Angie Craig: “before my colleague from Connecticut leaves the floor, let me suggest to him in all sincerity that he has no reason to…”

“before my colleague from Connecticut leaves the floor, let me suggest to him in all sincerity that he has no reason to be ashamed, no reason to be ashamed of engaging in this debate, or in talking, as he has so proudly, about the legacy of Nuremberg and our Nation's leadership there. Nuremberg was a unique and terrible case and we addressed that issue as we should, and we did it in a most appropriate fashion. On other occasions, our Nation has engaged in international tribunals for specific purposes. But there is a very real difference today between that which we debate in the ICC and a Nuremberg example. Nuremberg was a case in point to address the dramatic crisis coming out of and during World War II and those who perpetuated those horrendous acts. It was a temporary tribunal. What we debate today is a permanent tribunal, one that stays in constant existence, one that has an international prosecutor, and one that chooses to operate under a set of laws that is constant.”