Amnesty calls on Canada to arrest George W. Bush
BartSimpson @ Fri Oct 14, 2011 11:12 am
raydan raydan:
So it would be OK for the US to arrest a former Canadian PM. 
For political reasons or for things they did in office? Nope. Tons of us down here would not stand for it. Knowing that no one here would bother attempting it.
For something like drunk driving (which is entirely possible with Chretien from what I hear) it's possible, but then I'd expect the State Department to jump in and have the charges summarily dismissed and then he'd just be sent home.
raydan @ Fri Oct 14, 2011 2:35 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
raydan raydan:
So it would be OK for the US to arrest a former Canadian PM.
For political reasons or for things they did in office? Nope. Tons of us down here would not stand for it. Knowing that no one here would bother attempting it.
For something like drunk driving (which is entirely possible with Chretien from what I hear) it's possible, but then I'd expect the State Department to jump in and have the charges summarily dismissed and then he'd just be sent home.
What I meant is that by your logic, for the same offense, it would be OK for the US to arrest a former Canadian PM, but not for Canada to arrest a former US president.
BartSimpson @ Fri Oct 14, 2011 3:32 pm
raydan raydan:
What I meant is that by your logic, for the same offense, it would be OK for the US to arrest a former Canadian PM, but not for Canada to arrest a former US president.
If Bush or Clinton were drunk driving in Canada I'd expect them to be arrested and then our respective foreign relations departments would sort it out.
If someone in Canada got hurt because of that it would not be beyond the Pale to expect Bush/Clinton to be left to the mercy of a Canadian court. In the reverse of that situation I'd still expect the US to send the offending PM home.
GreenTiger @ Fri Oct 14, 2011 5:34 pm
Amnesty International can very useful function in this world, but this kind of stuff makes them look like a ridiculous kooks.
GreenTiger @ Fri Oct 14, 2011 5:35 pm
![[BB]](./images/smilies/beers.gif "Beers")
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
raydan raydan:
What I meant is that by your logic, for the same offense, it would be OK for the US to arrest a former Canadian PM, but not for Canada to arrest a former US president.
If Bush or Clinton were drunk driving in Canada I'd expect them to be arrested and then our respective foreign relations departments would sort it out.
If someone in Canada got hurt because of that it would not be beyond the Pale to expect Bush/Clinton to be left to the mercy of a Canadian court. In the reverse of that situation I'd still expect the US to send the offending PM home.
Johnny_H @ Fri Oct 14, 2011 5:39 pm
Regina Regina:
Is this AI trying to be relevant?
Yes, that is where it begins and ends.
DanSC @ Fri Oct 14, 2011 5:53 pm
Yet when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visits the UN General Assembly every few years, AI seems to turn a blind eye.
GreenTiger @ Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:55 pm
DanSC DanSC:
Yet when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visits the UN General Assembly every few years, AI seems to turn a blind eye.
The usual argument is "This is different".
eureka @ Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 am
The UN is neutral ground. No country has jurisdiction there.
PublicAnimalNo9 @ Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:08 am
Not that I have any love for Bush(or Cheney for that matter) but if the UN has an issue with the way the US does "business", maybe the UN should move from NYC and set up their HQ in "friendlier" lands.
I'm sure North Korea or Iran would love to have the UN headquartered in their respective countries.
DanSC @ Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:43 am
eureka eureka:
The UN is neutral ground. No country has jurisdiction there.
I thought this was a crime against humanity. Surely people are at the UN, right?
eureka @ Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:08 pm
DanSC DanSC:
eureka eureka:
The UN is neutral ground. No country has jurisdiction there.
I thought this was a crime against humanity. Surely people are at the UN, right?
They are. Or most of them are people. But there is not a national jurisdiction.
DanSC @ Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:59 pm
During one of Ahmadinejad's more recent visits to NYC, he gave a lecture at Columbia University, all the way across town from the UN. Surely Amnesty International could have arrested him there.
Zipperfish @ Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:13 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
It always has been and is nothing new. Military power is why Josef Stalin and Mao were never prosecuted for their crimes. Military power is also why the Nazis and the Japanese were prosecuted for their crimes.
+1.
![[B-o]](./images/smilies/drinkup.gif "Drink up")