First of all, I think it's incredibly arrogant of a European creation to think it can just assert jurisdiction over a sovereign head of state on another continent for his role in suppressing a local insurrection.

But aside from that...

Deputy Foreign Minister Khalid Kaim said the court was a "baby of the European Union designed for African politicians and leaders" and its practices were "questionable".

Is he right?

According to Wikipedia, every person indicted by that "court" is African.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court#Investigations

Given that Africans have virtually no role in running the court, why should Africans respect its jurisdiction?


Oh, and how, pray tell, oh how, do they manage to spend almost 100 million Euros a year on this meaningless academics conference?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:International_Criminal_Court_contributions,_2008.png

What possibly costs that much? Do they really need their own high tech building and large staff?

Personally, I congratulate the Dutch for scoring this boondoggle. If nothing else, I'm sure the influx of capital helps their economy a bit. But that begs the question as to whether the Dutch really need the influx of capital. Hey, I have an idea. Move this "court" to Athens or Dublin. They could really use the cash.

Originally posted by sh76
First of all, I think it's incredibly arrogant of a European creation to think it can just assert jurisdiction over a sovereign head of state on another continent for his role in suppressing a local insurrection.

There you go with your inferiority complex.

Originally posted by Palynka
There you go with your inferiority complex.

Yeah; okay.

Every time I criticize anything European it's because of my "inferiority complex."

Whatever.

Originally posted by sh76
Yeah; okay.

Every time I criticize anything European it's because of my "inferiority complex."

Whatever.

It is in this case because in your need to say something about your personal bogeyman you trample history remorselessly.

Originally posted by sh76
First of all, I think it's incredibly arrogant of a European creation to think it can just assert jurisdiction over a sovereign head of state on another continent for his role in suppressing a local insurrection.

But aside from that...

[quote]Deputy Foreign Minister Khalid Kaim said the court was a "baby of the European Union designed for African politici ...[text shortened]... I have an idea. Move this "court" to Athens or Dublin. They could really use the cash.

But the world looks to the Europeans for moral direction. So long as they want to go to war then war is a good thing or so long as they deem someone worthy enough to be given a Nobel Prize for "Peace" then they deserve it etc.

Originally posted by Palynka
It is in this case because in your need to say something about your personal bogeyman you trample history remorselessly.

What exactly is my "personal bogeyman"?

Originally posted by whodey
But the world looks to the Europeans for moral direction. So long as they want to go to war then war is a good thing or so long as they deem someone worthy enough to be given a Nobel Prize for "Peace" then they deserve it etc.

Who set up the court?
How many countries signed the treaty that established it?
Which ones ratified it?
How are the funding contributions determined?
Where is the president of the court from?
Where is the vice-president of the court from?
Which nationalities are the judges in the court from?
Where is the Head of the Office of the Prosecutor from?
Where is the person in charge of the Prosecution Division of the Office of the Prosecutor from?

Originally posted by sh76
What exactly is my "personal bogeyman"?

Do you prefer that I call it xenophobia?

Originally posted by Palynka
Do you prefer that I call it xenophobia?

You can call it what you like, but it isn't true; I am not xenophobic; nor do I have anything inherent against Europe or Europeans. On the French IMF guy thread, not only did I not pile on, I defended him (or at least his right to a presumption of innocence).

This business of dismissing everything I say against any European or European institution is getting a little tiresome. It's somewhat akin to calling someone an anti-Semite every time he criticizes an Israeli policy. I can't stop you from doing it anyway, of course; but this once I'll call it what it is and let you decide how to proceed from there.

Originally posted by sh76
You can call it what you like, but it isn't true; I am not xenophobic; nor do I have anything inherent against Europe or Europeans. On the French IMF guy thread, not only did I not pile on, I defended him (or at least his right to a presumption of innocence).

This business of dismissing everything I say against any European or European institution is getting course; but this once I'll call it what it is and let you decide how to proceed from there.

It's all about the regularity of absurd attacks.

There are some posters here that regularly post absurd attacks that it's safe to believe they are anti-Semite. Also the type of language and expression used. I certainly think some are. In your case, I think it's inferiority complex.

Originally posted by sh76
It's somewhat akin to calling someone an anti-Semite every time he criticizes an Israeli policy.

But what if he criticizes a UN policy then blames Israel for it? Wouldn't that justify calls of anti-Semitism?

Originally posted by Palynka
In your case, I think it's inferiority complex.

Don't go into psychoanalysis.

It doesn't suit you.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But what if he criticizes a UN policy then blames Israel for it? Wouldn't that justify calls of anti-Semitism?

Perhaps; but what does that have to do with my OP?

Originally posted by sh76
Perhaps; but what does that have to do with my OP?

Who set up the court?
How many countries signed the treaty that established it?
Which ones ratified it?
How are the funding contributions determined?
Where is the president of the court from?
Where is the vice-president of the court from?
Which nationalities are the judges in the court from?
Where is the Head of the Office of the Prosecutor from?
Where is the person in charge of the Prosecution Division of the Office of the Prosecutor from?

Originally posted by Palynka
Who set up the court?
How many countries signed the treaty that established it?
Which ones ratified it?
How are the funding contributions determined?
Where is the president of the court from?
Where is the vice-president of the court from?
Which nationalities are the judges in the court from?
Where is the Head of the Office of the Prosecutor fro ...[text shortened]...
Where is the person in charge of the Prosecution Division of the Office of the Prosecutor from?

Most of that information is on the Wikipedia page I linked to. As to the information that's not on the Wikipedia page, I don't know (though I did browse their site a bit this morning).

Other than calling the court a "European creation" I didn't mention anything about Europe at all in my OP. It was created by the Rome statute in Europe, it is mostly funded by Europe and it sits in Europe. It's two working languages are English and French. If you want to get on me because other countries have ratified it and it gets a sliver of its funds from non-European sources, fine. Whatever. Small detail.

Many African countries have criticized the court for seemingly only going after Africans. Do you agree with this criticism or not?