Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bradleykins
Your assuming my interpretation of torture is incorrect, i presume yours is. I did not intend to leave you without evidence when i posted my dictionary notes, hence why i provided the url, but my point remains torture can be moth mental and physical, that illustrates my point, when i have not been physically effected by the terror, but mentally.
As for definition three, it has a separate url, if you would please pay attention, and is a definition of terrorise. the two are linked but not the same.
Again this is your interpretation of the document, and not necessarily what must be the correct view.
|
Easily verifyable though. Read the rest of the document. There's articles in there about education, freedom of speech, slavery, freedom of movement, democracy, education and culture. Hardly things that individuals or non-government organisations are responsible for. From this would follow that the people that signed it did so in name of the government of their respective countries, because they're the only ones that can. And guess what, they did.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bradleykins
I don't quite understand what you are saying, are you implying that any of those three parts of a basic right are no more important than the other?
is that all your implying?
I merely point out one of those aspects is affected. I don't get where your argument is in that.
|
Yes, that is exactly what I'm implying, in no uncertain terms. In fact, I will even go as far as to say that limiting the freedom of an entire country (for
whatever reason!) is just as bad as (if not worse than) being part of an organisation that contributes to the loss of life.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bradleykins
[edit] I loved the summary, but can i point out the statement was intended on a little added security, not the amount which is provided by these new laws? i can still see the point tho[/edit]
|
If I'm understanding this correctly, you're making the statement that these laws provide a significant increase in security. Can you prove this? Did fewer people die since they were introduced? I doubt it, but even if so, what about causality? Can you prove beyond a reasonably doubt that the laws helped?
P.S.
Yes guys, he's real.