Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org (Shea Tisdale)]

I personally don't beleive in international law and feel the prospects for
such are dim.  It's a bit too much to get into here, but suffice it to say
that at this point in our evolution we aren't ready.  This is evidenced
every day by the actions of our government and the actions of most
governments around the world.  Perhaps one day.

What gets me is how willing our government and many of our citizens seem to
be to scrap procedure and civil rights in the face of terrorism.  You
mentioned our criminal justice system and I will point out that the Bush
administration and many citizens alike don't feel that normal criminal
justice rights or procedures should apply.  When they are willing to do
that, I'm not sure I can trust anything else about them.

Frankly all this is downright scary.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Joey Carr" <joey AT metalab.unc.edu>
To: <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Iraq and connection to Terrorism


>
> > I have to say this is all very questionable.
>
> I have to agree that it's very questionable, but perhaps on different
> grounds than yours.  I don't know for sure that you meant to suggest that
> the tape was "planted" by a U.S. agent, but that's how I read it.
> Personally, I'm remaining agnostic on the subject of whether our
> government is telling the truth.
>
> What gets me is the lack of firm procedure.  In the U.S. in our criminal
> justice system we have long lists of bureaucratic firewalls that the state
> must get through before it allows itself to do something like arrest a
> person, or jail them.  I tend to think about issues of state power over
> the individual in terms of Locke's Second Treatise on Government.
>
> International law is nowhere near as well developed as U.S.
> constitutional law or even the criminal code.  Intellectual consideration
> of international law has no John Locke.  The international bureaucracy
> consists of the UN and NATO, the powerless and the biased.
>
> We're left to consider, really to be among the first to consider, if there
> is an equivalent of civil rights when it comes to foreign sovereigns.
> The answer to this question will inform the future of Global Society
> ('cause globalization is here and ain't goin' nowhere).
>
> When is it right for one governmental body to penalize another?  What form
> of penalties are justifiable?  By what justification can military action
> (which must have collateral damage) be carried out against another nation?
> What about a nation under dictatorial control?  To whom does a nation
> appeal for independent and impartial judgment--on objective topics like
> whether or not a tape was in someone's hands on a certain date, as well as
> the more subjective such as Slobodan Milosevic's intent when he attacked
> the people of Kosovo.
>
> Like most ethical questions, when you consider them from multiple
> standpoints the answers stop looking as simple as your gut tells you they
> should be.  Could an Arab terrorist really get a fair trial in an
> international court?  Would Henry Kissinger get a fair trial?
>
> I think we're at a very interesting juncture in our history.
>
> -Joey
>
> --
>
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!
http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> To unsubscribe visit
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers
>