Thanks for contributing Mark. While I agree with some of your views and disagree with others, I find your viewpoints very interesting. Hey, you never know, you may convince me one day to see things entirely your way. Although, at 44 I doubt it! :o) Seriously I do try to keep informed but I also understand that I am not getting all of the information and as I learn more my opinion may very well change. Or maybe not. :o) *G*


>Since there are few if any venues for victims as opposed to governments to pursue these cases, they are rarely addressed. In this country, victims are forced to resort to novel lawsuit strategies such as RICO(http://www.palestinianjustice.com/about.htm - local attorney and supporters) and the Alien Tort Claims Act against Americans and other politically protected parties who have committed acts which are clearly sanctioned by the treaties we have signed as well as American Law. They are simply denied their day in court, any court. You may have noticed the effort of late primarily by the Republicans to gut the Alien Tort Act (one of our oldest and well established laws, cases of which are tried in American Federal Court System).
>
>As a Libertarian I share your concerns, but our government is able by treaty to address it by litigating war crimes charges in our courts, thus reliefing the ICC or any other tribrunal of the need\ability to do so. Instead, the major political parties in the US fail to act on these treaty obligations and thwart other nations attempts to do so. Hardly the role of a government that actually supports the ideals these treaties seek to enforce. All the while spewing propaganda, that in my travels, no one but Americans/American surrogates seem to be buying.
>
>Perhaps the anwser is to follow the Belgium lead and allow our judical branch to ajudicate international laws for which we have treaty obligations, as opposed to Congress and the President. There is already ample precedant for this i.e. Federal Drug Laws. Until the 1940s, the Federal Courts including the Supreme Court had all ruled that the Federal Government had no Constitutional Authority to regulate in any way, recreational drug use (states only). The legal manuver(sp) found to circumvent this impediment was to sign an International treaty(cretaed by a few American proponents) with the League of Nations and use the treaty making provisions of the Constitution to engage in a previously unconstitional activity and you know the results . It would seem that when we have the political will to enforce our treaty obligations our politicians find a way. If it were to happen and it won't while the two party system is in place, we would have to vastly increase the number of sitting Federal
>Court judges, as the number of these criminals currently sheltered in this country is simply mind boogling (and seemingly increasing monthly -see the 4 anti-castro terrorist Airline Bombers recently spirited into the country from a Panamanian prision two months ago).
>
>I have temendously enjoyed your insights on both programming and the state of affairs (its refreshing to see someone who does their homework on both) and hope to continue to do so. MKM