Tags: us


Those crazy, crazy student politicians

There's something innately depressing about riding a bus every morning. Something to do with being a sardine instead of a snowflake, I think.

Also, there's a special circle of hell reserved for people who wake me up in the middle of the night. Bounded by the river Insomnyx, its denizens are cursed with eternal exhaustion, falling asleep only to be repeatedly awoken by the mutters of daemons and the clanging of cauldrons.
Condi Rice is coming to New Zealand. Apparently, the AUSA is offering a $5000 reward to any member who successfully makes a citizen's arrest.

Given that the arrestee in this case is not a New Zealand citizen or permanent resident, and the arrest would be on the grounds of an alleged violation of international, but not domestic law, I'm not entirely sure that the right of citizen's arrest would apply here. Can anyone comment on that?

This seems to be largely a symbolic move on the part of the AUSA. I think it's highly debatable as to whether a student body should be engaging in this kind of political action; it drives a wedge between them and members whose politics vary. I'm personally a fan of compulsory student union membership, but I don't think it's possible if student associations behave in a partisan manner.

The other issue with this is that they're essentially trying to martyr their members. Given the security surrounding Dr. Rice, and the rather dim view that the NZ authorities would also take, I can't see how anything good or productive could possibly come of this. They will get somebody in a whole world of trouble, and make themselves look incredibly naive and irresponsible.

Then I suppose there's the question of whether Rice herself has actually violated international law. I would certainly think there's a good case that Bush and Cheney have, but where do you draw the line of culpability? Is anyone associated with the Bush administration culpable? How about Colin Powell, who represented the US case to the UN despite his personal opposition to the invasion? There's no doubt that Rice has consistently supported the actions of the administration, but she has no command over the military and I can't see that there's any connection between her personally and the torture allegations. She may be guilty of selling out, but war crimes? I think that's a stretch.

EDIT: I just hopped onto Slate, and discovered there's an article on pretty much this exact topic.

Who in the Bush administration broke the law, and who could be prosecuted?