On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 10:45:15 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter)
wrote:
(material deleted)
You keep talking about "international law" as if that was something
fixed and reliable. But I don't understand. What international law?
Made by whom and for whom? Where is the international legislature?
Who are it's members and how were it's members elected?
There is no worldwide, democratic body with the authority to make
and enforce "international law". So the concept is a meaningless
one at this point in our planetary evolution.
Or am I missing something significant?
Please, could you elucidate what you mean and explain how "international
law" gets enacted and how it could get enforced?
Also I do not believe that the "illegal combatants" detained at
Guantanamo Bay are being treated unhumanely. They recieve adequate
food, shelter and excellent medical care. They have been visited
by the International Red Cross. They are allowed to practice their
religion. None of them have been stood up against a wall and shot.
They are seen as being extremely dangerous and are being held under
the highest security. I think that's appropriate. Eventually, some
of them might be released--but certainly not while any possibility
exists that they might threaten the safety and security of the
United States or of anyone else.
You seem disposed to view the actions of the United States in the
worst possible light. I think this is unfair and unrealistic.
The United States is reasonably and appropriately concerned about
the safety and security of it's citizens. To suggest that this
concern is somehow immoral or wrong is irresponsible and absurd.
Sam Ewalt
Croswell, Michigan, USA
-- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
