Ayers Turned Away From Canada By Immigration Officials

If your dog poops in the living room, do you just put the dog out and not clean up the mess?

Hell, no, I frog march him to the Hague and make sure all the cable news outlets have the video.

No, I do not believe any American President or member of an administration should be subject to the ICJ. We are governed by our constitution, not the United Nations.

And I'm confident that's something both parties will agree on in spite of what some would say.

As for an internal investigation, no I do not think it's warranted. I think it is nothing more the political pay back for elections lost and if we don't move past it now, we never will.

Aaron wrote:No, I do not believe any American President or member of an administration should be subject to the ICJ. We are governed by our constitution, not the United Nations.

And I'm confident that's something both parties will agree on in spite of what some would say.

As for an internal investigation, no I do not think it's warranted. I think it is nothing more the political pay back for elections lost and if we don't move past it now, we never will.

But more than once here you have pointed to some United Nations resolution or other as justification for the U.S. invasion of Iraq- some world wide call to U.S. action, as you put it- or similar words.

So it's OK to make war based on a certain multi-nation agency's resolution, but it's not OK to be accountable for how that war is conducted to some similar multi-nation agency tribunal?

I am totally opposed to any international court leading proceedings against George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, or BMD from California or Ziggy from Jackson County, or any other American citizen.

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:No, I do not believe any American President or member of an administration should be subject to the ICJ. We are governed by our constitution, not the United Nations.

And I'm confident that's something both parties will agree on in spite of what some would say.

As for an internal investigation, no I do not think it's warranted. I think it is nothing more the political pay back for elections lost and if we don't move past it now, we never will.

But more than once here you have pointed to some United Nations resolution or other as justification for the U.S. invasion of Iraq- some world wide call to U.S. action, as you put it- or similar words.

So it's OK to make war based on a certain multi-nation agency's resolution, but it's not OK to be accountable for how that war is conducted to some similar multi-nation agency tribunal?

No I haven't. I may have pointed out that our government used a UN resolution but I've never used it as a justification for us going. You're mistaken.

Stephanie wrote:I am totally opposed to any international court leading proceedings against George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, or BMD from California or Ziggy from Jackson County, or any other American citizen.

So far as I know, Ziggy and I have never committed any war crimes, tortured anybody, or even pulled the wings off of flies, so I'm not too worried about it (I assume that goes for Zig, also).