Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

That is why it is over-rated and pretty much pointless. As said above, said rights should only apply to those that are victims, or those that care for, and contribute towards Humanity.

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

I take it you've never heard of the Innocence Project.

Right now there are thousands of people who were wrongfully convicted in American prisons, even on death row. According to you, these people shouldn't have even gotten trials in the first place. They should have just been killed, because our wise masters *know* they're guilty.

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

This is the exact reason why you have a trial, and thats why there are human rights.

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

No actually.

That's just the point you're missing. I'm talking specifically about those caught red handed.

If you've got 20 witnesses, or several security tapes that show an individual raping or killing another without cause, how can said individual be innocent? If there is 'actual' proof, then do away with the trials and hurry up with their death. That's what I'm saying.

Do elaborate please.

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

The Innocence Project - Home

Now you're just being silly. What if the witnesses are lying? Or what if they just misidentified you?

As for the "security tapes" - clearly, you've been watching way to much CSI. Security tapes are low resolution, and most of the time are next to useless in clearly identifying a single person (especially if he was making an effort to conceal himself, like with a hood or was simply turned away from the camera)

THAT'S WHY TRIALS EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE - to determine if you were indeed "caught redhanded".

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

Under Reagan, U.S. support for the mujahideen, under that support Osama Bin Laden was trained and armed to fight the soviet assisted Afghan government, much of the extremism in the area currently are still fighting with those weapons and using the same tactics that they were taught and now being passed down to younger generations in these "terror camps", Thus using your analogy, a driver who you claim is an aid to murder, is practically innocent compared to the Reagan Administration.

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

While we're on the Reagan administration, I could also point out the whole scandal involving the Contras (who frequently targeted civilians), and Iran.

The Arms-for-Hostages Iran-Contra Scandal - What Was the Reagan Administration's Iran-Contra Scandal

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

Are you going to question everything I say? =p

For the sake of this argument, lets say someone filmed another person brutally killing someone. They got a clear shot of his face, they have everything on record from the time of the event, the area in which it happened; everything.

Why put that person through court when there is undisputed truth that the individual in question is guilty?

Was used as an example only.

Well, it seems that the US created their own Demon. However, they didn't teach that Demon to kill innocent people at random, did they?

Osama (and co) has chosen to terrorize and kill innocent people. There is a difference between being trained for a war / battle, and training people to kill simply 'because'.

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

Then you would have a TRIAL to determine if the video was legit, and normal legal proceedings to determine guilt, and if found guilty, determine punishment.

I'm not sure why you find summary executions so appealing.

Because truth is NEVER undisputed. The only place where such reasoning is considered acceptable is a Police State - a Totalitarian Oppressive regime like North Korea.

Re: US Officials: Human Rights an "irritant"
 

If you hire murders with a different purpose, are they still not murders? Simply because you slap a new label on them every time you have a different train of thought doesn't change what they are, no?

Using your thought of mind, once again "being trained for a war / battle, and training people to kill simply 'because'." still doesn't change what can and does happen, that's why there are also war crimes, you have to have the intuition to see past the first decade and see what will happen in the next before you OK plans.