Imprisonment without charge ... ever justified? (page 2)

xenawarrior

One more question for the "Christian" killers, where is their old buddy Noriega? He still can't be found...

Um, Manuel Noriega is in Federal prison in Florida.

onacruse

Simon, this is a very good question! It cuts to the quick of human co-existence (or, rather, lack thereof).

History is the best judge and it has never judged this kind of blatently unfair action well.

Except when it's the victor, who, inevitably, as history records, almost always succeeds in portraying to the rest of the world that they acted in the most fair way. Thus with the American colonists and the pre-existing North American Indian (to name just one of thousands of such struggles).

Insofar as "justified" is concerned, I ask you: On what basis can even the most heinous of crimes against humanity be condemned as unjustified? What "standard" shall one turn to to prove the point? The Bible? The Koran? The Baghhivad-Gita?

If there is no "God" or proven "divine" revelation to delineate such human behavior, then even the most torturous treatment of prisoners, or citizens, cannot be defined as unjust.

seesthesky

manny's at my house drinking a beer

hillary_step

Craig,

If there is no "God" or proven "divine" revelation to delineate such human behavior, then even the most torturous treatment of prisoners, or citizens, cannot be defined as unjust.

Does the fact that there is a universal moral outrage about such things prove that God exists?

Much of our morality is set by commonly understood reactions. We experience pain, we do not enjoy it. We see people inflicting pain on others, our common experience repudiates it. At some stage in our human development, conciousness began to seperate us from the thinking outlined in your statement above.

Best regards - HS

Simon

"EVER" justified?? I dunno. I'm not comfortable with imprisoning anyone without a charge----merely a suspiscion. If a suspected terrorist was detained for up to 72 hours, I could see that as fair---if there was a legitimate allegation with foundation.

So, if we telephone the authorities and give them your name you would be happy to be locked up on that alone would you? Now, instead of 72 hours make it 3 years. Are you still as happy? Still think it's "fair"? I doubt it.

stevenyc

From Terry Gilliams Brazil

CUT TO JILL at top of queue with several forms in her
hand. A strange prototype radio controlled camera on a
wheeled base is whirring and clicking as it approaches
her. Throughout the next sequence it pokes around JILL in
an annoying manner - thrusting itself at her face, trying
to see what is written on the forms, peering over her
shoulder. JILL hands a form to the Information Porter.

JILL
I want to report a wrongful arrest.

PORTER
(looking at form)
You want Information Adjustments.
Different department.

JILL
(exasperated but
controlled)
I've been to Information Adjustments.
They sent me here. They told me you
had a form I had to fill in.

PORTER
Have you got an Arrest Receipt?

JILL
Yes.

PORTER
Is it stamped?

JILL
(producing Buttle receipt)
Stamped?

PORTER
(examining receipt)
No, there's no stamp on it. You see!
I can't give you the form until it's
stamped.

JILL
Where do I get it stamped?

PORTER
Information Adjustments.

steve

onacruse

Dear Mr. HS:

Does the fact that there is a universal moral outrage about such things prove that God exists?

I would take issue (and I think with no small measure of historical evidence) that there never has been a universal outrage against such actions (as deplorable as you and I and billions of other humans) consider such actions to be outrages against humanity. I mentioned the Americans as one example of such "convenient historical oblivity;" how about the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, "Barbarians," Muslims, Japanese, Germans..and indeed, the American Indians themselves? In my admittedly limited knowledge of human history, there hasn't been a single culture that didn't, at some time, and for some "reason," find a way to ignore, or even approve, of the brutal violation of what otherwise ordinarily be considered natural liberties of and respect for other human beings.

Much of our morality is set by commonly understood reactions. We experience pain, we do not enjoy it. We see people inflicting pain on others, our common experience repudiates it. At some stage in our human development, conciousness began to seperate us from the thinking outlined in your statement above.

I fully share that desire, but don't see that human society has, in any measurable way, improved (or degraded).

imho, when it comes down to survival, however we perceive a threat to that survival, we will, as individuals and communities, quickly resort to the lowest common denominator of behavior in order to preserve ourselves...and psychologically insulate ourselves against the condemnation of the gods by saying: "It was self-defense."

Respects,

Craig

Big Tex

If someone was arrested for reasonable cause or reasonable suspicion, I could see them being held for 48 or 72 hours without being charged but I have problems with imprisoning people (years now) without charging them. I understand the danger involved, but this is the type of thing that sparked the American revolution 200 years ago. Imprisonment without being charged goes against the what the Constitution is supposed to be about and I just can't support it.

However to be fair it should be pointed out this is not the first time in our history that the government has suspended basic rights. During the Civil War Lincoln suspended habeus corpus and essentially governed under martial law. Roosevelt imprisoned Japanese-Americans without trial during WWII. I think Bush is wrong to do this, but he's not the first.

hillary_step

Craig,

I would take issue (and I think with no small measure of historical evidence) that there never has been a universal outrage against such actions (as deplorable as you and I and billions of other humans) consider such actions to be outrages against humanity. I mentioned the Americans as one example of such "convenient historical oblivity;" how about the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, "Barbarians," Muslims, Japanese, Germans..and indeed, the American Indians themselves?

I understand what you are saying but actually what history shows is that even when outrages of genocide occur it is normally a very small group taking part in these outrages, the vast remainder of the population often being kept in the dark as to the true horrors by either deceit, distance or propaganda.

History also shows that mass acts of barbarism are never forgotten, hence your ability to recount them above. The reason that they are not forgotten is because there is a universal sense of outrage about them which keeps the alive in folklore, or these days in popular media culture.

In my admittedly limited knowledge of human history, there hasn't been a single culture that didn't, at some time, and for some "reason," find a way to ignore, or even approve, of the brutal violation of what otherwise ordinarily be considered natural liberties of and respect for other human beings.

Yes, that may be true in the instance of outrage but not it its retrospectivism, and this is where it has a universal application. Only a handful of people would support the attempted annhilation of the Jews of Europe and I have yet to meet one American who is proud of what the US Army did to its Indians. Ask an Armenian why he has issues with a Turk, or an Irishman as to why he cannot forgive the Brit's for stealing his lands and murdering his forefathers. Your view is historically short-sighted Craig.

Best regards - HS

Ianone

Ask Jesus how he felt when the Jewish Sanhedrin arrested Him and crucified Him.

Oh by the way, the Sanhedrin was re instated on October 13 of 2004.

Jewish Sanhedrin revived in Tiberius after over 1500 year absence

Imprisonment without charge ... ever justified?

Share this