Right, the Declaration of Independance starts off with "We hold these truths to be self evident..." and lists that some rights are inalienable, and granted to us just because we are human, so therefore they apply to all humans everywhere... Well, in practice between what was done to Native Americans, and African Americans didn't exactly reflect that... but they got away with it by changing the definition of what's a human being... Just like now they're getting away with removing all of one's rights by defining them as a "terrorist" or "illegal combattant" instead of as a human being, etc. ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :25Kliters anthrax, 38K liters botulinum toxin, 500 tons of /|\ \|/ :sarin, mustard and VX gas, mobile bio-weapons labs, nukular /\|/\ <--*-->:weapons.. Reasons for war on Iraq - GWB 2003-01-28 speech. \/|\/ /|\ :Found to date: 0. Cost of war: $800,000,000,000 USD. \|/ + v + : The look on Sadam's face - priceless! --------_sunder_@_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, J.A. Terranson wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Jim Dixon wrote:
<SNIP>
Why does the US military have to treat them as though they had US constitutional rights? They are not citizens or physically present in the United States.
In a nutshell, our Constitution *recognizes* universal human rights. It does not *establish* these rights. If we are going to be faithful to this premise, physical location is a non-sequitor.