At precisely what point should we be alarmed at human rights violations?
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 18:06
VIEWED: 6644
PAGE 2 of 12
"When they came for the robbers and murderers
I remained silent,
Because I was not a robber or murderer"
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Finn, I feel you are as blinded by your need to legitimize authority as you say I am in my resentment of same. As Kirk said, reality is probably somewhere in between us. I am at least ready to acknowledge this possibility...
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The truth is that screaming about human rights violations by our government when it is nothing more then your issue with authority puts us in more danger, not less.
Still, how can you possibly justify not FIRING (or not prosecuting) someone in authority who behaves like this?:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fae_1195587967&p=1
IMO this is government sanctioned unprofessionalism- at best. At worst it's a symptom of what might be down the road...like getting tazed for jaywalking or not filing your taxes on time...
Chrisisall, alarmist with a cause
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:"When they came for the sheeple,
Originally posted by Geezer:
"When they came for the robbers and murderers
I remained silent,
Because I was not a robber or murderer"
I did NOT remain silent;
I did not want my fellow Browncoat Geezer to be mistreated!"
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The truth is that some people spend a great deal of time trying to convince me that we are living in Nazi Germany, yet their horrific accusations never materialize.
Man.... it's really got to mess with your head that I'm trying to convince you that we're two steps away from living in (fictional) '40's Germany when I am probably the largest decryer of the Hollocaust here. lol
It's like a paradox which would cause Bender's CPU to explode.
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
G) When it is actually human right violations, and not just someone calling it that because they have some issue with authority or political or economic ax to grind.
I was going to say the same thing only you said it first and better so given that...I vote "G".
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'm probably somewhere between E and G. I acknowledge -some- of the HR crud is just whining; on the flip side, I consider some of the taser usage that Finn finds acceptable to be unacceptable. For practical purposes, I'm probably much more 'looking at 'E', but keeping 'G' 'in mind'.
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
G) When it is actually human right violations, and not just someone calling it that because they have some issue with authority or political or economic ax to grind.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
the sheeple,
"Sheeple" are the result of cross breeding PirateNews and his beloved goat.
Sure they make handsome jackets and good eating...but the crazy talk you have to put up with when fattening them up is too much.
"Baaa-naziJewQueen. Baaa-Bushchildmoester. Baaa-911consipracy."
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
At what point?
When we're too lazy, too discouraged, too frightened or too authoritarian-minded to DO anything about it. Because by then well find out that we can't.
Which was, IMHO, about 20 years ago.
BTW:
Quote:Would you taser the President? Would you waterboard a cop? Would you "detain" a solider in solitary for years and years w/o charges? I note for the record that the statement says HUMAN rights, not rights for authority but not for others. Once you start parsing out human rights as if they belonged to some but not others you're already there, man.
When it is actually human right violations
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Thanks Signy, you never disappoint.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Once you start parsing out human rights as if they belonged to some but not others you're already there, man.
Fan of reason Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Would you taser the President?
Only if he was disorderly and refused to calm down. I note for the record that the Secret Service will likely intercede.
Quote:
Would you waterboard a cop?
If he (in his off duty time) was a high ranking Al Queda leader (everybody has a hobby...some of our cops have a band) who had and refused to divulge information that could be used to prevent terrorist attacks, then yes I would authorize it under controlled circumstances and on a limited basis.
Quote:
Would you "detain" a solider in solitary for years and years w/o charges?
I note for the record you failed to specify American soldiers. By the end of World War 2 some 400,000 German, Italian, and Japanese POWs were housed in approximately 500 camps in the United States. Many were conscripted into labor and used to harvest and process crops, build roads and waterways, fell trees, roof barns, etc.
The most dangerous ones were likely held in solitary for months, if not years. The same and worse was true for American soldiers in enemy custody...such is war.
Quote:
I note for the record that the statement says HUMAN rights, not rights for authority but not for others. Once you start parsing out human rights as if they belonged to some but not others you're already there, man.
One, you cannot taint an entire system with a few isolated incidents. There have been what...two incidents of waterboarding since 9/11, both high level Al Queda types, both are in good health, and both yielded results that directly resulted in the prevention of terrorist attacks.
Two, sometimes bad things happen to bad people and oddly...I don't feel real sorry for them. Fact is if they want their rights they need to be a little more cooperative. Without their complete physical and psychological capitulation, then I and the govt can not be held responsible for the consequences of their beligerance.
Three, if an innocent person is abused in any fashion that is a tragedy. However it is not the end of the world. The end of the world is far more likely to happen if our fear, caution, or good intentions prevent us from doing everything we can to stop terrorist attacks.
Four, our primary goal must be the prevention of terrorist attacks. Our respect for human rights is essential, but must always come secondary to survival. After all the Constitution is not a suicide pact and a dead man has no rights human or otherwise.
I would ask you reserve any further comments about human rights until AFTER the terrorists have chopped off your head. At that point your perspective will carry more weight. We'll keep you around in a jar and whenever we need someone to tell us we're too hard on the bad guys we'll get you out of the fridge and listen very carefully to your silent testimony.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME