(UN expert:) US law 'violates' international treaties

[sabra]

http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=328783

US law 'violates' international treaties

The United States' new anti-terrorism law contains a number of provisions that fail to meet obligations the US has under international law, with some appearing to contradict the right to a fair trial, a key UN rights expert said on Friday.

Martin Scheinin, the United Nations' expert on protecting human rights in combating terrorism, said the Military Commissions Act signed into law this month by US President George W Bush "contains a number of provisions that are incompatible with the international obligations of the United States under human rights law and humanitarian law."

[bullimiami]

1. no shit. we have a rogue government that violates their own laws

and abrogates treaties with impunity.

they are criminals posing as politicians.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

13. Another day, another impeachable offense.

W is guilty of failure to carry out his constitutional duties to uphold treaties.

How many "counts" is that now? I'm sure it's dozens. It might be hundreds.

[bullimiami]

18. this is part of what really pissed me off when my own dino senator nelson

of florida voted for it.

if he bothered to read it he would have to know that it not only contradicted many existing us laws and that it was immoral but it is plainly unconstitutional for several reasons and it violates quite a few international treaties we have ratified.

[Solly Mack]

2. Duh

Yeah, yeah - we need experts saying this...but experts have been saying this

When are one of this august bodies of experts going to go from saying it - to acting on it.

It's not enough to merely say it - we need action.

We need the Bush Regime held accountable.

[HereSince1628]

3. UN? Bush believes in it! As in UNitary Executive

The world ought not wait for our corrupted election process to reverse US international positions.

[Bonescrat]

4. Newsflash: US law 'violates' US constitution...nt

[Jokerman]

5. How long until Martin Scheinin is declared an enemy combatant?

I mean, he OBVIOUSLY hates Amerikkka.

[Warren Stupidity]

6. Two problems.

1) no other nation appears to be willing to hold us accountible;
2) new law invalidates existing treaties.

The latter seems counter intuitive. After all, a treaty requires ratification by 2/3 of the Senate, so surely treaty obligations are superior to mere law. I thought so. However if you research the topic it turns out that while it is a very difficult constitutional process to ratify a treaty, there is no constitutional process defined for abolishing treaties. The practice has been that the executive can simply declare, by executive order, all or part of a treaty null and void. No congressional action at all is required. Even odder, it seems that ratification does not complete enactment of a treaty. Where the provisions of a treaty conflict with existing law, congress has to specifically act to pass new laws to enable those conflicting sections of the treaty. The Torture, Indefinite Detention, and Kangaroo Court Act of 2006 legally invalidates (legally within the United States, see point (1) above) treaty obligations that are in conflict with its provisions. This odious legislation might not pass constitutional muster for other issues, such as its attempt to do away with habeas corpus, but its invalidation of parts of the GC will stand, in my opinion.

[bananas]

7. So what do the treaties say happens when one country does not abide?

Usually the treaties have provisions regarding this,
either the treaty becomes completely null and void,
or the other countries get to impose sanctions, etc...

[Warren Stupidity]

9. See my point (1).

Nobody of consequence is doing anything about our idiocy. We violate treaties with impunity. Nobody except the few independent voices willing to speak up says anything and nobody does anything. This is one of the direct results of the collapse of the Soviet Union: the last standing super power has become an arrogant lawless bully.

[LynnTheDem]

14. Because the US or Israel would only veto any sanctions anyways.

No one ever expected the once-great United States of America to become a rogue state, terrorizing, threatening and invaded/occupying other nations, violating US and international laws.

As the Germans say about bush; same shit, different asshole.

[Warren Stupidity]

15. Indeed. However they could at least force us into that position.

As it is Europe China and Russia just play games with us, going along for a while, and then pulling back. The game they played with us on Iraq resulted in 650,000+ dead Iraqis, our fault but they passed on the opportunity to say no. They are playing the same game with us with respect to Iran and with North Korea. I expect that in both cases, if we decide to 'take measures' they will all once again step aside and hope we fall on our faces, and to hell with the consequences to the people of our next victim nations.

[LynnTheDem]

16. What "game" did they play re Iraq?

Same "game" Saddam Hussein played, when he kept insisting there was no "wmd" in Iraq?

Russia and China (and Canada and Mexico and over 85% of the rest of the entire world) said HELL NO to invading Iraq UNLESS the UN inspectors were allowed the time they needed to finish their work and IF they found anything.

The only "game" being played was by bush & his Cabal and their pack of total lies.

The UN said NO.

bush didn't bother taking his invasion to the UN for a 2nd vote.

BUSH played the games; BUSH is responsible for the 655,000+ dead Iraqis, along with the wounded Iraqis, the dead troops, & the wounded troops.

[Warren Stupidity]

17. The UN said sort of yes sort of no.

They eventually agreed to enough of a resolution to give us the fig leaf of international support that we then proceeded to abuse. When we pulled the plug on the inspectors I must have missed the emergency meeting of the UN Security Concil where we vetoed the resolution calling on us to cease and desist and return to the inspections.

As I said, we are of course responsible for all the damage we have done in Iraq. My point is that the international community does nothing to stop us, does not even try, and worse, goes along to a certain extent with our madness so as to not piss us off.

[LynnTheDem]

19. No; the UN said very clearly, very plainly; NO.

The international community tried as best they could to stop us.

What else could they have done?

The UN voted NO on bush's illegal invasion, and declared bush's illegal invasion illegal.

bush refused to even try for the 2nd vote (after the first vote was NO) even tho bush swore he would "no matter what" go for a 2nd vote.

The UN agreed to a Resolution making the US & UK the occupiers of Iraq after bushCabal were occupying Iraq; this was to have bound the US & UK to the international laws that occupiers are to follow. Of course being unlawful rogue bastards, the US & UK violated the occupation laws repeatedly & still do to this day.

There was nothing more the UN or the world could have done, other than unite together and attack America. Gee that woulda worked well.

However, imo they will do so, they will unite together & attack us, sooner or later, if bush continues down the Reich road.

[ShortnFiery]

8. Unfortunately the Wingers have duped the American People

with the seemingly ever present ticking time bomb scenario. :thumbsdown:

Yes, it's an absurd notion that's rare to nonexistent but fear-mongering still works in this "post 9-11" world. Haven't you heard? Terrorism started on 9-11 because America was the target ... that gave BushWorld the power to "change the world" ... every thing's changed since 9-11. What? Dammit! If Dear Leader says we are in a world wide war against TERROR, then THE WORLD is involved. Get used to it world community. :(

[underpants]

10. "Jack Bauer justice"

It's a talking point with them. Laura Ingraham used a few weeks ago (saw it at the end of the Daily Show) and Stephen Moore used it last week on Mahr's show.

"24" is produced by rightwingers. Rightwingers are almost required to watch it. Ask any of them you know it is almost guaranteed that they will say that they watch it.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. Except 'Jack'. is a socialist.

In real life I believe Mr. Sutherland and the rest of the Sutherland family are NDP (Canadian democratic socialist party) loyalists. His grandfather, Tommy Douglas founded the NDP.

Here is 'Jack' preaching to the Democratic Socialist choir: http://www.ndp.ca/node/4335

[Warren Stupidity]

11. The odd part of that is that

torture seems to be invariably used in the 'ticked bomb scenario', in other words it is used after the damn bomb has already gone off, after the planes have hit the WTC, after the party is over. Not that the ticking bomb scenario is a just cause for torture, it isn't, but this is all just another example of the dark humor of our criminally insane times.