Terrorist: Do they have Human Rights?

"anyone"
point being taken that they are still "one" one person, one human. so they SHOULD have human rights.

LoonylionWe used to, but the Australians started complaining :(

hahaha, i meant that as a joke, citizens and all. I thought that they became citizens when the number of inmates far surpassed the local population and Great Britain just declared australia as a Commonwealth nation... i think they even held a election there or something saying if they want to stay as a commonwealth nation or become a republic nation, declaring they are not anymore connected to the British ruler? I should read more on australia...but anyway, i know that even in North America, the british just sent the puritans or some threats to the British islands to the colonies that we now called the 13 original states of the USA... i think it happened during the time of King James, when he declared that Catholicism is again the official religion.Well, i think loony can correct me in all of my post if i'm entirely wrong in them...

damanaliI thought that they became citizens when the number of inmates far surpassed the local population and Great Britain just declared australia as a Commonwealth nation... i think they even held a election there or something saying if they want to stay as a commonwealth nation or become a republic nation, declaring they are not anymore connected to the British ruler?

...Yeah, you've definitely gotta read up on Australian history >_>Also, that "election" you're referring to is this.

Guys, my local news channel have been informing my country about the death of the planner or the brain of the first Bali bombing. The police found out where he has been hiding. In the process, the police use bombs and guns to seize this guy. This prove that my country doesn't respect the terrorist's rights. I don't know about law, is it allowed to shoot dead the terrorist or not, but I assume from the police action they were allowed to kill him.I believe law is equal to all people inside where the law is used. So, terrorists do have human rights because in despite their crimes people committed a crime must be treated equally according to law.

dhanash · #41"anyone"
point being taken that they are still "one" one person, one human. so they SHOULD have human rights.

That seems to be the crux of this debate. I believe that if someone, of sound mind, consciously denies an innocent's rights, that person is forfeiting their rights in the process. Of course, then comes the problem of proving such a thing, but that's a separate issue.

tehuber1337 · #43...Yeah, you've definitely gotta read up on Australian history >_>Also, that "election" you're referring to is this.

yeah, thanks for that. i dont really read a lot of topics which are not part of my concerns/areas of interests. But well, thats off topic so I'll just read that article.

anything else left to say? or is this settled?

no they don't, they commited a crime against humanity. if they have no respect for others why should they be given respect back?

the way you think is just....... revenge... thats all you want?

Replying to #49

its not a matter of revenge, its a case of having responsibilities as well as rights. You have a responsibility to respect others rights, if you blow up a load of other people you have intentionally violated their right to life, as well as the right of everyone else to not live in fear, so why should you expect them to respect your rights?

did they really chose to do those stuff?? did they had a choice?? who guided them?? weren't they misguided?

gaynorvaderwould class the troubles in the north differently as the IRA at the time were attacking military targets and so weren't terrorists until recently when they started attacking civilian targets.

This is incorrect.

Loonylion · #50its not a matter of revenge, its a case of having responsibilities as well as rights. You have a responsibility to respect others rights, if you blow up a load of other people you have intentionally violated their right to life, as well as the right of everyone else to not live in fear, so why should you expect them to respect your rights?

exactly, terrorists should not even be put under the geneva convention (cause its for formal armies, and terrorists aren't a military)

answer my questions

redoperator · #53exactly, terrorists should not even be put under the geneva convention (cause its for formal armies, and terrorists aren't a military)

Your thinking is quite in line with some terrorist thinking, "feck em this is our law".

dhanash · #51did they really chose to do those stuff?? did they had a choice?? who guided them?? weren't they misguided?

yes,sometimes,"gods",sometimesalthough they are misguided, they are still violating other people's right to live,and if you view another as inferior...
... it is you who is inferior.

but its not their fault....... don't you see.... they never had the chance to see or feel what is good...

it is their fault. they made a concious decision to carry out the act.

dhanash · #57but its not their fault....... don't you see.... they never had the chance to see or feel what is good...

Wait, what? What do you mean by "good" to them?

Sometimes the terrorists are correct in their ideas but wrong in their ways. Sometimes the only way to get a message across when no one will listen is to kill people. This is the reasoning of terrorists, I do not support that reasoning but I do understand it. It is always better to talk with these people than ignore them.