March 4th 2009
Genocide In Sudan? UN’s Court Can’t Find It
F
irst the good news: The International Criminal Court, created by the U.N.’s Rome Statute in 1998, has ordered the arrest of Sudanese bloodsucking scumbag President Omar Hassan al-Bashir on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity (murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture, rape, attacks against civilians and pillaging), all for Sudan’s inhuman behavior against Christians and others in Darfur.
Well, yay. That’s a pretty impressive work performance for a U.N.-related agency, given that they’ve only been at it for seven months.
Now the bad news: No one has the authority or (I’m sure) the will to pick up al-Bashir and drop him on the court’s doorstep in The Hague. Under law, Sudan is supposed to arrest its president, but let’s not kid ourselves, shall we?
Now the ridiculus news: The ICC did not bring charges of genocide against al-Bashir because (NYT here):
The question of genocide in Darfur has been divisive, and was so among the judges, who said two to one that the prosecutor had not provided sufficient evidence of the government’s intent, the key issue in determining genocide.
Proving genocide in court is a high hurdle because it is not about the magnitude of the atrocities. Genocide requires proof that an accused had “specific intent” to “destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such” on the basis of their identity.
Looks like genocide, hurts like genocide, bleeds like genocide, rots corpses by the thousands like genocide, but gee, we just can’t really bring ourselves to call it genocide. Perhaps the Court may wish to reconsider and ask itself this question: How many Muslims did al-Bashir’s forces kill? Even one?
Get ready for the spectacle of one of your typical Islamic demonstrations now, with Sudanese Muslims rallying in support of their leader and Sharia, and against international law and decency. Why, it’s already begun …
Thousands of Sudanese gathered in central Khartoum within minutes of the court’s announcement, waving Sudanese flags and posters showing the President’s face to demonstrate their support for him and denounce the court’s decision. The government in Khartoum vowed to ignore the court’s ruling.
“The court is only one mechanism of neo-colonialist policy used by the West against free and independent countries,” said Sudanese presidential advisor Mustafa Osman Ismail, according to Reuters.
Blah, blah, blah. Get over it, Mustafa. The U.S. was a colony and we’ve done pretty well for ourselves.
Then let’s see if the arrest warrant has any effect whatsoever on al-Bashir - or even if it stands up in the face of united Islamic defense of jihadocide in the U.N.:
The Security Council can postpone action against Mr. Bashir and even stop a trial. But on the eve of the ruling, the council remained largely divided over how to react. Sudan’s supporters, including the African Union and Arab League, called again Tuesday for the council to invoke Article 16 of the statute creating the court which allows it to suspend any indictment. But France, Britain or the United States would likely use its veto to block such a move.
Posted in Sudan, United Nations | No Comments yet » | |
Leave a Reply
[The "Comment Box" is WYSIWYG except that you have to double space between paragraphs!
Type it the way you want it to look -- Just remember to double up those line spaces.]
You must be logged in to post a comment.
