Running Scared: Observations of a Former Republican
[Home] [Former Republican] [About the Authors] [RSS Feed] [Pointless Vanity]

"Losing my faith in humanity ... one neocon at a time."

Friday, February 04, 2005

Rummy on the Run

posted by Jazz at 2/04/2005 08:56:00 AM

NOTE: YOU ARE VIEWING AN ARCHIVED POST AT RUNNING SCARED'S OLD BLOG. PLEASE VISIT THE NEW BLOG HERE.

While obviously nothing productive will come of it, it's still amusing to see that Donald Rumsfeld is skipping an important conference in Germany because there are charges of war crimes pending against him there.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Thursday he may skip a trip to a security conference in Germany next week because of a lawsuit there accusing him of war crimes.

"It's something that we have to take into consideration," he said when asked whether the suit was a factor in weighing whether to attend the Munich Conference on Security Policy, an annual gathering of government defense officials and lawmakers, where an address by the U.S. defense secretary is typically a highlight.

Attorneys from the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights filed a suit with German prosecutors last November charging that U.S. officials, including Rumsfeld, are responsible for acts of torture against detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

Rumsfeld also skipped the conference in 2002, sending his top deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, instead.

It's really Bush and, probably, Condi Rice who should be up on charges, but you take what you can get.

TalkLeft provides links to a lot of the background information on this case, and adds an important update.
In recent days, the Center added Alberto Gonzales as a defendant to the suit. According to this letter (pdf).
Professor Bainbridge (R - Mars) has a brief comment on this which I simply can't decipher. Can anyone translate this into an Earth based language for us?
I know what I'm about to say is incredibly silly and immature, but the my [sic] inner provocateur can't help thinking it would be remarkably droll if Rumsfeld got dragged before the ICC and the President ended up sending the 82nd Airborne to the Hague to break him out.
How could such a scenario possibly be considered droll? Delightful or outrageous (depending which side of the aisle you park your duff on) I could see... but droll? Granted, a literal reading of "droll" can mean humorous, though in a light, whimsical fashion. The general usage leans more towards "tedious" though. I would think the invasion of yet another nation to rescue the SecDef from his cell where he sits accused of war crimes would be a bit more provocative than that.