On Wed, 26 Sep 2001 12:19:10 +0200, Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sam H. wrote:
>> I had for long been aware of the "Universal Declaration of Human
>> Rights". I tell you that this is just some eyewash that was drawn
>> up in an attempt to make the United Nations look good in the eyes
>> of the world. There are no effective provisions for enforcement.
>> In visiting the URL I noted that Article 12 does not apply anywhere
>> in the world. Articles 16(1), 20(2), 23, 24, 25, and 26 do not apply
>> in the United States and neither would some of these articles apply
>> in several European countries.
> This one was interesting for our earlier discussions:
> Article 11
> (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed
> innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he
> has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
> So by blaiming bin Laden f�r the attacks one would violate the human
> rights, so you forgot that the US breaks this one Sam.
No it does not. Bin Laden refuses to voluntarily surrender to the
authorities to be taken into custody and to stand trial. In a trial
conducted by the United States he would be presumed innocent until
proven guilty. Since Bin Laden is accused of war crimes any nation
has the right to exercise jurisdiction. A similar situation occurred
in the case of the capture of Adolph Eichmann in Argentina by the
Israeli authorities. They went into Argentina and took him into
custody and brought him to Israel where he was given a perfectly fair
trial. In his trial, Eichmann was accorded the same rights as any
Israeli citizen who is accused of a crime. Since Eichmann was accused
of war crimes it didn't matter where his crimes were committed, nor
did it matter under whose jurisdiction he was living at the time of
his arrest, nor did it matter who exercised arrest authorities. Any
authority from any country had the right go anywhere in the world to
hunt him down and find him and place him under arrest.
> BTW: One could argue that 20 (2) is violated in Sweden since I need to
> belong to the student organization to get my test results back, but that's
> very far fetched and it was the closest I could get to finding one. I
> wasn't aware that the US broke so many of them. Well, some of the 23-26 I
> was aware of but not so many.
Article 20 (2) is violated in the US because one must belong to a labor
union in order to be hired by some companies in some states. I must
belong to the property owners' association in order continue to own my
home.
In Virginia any parent may be exempted from compliance with the
state's cumpulsory education law. There are hundreds of elementary
age children in my area who do not attend any kind of school. In some
cases their parents are illiterate. In other cases the parents are
highly educated and they have chosen to teach their children at home.
Most of the educated parents who are doing home schooling are doing
a better job than the public school system could do. These parents
strongly feel that they know what is best for their children to learn.
They think they can teach them better things than what their children
would otherwise be learning about in public school. Home schooling
is a very controversial subject in Virginia. There are very good
arguments for it and against it.
Regards,
Sam Heywood
-- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
