Saturday, October 24, 2009

Do you think that terrorists should be allowed human rights?


Answer:
Yes. Even the worst among us deserve basic human rights. Otherwise, we become the terrorists. This does not mean that in a battle a person should not be able to kill his enemy, it means that when a prisoner is in custody, they should not be subject to torture, and that everyone is entitled to a fair trial.
Yes, particularly the right to due process.
they have to right to choose death by bullet or death by hanging
i think they should be alloted a fair trial. if they can be proven to be terrorists, then we can kill them or lock them up for ever.
Are they Human?

The whole premise of human rights is that we are all treated fairly. I do not believe in torture under any circumstance regardless of the act committed.

Stripping people of their human rights based upon actions is a slippery slope.

The right to a fair trial, the right to be treated in a humane matter is just a given.
Why should they be allowed basic human rights when they take away other peoples human rights when they kidnap people and kill them and use planes and bombs to terrorise people they should be charged with treason and sentenced to life imprisonment with life meaning life
No. And if they are found guilty of terrorist activity then shoot them, a bullet is cheaper to us taxpayers than 拢35000 a year to keep each one in a prison with sky TV, snooker tables, gym etc...shoot them and save the rest of us some money to pay for nurses, education, armed services etc.

With any luck they would think twice then!

I wonder if they realise that the 100 virgins they have been promised are Nuns with shotguns!
Absolutely not. The reasons they are called terrorists are because they took those human rights from other innocent people. As far as I'm concerned, not only should they not have ANY human rights, they should all rot in hell.

And since people want to look deeper into it. What if we could make robots that's looked and acted like humans and had programmed emotions? Should they be granted human rights? Even if there was almost no way to tell the difference? So, basically, I'm asking you, what constitutes being a human? Killing babies and women, beheading their father? Raping the women in front of their entire families? Blowing up hundreds of innocent people? I don't think they are any more human than that robot is.
Who decides who is a terrorist but a court? Everyone deserves due process.

Even the terrorists in the White House... murdering 655 000 people to steal Iraqi oil. Dropping bombs on civilians! THose are the terrorists.
No. Once you plot to, and carry out a plan to kill or maim dozens of innocent people indiscriminately you should forgo your human rights.
If you deny human rights to terrorists, then anyone can be accused and tortured as a terrorist.
We are supposed to be above all that.

We used to believe that we should hold the high ground and not be as wicked as our enemys,
THAT WAS BEFORE GEORGE W BUSH
no, but i don't believe torture yields very many credible results
They are human.
Every living human being is entitle to be treated humanely. Every living human being has certain rights.

Torture is practice by the most barbaric societies throughout history. It is fruitless. The only thing torture produces is pain on the one being tortured.

That is NOT who we are as a country or a people.

Nazi's tortured, Soviets tortured, 3rd world countries torture, barbaric radical Islamic torture.

We are better than that.
I think all criminals should forfeit their human rights the minute they commit crimes
I think that the laws and rules of war in place from the beginning of our country's existence up until 2001 were adequate to address all concerns in this area.

As opposed to expanding the president's powers in time of war, Bush has not gone as far as other wartime presidents, and he has been further hemmed in by recent court decisions at odds with over 200 years of recognized executive authority.

I think we need to do what is necessary to fight and prevail, and survive.

I think the threat is real, and serious. Many don't. That's the problem.
You and I think alike. They should be tortured to learn as much as possible. You get a star for your line of thought.
I think we are all agreed that there is absolutely no excuse for such acts %26 there never will be. Even evil doesn't seem to be a strong enough word.
However, define 'terrorist'.
Does wearing the uniform of a soldier %26 belonging to a recognised military mean that such acts don't fall under the category of terrorist where innocent woman %26 children are being targeted, especially if it is a friendly government that is guilty?
Or does being a politician provide license to order such extremes?
And for that matter do you know of any country where we have allowed known terrorists to become respectable politicians, because it was politically expedient? There is more than one.
When does terrorism become legit? When it does %26 we accept it, then we have a double standard.
It is easy to jump on the sabre-rattling bandwagon %26 vent our anger at such atrocities, but unless we apply the same standard to one %26 all, whether a legit government or misguided individual then the problem will not go away.
All life is sacrosanct.
Bush has done a pretty good job of getting human rights. In the fight against terrorism he has done away with haebius corpus, the right to a speedy and trial. Which means that anyone suspected of being a terrorist may be locked away indefinitely leaving the American people safe for Democracy, right?

Wrong, what that means is anyone that the executive branch or the military that it controls (commander and chief) can lock up anyone they want as long as they label them a "terrorist" with no hope for a trial or access to advocates, representation, or any human rights.

This used to be a free country, but throw out the Constitution and all you are left with is an evolving dictatorship.

One last thought: Remember the Minutemen? Those freedom fighters that helped the colonies separate from the crown? King George labeled them "terrorists."
It all depends on whose side you are on.
An extremely important principle is at stake here. Once you condone torture, you render yourself and your entire family liable to torture.
For the most part, only suspects are tortured. A person will admit to anything he/she believes the torturer wants to hear. Any name mentioned under torture will cause the named person to become a suspect and thus liable to the same.
If you don't adhere to due process and the rule of law, you effectively give me and anyone else the right to do whatever we want to you.
At what point do you judge them to be terrorists? Until they have gone through due process of law, there is no certainty that they are guilty. Once we give those who have arrested them the right to decide on their guilt or innocence and act accordingly, we are betraying our whole system of justice, a system which is fundamental to our civilisation. Until they have been judged by a court of law to be terrorists, we cannot see them in that light.
Unfortunately we have a clash of cultures here. We have a system which is completely alien to their way of thinking and they operate according to a system which is at variance to ours. However, civilisation demands that we adhere to our principles and code of ethics, even when dealing with people who do not respect either.
I think that we need to separate a couple of issues.
Firstly, we cannot just arrest and torture people who may look like terrorists. Anyone suspected must be given due process of the law (but for **** sake don't let them roam free) or we are on the road to anarchy.
However, if we are talking about the slimy gits in the car (or those that we have proven 100% to be terrorists), then for me there is no doubt about what they were up to. They should use every effort to get essential information out of them to save the innocent who will die in the future. For me, if this means that their (sub) human rights are violated then so be it. My human right is to live in peace and they constantly violate my rights.
If this was war as they say; then as they are wearing civilian clothes and living as civilians, then surely under the Geneva convention they can be shot as spies!
NO. They give up all theire rights the minute they start using violence against innocent,law abiding citizens.This should also apply to convicted murderers,child sex molesters etc
everyone has the right to a fair trial but if its proven beyond all reasonable doubt that they have committed the crime then in my opinion they should loose all rights and should never be allowed to live in society again.
Human rights should always be applied. Torture will provide the answers they are looking for but not always the correct answer. Persistent questioning and refusal to take "no comment" as an answer, will usually provide the information needed. It takes time, but there is no quick answer .
Yes they should or we're no better than them.
Why don't you just substitute the word "undesirables" and reask the question,

"Do you think undesirables should be allowed human rights?"

That was the question asked in Berlin in the 1930s and 40s they decided on NO and came up with the final solution for Jews, gays, the blind, the deaf, among others.
Terrorists, no, but suspected terrorists have the right to a fair trial. Once it has been proven that's what they are, they lose all rights as far as I am concerned. If they kill and maim in their misguided interpretation of whatever religion they hold, then they should be punished similarly. In Christian doctrine they quote "an eye for an eye". I am not sure about Islam, but I guess there is something similar there. Islam, as well as any lasting religion must have a central tenet that life is sacred I feel sure.
According to a bunch of people in Iraq,WE are the terrorists...
point of view, you see.
If you admit that certain categories of persons should be denied human rights, you admit the possibility that you could be denied the same rights. Someone might accuse you of being a terrorist, and you would then regret that you denied the right to a fair trial and freedom from torture to terrorists.

No comments:

Post a Comment

 


Do you think © 2008. Design by: Pocket Web Hosting

vc .net