It's Official: US Court Rules Gitmo Victims Not Persons

[Simulist]

There are no "victims" at Guantanamo - only terrorists being detained. And of course they have no human rights - they're not only not members of the civilization from which those rights derive, they're actively working to destroy it. How on earth could they possibly claim any human rights?

There are a number of reasons why everything you've written here is... well, stupid... but the one someone might have actually missed is the part where you say, "they're not only not members of the civilization from which those rights derive..."

Don't you know any damn thing, Sepka?

Rights do not "derive" from the state or from a "civilization," but are inherent in every human being — whether the state recognizes them, or not. Even many sixth graders know that much.

Maybe you should consult one before you post again, and make yourself look like an idiot.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Human rights are inalienable.

They don't come from the state they come from the universe or god or tom waits or something.

[Elvis]

There are no "victims" at Guantanamo - only terrorists being detained. And of course they have no human rights - they're not only not members of the civilization from which those rights derive, they're actively working to destroy it. How on earth could they possibly claim any human rights?

Idiotic blatherskite. Fool.

For all the reasons offered by others, above.

Idiot.

[Nordic]

Well so much for that thread. Thanks, Sepka.

[Elvis]

Sorry for being uncivil. But the rights in question are not only intrinsically unalienable, their codification is the result of centuries of hard-fought social and legal progress. And insofar as we live in a civilization dependent on---defined by---social contracts, in the US the Constitution, flawed as it may be, is all we've got.

So it really steams me when people are not only willing but actually eager to throw it all away.

It's just offensive.

[nathan28]

You know, I looked in my wallet and on my passport for the bit about being a member of a "civilization," but I couldn't find it.

[Elvis]

You know, I looked in my wallet and on my passport for the bit about being a member of a "civilization," but I couldn't find it.

I think I understand what you mean, but I hope you understand what I mean. We can argue over the semantics of "civilization" (I appreciate Gandhi's quip about 'Western civilization': "excellent idea!") but in your wallet is there a driver's license or credit card or social security number? The point is, our 'civilization' might be primitive but it is a civilization, as was Sumeria and Bablylon and everything that's followed. And one thread through all of that history is a struggle for the rights under attack in the court decision of the OP. I'm not a Constitution-waver but it didn't just fall out of the sky.


(edited to correct Gandhi quote)

While I'm at it, another point is that rights might be unalienable but you have to write it down, the king has to sign it and you have to hold everyone to it. We've barely emerged from serfdom and this decision is barbaric.

[nathan28]

"Civilization", especially in any discussion involving Middle Eastern politics, is a dog-whistle to invoke bullshit arguments about "cultures in conflict" or whatever.

[Elvis]

"Civilization", especially in any discussion involving Middle Eastern politics, is a dog-whistle to invoke bullshit arguments about "cultures in conflict" or whatever.

Okay, understood. My thoughts are a million miles away from the "clash of civilizations" hand-wringing and I used 'civilization' in its generic sense, not its loaded-for-bear sense.

[blanc]

Also, if a state decides to recognise human rights by incorporating them in its laws, and subsequently decides that those rights do not apply to some people, such a state has undermined its own law and legal system and made an ass of it.

[Iamwhomiam]

Why Sepka the septic weasel's words are important for us to read, but first this message:

"Still wearing her fluorescent jacket, she knelt down at least 15 meters in front of the bulldozer, and began waving her arms and shouting, just as activists had successfully done dozens of times that day... When it got so close that it was moving the earth beneath her, she climbed onto the pile of rubble being pushed by the bulldozer... Her head and upper torso were above the bulldozer’s blade, and the bulldozer operator and co-operator could clearly see her. Despite this, the operator continued forward, which caused her to fall back, out of view of the diver. [sic] He continued forward, and she tried to scoot back, but was quickly pulled underneath the bulldozer. We ran towards him, and waved our arms and shouted; one activist with the megaphone. But the bulldozer operator continued forward, until Rachel was all the way underneath the central section of the bulldozer."

"She was a spoiled little princess who thought that if she told those quaint brown-skinned people how silly their wars were, of COURSE they'd have to listen and stop fighting. The world needs fewer Rachel Corries." - Sepka

It is always a good thing to hear the squeeks of a rat to reassure they do exist, even if you've confused their droppings as having come from something warm & fuzzy.

[Joe Hillshoist]

But the rights in question are not only intrinsically unalienable, their codification is the result of centuries of hard-fought social and legal progress.

Thats right, people died for those legal protections, and you are right, its "all we got". There is no "justice", just us.

BTW I have friends from a civilisation that is at least twice the age of Sumer. These days they call themselves Bundjalung.

[AlicetheKurious]

[AlicetheKurious]

Ignorance + hypocrisy + cruelty + racism + greed = zionism

[operator kos]

I was recently reminded that the State of Emergency which Bush declared on September 14, 2001, was renewed by Obama in September 2010. So just in case anyone was unclear, the Constitution doesn't protect the rights of anyone right now.