Liberal Road Blog Individual Freedom and Equality

The Swedish government is going on with plans of a new law allowing the wiretapping and monitoring of all phone and data traffic in Sweden (Source:Svenska Dagbladet, in Swedish. See also my old post about this proposition). The law proposition will be voted in the parliament later.

It is a pity the government isn’t listening enough to critics. Although the proposition has slightly been changed, the spying for the need of the government will not require any approval by a controlling authority.

Allowing the listening of phone calls and the monitoring of all data traffic is a violation of the privacy. I understand that to solve crimes phone listening is sometimes necessary, but in that case there should be some evidence that the persons in question may have committed a serious crime. Secondly the listening should be submitted to a court.

But in this law proposition the listening would be more based on keywords. For example if a phone call contains some keywords it would be listened to. This means non suspects would be listened to.

This law proposition shows that the government clearly doesn’t care about the rights to privacy of people and this is a dangerous step toward a Big Brother state.

1 Comment »

Animal rights are not accepted as widely as human rights. I believe animals should have equal rights as people. Animals should for example have the right to life, freedom and so on. Using them for medical research, food and other is completely unacceptable. I’m going to explain why.

Most of us agree that individuals have rights. Most of us agree that people shouldn’t for example be killed, assaulted and that everyone should have basic freedom (and the list could go on). Most of us also agree that all of us have these rights - not only some. For examples not only the rich or the intelligent have the right to life and not to be beaten or imprisoned for no reason.

However most people think that these rights don’t apply to animals. Why? One of the most common arguments used is that animals wouldn’t be able to think and therefore inferior. This is a very controversial issue in scientific research and many scientists believe that animals think (link).

And even if it was the case that animals didn’t think it still wouldn’t be acceptable to violate their rights. I give an example: There are some very seriously mentally retarded people that can’t actually really think very much. If it was all right to kill and eat animals because they couldn’t think, then it should be all right to kill and eat these seriously mentally retarded persons. However there is a large consensus that allowing to kill and eat the seriously mentally retarded people in question is totally unacceptable.

Another argument used to argue that animals shouldn’t have rights is that animals “are naturally inferior” because they are not civilized. Here again we have the same situation. What about the persons that don’t live in “civilized” and have no idea of the industrial world? Should it be all right to kill and eat them? No, it shouldn’t; they have rights too is what almost anyone asked will answer. So why wouldn’t animals not living in “civilization” have these rights?

As a conclusion and for all these reasons animals should have the same rights as human beings. A crime against an animal should bring the same punishment as the same crime against a person. Killing animals, using them as food or using them in medical experiments is totally unacceptable and can actually be compared to concentration camps in Nazi Germany.

48 Comments »

A court of appeal has ruled that foreign terrorist suspects (foreign enemy combatants) don’t have the right to challenge their detention in civil courts (source: Times). This is a serious violation of human rights.

The court decision means that detainees in Guantanamo won’t be able to challenge their detention in US courts. The rule in question is a part of the Military Commission Act passed after the US Supreme court declared unconstitutional that detainees in Guantanamo didn’t have the right to challenge their detention. Now the court’s decision keeps in force this part of the Military Commission Act.

One question the media and public opinion hasn’t been discussing that much is the extent to which non-citizens have different rights than citizens. Some countries make little distinction between citizens’ and non-citizens’ rights, while others have bigger differences. The rights of non-citizens’ in the United states have been continuously weakened (Patriotic Act, Military Commission Act, indefinite arrest without trial of foreign terrorist suspects and so on) in the war on terrorism.

But why non-citizens’ shouldn’t have the same rights? After all we are all individuals and it is therefore unfair that your origin determines what rights you have.

In the middle age it was current in many countries that laws had smaller punishments for people from the rich classes than from the poor classes for exactly the same crime. Nowadays this is seen as unacceptable. So why are we still making a similar distinction in practice? Now the distinction is between citizens and non-citizens instead of rich and poor classes.

Add a Comment »

I run into this article today. A school in New Zealand has found an inventive way to bypass laws forbidding teachers from hitting students: it asks parents to do the hitting instead (it’s not illegal for parents to use corporal punishment).

I believe corporal punishment is an unacceptable way to try to teach children. Corporal punishment by parents should be illegal as well. Allowing corporal punishment of children is the same as saying children don’t have basic human rights.

Unfortunately corporal punishment is forbidden in only a few countries as I’ve written in an earlier post.

Add a Comment »

Finally a court has ordered a trial of CIA agents for kidnapping terrorist suspects (source:BBC). The case in question is about the kidnapping of a terrorist suspect in Italy to send him to Egypt. He was allegedly tortured in Egypt.

However it is quite likely that the CIA agents won’t attend the court and as they are most likely in the United States. The Italian police won’t be able to arrest them. Unless, of course, if Italy uses the same methods as the United States and kidnaps the suspected CIA agents on US ground:-) My guess is that the United States wouldn’t tolerate that at all.

1 Comment »

Weapons of mass destruction. Freedom. Two arguments George Bush has been using to back the necessity of the Iraq war.

Well, no weapons of mass destruction have been found. With daily bomb attacks, kidnappings and political murders are Iraqis really freer than under Saddam?

In on sentence: the Iraq war has been a miserable failure.

Freedom remains the main argument for the war. However we can wonder how free Iraqis actually are with the increasing violence (bomb attacks, killings, kidnappings and so on) and frequent curfews.

Moreover the Abu Ghraib scandal (torture of prisoners) and other human rights abuses by the US army makes me ask one question: how does it make Iraqis freer? Sure, there were serious human right abuses under Saddam Hussein. Now the difference is that it’s not Saddam Hussein’s army or police committing them, it’s the US army as well as criminals.

The public opinion has finally shifted also in the United States: 68% of Americans disapprove of the way Bush is handling the Iraq war (source: CBS News). The public opinion begins to be reflected also in the political debate as a result of the US mid-term elections.

Bush has only bad options I have to say. Withdrawing from Iraq would leave the country insecure and would leave it in a civil war. The current situation isn’t good either as the army isn’t succeeding in stopping the violence.

The war shouldn’t have been started in the first place.

——
Picture taken by dragon_mg (www.sxc.hu)

3 Comments »

I finally finished reading the book Putin’s Russia written by the killed writer Politkovskaya. A few facts to remind us all: Politkovskaya was a journalist who severely criticized Putin and she was shot dead in last October.

As I read her book “Putin’s Russia” one thing became pretty clear: she must have had many enemies. In her book she severely criticize Putin for the atrocities of the Chechen war and human right abuses. She also accuses the Russian court system for being completely corrupt (naming several judges who she thinks have been taking bribes). She even accuses some leading businessmen of serious crimes including bribery and using contract killers. All the accusations come with details.

That’s why I’m not at all surprised if she had many enemies who preferred to see her dead than alive. It’s very wrong that people are silenced by killing them. It’s a serious threat to the freedom of speech. The Freedom of speech is already in a bad condition in Russia as Putin’s administration has done a lot to silence criticism in the media.

Today the media has announced that the Russian police has arrested two suspects of the murder. However I think that we will never be sure who killed Politkovskaya as the Russian justice system is bad and malfunctioning.

————————————————————————-
picture: A picture I took in Moscow in 2006.

Add a Comment »

I wrote in an earlier post that a US officer (Watada) is risking jail for refusing to go to Iraq and for criticizing publicly the war. The court martial has ended for now in a mistrial as Watada hadn’t understood a document he had signed that was used against him in court (source: ABC News).

Will be interesting to follow the new trial that should take place in March. I’ll write about it on this blog:-)

Add a Comment »

A US army officer who refused to go to Iraq is facing court-martial (source: CBS News). Ehren Watada risks up to four years in prison for refusing to fight in Iraq and criticizing the war publicly.

Watada claims that the war on Iraq is illegal according to US laws. He claims also that he has a legal right and obligation to refuse to follow unlawful orders (ie the order to fight in Iraq).

This is once again an example of a totally unacceptable violation of the individual freedom. Refusing to serve and saying what you want to are basical rights that everyone should always have.

The state doesn’t have the right to limit the individual freedom unless it is necessary for the freedom of others. And it’s not the case here.

The court case already seems to have started in an unfair way as the court refused to analyze the legality of the war. The trial is unfair, because if the war is illegal Watada hasn’t actually committed a crime. Now he doesn’t have the chance to prove his innocence.

I see this court case also as an attack on the freedom on speech: Watada can face a jail term for publicly questioning the legality of the war in Iraq.

It’s very unfair that an army officer wouldn’t have the right to the freedom of speech (which is guaranteed in the first amendment of the American constitution). I’m not a law specialist so anyone who has more information about the first amendment in this case is welcome to comment.

Watada’s courage to stand behind his convictions can only be admired.

4 Comments »

As I wrote in an earlier post the cost of doctor visits makes people avoid going to a doctor even when they would need it. More than 25% of Americans have skipped or postponed an important medical visit due to the costs According to a poll by MSN-Zogby.

The problem is that the poor are much more likely to skip health care due to the costs than the wealthier. The poor that have difficulties in financing a doctor visit are in a very unequal situation compared to wealthier persons.

Health care is a basic necessity and therefore it should be free and financed by the state. A bad health situation limits the choises you can do in life and in that way not being able to afford health care is actually an indirect limitation of your freedom.

3 Comments »