|
fill me in please on exactly how the bill posted above functions to obviate the question of rightwing political biais at every level of the debate in this thread on the question of internationa law with reference to crimes against humanity? it seems rather to simply write that political logic into a different register...a republican dominated congress passes a bill written on the basis of exactly the kind of john birch society-style "logic" about international law i complained about earlier--this changes things how exactly?
given that a war crime is a crime against humanity, i do not see how teh question of national sovereignty enters into consideration here. folk who are supporting the american refusal to accept the jurisdiction of the incr seem to be bent on pretending that the issue is sovereignty and not the prsecution of war crimes. i think that is false. what, then, is the basis for refusing to accept the notion that americans can and should be prsoecuted for war crimes? nothing about being prsecuted assumes guilt....
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|