tall order.

Let's not forget the Afghan war as well.

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

No shit... You guys would end up in jail before any of those guys do... sorry.

Who are "you guys" versus "those guys"?

In our modern world there is no direct democracy like there was in Ancient Athens.

With the First Past The Post election system we elect "majority" governments with a minority of voters/supporters.

After we elect people to office they make their own decisions regardless and sometimes in contradiction to what they promised.

What can people do aside from voice their opposition?

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Well, some people have managed to combine military struggle with political struggle and rather successfully, I might add.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

ikosmos wrote:

Well, some people have managed to combine military struggle with political struggle and rather successfully, I might add.

No kidding. Libya has just added another dimension to pre-emptive wars.

Fidel

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Bouchard is just a pawn, he takes his orders from the 307 elected politicians that voted for this illegal war, not only one but twice in parliament.  

That would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The way it actually works is our corrupt stooges accept their marching orders from Warshington. Junior toadies like Bouchard never question delegated authority of the colonial administrativeship in Ottawa. When Uncle Sam orders Ottawa to jump, their only concern is to ask:  How high, Uncle Sam, ready-aye-aye on the [email protected]

Frmrsldr

ikosmos wrote:

Well, some people have managed to combine military struggle with political struggle and rather successfully, I might add.

[Without or in spite of foreign military intervention, War of Aggression and regime change]

Who might that be?

The Soviet Union?

China?

Cuba?

Venezuela?

Hoodeet

VietNam. 

Korea (DPRK).

The FMLN in El Salvador.  The FARC and ELN in Colombia.  (Hell - they're still fighting, aren't they?)

 

Frmrsldr

laine lowe wrote:

... Libya has just added another dimension to pre-emptive wars.

George W. Bush justified dragging NATO countries into the War of Aggression on Afghanistan by citing the NATO Charter where it talks about "An attack against one [NATO member] is to be considered an attack against all."

Once again the U.S. and NATO are waging a War of Aggression, this time on Libya.

What attack or imminent threat of attack did Libya pose to the U.S. and NATO countries and their military personnel and assets abroad?

Fidel

Frmrsldr wrote:

What attack or imminent threat of attack did Libya pose to the U.S. and NATO countries and their military personnel and assets abroad?

Very good question. It is illegal since Nuremberg to attack sovereign countries militarily or otherwise in the absence of a genuine threat to the German homeland, I mean, the homeland. Their only answer is to follow the party line and repeat the rhetoric that Gadaffi was a threat to world peace and democracy bla bla bla. They don't realize it but their personal motto for living life in general appears  to be this: Trust and obey - it's the only way. Because that is what they are really saying when mincing words.

The truth is that there was no threat to any western nation's homeland from Libya. Just like there was no military threat to the heimat after they ripped off Himmler's schutzstaffel for 9/11.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

With Iraq, the US fabricated the whole Weapons of Mass Destruction dossier that Tony the poodle Blair happily supported. With Libya, there isn't even the pretense of that country being a threat to any NATO country. That was a pre-emptive strike on "humanitarian" grounds. Ignatieff must of creamed his jeans over that.

dacckon dacckon's picture

But what was the alternative?

 

If you look at the Kosovo War, its obvious that NATO and the Kosovo/Albania side did commit some crimes. Some which did go unpunished unfortunatly. But the serbian side did much more human rights violations. War is not a clean thing.

 

The alternative in this case was that Gaddafi's forces would have arrived in Benghazi and started massacres. Look at what he is doing now, pulling out political prisoners and killing them as if they were nothing. And by far the mission is much cleaner than the Kosovo War. What level of intervention would have been appropriate? To see Tripoli taken so quickly and the change embraced by its people indicates that things are more better than I expected they would go. Gaddafi must  clearly pay for his crimes and his insanity. If a group of rebels are targeting those with darker skin colour because they believe them to be mercenaries, then that group of the rebels must be tried as well. If nato violated anything, then it must pay. But somehow claiming that a supermajority of mps are imperialists is a bunch of fooey. No war is 100% clean, mistakes have to be corrected and there has to be an understanding that necessary evil is necessary. And the comment way above claiming that social democracy is worse than liberalism and conservatism and fascism is also fooey. The USSR use to campaign against what it called "social fascists" even when Hitler rose to power it did not focus on him, only on social democrats because they feared democracy and somehow feared Otto Wels who stood against one of the most evil men in history. I also don't think that calling Scandinavia worse off than countries like the U.S makes much sense if you are implying that social democracy is worse.

Frmrsldr

dacckon wrote:

But what was the alternative?

To let the Libyan people decide, unhindered, for themselves.

dacckon wrote:

The alternative in this case was that Gaddafi's forces would have arrived in Benghazi and started massacres.

That is not at all certain.

dacckon wrote:

Look at what he is doing now, pulling out political prisoners and killing them as if they were nothing.

Notice how only a very short time ago when the war on Libya was stalemated, there were reports on rebel atrocities.

Notice now that the rebels appear to have taken over nearly all of Libya the horror stories of war crimes committed by Gadhafi forces come to light - even though this is still leavened by stories of rebels committing atrocities.

dacckon wrote:

What level of intervention would have been appropriate?

At the state, military and state actor level,

none.

dacckon wrote:

Gaddafi must  clearly pay for his crimes and his insanity.

(Assuming Gadhafi is insane) insanity is a crime?

dacckon wrote:

If a group of rebels are targeting those with darker skin colour because they believe them to be mercenaries, then that group of the rebels must be tried as well.

Those Pentagon/CIA/Special Forces/SAS/Para/NATO etc., trained, armed, supported, paid "rebels" are not also mercenaries?

dacckon wrote:

If nato violated anything, then it must pay.

Um, yeah.

The U.S. and NATO violated UNSCR 1973 by attacking civilians and civilian areas, picking sides, waging a War of Aggression and engaging in regime change. All of which are illegal and are war crimes/crimes against humanity.

dacckon wrote:

But somehow claiming that a supermajority of mps are imperialists...

That is how the U.S. and NATO will/are get(ting) away with their war crimes/crimes against humanity.

dacckon wrote:

... there has to be an understanding that necessary evil is necessary.

This military intervention, War of Aggression and regime change on Libya was a war of choice, not a "necessary evil."

One of the world's greatest perennial myths is that war is fought for generous and humanitarian reasons.

Todrick of Chat...

Erik Redburn wrote:

Ahahaha.  Good one.

 

We could hope that the politicians pay for their crimes in this illegal war, but we both know that will never happen.  Most people on this forum are quiet happy with convicting the pawns of this conflict, while maintaining the status quo for their favorite political party.

Todrick of Chat...

Fidel wrote:

That would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The way it actually works is our corrupt stooges accept their marching orders from Warshington. Junior toadies like Bouchard never question delegated authority of the colonial administrativeship in Ottawa. When Uncle Sam orders Ottawa to jump, their only concern is to ask:  How high, Uncle Sam, ready-aye-aye on the [email protected]

 

Fidel, you are so very right, we currently have 307 corrupt stooges accept their marching orders from Washington. None of our elected officials will never question delegated authority of our political masters in the United States.

Sven Sven's picture

Frmrsldr wrote:

Is it just me,

or is waging a War of Aggression on the people of Libya

and then offering thanks to the war criminals on behalf of the Libyan people

paradigmatic of Western arrogance?

I'm a bit ambivalent about the actions in Libya.

That said, when Gaddafi is gone, it would be interesting to hear what the Libyan people have to say about NATO's efforts.

Frmrsldr

Sven wrote:

I'm a bit ambivalent about the actions in Libya.

That said, when Gaddafi is gone, it would be interesting to hear what the Libyan people have to say about NATO's efforts.

Yes,

but the question is

Did we have the right to militarily intervene, effect regime change in and wage a War of Aggression on Libya?

My understanding of the relevant international laws tells me

"No."

Sven Sven's picture

Frmrsldr wrote:

Sven wrote:

I'm a bit ambivalent about the actions in Libya.

That said, when Gaddafi is gone, it would be interesting to hear what the Libyan people have to say about NATO's efforts.

Yes,

but the question is

Did we have the right to militarily intervene, effect regime change in and wage a War of Aggression on Libya?

My understanding of the relevant international laws tells me

"No."

I'll just assume that's right on target.  And, I wouldn't have voted to go into Libya.  I'm just saying, after the dust settles, that I'd like to hear what the Libyan people will have to say about NATO.

Frmrsldr

Sven wrote:

I'm just saying, after the dust settles, that I'd like to hear what the Libyan people will have to say about NATO.

NATO and the U.S. took it upon themselves to militarily intervene, effect regime change and wage a War of Aggression on Libya and handed this as a fait accompli to the Libyan people.

Now we hear that the Transitional National Council (TNC - in effect the rebel government that has taken over from the Gadhafi government) doesn't have the money to run the day-to-day affairs of Libya and is dependent on the U.S. and E.U. (i.e., NATO countries') governments to unfreeze Libyan assets, coupled with the prospect that the war on Libya could become like Afghanistan and Iraq - an unwinable (for the U.S. and NATO) protracted insurgency quagmire,

how critical do you think those who seek to take the reigns of power and the rest of the Libyan "people" are going to be?

Not very, I should think.

 

NDPP

ICC Urged to Probe NATO Crimes in Libya

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/195666.html

"South Africa has called for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate NATO's role in the Libyan war. South Africa's Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe said "the prosecutors should also charge NATO for bombing innocent civilians"

I know its not called 'Babble' for nothing - and mostly nothing ever happens here in a real sense except 'babble', but given that Elizabeth May did vote 'no' on the libya war, please avail yourself of her email address upthread (#19) and request that she take up this issue.

NDPP

Lt Gen Charles Bouchard named #1 Responsible for War Crimes in Libya

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/9884635-lt-gen-charles-bouchar...

"He is the military commander who ultimately selects and authorises strikes by NATO warplanes. As such he has become a special target for those seeking to bring warcrimes charges.."

NATO Commander on Libya: 'We will see this mission through' (and vid)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13920517

Rikardo

 

It is « pie in the sky », an utopic illusion, to call on the indictment of someone from NATO or George Bush for war crimes.  A World Supreme Court doesn't exist except in science fiction.  Global legalists, some Babblers, dream of some neutral higher authority that can judge the powerful.  But who would judge the judges? There is absolutely no democratic legislature to create such a court.  These are political problems with difficult political solutions, not phoney legal ones.

Read Philip Hammond on spiked.com (2010/10/28) "Demands for the prosecution of Tony Blair only legitimize the use of international courts against weak states."

Frmrsldr

Rikardo wrote:

But who would judge the judges?

Hopefully they would be guided by principles of universal morality, justice and jurisprudence.

When we enunciate universal laws and principles the goodness of humanity triumphs.

Where we fail is in the misapplication or (complete) inapplication of universal justice.

Todrick of Chat...

Frmrsldr wrote:

Hopefully they would be guided by principles of universal morality, justice and jurisprudence.

When we enunciate universal laws and principles the goodness of humanity triumphs.

We have 307 elected officails that would not fit this classification.

Frmrsldr

Frmrsldr wrote:

Hopefully they would be guided by principles of universal morality, justice and jurisprudence.

When we enunciate universal laws and principles the goodness of humanity triumphs.

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

We have 307 elected officails that would not fit this classification.

I'm not talking about elected politicians in national governments.

I'm talking about the Justices (judges) on the ICC (International Criminal Court) and IJC (International Justice Court)

and things like the Nuremberg Principles, the U.N. Charter and the Geneva Conventions.

NDPP

There is certainly something to the assertion that the courts are there only  for the powerful to oppress the weak (persecution masquerades as prosecution). And where the criminals themselves, control the process, there can be no justice, but only 'just-us' -  but it is also true that the laws are there defining these warccrimes and there are precedents for their usage against those previously thought powerful and untouchable. As importantly the effort to bring highly placed offenders to account, educates and radicalizes, even when these offenders are 'protected' by the system.

I also think however that there must be popular pressure and public interest in order to force the system to act.  (G20 was an example of some positive 'results' due to  pressure and notoriety of the abuses at issue}. But I very much begin to think that in Canada, the liberal-left progressive elements have become so habituated to being passive and subservient to power and so used to sitting on their asses (especially those occupying paid positions) - that they have a 1000 and one easy and credible excuses NOT to move on issues like Libya and Bouchard's warcrimes.

Look, for me it is quite simple. Bouchard committed warcrimes. Bouchard is the NATO official charged with final choice and approval of targeting. Bouchard is a Canadian. Surely it is fitting and meet that his alleged warcrimes are remarked and efforts made to force accountability? if this doesn't happen it will indicate clearly that most of our beliefs about truth and justice and accountability are fairweather concepts only that Canadians, even 'progressive' ones are not willing to lift a finger to defend.

NDPP

Canada Contributed a Disproportionate Amount to Libya Air Strikes: Sources

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/08/25/canada-contributed-a-disproporti...

"The burden of the strike sorties fell on the shoulders of predominately the Canadians, the British and the French,' said the NATO official. 'I must say that, Canada in particular, being the smaller of the three airforces, once again punched well above our weight."

pilots, bombs, and our RP2  NATO Commander, General Charles Bouchard -  not to mention every MP but Elizabeth May, paid for with your tax dollars, mass murdered Libyan people  and destroyed the civilian infrastructure of Libya, Canada. So don't tell me (on this 'progressive' board - yeah right...) we shouldn't be pursuing warcrimes charges,

NDPP

Green Party of Canada: Libya Mission Creep Undermines R2P Possibilities

http://greenparty.ca/en/node/18991

"...the Green Party also calls on Stephen Harper to recognize that his government is undermining the prospects for UN Security Council solidarity by participating in the transformation of a UN Responsibility to Protect (R2P) mandate in Libya into the current regime-change-by-bombardment NATO operation..

Green Party International Affairs Critic Eric Walton also called on the Canadian government to investigate claims that depleted uranium (DU) bombs have been used by NATO in Libya - especially in view of Canada's command role...'

NDPP

We Are Living in a Dirty, Blind Country (vid)

http://libyasos.blogspot.com/2011/08/we-live-in-dirty-blind-worl.html

 

Rikardo

I am not asserting that "courts are there for the powerful to oppress the weak" Our courts are part of our democratic system and depend on the elected legislature. The ICC has no such democratic legitimacy. It was the World Federalists, Lloyd Axworthy, Canada, Britain and France and other zealous Western "international" legalists that set it up, through the 2002 Rome Treaty. Russia, China, India and the USA don't support it. And you think this ICC will judge some NATO official? You think we should all write Luis Moreno-Ocampo to ask him to do this. He's so happy to have indicted Ghadafi. Some lawyers tried to get the Yugoslavia Tribunal onto NATO. No way. The late Robin Cook, UK foreign minister said the ICC was "not a court set up to bring to book prime ministers of the UK or presidents of the US" Sorry no URL but search Spiked.com and Phillip Hammond.

Fidel

They've got the scum of the country marauding through neighborhoods and back alleys to worry about now. Taste the freedom, Libya!

Pages

Topic locked