> > Anyone have a problem with that list?
>
>In regard to points (1) and (2), I believe what's being
>proposed is a scenario for "bringing the perpetrators to
>justice", although those terms weren't explicitly used. The
>problem here would be the question of whether there is any
>justice to bring them to. Without it, any court would be a
>kangaroo court, a ceremonial exercise of mere power,
>regardless of how many states and politicos signed on to it.
>
>So what is justice? I would think it would have to be a set
>of rules of conduct to which all were subject. . . . .>
>But then you have to apply the rules to _everybody_, including
>people like Clinton and Albright and the Bushes . . . .
That's a goal to aspire to, but consider a humbler analogy. Our criminal justice system in this country is racist and unfair. But does that mean we shouldn't want murderers, thieves, and fraudsters caught and punished, just because the big fish get away? "Oh, that's all right Mr. Gacy, go right ahead; it would unfair to stop you as long as Henry Kissinger's free"?
jks
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp