TITLE II--AMERICAN SERVICE-MEMBERS' PROTECTION ACT

SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the `American Servicemembers' Protection Act of 2002'.

SEC. 2002. FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:

(1) On July 17, 1998, the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, meeting in Rome, Italy, adopted the `Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court'. The vote on whether to proceed with the statute was 120 in favor to 7 against, with 21 countries abstaining. The United States voted against final adoption of the Rome Statute.

(2) As of April 30, 2001, 139 countries had signed the Rome Statute and 30 had ratified it. Pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, the statute will enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date on which the 60th country deposits an instrument ratifying the statute.

(3) Since adoption of the Rome Statute, a Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court has met regularly to draft documents to implement the Rome Statute, including Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Elements of Crimes, and a definition of the Crime of Aggression.

(4) During testimony before the Congress following the adoption of the Rome Statute, the lead United States negotiator, Ambassador David Scheffer stated that the United States could not sign the Rome Statute because certain critical negotiating objectives of the United States had not been achieved. As a result, he stated: `We are left with consequences that do not serve the cause of international justice.'.

(5) Ambassador Scheffer went on to tell the Congress that: `Multinational peacekeeping forces operating in a country that has joined the treaty can be exposed to the Court's jurisdiction even if the country of the individual peacekeeper has not joined the treaty. Thus, the treaty purports to establish an arrangement whereby United States armed forces operating overseas could be conceivably prosecuted by the international court even if the United States has not agreed to be bound by the treaty. Not only is this contrary to the most fundamental principles of treaty law, it could inhibit the ability of the United States to use its military to meet alliance obligations and participate in multinational operations, including humanitarian interventions to save civilian lives. Other contributors to peacekeeping operations will be similarly exposed.'.

(6) Notwithstanding these concerns, President Clinton directed that the United States sign the Rome Statute on December 31, 2000. In a statement issued that day, he stated that in view of the unremedied deficiencies of the Rome Statute, `I will not, and do not recommend that my successor submit the Treaty to the Senate for advice and consent until our fundamental concerns are satisfied'.

(7) Any American prosecuted by the International Criminal Court will, under the Rome Statute, be denied procedural protections to which all Americans are entitled under the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution, such as the right to trial by jury.

(8) Members of the Armed Forces of the United States should be free from the risk of prosecution by the International Criminal Court, especially when they are stationed or deployed around the world to protect the vital national interests of the United States. The United States Government has an obligation to protect the members of its Armed Forces, to the maximum extent possible, against criminal prosecutions carried out by the International Criminal Court.

(9) In addition to exposing members of the Armed Forces of the United States to the risk of international criminal prosecution, the Rome Statute creates a risk that the President and other senior elected and appointed officials of the United States Government may be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court. Particularly if the Preparatory Commission agrees on a definition of the Crime of Aggression over United States objections, senior United States officials may be at risk of criminal prosecution for national security decisions involving such matters as responding to acts of terrorism, preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and deterring aggression. No less than members of the Armed Forces of the United States, senior officials of the United States Government should be free from the risk of prosecution by the International Criminal Court, especially with respect to official actions taken by them to protect the national interests of the United States.

(10) Any agreement within the Preparatory Commission on a definition of the Crime of Aggression that usurps the prerogative of the United Nations Security Council under Article 39 of the charter of the United Nations to `determine the existence of any .... act of aggression' would contravene the charter of the United Nations and undermine deterrence.

(11) It is a fundamental principle of international law that a treaty is binding upon its parties only and that it does not create obligations for nonparties without their consent to be bound. The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute and will not be bound by any of its terms. The United States will not recognize the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over United States nationals.

SEC. 2003. WAIVER AND TERMINATION OF PROHIBITIONS OF THIS TITLE.

(a) AUTHORITY TO INITIALLY WAIVE SECTIONS 5 AND 7- The President is authorized to waive the prohibitions and requirements of sections 2005 and 2007 for a single period of 1 year. A waiver under this subsection may be issued only if the President at least 15 days in advance of exercising such authority--

(1) notifies the appropriate congressional committees of the intention to exercise such authority; and

(2) determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that the International Criminal Court has entered into a binding agreement that--

(A) prohibits the International Criminal Court from seeking to exercise jurisdiction over the following persons with respect to actions undertaken by them in an official capacity:

(i) covered United States persons;

(ii) covered allied persons; and

(iii) individuals who were covered United States persons or covered allied persons; and

(B) ensures that no person described in subparagraph (A) will be arrested, detained, prosecuted, or imprisoned by or on behalf of the International Criminal Court.

(b) AUTHORITY TO EXTEND WAIVER OF SECTIONS 5 AND 7- The President is authorized to waive the prohibitions and requirements of sections 2005 and 2007 for successive periods of 1 year each upon the expiration of a previous waiver pursuant to subsection (a) or this subsection. A waiver under this subsection may be issued only if the President at least 15 days in advance of exercising such authority--

(1) notifies the appropriate congressional committees of the intention to exercise such authority; and

(2) determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that the International Criminal Court--

(A) remains party to, and has continued to abide by, a binding agreement that--

(i) prohibits the International Criminal Court from seeking to exercise jurisdiction over the following persons with respect to actions undertaken by them in an official capacity:

(I) covered United States persons;

(II) covered allied persons; and

(III) individuals who were covered United States persons or covered allied persons; and

(ii) ensures that no person described in clause (i) will be arrested, detained, prosecuted, or imprisoned by or on behalf of the International Criminal Court; and

(B) has taken no steps to arrest, detain, prosecute, or imprison any person described in clause (i) of subparagraph (A).

(c) AUTHORITY TO WAIVE SECTIONS 4 AND 6 WITH RESPECT TO AN INVESTIGATION OR PROSECUTION OF A NAMED INDIVIDUAL- The President is authorized to waive the prohibitions and requirements of sections 2004 and 2006 to the degree such prohibitions and requirements would prevent United States cooperation with an investigation or prosecution of a named individual by the International Criminal Court. A waiver under this subsection may be issued only if the President at least 15 days in advance of exercising such authority--

(1) notifies the appropriate congressional committees of the intention to exercise such authority; and

(2) determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that--

(A) a waiver pursuant to subsection (a) or (b) of the prohibitions and requirements of sections 2005 and 2007 is in effect;

(B) there is reason to believe that the named individual committed the crime or crimes that are the subject of the International Criminal Court's investigation or prosecution;

(C) it is in the national interest of the United States for the International Criminal Court's investigation or prosecution of the named individual to proceed; and

(D) in investigating events related to actions by the named individual, none of the following persons will be investigated, arrested, detained, prosecuted, or imprisoned by or on behalf of the International Criminal Court with respect to actions undertaken by them in an official capacity:

(i) Covered United States persons.

(ii) Covered allied persons.

(iii) Individuals who were covered United States persons or covered allied persons.

(d) TERMINATION OF WAIVER PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (c)- Any waiver or waivers exercised pursuant to subsection (c) of the prohibitions and requirements of sections 2004 and 2006 shall terminate at any time that a waiver pursuant to subsection (a) or (b) of the prohibitions and requirements of sections 2005 and 2007 expires and is not extended pursuant to subsection (b).

(e) TERMINATION OF PROHIBITIONS OF THIS TITLE- The prohibitions and requirements of sections 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 shall cease to apply, and the authority of section 2008 shall terminate, if the United States becomes a party to the International Criminal Court pursuant to a treaty made under article II, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States.

SEC. 2004. PROHIBITION ON COOPERATION WITH THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.

(a) APPLICATION- The provisions of this section--

(1) apply only to cooperation with the International Criminal Court and shall not apply to cooperation with an ad hoc international criminal tribunal established by the United Nations Security Council before or after the date of the enactment of this Act to investigate and prosecute war crimes committed in a specific country or during a specific conflict; and

(2) shall not prohibit--

(A) any action permitted under section 2008; or

(B) communication by the United States of its policy with respect to a matter.

(b) PROHIBITION ON RESPONDING TO REQUESTS FOR COOPERATION- Notwithstanding section 1782 of title 28, United States Code, or any other provision of law, no United States Court, and no agency or entity of any State or local government, including any court, may cooperate with the International Criminal Court in response to a request for cooperation submitted by the International Criminal Court pursuant to the Rome Statute.

(c) PROHIBITION ON TRANSMITTAL OF LETTERS ROGATORY FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT- Notwithstanding section 1781 of title 28, United States Code, or any other provision of law, no agency of the United States Government may transmit for execution any letter rogatory issued, or other request for cooperation made, by the International Criminal Court to the tribunal, officer, or agency in the United States to whom it is addressed.

(d) PROHIBITION ON EXTRADITION TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no agency or entity of the United States Government or of any State or local government may extradite any person from the United States to the International Criminal Court, nor support the transfer of any United States citizen or permanent resident alien to the International Criminal Court.

(e) PROHIBITION ON PROVISION OF SUPPORT TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no agency or entity of the United States Government or of any State or local government, including any court, may provide support to the International Criminal Court.

(f) PROHIBITION ON USE OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO ASSIST THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds appropriated under any provision of law may be used for the purpose of assisting the investigation, arrest, detention, extradition, or prosecution of any United States citizen or permanent resident alien by the International Criminal Court.

(g) RESTRICTION ON ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE TREATIES- The United States shall exercise its rights to limit the use of assistance provided under all treaties and executive agreements for mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, multilateral conventions with legal assistance provisions, and extradition treaties, to which the United States is a party, and in connection with the execution or issuance of any letter rogatory, to prevent the transfer to, or other use by, the International Criminal Court of any assistance provided by the United States under such treaties and letters rogatory.

(h) PROHIBITION ON INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES OF AGENTS- No agent of the International Criminal Court may conduct, in the United States or any territory subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, any investigative activity relating to a preliminary inquiry, investigation, prosecution, or other proceeding at the International Criminal Court.

SEC. 2005. RESTRICTION ON UNITED STATES PARTICIPATION IN CERTAIN UNITED NATIONS PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS.

(a) POLICY- Effective beginning on the date on which the Rome Statute enters into force pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, the President should use the voice and vote of the United States in the United Nations Security Council to ensure that each resolution of the Security Council authorizing any peacekeeping operation under chapter VI of the charter of the United Nations or peace enforcement operation under chapter VII of the charter of the United Nations permanently exempts, at a minimum, members of the Armed Forces of the United States participating in such operation from criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court for actions undertaken by such personnel in connection with the operation.

(b) RESTRICTION- Members of the Armed Forces of the United States may not participate in any peacekeeping operation under chapter VI of the charter of the United Nations or peace enforcement operation under chapter VII of the charter of the United Nations, the creation of which is authorized by the United Nations Security Council on or after the date that the Rome Statute enters into effect pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, unless the President has submitted to the appropriate congressional committees a certification described in subsection (c) with respect to such operation.

(c) CERTIFICATION- The certification referred to in subsection (b) is a certification by the President that--

(1) members of the Armed Forces of the United States are able to participate in the peacekeeping or peace enforcement operation without risk of criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court because, in authorizing the operation, the United Nations Security Council permanently exempted, at a minimum, members of the Armed Forces of the United States participating in the operation from criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court for actions undertaken by them in connection with the operation;

(2) members of the Armed Forces of the United States are able to participate in the peacekeeping or peace enforcement operation without risk of criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court because each country in which members of the Armed Forces of the United States participating in the operation will be present either is not a party to the International Criminal Court and has not invoked the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court pursuant to Article 12 of the Rome Statute, or has entered into an agreement in accordance with Article 98 of the Rome Statute preventing the International Criminal Court from proceeding against members of the Armed Forces of the United States present in that country; or

(3) the national interests of the United States justify participation by members of the Armed Forces of the United States in the peacekeeping or peace enforcement operation.

SEC. 2006. PROHIBITION ON DIRECT OR INDIRECT TRANSFER OF CLASSIFIED NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.

(a) IN GENERAL- Not later than the date on which the Rome Statute enters into force, the President shall ensure that appropriate procedures are in place to prevent the transfer of classified national security information and law enforcement information to the International Criminal Court for the purpose of facilitating an investigation, apprehension, or prosecution.

(b) INDIRECT TRANSFER- The procedures adopted pursuant to subsection (a) shall be designed to prevent the transfer to the United Nations and to the government of any country that is party to the International Criminal Court of classified national security information and law enforcement information that specifically relates to matters known to be under investigation or prosecution by the International Criminal Court, except to the degree that satisfactory assurances are received from the United Nations or that government, as the case may be, that such information will not be made available to the International Criminal Court for the purpose of facilitating an investigation, apprehension, or prosecution.

(c) CONSTRUCTION- The provisions of this section shall not be construed to prohibit any action permitted under section 2008.

SEC. 2007. PROHIBITION OF UNITED STATES MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO PARTIES TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.

(a) PROHIBITION OF MILITARY ASSISTANCE- Subject to subsections (b) and (c), and effective 1 year after the date on which the Rome Statute enters into force pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, no United States military assistance may be provided to the government of a country that is a party to the International Criminal Court.

(b) NATIONAL INTEREST WAIVER- The President may, without prior notice to Congress, waive the prohibition of subsection (a) with respect to a particular country if he determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that it is important to the national interest of the United States to waive such prohibition.

(c) ARTICLE 98 WAIVER- The President may, without prior notice to Congress, waive the prohibition of subsection (a) with respect to a particular country if he determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that such country has entered into an agreement with the United States pursuant to Article 98 of the Rome Statute preventing the International Criminal court from proceeding against United States personnel present in such country.

(d) EXEMPTION- The prohibition of subsection (a) shall not apply to the government of--

(1) a NATO member country;

(2) a major non-NATO ally (including Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand); or

(3) Taiwan.

SEC. 2008. AUTHORITY TO FREE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND CERTAIN OTHER PERSONS DETAINED OR IMPRISONED BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.

(a) AUTHORITY- The President is authorized to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.

(b) PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO BE FREED- The authority of subsection (a) shall extend to the following persons:

(1) Covered United States persons.

(2) Covered allied persons.

(3) Individuals detained or imprisoned for official actions taken while the individual was a covered United States person or a covered allied person, and in the case of a covered allied person, upon the request of such government.

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF LEGAL ASSISTANCE- When any person described in subsection (b) is arrested, detained, investigated, prosecuted, or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court, the President is authorized to direct any agency of the United States Government to provide--

(1) legal representation and other legal assistance to that person (including, in the case of a person entitled to assistance under section 1037 of title 10, United States Code, representation and other assistance in the manner provided in that section);

(2) exculpatory evidence on behalf of that person; and

(3) defense of the interests of the United States through appearance before the International Criminal Court pursuant to Article 18 or 19 of the Rome Statute, or before the courts or tribunals of any country.

(d) BRIBES AND OTHER INDUCEMENTS NOT AUTHORIZED- This section does not authorize the payment of bribes or the provision of other such incentives to induce the release of a person described in subsection (b).

SEC. 2009. ALLIANCE COMMAND ARRANGEMENTS.

(a) REPORT ON ALLIANCE COMMAND ARRANGEMENTS- Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President should transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a report with respect to each military alliance to which the United States is party--

(1) describing the degree to which members of the Armed Forces of the United States may, in the context of military operations undertaken by or pursuant to that alliance, be placed under the command or operational control of foreign military officers subject to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court because they are nationals of a party to the International Criminal Court; and

(2) evaluating the degree to which members of the Armed Forces of the United States engaged in military operations undertaken by or pursuant to that alliance may be exposed to greater risks as a result of being placed under the command or operational control of foreign military officers subject to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.

(b) DESCRIPTION OF MEASURES TO ACHIEVE ENHANCED PROTECTION FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President should transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a description of modifications to command and operational control arrangements within military alliances to which the United States is a party that could be made in order to reduce any risks to members of the Armed Forces of the United States identified pursuant to subsection (a)(2).

(c) SUBMISSION IN CLASSIFIED FORM- The report under subsection (a), and the description of measures under subsection (b), or appropriate parts thereof, may be submitted in classified form.

SEC. 2010. WITHHOLDINGS.

Funds withheld from the United States share of assessments to the United Nations or any other international organization during any fiscal year pursuant to section 705 of the Admiral James W. Nance and Meg Donovan Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 (as enacted by section 1000(a)(7) of Public Law 106-113; 113 Stat. 1501A-460), are authorized to be transferred to the Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance Account of the Department of State.

SEC. 2011. APPLICATION OF SECTIONS 2004 AND 2006 TO EXERCISE OF CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITIES.

(a) IN GENERAL- Sections 2004 and 2006 shall not apply to any action or actions with respect to a specific matter involving the International Criminal Court taken or directed by the President on a case-by-case basis in the exercise of the President's authority as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States under article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution or in the exercise of the executive power under article II, section 1 of the United States Constitution.

(b) NOTIFICATION TO CONGRESS-

(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to paragraph (2), not later than 15 days after the President takes or directs an action or actions described in subsection (a) that would otherwise be prohibited under section 2004 or 2006, the President shall submit a notification of such action to the appropriate congressional committees. A notification under this paragraph shall include a description of the action, a determination that the action is in the national interest of the United States, and a justification for the action.

(2) EXCEPTION- If the President determines that a full notification under paragraph (1) could jeopardize the national security of the United States or compromise a United States law enforcement activity, not later than 15 days after the President takes or directs an action or actions referred to in paragraph (1) the President shall notify the appropriate congressional committees that an action has been taken and a determination has been made pursuant to this paragraph. The President shall provide a full notification under paragraph (1) not later than 15 days after the reasons for the determination under this paragraph no longer apply.

(c) CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this section shall be construed as a grant of statutory authority to the President to take any action.

SEC. 2012. NONDELEGATION.

The authorities vested in the President by sections 2003 and 2011(a) may not be delegated by the President pursuant to section 301 of title 3, United States Code, or any other provision of law. The authority vested in the President by section 2005(c)(3) may not be delegated by the President pursuant to section 301 of title 3, United States Code, or any other provision of law to any official other than the Secretary of Defense, and if so delegated may not be subdelegated.

SEC. 2013. DEFINITIONS.

As used in this title and in section 706 of the Admiral James W. Nance and Meg Donovan Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001:

(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES- The term `appropriate congressional committees' means the Committee on International Relations of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.

(2) CLASSIFIED NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION- The term `classified national security information' means information that is classified or classifiable under Executive Order 12958 or a successor Executive order.

(3) COVERED ALLIED PERSONS- The term `covered allied persons' means military personnel, elected or appointed officials, and other persons employed by or working on behalf of the government of a NATO member country, a major non-NATO ally (including Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand), or Taiwan, for so long as that government is not a party to the International Criminal Court and wishes its officials and other persons working on its behalf to be exempted from the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.

(4) COVERED UNITED STATES PERSONS- The term `covered United States persons' means members of the Armed Forces of the United States, elected or appointed officials of the United States Government, and other persons employed by or working on behalf of the United States Government, for so long as the United States is not a party to the International Criminal Court.

(5) EXTRADITION- The terms `extradition' and `extradite' mean the extradition of a person in accordance with the provisions of chapter 209 of title 18, United States Code, (including section 3181(b) of such title) and such terms include both extradition and surrender as those terms are defined in Article 102 of the Rome Statute.

(6) INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT- The term `International Criminal Court' means the court established by the Rome Statute.

(7) MAJOR NON-NATO ALLY- The term `major non-NATO ally' means a country that has been so designated in accordance with section 517 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

(8) PARTICIPATE IN ANY PEACEKEEPING OPERATION UNDER CHAPTER VI OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS OR PEACE ENFORCEMENT OPERATION UNDER CHAPTER VII OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS- The term `participate in any peacekeeping operation under chapter VI of the charter of the United Nations or peace enforcement operation under chapter VII of the charter of the United Nations' means to assign members of the Armed Forces of the United States to a United Nations military command structure as part of a peacekeeping operation under chapter VI of the charter of the United Nations or peace enforcement operation under chapter VII of the charter of the United Nations in which those members of the Armed Forces of the United States are subject to the command or operational control of one or more foreign military officers not appointed in conformity with article II, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States.

(9) PARTY TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT- The term `party to the International Criminal Court' means a government that has deposited an instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession to the Rome Statute, and has not withdrawn from the Rome Statute pursuant to Article 127 thereof.

(10) PEACEKEEPING OPERATION UNDER CHAPTER VI OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS OR PEACE ENFORCEMENT OPERATION UNDER CHAPTER VII OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS- The term `peacekeeping operation under chapter VI of the charter of the United Nations or peace enforcement operation under chapter VII of the charter of the United Nations' means any military operation to maintain or restore international peace and security that--

(A) is authorized by the United Nations Security Council under chapter VI or VII of the charter of the United Nations; and

(B) is paid for from assessed contributions of United Nations members that are made available for peacekeeping or peace enforcement activities.

(11) ROME STATUTE- The term `Rome Statute' means the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on July 17, 1998.

(12) SUPPORT- The term `support' means assistance of any kind, including financial support, transfer of property or other material support, services, intelligence sharing, law enforcement cooperation, the training or detail of personnel, and the arrest or detention of individuals.

(13) UNITED STATES MILITARY ASSISTANCE- The term `United States military assistance' means--

(A) assistance provided under chapter 2 or 5 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.); or

(B) defense articles or defense services furnished with the financial assistance of the United States Government, including through loans and guarantees, under section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2763).

SEC. 2014. REPEAL OF LIMITATION.

The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2002 (division A of Public Law 107-117) is amended by striking section 8173.

SEC. 2015. ASSISTANCE TO INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS.

Nothing in this title shall prohibit the United States from rendering assistance to international efforts to bring to justice Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosovic, Osama bin Laden, other members of Al Queda, leaders of Islamic Jihad, and other foreign nationals accused of genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity.

Just when you think it can't possibly get any more mutated and underhanded
and insulting and oh my god when will it stop.

Just when you think it's all been done and they can't possibly dream up
one more inane gimmick or obnoxious trick or devious smirking ploy to slap
yet another corporate logo or SUV advertisement in front of your singed
eyeballs, along comes . . . tray-table advertising.

Yes. Tray tables. On airplanes. Right there.

So now, after you suffer an hour of interminable security checks and the
removal of your shoes and your belt and your pants and your nipple ring
only to wait in line C at the airline counter for 117 minutes just to get
stuck in the middle seat on that four-hour flight to Chicago . . .

And you sit down and squeeze in your arms to your sides and make yourself
very small and start breathing that toxic recycled bone-dry pressurized
air and realize that every single flight exposes your id to this warped
artificial canned surreality that simply cannot be good for your karmic
complexion . . .

And after the flight attendant ambles by with drinks and you flip down the
tray table to receive your requisite 2.7 ounces of refreshing canned
heavily sugared beverage in a plastic nonrecycled cup, you will see, right
there on the tray, a large unavoidable advertisement for, say, Bank of
America. Or Amex. Or Mercedes. Staring right back at you. For the entire
flight. Joy.

Tray-table advertising is the latest thing. TTA is beginning with America
West Airlines and will almost certainly be coming to a flight near you.
Why? Because Madison Avenue apparently has yet to exploit and abuse every
possible inch of space in the public sphere.

Because it's not enough that they put little ads on ATM machines and on
the little separator bars at the grocery-store checkout and on the insides
of the restroom-stall doors and on paper coffee-cup holders and in the
previews at the movie theater and in that goddamn pop-up window in your
browser right now, stopping just short of breaking into your home at night
and drugging you up and tattooing a Coke logo onto the underside of your
eyelids.

Because they are shameless and whorelike and borderline insane, and on a
long flight you are a miserable and deliciously captive audience.

This is what the marketing people love the most about TTA. You cannot
escape. You cannot get off the plane. Your only option to avoid tainting
your soul is to flip your tray table back up (or down, depending on where
they stick the ad) and try to ignore it entirely.

Which is no solution at all, given how four inches away is another seat
with another person whose tray table has the exact same ad, and you can
only sigh in realization that you are, in fact, utterly surrounded with
the dumb porn of relentless marketing, again.

And all you can really do is pop the Valium and put on the headphones and
close your eyes and drift off into the nice reverie featuring open fields
and beautiful oceans and happy woodland creatures as yet unstamped with a
ConAgra hormone-injected toxic brand of inedibility.

Oh hell. It's not really a big deal. It's just another dumb ad in a vast
teeming unrelenting sea of dumb ads. Right? Of course it is.

But is there no threshold? This is the question. Is there no point when we
all collectively recoil at the savage parade of schlock and awe, and we
all raise our hands to the sky and scream our collective agony just before
slumping down on the couch for 19 minutes of beer commercials interspersed
with 11 minutes of "Frasier?"

You'd think we'd have reached saturation. You'd think that there simply
cannot be a single person existing in modern American popular culture
today who has not been so inundated, so completely drenched and hammered
and pulverized since birth by the never-ending jackhammer of brands and
logos and slogans, that therefore there is simply no way they would be
open to any "new" attempt to sucker punch their last unsuspecting synapse.

You are, apparently, wrong. There are more ways. There are always more
ways.

It is all in the name of helping the consumer, they claim, and the airline
says the ads can help keep ticket prices lower and, hey, that can only be
a good thing and therefore no one will complain because, as the cancer of
Wal-Mart has proven, America values nothing, absolutely nothing, more than a bargain.

We will sacrifice our integrity for it. We will sacrifice our rational
thought, our sense of decency, our sense of fair play. We will gladly hand
over, in the case of cheap-ass garbage food, our own health, and our
children's health, and the decent functionality of our hearts and sex organs and arteries.

We will sacrifice American jobs. We will gladly let the plant down the
road shut down and fire 5,000 employees because they had to ship all
manufacturing to overseas sweatshops in order to be able to sell their wares to Wal-Mart.

We will sacrifice our planet. Gladly, every day, every corner, every
possible resource. Noise pollution and air pollution and light pollution
and corporate pollution. We do not care. So long as it results in lower
prices on the 30,000 brands of corn flakes or a free barrel of oil for the Expedition, we're there.

Tray-table ads are a tiny speck, the latest infinitesimal blow to the
integrity of the human animal. They are, of course, no big deal and in a
few years when all jetliners look like the inside of city buses, plastered
all over with ads for Heineken and Xanax, we will think nothing of it and
think this is how it has always been and always will be and oh well might
as well just shut up and get used to it.

Because if we have learned anything, it is not so much that we are a
free-wheelin' capitalist society and therefore you just gotta deal with
the ugly and invasive consequences, the snarling sloganeering and
incessant little cries of consume, consume, consume.

Rather, we have learned that the demons of that capitalist pantheon will,
in fact, stop at absolutely nothing to market you to death so they may
finally stick you in a nice $2,000 coffin -- which you can, of course, buy
right now at Costco for only $1,499, while supplies last.

[Federal Register: December 11, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 238)]
[Notices]
[Page 69089-69090]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11de03-85]

=========================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

MARINE MAMMAL COMMISSION

Committee Management; Notice of Establishment; Advisory Committee
on Acoustic Impacts on Marine Mammals

AGENCY: Marine Mammal Commission.

ACTION: Charter filed for the Advisory Committee on Acoustic Impacts on
Marine Mammals.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Chairman of the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission) has
determined that the establishment of the Advisory Committee on Acoustic
Impacts on Marine Mammals (Committee) is necessary and in the public
interest in connection with fulfilling Commission mandates created
under the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-7). This
determination follows consultation with the Office of Management and
Budget and with the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services
Administration (GSA).

[[Page 69090]]

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the charter
has been filed with the GSA, the chair of the Commission, the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and the House of
Representatives Committee on Resources. A copy of the charter has also
been submitted to the Library of Congress.
Name of Committee: Advisory Committee on Acoustic Impacts on Marine
Mammals
Purpose and Objective: Committee members will participate in a
policy dialogue to review available information, identify research
needs, and recommend management actions and strategies related to the
impacts of antyhropogenic sound on marine mammals.
Balanced Membership Plans: In an effort to assess the need for an
advisory committee, over eighty individuals from a wide variety of
interested stakeholder groups were interviewed. The Commission also
solicited comments and nominations for the Committee in the Federal
Register.
The Committee will consist of approximately 26 members representing
entities who activities introduce anthropogenic sounds into the marine
environment, government regulatory and funding agencies, non-
governmental organizations including environmental groups, and
scientists with pertinent expertise. Every effort has been made to
select Committee members who have a high level of expertise and
interest concerning the impacts of sound on marine mammals and other
components of the marine environment, who have decision-making
authority, and who have demonstrated their ability to represent a
constituency and communicate effectively with constituents whose
interests they represent.
Duration: Continuing.
Responsible Commission Official: David Cottingham, Executive
Director, Marine Mammal Commission, 4340 East-West Hwy., Rm. 905,
Bethesda, MD 20814.

DATES: The Commission intends to appoint Committee members in December
2003 and convene the Committee's first meeting in early February 2004.
A list of Committee members will be posted on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.mmc.gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Vos, Project Manager for Sound-
Related Meetings and Actions, Marine Mammal Commission, 4340 East-West Hwy., Rm. 905, Bethesda, MD 20814, e-mail: evos@mmc.gov, tel.: (301)
504-0087, fax: (301) 504-0099; or visit the Commission Web site at
http://www.mmc.gov.

Dated: December 4, 2003.
David Cottingham,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 03-30682 Filed 12-10-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-31-M

[Federal Register: December 10, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 237)]
[Notices]
[Page 68949-68950]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10de03-113]
-----------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Notice of Intent to Repatriate a Cultural Item: U.S. Department
of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, San Francisco, CA

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------

Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 43 CFR 10.8 (f), of the
intent to repatriate a cultural item in the possession of the U.S.
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, San Francisco,
CA, that meets the definition of sacred object under 25 U.S.C. 3001.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's
administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3).
The determinations within this notice are the sole responsibility of
the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the
cultural item. The National Park Service is not responsible for the
determinations within this notice.
The cultural item is a braided scalp with a decorative covering of
red wool and contrasting blue wool cross.
In 1876, Corporal William O. Taylor acquired the scalp under
unknown circumstances while serving as a member of General George A.
Custer's Sioux Expedition. The scalp was subsequently acquired by Mr.
Alexander Acevedo. On April 4, 1995, Butterfield and Butterfield
Auction House, San Francisco, CA, held a sale of items under Mr.
Acevedo's control. The estimated sale price of the scalp was listed in
the auction catalog as between $3,000 and $4,000. On May 5, 1995, the
scalp was sold to Ripley's Entertainment, Orlando, FL, for $7,150.
Accompanying the scalp in the auction catalog was a pipe tomahawk,
also acquired by Corporal Taylor in 1876. A faded label attached to the
pipe tomahawk reads, ``A Black Hills Indian Tomahawk and Pipe/Captured
by ... he was ... killed ... and scalped the ... 35 years ... August
19, 1876.'' The auction catalog listed the battle of Slim Buttes as the
source of the pipe tomahawk. It is believed that Corporal Taylor
acquired the scalp and the pipe tomahawk after the battle of Slim
Buttes. The pipe tomahawk is not considered to be subject to
repatriation under NAGPRA.
On April 3, 1996, at the request of the United States Attorney's
Office for the Northern District of California, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, San Francisco, CA, began an investigation into the
trafficking of Native American scalps by Butterfield and Butterfield
Auction House. On July 19, 1996, Ripley's Entertainment released
custody of the scalp to Federal Bureau of Investigation agents. The
scalp was sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Laboratory
Division, Hair and Fiber Section, Washington, DC, for examination.
Based on morphological characteristics, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation determined that the hair on the scalp exhibits mongoloid
characteristics, a classification that encompasses Native American
hair.
Historic records indicate that the battle of Slim Buttes occurred
on September 9-10, 1876, when forces led by Captain Anson Mills
encountered a village of about 37 Minniconjou lodges. The battle was
soon joined by warriors from nearby Sans Arc, Brule, and Cheyenne
camps. Lakota oral tradition indicates that all of the tribal
participants in the battle of Slim Buttes belonged to the Mnikoju
(Minniconjou) and Itazipco (Sans Arc) bands. Descendants of the Mnikoju
(Minniconjou) and Itazipco (Sans Arc) bands that participated in the
battle of Slim Buttes are included in the present-day Cheyenne River
Sioux Tribe of the Cheyenne River Reservation, South Dakota.
In 1994, representatives of Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of the
Cheyenne River Reservation, South Dakota; Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe
of South Dakota; Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation,
South Dakota; Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation,
South Dakota; and Santee Sioux Tribe of the Santee Reservation of
Nebraska signed a memorandum of agreement that authorized
representatives of any of the signatory tribes to speak on behalf of
all five Indian tribes.
In 2002, a representative of the signatory tribes reviewed the
information pertaining to the scalp and concluded that the scalp was a
war trophy taken by one of the Mnikoju (Minniconjou) or Itazipco (Sans
Arc) warriors from one of their traditional enemies, possibly the
Arikara, Pawnee, or Crow. The representative of the signatory tribes
identified the scalp as innately sacred. Among the Lakota, scalping is
a way of showing contempt for an enemy's prowess in war. The
Iwa'kiciwacipi, or scalp dance, was performed to punish the individual
from whom the scalp was taken. Another ceremony must be performed after
a period of time in order to release the captured spirit of the
individual from whom the scalp was taken. The representative of the
signatory tribes has requested that the scalp be returned in order to
perform the spirit-releasing ceremony. The representative of the
signatory tribes also indicated that the signatory tribes do not intend
to preclude repatriation of the scalp to any other federally recognized
Indian tribe. The signatory tribes will immediately withdraw their
request at any time that any federally recognized Indian tribe submits
a competing claim to repatriate the scalp.
Officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, San Francisco,
CA, have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C.

[[Page 68950]]

3001 (9-10), the human remains described above represent the physical
remains of one individual of Native American ancestry. Officials of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, San Francisco, CA, also have
determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is insufficient
evidence to reasonably trace a shared group identity between the human
remains and an Indian tribe. Officials of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, San Francisco, CA, also have determined that, pursuant
to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(C), the cultural item is a specific ceremonial
object needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the
practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day
adherents. Finally, officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
San Francisco, CA, have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001
(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be
reasonably traced between the sacred object and the Cheyenne River
Sioux Tribe of the Cheyenne River Reservation, South Dakota; Flandreau
Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota; Lower Sioux Indian Community in the
State of Minnesota; Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation,
South Dakota; Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation,
South Dakota; and Santee Sioux Tribe of the Santee Reservation of
Nebraska.
Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to
be culturally affiliated with the sacred object should contact Special
Agent Brian J. Guy, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 450 Golden Gate
Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, telephone (415) 553-7400, before
January 9, 2004. Repatriation of the sacred object to the Cheyenne
River Sioux Tribe of the Cheyenne River Reservation, South Dakota;
Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota; Lower Sioux Indian
Community in the State of Minnesota; Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine
Ridge Reservation, South Dakota; Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud
Indian Reservation, South Dakota; and Santee Sioux Tribe of the Santee
Reservation of Nebraska may proceed after that date if no additional
claimants come forward.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation, San Francisco, CA, is
responsible for notifying the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of the
Cheyenne River Reservation, South Dakota; Crow Tribe of Montana;
Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota; Lower Sioux Indian
Community in the State of Minnesota; Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine
Ridge Reservation, South Dakota; Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma; Rosebud
Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation, South Dakota; Santee
Sioux Tribe of the Santee Reservation of Nebraska; Standing Rock Sioux
Tribe of North & South Dakota; and Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort
Berthold Reservation, North Dakota that this notice has been published.

Dated: November 5, 2003.
John Robbins,
Assistant Director, Cultural Resources.
[FR Doc. 03-30569 Filed 12-9-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-50-S