Interesting Article

[tom&tata 2]

Also its interestin to note that while Amnesty International reports are used as ammunition to condemn human rights abusers in 3rd world countries, that same organisation is condemned when they criticise the US government for similar human rights violations in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.

Last year, some folks in the senate tried to have funding withdrawn from (if memory serves) the International Committee of the Red Cross because that organisation comments were 'incompatible' with their political agenda.

Double standard. It is terorism if your enemy is doing it, it is war on terror if you are doing it to your enemy. At the end, both are wrong

No it isn't a double standard. THEY are doing to inocent women and children. WE are doing it the the terrorists.

I thought basic human rights are the same for everyone.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Also its interestin to note that while Amnesty International reports are used as ammunition to condemn human rights abusers in 3rd world countries, that same organisation is condemned when they criticise the US government for similar human rights violations in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.

Last year, some folks in the senate tried to have funding withdrawn from (if memory serves) the International Committee of the Red Cross because that organisation comments were 'incompatible' with their political agenda.

Double standard. It is terorism if your enemy is doing it, it is war on terror if you are doing it to your enemy. At the end, both are wrong

No it isn't a double standard. THEY are doing to inocent women and children. WE are doing it the the terrorists.

I thought basic human rights are the same for everyone.

They should be. And at one time, they were.

[Jaylen Brit 0]

Interesting discussion.

I think I'm siding with Fishdude on this one having been almost blown up twice in London (ya missed me! HAH!) and missing the 7/7 tube bombs by a miracle (I was sick that day, decided not to go in, and one of the tubes I WOULD probably have been on - it was the right time of day - was hit)

Did I stop travelling on tubes?

No

Did I stop going into town?

No

In fact I PURPOSELY went into town 2 days after 7/7, to show NOTHING the terrorists did would put me off my normal life (and I did the same after one of the London IRA bombs)

I'm not being dictated to by people who use bombs as a means of debate.

Should we hunt down and arrest terrorsits?

Absolutely.

Throw them in jail to rot - or thru due process (where applicable) apply the death sentence?

Sure, if that's the law of the land.

Should we torture them..well no I don't think we should. I am not a terrorist - I don't use terror as a means of communicating - I am NOT the same as people like that.

The country I live in (the UK) is a 'free society' - as much as one CAN be these days - and it got that way thru a lot of people dying so I could stand up and say what I want to - but we didn't torture everyone then and I don't think we should do it now.

[GaryC 7]

I have been to China, I have seen the way their people are treated. Trust me, we are nothing like that. And if we "play by the rules" and they don't, what do you think will happen? We automaticly handcuff ourselves. We are dealing with lunitics that have no conception of right and wrong. We can't treat them like humans because they don't act like humans. If you want to rest in your grave with the satisfaction that you respected the human rights of the terrorists you go right ahead. I for one am for treating them like the inhuman animals they are. And I will sleep well at night knowing that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I have been to China, I have seen the way their people are treated. Trust me, we are nothing like that. And if we "play by the rules" and they don't, what do you think will happen? We automaticly handcuff ourselves. We are dealing with lunitics that have no conception of right and wrong. We can't treat them like humans because they don't act like humans. If you want to rest in your grave with the satisfaction that you respected the human rights of the terrorists you go right ahead. I for one am for treating them like the inhuman animals they are. And I will sleep well at night knowing that.

You have a lot of repressed anger don't you?

Why do you think we have a universal declaration of human rights?

This here is what we are talking about:

http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

Edited May 3, 2006 by Fishdude

[LenJayUS 0]

Well, I'm sorta inbetween here... I have no problem with the torturing of known terrorists to a certain degree... having bad memories of the experience is fine... not being able to walk the rest of their lives is too far...

I disagree that what ever Bush is doing is being dictated out of fear. Really, what does HE have to fear at all? Not a damn thing. When 9/11 happened, it did not scare me one bit. It pissed me off. Call it revenge if you will, but taking the fight to them, instead of on american soil, is fine by me. They are the one's running scared... trying to do hit and run tactics.. not the large majority of us.

Human Rights is all well and good when everyone wishes to play by the rules. The terrorists don't, and they won't. Why are people not condemning them for killing kids and other innocent people? Isn't that worst evil when compared to some torture?

They have declared war on us... so it's okay for us to put a bullet in them, but we can't give them alittle encouragement to hand over their buddies and give us info to prevent more bloodshed?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well, I'm sorta inbetween here... I have no problem with the torturing of known terrorists to a certain degree... having bad memories of the experience is fine... not being able to walk the rest of their lives is too far...

I disagree that what ever Bush is doing is being dictated out of fear. Really, what does HE have to fear at all? Not a damn thing. When 9/11 happened, it did not scare me one bit. It pissed me off. Call it revenge if you will, but taking the fight to them, instead of on american soil, is fine by me. They are the one's running scared... trying to do hit and run tactics.. not the large majority of us.

Human Rights is all well and good when everyone wishes to play by the rules. The terrorists don't, and they won't. Why are people not condemning them for killing kids and other innocent people? Isn't that worst evil when compared to some torture?

They have declared war on us... so it's okay for us to put a bullet in them, but we can't give them alittle encouragement to hand over their buddies and give us info to prevent more bloodshed?

People aren't condemning the terrorists? News to me - as far as I am aware there's been worldwide condemnation of terrorist atrocities.

What this really comes down to is whether or not a universal declaration represents the basis of an absolute law. Or has that law, like the US Constitution, become something that can be put aside in certain situations?

If you agree with that idea, then I suggest you read up on the political philosopher Leo Strauss. He suggests that constitutions can be put aside (essentially as 'nice to haves') if the national need demands it. Interesting idea, but not one I agree with.

What bothers me specifically is the philosophical change that has taken place since 9/11. An absolute black and white law (well its really more of a guideline, but a guideline that most progressive countries have enshrined into law) , formulated largely after the horrors of WW2 and the holocaust to prevent inhumane treatment of human beings is now, suddenly, amorphous and open to a wide degree of interpretation.

Edited May 3, 2006 by Fishdude

[mrswooten4ever 0]

Operative word SUSPECTED. Innocent until proven guilty remember? Sure when they are found guilty throw them to the dogs. I too grew with terrorism on a daily basis. I spent most off my life in South Africa and was there during the fall of apartheid however, I wouldnt like to see an innocent man condemned and tortured because of fear and over zealousness.

Adele

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Operative word SUSPECTED. Innocent until proven guilty remember? Sure when they are found guilty throw them to the dogs. I too grew with terrorism on a daily basis. I spent most off my life in South Africa and was there during the fall of apartheid however, I wouldnt like to see an innocent man condemned and tortured because of fear and over zealousness.

Adele

I agree. The issue here is not about denying terrorists due punishment under the maximum penalty law, but about ensuring that basic human rights in this country are protected.

Before 9/11 we would never have questioned the idea.

[GaryC 7]

Thank you LenJayUS.

Fishdude. Don't get me started on the UN. That is the most useless org. that was ever created. The lunatics are running the asylum there.

Yes I have a LOT of repressed anger. When someone uses 4 airliners as guided missiles it kind of pisses me off. I want these people sent to hell and I don't care if I damage their human rights sending them there.

As far as the "Universal Human Rights" goes. That is all good in theory. If everyone went by that it would be a wonderful world. Sorry to say we are fighting an enemy that pisses on that document. They started it, they set the rules and we are gonna have to fight it their way to win.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Thank you LenJayUS.

Fishdude. Don't get me started on the UN. That is the most useless org. that was ever created. The lunatics are running the asylum there.

Yes I have a LOT of repressed anger. When someone uses 4 airliners as guided missiles it kind of pisses me off. I want these people sent to hell and I don't care if I damage their human rights sending them there.

As far as the "Universal Human Rights" goes. That is all good in theory. If everyone went by that it would be a wonderful world. Sorry to say we are fighting an enemy that pisses on that document. They started it, they set the rules and we are gonna have to fight it their way to win.

Interesting opinion, but not one I share.

You think I don't feel anger over the senseless murder of 3000 people? Far from it. I simply don't see the significance of a single (albeit unprecedented) terrorist attack as sufficient justification for the repealing of 50 years of human rights legislation. A law that was created expressly following the systematic extermination of millions of people in WW2.

By violating our own sacred principles, we are entering area that is closer to the black side of grey than it is to white.

We hold dictators to account for genocide under those same laws, BTW. What moral authority can the US claim to have once it it adopts the tactics of those same dictators and the people it claims to be fighting?

Edited May 3, 2006 by Fishdude

[Jaylen Brit 0]

For me one of the fundamental differences between some popular opinion in the US and other places is that this attack on 9/11 was the first terrorist attack by foreign nationals on US soil.

9/11 was horrendous and I condemn everything about it (make no mistake please!) - but perhaps we, at least in the UK have become more - I hestitate to say 'used to' but for us something like this, while heinous and wrong, isn't a 'new event'. Ditto much of Europe, and other countries.

Not only, IMO, did the American people have to deal with such a dreadful and devasting loss of life (civillian life, not military targets), but there was also the 'outrage' factor. The feeling of shock that this had happened on AMERICAN soil.

So it doesn't surprise me that many Americans share gary's POV - I'm sure the first time London got hit by a terrorist bomb that Brits probably felt the same way - its natural to feel that way. And this wasn't one small tube bomb - it was designed to cause fear and terror and HUGE loss of life; which it did.

[GaryC 7]

Do you think the terrorists are done? Do you think if we promised that we will respect their human rights they will say "Oh OK I guess we will leave them alone now"? They will continue to attack us in the most inhumane way they can. When Iran gets their A-Bomb do you doubt that they will give it to a terrorist group? So should we play nice and let them fry us? Sorry Fishdude I don't care what the world thinks of us if it means stopping that. I don't care if some terrorists human rights are violated if in means stopping a nuke attack.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

For me one of the fundamental differences between some popular opinion in the US and other places is that this attack on 9/11 was the first terrorist attack by foreign nationals on US soil.

9/11 was horrendous and I condemn everything about it (make no mistake please!) - but perhaps we, at least in the UK have become more - I hestitate to say 'used to' but for us something like this, while heinous and wrong, isn't a 'new event'. Ditto much of Europe, and other countries.

Not only, IMO, did the American people have to deal with such a dreadful and devasting loss of life (civillian life, not military targets), but there was also the 'outrage' factor. The feeling of shock that this had happened on AMERICAN soil.

So it doesn't surprise me that many Americans share gary's POV - I'm sure the first time London got hit by a terrorist bomb that Brits probably felt the same way - its natural to feel that way. And this wasn't one small tube bomb - it was designed to cause fear and terror and HUGE loss of life; which it did.

Sure a lot of people were, and still are angry over 9/11. No disagreement there. But its also fair to say that very few good decisions are made in anger.

The question is, to what extent is it reasonable to repeal human rights laws purely as a result of anger and outrage?

While Gary seems content to make this all about the immorality wringing hands over protecting terrorists' rights when they don't respect them themselves, the point is that those rights we are so keen to throw away exist for the protection of law-abiding citizens.

Edited May 3, 2006 by Fishdude

[GaryC 7]

My point is a simple one. If we follow the rules of civilized people the terrorists will strike again and cause millions of deaths. If we play by their rules we can stop them. So I guess the choice we have is to live or die. We can't have it both ways. Like it or not we live in a world that rouge nations like Iran will have nukes. There is no doubt that they will give it to someone that will have no problem setting it off where it will do the most harm. Like I said, we have the choice to live or die. I choose to live.