Italian Courts Attack US Marines


PDA






Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 02:08 AM
This just came up:

"ItalyItaly investigates US marine over agent killing

Italian magistrates have placed a US marine under official investigation for murder over the killing of an Italian agent in Iraq in March. Intelligence officer Nicola Calipari was shot dead at an improvised checkpoint near Baghdad as he was accompanying freed hostage Giuliana Sgrena to safety. She was shot in the shoulder during the incident.
..."

http://euronews.net/create_html.php?page=detail_info&article=327642&lng=1


This is completely beyond the pale. Italian courts have NO JURISDICTION OVER THIS ISSUE AT ALL! It was a shooting that took place in Iraq. Jurisdiction rests only with the Iraqi courts and the US military courts. Italy has no authority over Iraq whatsoever, and the man who was shot there was an Italian agent operating on US-controlled Iraqi soil.

This is just the latest in a long line of European courts attempting to assert criminal jurisdiction on the basis of the CITIZENSHIP of the alleged victim. Spanish courts started the process when they used the Spanish citizenship of alleged victims of Pinochet to bring charges against him in Spanish court for crimes that had no relation to Spain whatsoever. These edicts run directly against longstanding jurisprudence that was established only after long and bloody struggles. A court attempting to charge a foreigner with murder merely for killing one of their citizens in a foreign country is itself commiting an act of STATE AGGRESSION against the sovereign status of that nation. I cannot stress this strongly enough. Attempts by Italy to enforce their edict would be grounds for a declaration of war. Indeed they'd be the firmest grounds for a declaration of war we've had since Pearl Harbor or the Iran hostage crisis.

NO TERRORIST poses anything like the level of threat to our sovereign status that these out-of-control Eurocourts and their vaunted ICC pose against us. We need to move quickly and with force if necessary to stop them. Any attempts to seize US citizens on these baseless charges should be met with immediate force. ANYONE who has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution is in fact duty-bound to use all necessary force to stop these efforts.

If you enjoyed reading about "Italian Courts Attack US Marines" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MR73
December 29, 2005, 02:33 AM
"NO TERRORIST poses anything like the level of threat to our sovereign status that these out-of-control Eurocourts and their vaunted ICC pose against us."

Ridiculous.

The current US administration poses more of a threat to Americans, the US and beyond than any "Eurocourt".

All of the abuses unveiled in the past years support this beyond anything seen before. Most recent: all of the abuse within the USA like the illegal spying on US citizens. ALL illegal, disrespectful of American and International law and conventions (...). ALL of this and the rest (known and not yet known) are a real threat. Not marginal actions by European courts.

But then, doesn't it feel good to only see evil elsewhere so you can justify your own agenda.

Azrael256
December 29, 2005, 02:35 AM
Italian magistrates have placed a US marine under official investigation for murder Well, if they want him that bad, they can come get him.

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 02:51 AM
The current US administration poses more of a threat to Americans, the US and beyond than any "Eurocourt".


I like how you change the subject rather than offer any substantive response. It's what I've come to expect from Euro-apologists.

odysseus
December 29, 2005, 03:01 AM
This is just the latest in a long line of European courts attempting to assert criminal jurisdiction on the basis of the CITIZENSHIP of the alleged victim

Just wait, they will then want it tried in a court regulated by the UN. :barf:

Firethorn
December 29, 2005, 03:07 AM
Well, if they want him that bad, they can come get him.

I'm sure his buddies would really love that...

Anybody else think it'd be hilarious see see them try to serve the warrent while the marine is still in Iraq?

exoduster18
December 29, 2005, 03:10 AM
MR73 - Do you realize that this spying is nothing new? It was just done by a different governmental entity. Namely that of out British counterparts. The CIA knows that it can't legally spy on U.S. citizens. So they have the Brits do it for them. (I believe it to be the Brits MI:6 is the organization that does it) And the CIA does the same for the Brits as it is against their laws for domestic spying.

And just because this is all coming forward now under the administration of GWB doesn't necessarily mean that others before him haven't done it.

SIGarmed
December 29, 2005, 03:20 AM
Baloney. What do you think the NSA does? What rock have you been hiding under? The euro marxists are full of it and this is more in the long line of their anti-US activism. Agenda? And what agenda would that be? The success of the United States? Gee how terrible.


"NO TERRORIST poses anything like the level of threat to our sovereign status that these out-of-control Eurocourts and their vaunted ICC pose against us."

Ridiculous.

The current US administration poses more of a threat to Americans, the US and beyond than any "Eurocourt".

All of the abuses unveiled in the past years support this beyond anything seen before. Most recent: all of the abuse within the USA like the illegal spying on US citizens. ALL illegal, disrespectful of American and International law and conventions (...). ALL of this and the rest (known and not yet known) are a real threat. Not marginal actions by European courts.

But then, doesn't it feel good to only see evil elsewhere so you can justify your own agenda.

Ezekiel
December 29, 2005, 03:27 AM
A court attempting to charge a foreigner with murder merely for killing one of their citizens in a foreign country is itself commiting an act of STATE AGGRESSION against the sovereign status of that nation.

This seems to me to be exactly the sort of Roman Empire and Charlemagne-esque policy that el Presidente Jorge Shrub has offered against any nation that has opposed -- admittedly through killing folks -- U.S. foreign doctrine.

"Having it both ways", is a purely self-righteous and American fallacy. :barf:

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 05:08 AM
Just wait, they will then want it tried in a court regulated by the UN. :barf:

Specifically, they want the ICC. Thankfully Klinton didn't get his wish and we're not members of it. I honestly see ratification of that treaty as the greatest threat to American liberty since the birth of the Republic. It is unique among treaties in that it would strip away the sovereign power of our courts and give supreme power to a foreign court sitting in Europe and staffed by Europeans and Europe-friendly American jurists.

For example, if the US federal courts dismissed a claim against an American for alleged war crimes overseas, the ICC could take up the case and press it. That means they could bring charges against US servicemen, politicians or anyone on their list and subject them to a European tribunal with none of the safeguards of the US Constitution.

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 05:09 AM
This seems to me to be exactly the sort of Roman Empire and Charlemagne-esque policy that el Presidente Jorge Shrub has offered against any nation that has opposed -- admittedly through killing folks -- U.S. foreign doctrine.

"Having it both ways", is a purely self-righteous and American fallacy. :barf:

That's just good old fashioned war. Been around since the dawn of civilization. If Italy invades us and takes us over, *THEN AND ONLY THEN* would Italian courts have jurisdiction over US citizens outside of Italy. Don't you see?

THEY WANT TO ACCOMPLISH BY TREATY WHAT NO ARMY OF FIFTY MILLION COULD EVER ACCOMPLISH! STRIP US OF OUR SOVEREIGN STATUS AND MAKE US A MERE STATE IN A GLOBAL UNION!!

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 05:13 AM
I'm sure his buddies would really love that...

Anybody else think it'd be hilarious see see them try to serve the warrent while the marine is still in Iraq?

It is hilarious, and that's a comfort. What's less of a comfort is the thought of seeing European poletzei arrest the man after he's retired and just happens to have a layover at some Italian airport.

Make no mistake, people. An awful lot of Europeans see us as the greatest threat to world peace in the new century. They want to bring us to heel by any means necessary--including humilate us by trying and convicting US soldiers and politicians in their tinpot courts. If we give in and let that happen, then we truly have lost the right to be a nation anymore. I can think of no better reason to fight a war than to protect such a critical element of our sovereign power.

gunsmith
December 29, 2005, 05:41 AM
it's President GW Bush.

LAK
December 29, 2005, 06:21 AM
This is completely beyond the pale. Italian courts have NO JURISDICTION OVER THIS ISSUE AT ALL! It was a shooting that took place in Iraq. Jurisdiction rests only with the Iraqi courts and the US military courts. Italy has no authority over Iraq whatsoever, and the man who was shot there was an Italian agent operating on US-controlled Iraqi soil.

This is just the latest in a long line of European courts attempting to assert criminal jurisdiction on the basis of the CITIZENSHIP of the alleged victim ....
Shouldn't be much of a surprize. The state of Israel claims jurisdiction worldwide, the right to execute without trial anyone it deems an enemy of their state in any country of the world. Including the United States.

Neither so-called "republican" and "patriot" George W Bush, nor the U.S. Congress, have publicly denounced and declared in perpetuity, that no U.S. soldier or citizen will ever be subject to Israeli jurisdiction - or the jurisdiction of a so-called "world court" - while onboard any ship bearing the U.S. flag or U.S. soil.

So this should not be any surprize at all.
---------------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 06:32 AM
This has nothing whatsoever to do with the exercise of military force or Israel. The US, Israel and most other nations routinely kill their enemies overseas. This has been going on for as long as there have been nations. If Europe wants to come try to kill Marines or the President, let them try. I'm not worried about that. I am worried about a treaty that would let them do with a court what they could never do in the open with military force.

McCall911
December 29, 2005, 07:19 AM
Maybe this story from Italian Leftist Giuliana Sgrena will help put things into perspective:

http://www.ilmanifesto.it/pag/sgrena/en/

To me it's pretty obvious that this whole situation is orchestrated by the Italian Left to sow discontent between the U.S. and Italy.

Hawkmoon
December 29, 2005, 10:56 AM
Well, if they want him that bad, they can come get him.
Not so fast.

The problem with this is that there is an international extradition treaty that this would fall under. If the Italian court issues a warrant, the U.S. personnel involved will not be safe traveling to or through any country that is signatory to the treaty ... and that includes most of the countries of the world. In essence, they would not be safe setting foot outside the U.S.

And I don't think those warrants have an expiration date ...

HankB
December 29, 2005, 11:00 AM
I agree that the case against this Marine is bogus, and driven purely by knee-jerk, leftist, European anti-US politics. It should be publically ignored, and the Italians should - quietly, diplomatically, and unofficially - be informed that they really don't want to provoke a US military response by attempting to use force to seize a serving member of the US Armed Forces. (And of course, the nation of Italy should be strictly "off limits" to this particular Marine while he's serving.)

But before we get too upset about "sovereignty" issues, consider . . .

* The US invaded Panama and threw Noriega in jail, though he personally broke no law while in the US or on US territory.

* The US routinely asserts jurisdiction over narcotics kingpins, even if they've never set foot in the US.

* Nazi war criminals have been extradited to Israel, which didn't even exist as a country during WWII.

There are other examples of nations - including the USA - claiming extraterritorial jurisdiction.

another okie
December 29, 2005, 11:15 AM
Notice that our law not only applies outside the U.S., it doesn't even require the victim to be an American citizen.


TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 118--WAR CRIMES

Sec. 2441. War crimes

(a) Offense.--Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States,
commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection
(b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term
of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be
subject to the penalty of death.

WT
December 29, 2005, 11:22 AM
That Marine better not vacation in Europe or go visit Niagara Falls, Canada. Doing so would place the Marine at risk of arrest under a European Union warrant.

The Italians are not confident that the US government did a thorough and complete investigation of the incident. I am not surprised that the Italians are suspicious of George W. and crew.

I would hope the USA would investigate and prosecute those who harm Americans overseas when the host country declines to do so.

Lupinus
December 29, 2005, 11:40 AM
Two words- NATALEE HOLLOWAY

We may go after criminals that cost us billions or poison our citizens (drug bosses).

We may go after war criminals and brutal tyrants on occasion.

We even stick out nose where it doesn't belong a few times a decade.

But we don't stick out courts in for individual crimes. Big things that effect our country or the lives of many, many people we do. But we don't get some judges together to try a case or "investigate" every time an American citizen is killed by criminals.

That said Italy to my understanding has been a pretty good ally of the US and I fully support them, even if this court "investigation" I don't.

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 01:52 PM
But before we get too upset about "sovereignty" issues, consider . . .

* The US invaded Panama and threw Noriega in jail, though he personally broke no law while in the US or on US territory.

* The US routinely asserts jurisdiction over narcotics kingpins, even if they've never set foot in the US.

* Nazi war criminals have been extradited to Israel, which didn't even exist as a country during WWII.

There are other examples of nations - including the USA - claiming extraterritorial jurisdiction.

Noriega was charged with violating US law by helping to smuggle drugs into the US. He was tried and convicted by an Art. III court under US drug laws. If a US Marine had used his position to smuggle drugs into Italy, of course Italy would have a right to put him on trial. In this case, however, no valid Italian law has been broken. Italy cannot make murder in Iraq illegal. It has no jurisdiction there. Nor does it have jurisdiction over US military forces outside of Italy.

Narco kingpins can violate US law without setting foot in the US by smuggling drugs into the US. Just as I could violate UK law by smuggling firearms into the UK. Or violate Singapore law by paying someone to smuggle drugs to my buyer in Singapore. Even if I never set foot there. By my actions I secretly sent illegal items into the foreign nation to a buyer there, violating their criminal and import laws.

Think of it this way. Imagine Agricola visits your range and you let him shoot a variety of arms which are legal here but would be illegal in the UK. What Italy is doing is the equivalent of a UK court issuing a warrant for your arrest arising from that, simply because Agricola is a British citizen. There is no legal distinction between that and an Italian court claiming a right to try a murder of an Italian citizen in Iraq. You don't drag your nation's laws with you as you travel to other nations. Not unless you come with a very large army behind you.

As far as the hunt for NAZIs, it is true that the foundation and pretext for the current efforts to expand Eurocourt jurisdiction lies in the post-WWII war crimes tribunals and the exercise of what amounts to worldwide jurisdictional reach by the Alliance courts in Japan and Germany for "war criminals." The doctrine that certain criminals were so outrageous that any court could grab them at any time was adopted by Israel and many European nations--though US courts have been more reluctant to accept it. This doctrine has been further expanded to justify jurisdiction anytime a victim carries the nationality of the court, no matter how far away the murder took place. Spanish courts used this doctrine to try to get Pinochet for killing Spanish nationals in Chile. Now Italian courts are using it to try to reach into Iraq to cover what they claim is a murder. The pretext of a war crime is fading away fast--just as it will as the ICC exercises more and more power.

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 02:00 PM
I would hope the USA would investigate and prosecute those who harm Americans overseas when the host country declines to do so.

This would undermine a thousand years of comity and jurisprudence, not to mention basic notions of what constitutes a sovereign nation. Unless we have an army to back us and take over the subject nation, we have no right to try anyone simply because they harmed an American overseas.

Imagine if a drunk British tourist (not Agricola this time :D ) attacked me with a knife in Spenard and I shot him dead. Imagine further that the local authorities investigate the situation, see my knife wound and interview witnesses, then decide not to bring any charges. UNDER THE SYSTEM YOU ADVOCATE, the UK courts would then be free to charge me with murder in the UK and try me before a British jury. Do you honestly not see any problem with this?

This is why the issue has direct relevance to gun laws. THE GREATER INCLUDES THE LESSER. If the European courts can try murder of their citizens anywhere in the world, then they can impose lesser laws than murder anywhere in the world. We are already seeing the downward creep from ultimate Hitler-level war criminal to lesser nazi to third world dictator to US marine. If they can grab that Marine--they can grab you and me just as easily.

Remember the shooting of the Japanese student in Baton Rouge a few years ago? Under the European doctrine, Japan would have a right to try and convict the shooter IN JAPAN. Lord knows they wanted to.

c_yeager
December 29, 2005, 02:11 PM
This is just the latest in a long line of European courts attempting to assert criminal jurisdiction on the basis of the CITIZENSHIP of the alleged victim

We do the exact same thing. Remember the hijacking of TWA 847? We have been claiming the authority to try the guy who killed a U.S. Navy Diver on that plane, despite the fact that it was a flight from Athens to Rome and that the Hijacking never touched American soil. We contend that the citizenship of the victim is all that we need to try the man who killed him. Complain all you want about the concept, but its a precedent that we set.

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 02:11 PM
Notice that our law not only applies outside the U.S., it doesn't even require the victim to be an American citizen.



That's the danger of a cut-n-paste legal analysis. The US war crimes law is restrained by basic doctrines of criminal jurisdiction. The federal courts are not going to allow a US attorney to bring criminal charges against a foreign national for harming an American overseas. The Marine in this case would be subject to US war crimes law via military jurisdiction, which binds him wherever he is pursuant to his status as a serving Marine. He's subject to Court Martial under the uniform code of military justice. But no American court has jurisdiction over an Italian soldier who shoots an American in Italy. The notion would be laughed out of court here.

However, you are correct that there are many advocates of free-ranging international jurisdiction within our own legal system. The sort of Jack McCoy types who honestly believe there is "only one law" and that it should be applied worldwide.

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 02:22 PM
We do the exact same thing. Remember the hijacking of TWA 847? We have been claiming the authority to try the guy who killed a U.S. Navy Diver on that plane, despite the fact that it was a flight from Athens to Rome and that the Hijacking never touched American soil. We contend that the citizenship of the victim is all that we need to try the man who killed him. Complain all you want about the concept, but its a precedent that we set.

The rules regarding jurisdiction over international flights are different. These flights can cross many borders during the course of a flight, and the nations of the world agreed a long time ago not to attempt to flip through the criminal jurisdictions as the planes cross the invisible barriers. That's why the flight attendants don't snatch your cocktail away if you happen to be flying over a dry nation.

If you murder an American on a US airline during an international flight, you may well be subject to criminal jurisdiction in the US. Just as a drunk Russian who beats up crew members on a US airline flight from Magadan to Mexico may find himself dropped into US custody at the airport here in Anchorage. Though in this case Mohammed Ali Hammadi has still managed to avoid us and the fact that the murder took place on the ground in Greece is clearly causing other nations to be unwilling to hand him over.

Old Dog
December 29, 2005, 02:25 PM
I find myself totally in agreement with Cosmoline on all these issues. This is the big problem we face now -- the increasing acceptance within the U.S. legal community, and higher court judges as well, of applying standards of international (and in particular, European) law in U.S. jurisprudence ... We have already one SCOTUS justice who has no problem with this; we really, really cannot afford any more on this court.

McCall911
December 29, 2005, 04:05 PM
OK, then, add this to the collection of Italian court vs. U.S. stories:

http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-12-23-voa23.cfm

Cosmoline
December 29, 2005, 04:14 PM
Well there at least there is some jurisdictional basis, since the alleged kidnapping took place in Milan.

LAK
December 30, 2005, 04:41 AM
This has nothing whatsoever to do with the exercise of military force or Israel. The US, Israel and most other nations routinely kill their enemies overseas. This has been going on for as long as there have been nations. If Europe wants to come try to kill Marines or the President, let them try. I'm not worried about that. I am worried about a treaty that would let them do with a court what they could never do in the open with military force.
On the contrary, killing "enemies" overseas requires a declared state or war.

Don't get me wrong, I oppose this completely. But no one should be surprized at developements like this with existing abominations like a kangaroo "world Court" and a state like the state of Israel, the government of whom are apparently a law unto themselves.

If we didn't have traitors in Washington DC, both the majority in the U.S. Congress, and the WH, all this nonsense wouldn't be tolerated at all. As it is, expect plenty more.
------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

c_yeager
December 30, 2005, 01:00 PM
Really the idea that the only people who have jurisdiction should be the Americans or the Iraqis is kinda dangerous. Now, I think that what *we* are doing is fine.

However, imagine this: France invades Belgium, kills off all the left handed people, and installs a puppet government. By the stated logic the only people who should have legal authority to prosecute would be the French themselves, or the puppet government that they installed. That doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

The thing is, we killed an Italian government official. It is perfectly understandable that they wouldnt want the government that is responsible for the action to be the one who decides that its OK. This sort of thing is probably the only legitimate use for a "world court" type of organization.

If you enjoyed reading about "Italian Courts Attack US Marines" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!