--- Bill Bartlett <billbartlett at dodo.com.au> wrote:
> At 6:08 AM -0700 30/7/06, Chris Doss wrote:
>
> >I really think the definition is far too wide. Caps
> >mine:
> >
> >"Article 2
> >In the present Convention, genocide means any of
> the
> >following acts committed with intent to destroy, IN
> >WHOLE OR IN PART, a national, ethnical, racial or
> >religious group, as such:
> >
> > * (a) KILLING MEMBERS OF THE GROUP;
> > * (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm
> to
> >members of the group;
> > * (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group
> >conditions of life calculated to bring about its
> >physical destruction IN WHOLE OR IN PART;
> > * (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent
> >births within the group;
> > * (e) Forcibly transferring children of the
> group
> >to another group."
> >
> >This strikes me as way too wide to be meaningful.
> >According to this, if a Puerto-Rican gang and a
> >Vietnamese gang have a ruble and a Vietnamese
> >gangmember gets killed, then the Puerto-Ricans have
> >committed geocide (bacause one Vietnamese is a PART
> of
> >the group of Vietnamese).
>
> Talk about jumping to (the worst possible)
> conclusions!
>
> It might be genocide if the killer of the Vietnamese
> gangmember did
> so motivated by the desire to destroy that
> particular national,
> ethnical, racial or religious group. But, and its a
> BIG but, you'd
> require some further evidence to come to the
> conclusion you have
> about intent, based on the killing of a single
> person of a particular
> ethnic group though.
>
> Without any evidence, I think a rational person
> would regard the
> attribution of "genocide" as a classic case of
> paranoid delusion?
>
> > German soldiers were
> >committing really vicious genocide against French
> >soldiers (a PART of the French nation) in WWI, and
> >vice versa The Chinese government, which forcibly
> >limits births of Chinese, is committing genocide of
> >its own people.
>
> I don't thinks so and neither does anyone who has
> any grasp of the
> legal meaning of words. But I do recognise that some
> people lack the
> capacity to understand complex sentences like that
> of this UN
> resolution.
>
> Let me explain why your interpretation is wrong. In
> the case of the
> German soldiers, the killing of soldiers of an
> opposing army is
> usually motivated by not by a desire to destroy any
> particular nation
> or group, as a group, but merely to defeat the
> particular nation or
> group. As to the birth control measures, they are
> motivated not by a
> desire to destroy any group, but by the desire to
> limit its
> population.
>
> It is necessary to exercise some common sense in
> determining intent.
> I think if you actually understood the convention on
> torture you
> would realise that your objections are fanciful.
>
> Bill Bartlett
> Bracknell Tas
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Lyubo, bratsy, lyubo, lyubo, bratsy, zhit!
ËÞÁÎ, ÁÐÀÒÖÛ, ËÞÁÎ, ËÞÁÎ, ÁÐÀÒÖÛ, ÆÈÒÜ!
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com