Bush is coming over.

[Ted the Poster 0]

Now now, Czech, let us not forget Bryan Adams. Or Aviril Lavigne. Or Celine Dion. Canada might give us good comedians, but they tend to send over some horrid musicians. It mostly balances out.

[cbacon 0]

Previously mentioned artists aside, Canadian musicians are fantastic.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

Rita MacNeil, Anne Murray, Our Lady Peace, The Watchmen, Moist, Sum 41, Ashley MacIsaac...

 

Oh yeah, FANTASTIC!

[cbacon 0]

Didn't say they were. I wouldn't think of that group as representitive of Canadian music.

[Red Baron 0]

Now now, we apologized about Bryan Adams numerous amounts of times.

[Vern Gagne 0]

[Guest Regina Phelange]

Okay, okay...sorry about Alan Thicke too...

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

I enjoyed every part of Canada I've visited except for Quebec. Fucking ass-holes.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

Yeah but their strip clubs are off the hook and more liberal then anything you'd see in the States.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Bush is coming over

 

Hide the good china.

[NoCalMike 0]

I am sure while in Canada Bush will be strictly business and stick to the important issues........like repealing Canada's lax marijuana laws.

[Highland 0]

He'll change his mind after a few good tokes.

[iggymcfly 0]

Yeah, why is Bush all anti-drug anyway? I mean somebody smoking a couple bowls shouldn't be that big of a deal to a guy who got caught doing coke.

[cbacon 0]

If only...

 

Should Canada indict Bush?

 

THOMAS WALKOM

 

When U.S. President George W. Bush arrives in Ottawa — probably later this year — should he be welcomed? Or should he be charged with war crimes?

 

It's an interesting question. On the face of it, Bush seems a perfect candidate for prosecution under Canada's Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act.

 

This act was passed in 2000 to bring Canada's ineffectual laws in line with the rules of the new International Criminal Court. While never tested, it lays out sweeping categories under which a foreign leader like Bush could face arrest.

 

In particular, it holds that anyone who commits a war crime, even outside Canada, may be prosecuted by our courts. What is a war crime? According to the statute, it is any conduct defined as such by "customary international law" or by conventions that Canada has adopted.

 

War crimes also specifically include any breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, such as torture, degradation, wilfully depriving prisoners of war of their rights "to a fair and regular trial," launching attacks "in the knowledge that such attacks will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians" and deportation of persons from an area under occupation.

 

Outside of one well-publicized (and quickly squelched) attempt in Belgium, no one has tried to formally indict Bush. But both Oxfam International and the U.S. group Human Rights Watch have warned that some of the actions undertaken by the U.S. and its allies, particularly in Iraq, may fall under the war crime rubric.

 

The case for the prosecution looks quite promising. First, there is the fact of the Iraq war itself. After 1945, Allied tribunals in Nuremberg and Tokyo — in an astonishing precedent — ruled that states no longer had the unfettered right to invade other countries and that leaders who started such conflicts could be tried for waging illegal war.

 

Concurrently, the new United Nations outlawed all aggressive wars except those authorized by its Security Council.

 

Today, a strong case could be made that Bush violated the Nuremberg principles by invading Iraq. Indeed, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has already labelled that war illegal in terms of the U.N. Charter.

 

Second, there is the manner in which the U.S. conducted this war.

 

The mistreatment of prisoners at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison is a clear contravention of the Geneva Accord. The U.S. is also deporting selected prisoners to camps outside of Iraq (another contravention). U.S. press reports also talk of shadowy prisons in Jordan run by the CIA, where suspects are routinely tortured. And the estimated civilian death toll of 100,000 may well contravene the Geneva Accords prohibition against the use of excessive force.

 

Canada's war crimes law specifically permits prosecution not only of those who carry out such crimes but of the military and political superiors who allow them to happen.

 

What has emerged since Abu Ghraib shows that officials at the highest levels of the Bush administration permitted and even encouraged the use of torture.

 

Given that Bush, as he likes to remind everyone, is the U.S. military's commander-in-chief, it is hard to argue he bears no responsibility.

 

Then there is Guantanamo Bay. The U.S. says detainees there do not fall under the Geneva accords. That's an old argument.

 

In 1946, Japanese defendants explained their mistreatment of prisoners of war by noting that their country had never signed any of the Geneva Conventions. The Japanese were convicted anyway.

 

Oddly enough, Canada may be one of the few places where someone like Bush could be brought to justice. Impeachment in the U.S. is most unlikely. And, at Bush's insistence, the new international criminal court has no jurisdiction over any American.

 

But a Canadian war crimes charge, too, would face many hurdles. Bush was furious last year when Belgians launched a war crimes suit in their country against him — so furious that Belgium not only backed down under U.S. threats but changed its law to prevent further recurrences.

 

As well, according to a foreign affairs spokesperson, visiting heads of state are immune from prosecution when in Canada on official business. If Ottawa wanted to act, it would have to wait until Bush was out of office — or hope to catch him when he comes up here to fish.

 

And, of course, Canada's government would have to want to act. War crimes prosecutions are political decisions that must be authorized by the federal attorney-general.

 

Still, Prime Minister Paul Martin has staked out his strong opposition to war crimes. This was his focus in a September address to the U.N. General Assembly.

 

There, Martin was talking specifically about war crimes committed by militiamen in far-off Sudan. But as my friends on the Star's editorial board noted in one of their strong defences of concerted international action against war crimes, the rule must be, "One law for all."

 

thestar.ca

[Guest Cerebus]

*C-Bacon does not condone the actions of OBL

^

Disagrees.

[Guest BDC]

Hmmm, a horribly leading and biased article from C-Bacon. What a surprise.

[Red Baron 0]

It's the Toronto Star, of course its a left wing paper.

 

Read the National Post, that's more right-wing than Fox

[Lord of The Curry 0]

I hope Bush enjoys his Alberta beef.

[MARTYEWR 0]

I enjoyed every part of Canada I've visited except for Quebec. Fucking ass-holes.

We apologize for them too.

[Guest Cerebus]

I love Nova Scotia. We've taken a cruise up there every summer for the last three years. Absolutely beautiful place and AMAZING seafood (and this is coming from a life long New Englander).

[Guest NoMercy]

I wonder what would happen if Bush was actually indicted as soon as he landed on Canadian soil.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

It's the Toronto Star, of course its a left wing paper.

 

Read the National Post, that's more right-wing than Fox

How about the Toronto Sun? They have bitched every day for two years that we aren't in Iraq.

 

I wonder what would happen if Bush was actually indicted as soon as he landed on Canadian soil.

 

The US would declare war and we would be Yankees in about 12 hours after our 'army' is devastated by their own equipment malfunctioning.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Is the Sun even considered a newspaper?

 

I am convinced that the Canadian Army has trained various kinds of bears the art of combat and will send them -armoured- into large cities to reign chaos. Deal with THAT, bitches.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Is the Sun even considered a newspaper?

 

I actually like their sports coverage much better than the Star's.

[Red Baron 0]

The Sun is a legitimate tabloid.

[starvenger 0]

Is the Sun even considered a newspaper?

No. It's not even a good subway paper anymore since you can get Metro for free. To be fair though, it's got a good sports section and if you need to know who's a featured dancer at Friction, pick it up.

 

Bush meeting with Martin could go either way. Minority governments can do that to you.

[Vern Gagne 0]

I wonder what would happen if Bush was actually indicted as soon as he landed on Canadian soil.

Some sleazy lawyer probably did. I thought a group of lawyers did in the U.S.

[Vern Gagne 0]

What happened to your country? Why did things change so much? Canada used to much more similiar to the U.S. Know it's more like Western Europe. The military which performed bravely in the past, is virtually non-existent. The gov't from an outsiders view looks liberal leaning socialist.

 

No shock, but I for one would love to see Canada become closer allies with the U.S. and UK. We have so much more in common than you do with Germany or France. Oh and please build up your military.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

We are much closer allies with the UK, US & Australia than we are with Western Europe. The difference is Iraq (other than the standard trade disputes).

 

I'm not saying we need a strong military, at least with the juggernaut known as the US next door. But I find it disgraceful that the government won't give them working equipment. We suffer more casualties in helicopter crashes and submarine fires than we ever do in actual combat. Even the NDP agrees on that, but the Liberals have only started doing something about it now.

[Vyce 0]

Is the Sun even considered a newspaper?

 

I am convinced that the Canadian Army has trained various kinds of bears the art of combat and will send them -armoured- into large cities to reign chaos. Deal with THAT, bitches.

VARIOUS kinds?

 

Shit.

 

I personally think that a partially cybernetic grizzly would be the coolest weapon of mass destruction ever.