Sometimes he's a likable guy...

[roymond]

From a visit to Nashville in July:

Q Mr. President, music is one of our largest exports the country has. Currently, every country in the world -- except China, Iran, North Korea, Rwanda and the United States -- pay a statutory royalty to the performing artists for radio and television air play. Would your administration consider changing our laws to align it with the rest of the world?

THE PRESIDENT: Help. (Laughter.) Maybe you've never had a President say this -- I have, like, no earthly idea what you're talking about. (Laughter and applause.) Sounds like we're keeping interesting company, you know? (Laughter.)

Look, I'll give you the old classic: contact my office, will you? (Laughter.) I really don't -- I'm totally out of my lane. I like listening to country music, if that helps. (Laughter.)

[Hoblit]

eh, at least he didn't lie. This time.

[Caravan Ray]

Q Mr. President, music is one of our largest exports the country has. Currently, every country in the world -- except China, Iran, North Korea, Rwanda and the United States -- pay a statutory royalty to the performing artists for radio and television air play. Would your administration consider changing our laws to align it with the rest of the world?

THE PRESIDENT: Help. (Laughter.) Maybe you've never had a President say this -- I have, like, no earthly idea what you're talking about. (Laughter and applause.) Sounds like we're keeping interesting company, you know? (Laughter.)

The USA seems to keep that sort of company alot. Look at the handful of countries who refused to sign the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court - we have USA, China, Libya, Iraq, Israel, Yemen.

At least Australia didn't kowtow on that one, and there is a hope that one day John Howard may be put in front of the ICC charged with crimes of aggression and and complicity in crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Have any of the upcoming Democrat candidates mentions thier views on the USA ratifying the Rome Statute?

I know I just took this widely off-topic, but that fucking Bush deadshit just landed in Australia, and Sydney is looking like Berlin circa 1961. Our PM in the last dying throws of a dishonest government is trying to pretend that Sydney houses 3 million potential terrorists.

These pricks are really making me very fucking angry.

[bz£]

Have any of the upcoming Democrat candidates mentions thier views on the USA ratifying the Rome Statute?

"Mentioning your views" is a sure way to not get elected over here, so those candidates with views generally keep their opinions to themselves.

[blue]

From a visit to Nashville in July:

Q Mr. President, music is one of our largest exports the country has. Currently, every country in the world -- except China, Iran, North Korea, Rwanda and the United States -- pay a statutory royalty to the performing artists for radio and television air play. Would your administration consider changing our laws to align it with the rest of the world?

THE PRESIDENT: Help. (Laughter.) Maybe you've never had a President say this -- I have, like, no earthly idea what you're talking about. (Laughter and applause.) Sounds like we're keeping interesting company, you know? (Laughter.)

Look, I'll give you the old classic: contact my office, will you? (Laughter.) I really don't -- I'm totally out of my lane. I like listening to country music, if that helps. (Laughter.)

how is this different from our current system?

[roymond]

From a visit to Nashville in July:

Q Mr. President, music is one of our largest exports the country has. Currently, every country in the world -- except China, Iran, North Korea, Rwanda and the United States -- pay a statutory royalty to the performing artists for radio and television air play. Would your administration consider changing our laws to align it with the rest of the world?

THE PRESIDENT: Help. (Laughter.) Maybe you've never had a President say this -- I have, like, no earthly idea what you're talking about. (Laughter and applause.) Sounds like we're keeping interesting company, you know? (Laughter.)

Look, I'll give you the old classic: contact my office, will you? (Laughter.) I really don't -- I'm totally out of my lane. I like listening to country music, if that helps. (Laughter.)

how is this different from our current system?

Q: Mr President, we understand that Iraq has no known WOMD, as the previous 10 years of monitoring, containment and sanctions have apparently worked. How would we justify a full-out invasion of a sovereign nation that also has no apparent links to terrorist operatives responsible for 9/11?

THE PRESIDENT: Help. (Laughter.) I have, like, no earthly idea what you're talking about. (Laughter and applause.)

I like listening to country music, if that helps. (Laughter.)

[Hoblit]

From a visit to Nashville in July:

Q Mr. President, music is one of our largest exports the country has. Currently, every country in the world -- except China, Iran, North Korea, Rwanda and the United States -- pay a statutory royalty to the performing artists for radio and television air play. Would your administration consider changing our laws to align it with the rest of the world?

THE PRESIDENT: Help. (Laughter.) Maybe you've never had a President say this -- I have, like, no earthly idea what you're talking about. (Laughter and applause.) Sounds like we're keeping interesting company, you know? (Laughter.)

Look, I'll give you the old classic: contact my office, will you? (Laughter.) I really don't -- I'm totally out of my lane. I like listening to country music, if that helps. (Laughter.)

how is this different from our current system?

Q: Mr President, we understand that Iraq has no known WOMD, as the previous 10 years of monitoring, containment and sanctions have apparently worked. How would we justify a full-out invasion of a sovereign nation that also has no apparent links to terrorist operatives responsible for 9/11?

THE PRESIDENT: Help. (Laughter.) I have, like, no earthly idea what you're talking about. (Laughter and applause.)

I like listening to country music, if that helps. (Laughter.)

Like I said...

Also. The (laughter) & (Laughter and applause) reminds me of Star Wars III (Return of the Sith). - “And this is how democracy dies… to thunderous applause.” - Padme

[jb]

I agree with you Roy, that it was a refreshingly candid answer. However, he was in Nashville and I think his handlers should have an idea about the area's concerns-- the music industry is a major, major economic impactor in Nashville. Look at this:

http://www.nashvillechamber.com/members ... ustry.html

Key findings:
Economic Impact — Direct spending by music industry firms in Nashville totaled $2.64 billion. The combined impact of direct and secondary spending totaled $3.96 billion. Music-related tourism accounts for another $2.42 billion in spending, bringing the total economic impact of the music industry in the Nashville MSA to <b><font>$6.38 billion.</font></b>

According to the report, the cities of Seattle; Austin, Texas; and Memphis, Tenn.; have conducted similar music industry studies, in addition to the state of Georgia. The cumulative direct spending impact for those studies was $3.14 billion.

Jobs — The study estimates there are 19,437 jobs directly related to music production. These jobs provide $722 million in annual labor income and pay an average annual wage of $37,200. An additional 19,826 jobs are indirectly created when music industry employees spend their income. Music-related tourism supports an additional 14,995 employees in the Nashville MSA, bringing the total employment impact of the music industry to more than 54,000 jobs.

Taxes — Sales taxes collected from core music businesses exceed $24 million annually, with property taxes adding another $45 million to local government treasuries. Accommodation taxes attributable to music-related tourism accounts for another $7 million, bringing the tax revenue generated by the music industry to more than $75 million.

Bush should know something about the music industry when he's stumping in Nashville IMO.

[Caravan Ray]

...The USA seems to keep that sort of company alot. Look at the handful of countries who refused to sign the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court - we have USA, China, Libya, Iraq, Israel, Yemen.

At least Australia didn't kowtow on that one, and there is a hope that one day John Howard may be put in front of the ICC charged with crimes of aggression and and complicity in crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Have any of the upcoming Democrat candidates mentions thier views on the USA ratifying the Rome Statute?

Good to see someone agrees with me, from this morning's The Australian*:

"GEORGE W. Bush should be tried as a war criminal for his role in launching the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the Howard Government is culpable for supporting him, a US anti-war activist claims.

The US President and John Howard were committed to a failing war that was being waged for oil and economic motives, former US marine and two-time combat tour veteran Matt Howard said in Sydney yesterday...
"We've destroyed Iraq and it's been done in our name, and the Australian Government is involved," he said.

"In 2003, I illegally invaded Iraq. We left a swath of destruction all the way from Basra to Baghdad."

Mr Bush should be tried for crimes against humanity over the killing of the tens of thousands of Iraqi men, women and children who were victims of the war, Mr Howard said"
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 84,00.html

To be more specific - the attack on Iraq was a crime of aggression, and illegal because it was not sanctioned by the UN Security Council and the USA and Australia are signatories to the UN Charter. Bombing civilian populations is a war crime. And torture and illegal imprisonment are both crimes against humanity under the International Criminal Court and breaches of the Geneva Conventions.

These bastards have to do prison time.

*This story is even more remarkable in that Murdoch-owned The Australian is Australia's answer to the USA's FOX News. But in the last week or so - The Aus. has turned, and is now starting to attack John Howard regularly, probably because that it is obvious that the Howard government is history. Is this happening with the Murdoch-owned press in the USA too?

[Hoblit]

So, under that logic... would that make Saddam's hanging an assassination? And then who'd be held responsible for that? The IRAQI president? (Jalal Talabani) or...

AND realistically.. how would this go down? Would Australia's Prime Minister face the theoretical trial? I somehow doubt that George Bush would show up. Assuming they were proven guilty (along with Tony Blair...and don't forget (that guy in charge of) Poland), would John Howard turn himself over? Would Bush? Would they come after them? Would the UN have to send troops to these nations to collect the convicted?

Those questions illustrate that what SHOULD BE can NEVER BE. I'm not discouraging you from having an opinion. I'm just saying ultimately... deaf ears. So shake that tiny fist vigorously but expect to get tuckered out.

[Caravan Ray]

So, under that logic... would that make Saddam's hanging an assassination? And then who'd be held responsible for that? The IRAQI president? (Jalal Talabani) or...

AND realistically.. how would this go down? Would Australia's Prime Minister face the theoretical trial? I somehow doubt that George Bush would show up. Assuming they were proven guilty (along with Tony Blair...and don't forget (that guy in charge of) Poland), would John Howard turn himself over? Would Bush? Would they come after them? Would the UN have to send troops to these nations to collect the convicted?

Those questions illustrate that what SHOULD BE can NEVER BE. I'm not discouraging you from having an opinion. I'm just saying ultimately... deaf ears. So shake that tiny fist vigorously but expect to get tuckered out.

Saddam was given a trial in an Iraqi court and found guilty. True, Iraq was under military occupation at the time - but at least there was some sort of legal process involved. (A luxury BTW that has not been afforded to over 700 men illegally detained at Guantanamo Bay - some 300 still detained - a crime against humanity)

This isn't something that can NEVER BE. Of course it can BE. The International Criminal Court was establish precisely for this very purpose, to prosecute individuals responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Over 100 nations have signed and ratified the Statute of Rome, making findings of the ICC legally binding in these countries. A conviction under the ICC is a conviction under Australian law. All it will take to proscecute John Howard is for the Australian Director of Public Proscecutions to lay carges against him and refer it to the ICC. With Howard on the verge of losing Governemnt - there is perhaps a slim hope that the new government will look past poliltics, covering their own arses and covering for their mates and actually seek justice.

The USA is not a signatory to the ICC (Clinton signed it but Bush refused to ratify it - so that US forces overeseas, for the moment, can it seems commit atrocities with impunity). Bush and Rumsfeld etc. at this point are immune from the ICC. But Howard is not (nor many other national leaders, Blair etc. who are the concern of their own nationals). Howard can be tried for complicity in the crimes of Bush etc. Perhaps if the USA ever joins the rest of the world in the ICC - perhaps the other criminals may also be rounded up.


Here is one list of offences compliled by some ratbag group:
These prosecutions should include the following crimes, committed by the accused in their official capacities:

* Complicity in the massacre of hundreds of civilians in Baghdad, Basra, Khormal, Babel, Nassariya, Najaf, Karbala and Anbar, in March 2003, through aerial bombardment, including cluster bombs, assisted by Australian ‘imagery specialists’
* Complicity in the S.A.S. backed murder of ten Sabri tribespeople (mostly teenagers) in Afghanistan, 16 May 2002
* Complicity in the massacre of between one thousand and three thousand prisoners, after US operation ‘Anaconda’ operation at Shah-i-Kot, Afghanistan, March 2002
* Complicity in the maintenance of an international network of torture, from Pakistan to Iraq to Egypt to Guantanamo Bay (US-occupied Cuba)
* Complicity in the criminal two attacks on the civilian population of Falluja, in April and November 2004 — where between one thousand and two thousand people were murdered in attacks which included the use of napalm, and the blockading of Falluja Hospital
http://www.agitprop.org.au/nowar/200508 ... howard.php

There may be some problems with securing convictions for crimes committed in Iraq - as the Iraqi government is also not a signatory to the ICC - but there is a very strong case for Point 4 there:
* Complicity in the maintenance of an international network of torture, from Pakistan to Iraq to Egypt to Guantanamo Bay (US-occupied Cuba)
There is a lot of evidence that suggests that the Horward government was aware of the use of torture by the US forces - yet it did nothing to stop it. A member of the Aus. military has testified that he made our government aware of the torture at Abu Ghraib long before it became public knowlegde - and the information was suppressed. That is aiding and abetting a warcrime and a crime against humanity.

Here is another view from a UK perspective

[Hoblit]

My point with the Saddam thing was more to the idea of 'would there have ever been a trial without an invasion' therefore asking the question if the trial was even legal. (nevermind overlooking the fact that it was a sham)

I understand legally what you are saying...I'm only arguing the execution (not in the sense of capital punishment) of the sentence. Do you really think its a possibility? The arrest? The trial? The punishment? - Do you really think it would happen as in, is it even remotely a possibility. IF SO, and you know your country WAY better than I do, your system has a LOT more teeth. Because here, even if we were part of that organization , there is almost NO WAY our President would be handed over. (without a fight anyways) I mean, Bush would have to eat a baby on live TV and still have to have a bad excuse as to why he just ate a bay on live TV before we could get somebody to arrest him.

Who comes and throws John Howard into the pokey?

[Caravan Ray]

My point with the Saddam thing was more to the idea of 'would there have ever been a trial without an invasion' therefore asking the question if the trial was even legal. (nevermind overlooking the fact that it was a sham)

I understand legally what you are saying...I'm only arguing the execution (not in the sense of capital punishment) of the sentence. Do you really think its a possibility? The arrest? The trial? The punishment? - Do you really think it would happen as in, is it even remotely a possibility. IF SO, and you know your country WAY better than I do, your system has a LOT more teeth. Because here, even if we were part of that organization , there is almost NO WAY our President would be handed over. (without a fight anyways) I mean, Bush would have to eat a baby on live TV and still have to have a bad excuse as to why he just ate a bay on live TV before we could get somebody to arrest him.

Who comes and throws John Howard into the pokey?

The Australian police throw JH in the pokey.

The Rome Statute is an international treaty. It established the International Criminal Court.

International treaties form part of the body of domestic law for the signatories of that treaty (even for the USA if I'm not mistaken - check your Constitution).

A decicion by the ICC has exactly the same force of law in a signatory country as a decision by any of that countries domestic courts.

There is nothing remotely "un-possible" about this. This is an international court ratified by virtually all the countries on earth (only a few rogue nations like the USA and Israel are not part of it).

Google "ICC" and "Rome Statute". This is a functioning court with real powers. There are 4 cases befor the Court at the moment (concerning crimes in Uganda, Sudan, the Congo and C.A.R)

The main hurdle is for the Australian government to lay charges against a Prime Minister (or ex PM). Polititians are generally spineless gits. It will be a brave Attorney-General or PM that sets a precedent that will make them accountable for their own future actions. Maybe Kevin Rudd (our PM-to-be) will have that conviction. I hope so.

[Hoblit]

I was finished with it being 'un-possible' as far as your explanation. I'm just amazed that Australia would actually arrest the guy. I can see thats one of the reasons why we are one of the rogue nations. It would be FOR THE U.S. almost impossible to have the president arrested. NOT IMPOSSIBLE but darn close.

Very interesting.

Also, if it was an illegal war (and I'm not arguing that its not or anything) why didn't anyone feel it was their obligation to step in and stop it from the get go? Thats like yelling at little Johnny from the couch not to feed the family bird to the family cat...then watch Johnny feed the family bird to the family cat... THEN punishing Johnny. This doesn't save the life of the bird.

[Caravan Ray]

I'm just amazed that Australia would actually arrest the guy. I can see thats one of the reasons why we are one of the rogue nations. It would be FOR THE U.S. almost impossible to have the president arrested. NOT IMPOSSIBLE but darn close.

Very interesting.

It isn't remarkable that a PM may be arrested. A PM is just a bloke who happens to leads the party that has the most seats in Parliament at a point in time. I don't think anyone in Australia holds the position of PM in any particularly high regard. In fact - even if the Liberal Party does somehow miraculously win the next election - it is still unlikely that Howard will be PM again, because it is very likely that he will lose his seat in Parliament. Though we live in a Monarchy, we don't treat our politicians like kings you you people in the "Republican" USA do!

Several PMs over the years have been dumped mid-term, either by their own party, by a a vote of no confidence from the Parliament as a whole or even being sacked by the Govenor-General (eg, Bob Hawke, John Gorton and Gough Whitlam).

If a politician commits a crime here - they will generally be charged. We haven't had a PM arrested yet - but a former Premier of Western Australia spent time in prison. 2 Queensland Members of Parliament have been carged with criminal offences this year.

The problem is that Howard can't be tried as a war criminal in an Australian court - those crimes don't exist in domestic law. And the ICC is a fairly new institution that many people are not aware of.

Also there is the fact (thing thing that makes me most ashamed of my country) - John Howard was re-elected in 2004 - after he hed committed us to an illegal war, after he lied about children being thrown overboard, after he locked up refugees, including children in desert detenton camps.

He should have been chucked out and brought to justice in 2004 - People knew he was a cunt - but they still voted for him anyway because interest rates were low and unemployment was low, and everyone was happy so long as they only thought about themselves.

It is only now, that interest rates are rising, and Labor actually has a capable leader - that people are starting to remember all the lies the little shit has told.

Actually - I'm surprised you Americans don't want to lock Howard up too. Didn't you get the news over there that as the USA was preparing to invade Iraq, the Australian government was paying millions of dollars of bribes to Saddam Hussein through the Australian Wheat Board so that Iraq would buy Australian wheat? A lot of your dead American servicemen were killed by bullets paid for with Australian money.

Also, if it was an illegal war (and I'm not arguing that its not or anything) why didn't anyone feel it was their obligation to step in and stop it from the get go? Thats like yelling at little Johnny from the couch not to feed the family bird to the family cat...then watch Johnny feed the family bird to the family cat... THEN punishing Johnny. This doesn't save the life of the bird.

errr....how exactly does one stop the USA from invading somebody whenever they want to?


Or are you talking about Australia's involvement? Many Parliamentarians spoke about the illegality of the war - particularly Greens Party leader Bob Brown. But the Liberal Party has had a majority in both houses of Parliament since 2004, meaning that any Royal Commissions or Senate Committees investigating government wrongdoings have been hamstrung by limited terms of reference to their investigations. As I have said earlier though - that balance will soon change - probably in December.

[HeuristicsInc]

I think part of the problem in doing anything to Bush is the two-party system here. There are way too many people in Congress and such that would never do something to him just because they're in the same party. I think we'd be better off with multiple parties that mean something. The news item of which you spoke wasn't reported here, as far as I know. Press!
-bill

[Hoblit]

more interesting @ how Australia's government works. Neat.

As far as stopping the U.S.A. from invading other countries... how to stop us? I think the fact there was NO resistance is an illustration of 'doing nothing'. Not necessarily Australia... because ya'll went right along with us to the desert front property as well as our good friends on that island in between us. (and of course: don't forget poland - U.S. in joke?) can be held responsible for the war itself...

What I'm talking about is that nobody stepped in to stop the whole thing. Not anybody. The only resistance we got militarily was the Iraqi government of the time. We may have been a formidable military power, but no country stepped up to stop us. The U.N. can say no and wag a finger all day long but nobody stepped up with conviction. Why? I'm not entirely certain that we would have gone say some legitimate opposition banded together to say 'hey, this ain't cool'. I'm not necessarily talking about other middle eastern countries either... I mean European armies or even Asian ones... somebody with legitimacy, respect, and world recognition.

I'm just saying... nobody is taking responsibility for 'doing nothing'. Especially in light of world history.

[Caravan Ray]

more interesting @ how Australia's government works. Neat.

As far as stopping the U.S.A. from invading other countries... how to stop us? I think the fact there was NO resistance is an illustration of 'doing nothing'.

I wouldn't call an estimated 36 million people marching in protest throughout the world "no resistance" - though fat lot of good it did.

[Hoblit]

more interesting @ how Australia's government works. Neat.

As far as stopping the U.S.A. from invading other countries... how to stop us? I think the fact there was NO resistance is an illustration of 'doing nothing'.

I wouldn't call [url=http://en.[CENSORED].org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War]an estimated 36 million people marching in protest throughout the world[/url] "no resistance" - though fat lot of good it did.

yeah, I totally agree. There has become a huge difference in the 'free world' between what is known as 'the people' and the folks who represent 'the people' if you know what I mean.

Perhaps that illustrates both of our points. I have come to believe that no matter how we feel or what we say, it will never make a difference. You believe that it will make a difference.

I think we can both agree that it SHOULD make a difference.

You're gonna need to flank Canberra while I flank Washington D.C. before anything we say (or do) will matter at this point. (IMO of course)

[Paco Del Stinko]

Someone here used to have a signature by Jello Biafra that was something like: "We are a sheep-like nation of wolves" that I thought summed up the U.S. quite well. In a broad sense, anyway.

I don't know the full story, but I was chuckling over the guy dressed as Osama Bin Laden sneaking around the Bush compound down there. Still sportin' that Halloween costume, eh Ray?

[Rabid Garfunkel]

Someone here used to have a signature by Jello Biafra that was something like: "We are a sheep-like nation of wolves" that I thought summed up the U.S. quite well. In a broad sense, anyway.

Good memory Paco! Yes, that was the quote in its entirety. Still an accurate description of this republic, IMO.

[Caravan Ray]

I don't know the full story, but I was chuckling over the guy dressed as Osama Bin Laden sneaking around the Bush compound down there. Still sportin' that Halloween costume, eh Ray?

That made news over there!?! Beautiful!!

That was genuinely one of the funnies stunts of all time. This APEC stuff has been making me really cranky - but The Chaser's respopnse was just wonderful.

For those who didn't see it :
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/ape ... 15499.html

The Chaser is a very funny news satire show.

The obscene amount of money and distruption to the lives and rights of Sydney-siders for the APEC circus has been absoulutely disgraceful.

To see those guys drive past 2 check points in a hired car with a little Canadian flag stuck to it, then get to within a block of Bush's hotel and have a guy dressed as Osama get out of the car and walk down the street - pure champagne comedy!

What is amazing has been the public reaction - the next day, Letters to the Editor were full of praise for them. I have never seen such a positive reaction before for a prank. Australian's don't seem to like having their most beautiful city turned into a police state.

The Chaser comes on telly next Wednesday night. Check Youtube after that - there is bound to be some very funny stuff there