backtop


Print 233 comment(s) - last by michael67.. on May 28 at 7:00 PM


Matthew, the chimp at the heart of the legal action
Austrian Chimpanzee launches appeal to gain formal legal status as a human being.

The European Court of Human Rights has agreed to a preliminary hearing to determine whether chimpanzees are entitled to the legal status and protections granted to human beings. 

The action is being sponsored by the Association Against Animal Factories, an activist group based in Vienna.  Eberhart Theuer, the group's legal advisor says, "This case is about the fundamental question: Who is the bearer of human rights? Who is a person according to the European Human Rights Charter?"

At the center of the case is Hiasl, a 26-year old chimpanzee now called Matthew by his keeper, Briton Paula Stibbe.  Matthew currently shares a shelter with another chimpanzee named Rosi in the town of Voesendorf, outside of Austria.  Their upkeep runs nearly $8,000 a month and the shelter recently filed for bankruptcy. 

Donors have stepped in to offer assistance, but Stibbe says only official status as a human can permanently prevent Matthew from being transferred out of Austria.  That status would force the state to appoint a guardian to look after his status, and presumably also entitle him to government assistance for upkeep.

A win for the group could have sweeping ramifications for the entire European Union, with legal precedent existing for apes -- and possibly other animals -- to receive the rights, protections, and even medical, financial, and social benefits of human beings.

A lower court dismissed the original case without directly addressing whether or not an ape could legally be adjudged a human.  So Miss Stibbe and the AAAF appealed directly to the European Court of Human Rights, which has agreed to a preliminary hearing.

Miss Stibbe says, "Since he has no close relatives, I am doing this as the person closest to him."  She says she also plans to legally adopt Matthew as well.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: This is a joke right?
By michael67 on 5/24/2008 6:28:45 AM , Rating: 1
I always wonder how any post about the EU comes down to that we are all "hart bleeding socialist idiots"

quote:
Yeah only a true Ape would be responsible for the 2 greatest wars on the planet, then make fun of the country that saved your collective asses both times. Wanna try for the third?

Yeah we should thank America for the rest of our lives on our hands and knees????

I grow up in Holland and when i was young, we ware thankful for the liberation and and food drops on Holland by the US and properly own my existence to them.

Now a days i see 90% of the problems in the world have there roots from the always short term and self interested US foreign policy's over the last 50+ years.

I give one example, but could give dozens more and all well documented.
Iran:
During the fifties Iran had a real Pro western leader that wanted Iran modeled after European/US model
During his term he wanted to renegotiate the contracts that Iran had whit British petroleum (BP) that ware made up before WOII to get a fair prize.
Brittan saw that this would cost them billions of pounds and went to the US because they ware still devastated after cost of WOII.
British MI6 and CIA set up plan under a "false flag"(1)
This plan was to get the Shah(2) in power as a puppet of the west.
This was done by terrorist bomb attacks and and under the claim of a non-terrorist group wanted separation from Iran.
And by supporting the troops loyal to the Shah.
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag#Terrorism_...
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi...

There are dozens more examples ware CIA involvement was soul focus on the self interest of the US.

quote:
Socialism at its best:
"Lets tear everything down to the same level so we are all equal, 'cept me of course..." - Socialist Liberal Mantra

Capitalism on it best:
"Lets just think of my self and screw everyone else, its doggy dog, and put it all under a national sauce so my hands are clean"
Conservative capitalistic Mantra

Did this statement help you seeing my point of view?. no it just polarizes opinions and makes you feel its you against me, and makes you even less seeing my point of view!
Screaming that all people of the EU hart bleeding socialist is just nonsense.

I would strongly advice all fans of the capitalistic model to take a good look at the documentaries of Adam Curtis how American society is manipulated to adopt a extreme form of Capitalism by the the "captains of industry" because they ware scared shirtless they would loose there change to control society and make more money.

Hey analyses not only US but global history by the use of psychoanalysis, these documentaries are very powerful to open up eyes left and right, and are also not left ore right orientated as he is evenly harsh on left as on right wing party's

It will also show that for example one of America's greatest presidents, Roosevelt would even bin seen by current average EU standards as "EXTREEMLY LEFT"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Adam+Curtis&...

quote:
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it;
Those who fail to learn history CORRECTLY.. are simply doomed.

Don't remember ware the quote comes from but it has a lot of truth in it


RE: This is a joke right?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/24/2008 7:52:31 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
I always wonder how any post about the EU comes down to that we are all "hart bleeding socialist idiots"


Not all of you. Just your government.

quote:
Yeah we should thank America for the rest of our lives on our hands and knees????


I don't think he was saying that. But a little respect would be nice once and a while.

quote:
Now a days i see 90% of the problems in the world have there roots from the always short term and self interested US foreign policy's over the last 50+ years.


Hey lets pull big numbers out of our ass to make our arguments look more solid. Also If you are going to accuse the CIA of funding terrorism you had better bring more proof then Wikipedia links!

quote:
There are dozens more examples ware CIA involvement was soul focus on the self interest of the US.


Who's interest should the CIA be focused on ? Other nations have well developed intelligence agencies too you know. Are you saying they aren't " self focused " as well ? Besides, whats good for the US is good for the world. Hate that fact all you want.

quote:
Hey analyses not only US but global history by the use of psychoanalysis, these documentaries are very powerful to open up eyes left and right, and are also not left ore right orientated as he is evenly harsh on left as on right wing party's


Have you ever heard of a spell checker ? I can barely read and understand this paragraph. So I guess I can't debate whatever point you are trying to make here.

Basically a bunch of EU snobs were bashing Bush, and he pointed out that because of European idiocy, the world was plunged into war not once, but twice. And yes, the United States was instrumental in those wars. By comparison the " Iraq War " was barely ever a war. And certainly not a World War. This argument is going to come up every time Europeans get on their high horse about things. Sorry your feelings got hurt though.


RE: This is a joke right?
By Strunf on 5/24/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By michael67 on 5/24/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/24/2008 10:02:29 PM , Rating: 4
Ok so lets review.

1. Clinton was a better president than Bush. ( on what planet ? )
2. The CIA and the CIA alone is responsible for %90 of the worlds problems.
3. Germany plunged Europe into world war, so the fact that almost a dozen countries watched and did nothing while the German war machine was getting underway means...? Oh thats right, the CIA must have caused that one too.

4. Because the USA is big, it doesn't cooperate with other nations. So the trillions in foreign aid every year, being in the UN, and responding to EVERY natural disaster that happens in any country means .. uhh... yes clearly we're isolationist.

5. America is actually heavily INVESTED in other countries. So obviously we would love to ruin the world and spread misery. Maybe, if we try really hard, we can cause an even 100% of the worlds problems instead of only 90% !

6. If Obama wins, we'll be more " loved " and terrorist will go away. Oh did I say terrorist ? I meant those guys the CIA made.

quote:
No, my feelings don’t get hurt, its just a shame that a lot of Americans haven’t got a clue what’s happening in the EU and the World, and there lack of historical facts.


The coupe' de graz. Your " facts " have been disproved by about 4 posters on this thread. Your opinions are biased and skewed. And the only proof you bring are wikipedia links written by clueless Internet people just like you. Your historical facts are conspiracy theories mixed with revisionist history with a dash of unsupported wildly unfounded percentage based statements.


RE: This is a joke right?
By michael67 on 5/25/08, Rating: 0
RE: This is a joke right?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/25/2008 9:41:10 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Hey that you really dint like Clinton docent mean he was a bad President, but at least even if McCain will be the next president there will be a man there that has at least a brain.


I actually did like Clinton. Because at the time I was younger, dumber, and liberal. But the fact that he purjured himself and was impeached in 1998 pretty much disqualifies him from being a " better prez than Bush ". So your wrong, its pretty safe to say any president who gets impeached is in fact a " bad " president.

quote:
NO, I was saying: Now a days i see 90% of the problems in the world have there roots from the always short term and self interested US foreign policy's over the last 50+ years


If you still believe that your too far gone debate with. America is the ultimate scapegoat. Its responsible for all the worlds problems, yet when it does anything good you give all the credit to someone else. You call the US selfish, I point out we do give, and you post articles saying we don't give ENOUGH. So tell me, is there a critical mass of giving that will start making a bigger difference ? How much should we lower the quality of life for the average American to give to other countries who never give to us or lift a finger when we need help ?

quote:
Thank you for making my point that Americans haven’t got a clue what’s happening in the EU and the rest of the World


Because we see things a different way and don't buy your spin we're all ignorant ? Frankly I don't think Americans should go around caring about what happens in the " EU ". Yet you people seem far too interested in what happens here.

quote:
Yeah Bush cares really for Africa.


Once again, ultimate scapegoat mindset. There are SOOOO many things wrong with that article you posted its not even funny. Liberalist slant to the extreme. America did not cause the African HIV epidemic. America is not the ONLY country that has condoms to donate. In fact, where is your precious EU on this one ? You just finished explaining to me the EU does 60% than the US in foreign aid. So why is it only Americas job to help Africa ?

quote:
Oops the US isn’t generous as you think and the EU country’s even give 4 times more and my country even gives 7 times more.


Ok so why is there a huge " condom crisis " in Africa ? Where is the EU ? Where is the UN ? Oh thats right, lets blame America.

quote:
No, if he wins the US will not be loved more just trusted more because it will appear to many people that the American people voted out a “greedy selfish bastard that only want there oil ore act in self interest”(1) and wants to change there role in the world.


Bush can't be " voted out " because hes already at his maximum second term. The most legally allowed. What hes doing isn't for popularity. And oil ? I want to ask people where all that oil is we " went to war for " given that our gas prices are nearing $5 a gallon. By the way it was a $2 when the Democrats took congress and promised a change for the better.

So I should have intimate knowledge about how European governments work, but you thought Bush was going to be " voted out " this year ?


RE: This is a joke right?
By michael67 on 5/25/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By MrPoletski on 5/26/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By onelittleindian on 5/27/2008 1:39:17 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
They impeached Clinton for lying about a blowjob
They impeached Clinton for lying under oath, in a sexual harrassment case which demonstrated he had a longstanding history of sexually harrassing and even abusing women who worked for him. Would you like for your mother, sister, or daughter to have a boss like that, a man who sends a state trooper to take them to his hotel room, and puts their career on the line for not "performing"?

Such things are against the law for good reason. So put your idiotic BS back where it belongs.


RE: This is a joke right?
By MrPoletski on 5/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By masher2 (blog) on 5/27/2008 3:23:44 PM , Rating: 4
> "that was Paula Jones and her case was thrown out of court "

Err, Paula Jones won a settlement against Clinton, and he was additionally disbarred for his actions as well.

And Paula Jones was hardly the only woman to accuse him. Don't forget Gennifer Flowers (sexual harrasment, intimidation), Juanita Broadrick (rape), Kathleen Wiley (harassment, sexual assault), Elizabeth Ward Gracen, Sally Perdue, and quite a few others.

You can quantify all this as him just "boning a secretary", but the fact remains that countless women suffered as as result of his crimes, and had their lives blighted as a result.

> "What about lying to congress about a war?"

Bush said nothing to Congress about Iraq that Clinton didn't also say...and he simply concurred with the conclusions of the US intelligence service (which agreed with those of the English and Germans, as well btw).

But continue with your fantasy that Bush simply made it all up. The facts certainly aren't going to sway you.


RE: This is a joke right?
By MrPoletski on 5/28/2008 9:39:56 AM , Rating: 1
What? Bush controlled what evidence went into the intelligence reports, cherry picking data, then claims he saw the same intelligence as congress. He lied. Colin powell went to the UN saying they know he is seeking ingerian yellowcake when that data was refuted by the CIA - but they left that data out and punished the agent when he blew the whistle.

Sadly, you don't get facts in the USA, you get fox news. I bet you think al qeada was involved with saddam and that WMD's were found too right?


RE: This is a joke right?
By Drexial on 5/27/2008 1:42:47 PM , Rating: 2
FTAA and NAFTA to give the shortest answer possible.


RE: This is a joke right?
By masher2 (blog) on 5/25/2008 2:03:44 PM , Rating: 5
> "Nazi Germany would never get away now a days whit what they did then building up in secret a army"

Err, there was nothing secret about the Third Reich's military buildup...all of Europe knew of it. The only thing they didn't know were Germany's intentions on how they planned to use it.

> "Hey that you really dint like Clinton docent mean he was a bad President"

The fact remains that the Clinton Administration was by far the least productive in recent memory. Clinton was certainly both a charismatic and a crafty individual...but he accomplished nearly nothing while in office.

> "Oops the US isn’t generous as you think and the EU country’s even give 4 times more "

Wrong on a few counts. First of all, you're using a highly misleading metric that measures not total giving, but rather share of GDP. Secondly and much worse, you're ignoring by far the largest portion of US giving -- private contributions. The US has by far the largest amount of private contributions of any nation on earth, a sum which far outweighs governmental aid.


RE: This is a joke right?
By michael67 on 5/25/08, Rating: 0
RE: This is a joke right?
By mindless1 on 5/26/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By Justin Case on 5/24/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By Ringold on 5/25/2008 4:07:54 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
1. There is no "European government".


The person you responded to was responding to a person who was said he was from Holland.

Besides, one could have a spirited debate about how much your assertion is even true after the Lisbon treaty.

quote:
2. The main countries in the EU are currently ruled by center-right parties or coalitions.


All of which are to the left of the American political center. Even the UK's Conservative's are slightly to the left of center here.

The Economist recently did a detailed analysis, and the only issue I can recall where they were to the right of us to any significant degree, I think, was their belief in trade. I could be wrong, though.

quote:
3. In Europe, the term "liberal" generally refers to right-wing parties (parties that favor free-market capitalism).


An American spoke using words that carried American definitions. My god. How horrible. Perhaps he should've translated it in to French, German, Spanish and Italian so more Europeans could've understood it with greater precision?

In business, the world 'liberal' also refers to free markets, etc, here in the US but it's hard to use it properly. If the person hearing it attachs the modern American political meaning to it, they might equate "market liberalization" with "government take-over,", so I at least never use the "proper" definition in mixed company.

quote:
Care to make more hilarious comments about the politics of continents you don't know?


Care to needlessly flame more, or was there anything actually constructive about your post?


RE: This is a joke right?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/25/2008 9:44:54 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
An American spoke using words that carried American definitions. My god. How horrible. Perhaps he should've translated it in to French, German, Spanish and Italian so more Europeans could've understood it with greater precision?


Of course. Its just more proof that I'm a typical ignorant, selfish, and self centered American.


RE: This is a joke right?
By Justin Case on 5/25/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By William Gaatjes on 5/25/2008 8:48:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Have you ever heard of a spell checker ? I can barely read and understand this paragraph. So I guess I can't debate whatever point you are trying to make here.


I used the translate function from word 2003 once. I had to laugh so much that i could not get my work done. I stopped using this feature from word after i nearly fell of my chair while laughing. Maybe he is using it too :)

quote:
So I guess I can't debate whatever point you are trying to make here.


And that is a statement purely about yourself.
You cannot interpret what he is is saying and therefore refuse to debate.
A sign of weakness or cheapness.

Is it not so that secret services/intelligence agencies where once cooked up with the thought to make sure long term stability is a reality by using means that a more publicly service like military cannot do ?

More and more people feel these days that for example the cia is just used to make easy money in short term.
No more long term thinking.


RE: This is a joke right?
By onelittleindian on 5/24/2008 10:37:07 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Now a days i see 90% of the problems in the world have there roots from the always short term and self interested US foreign policy's over the last 50+ years.
Rofl, who paid you to make all Europeans sound like a bunch of blinkin' idiots?


RE: This is a joke right?
By MrPoletski on 5/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By MrPoletski on 5/28/08, Rating: 0
RE: This is a joke right?
By masher2 (blog) on 5/24/2008 11:10:41 AM , Rating: 5
> "During the fifties Iran had a real Pro western leader...British MI6 and CIA set up plan...to get the Shah(2) in power"

Your history here is wrong in several places. First of all, the Shah of Iran was *already* in power long before the West got involved.

Mossadegh was Prime Minister -- a position below that of Shah -- and once elected, began attempting to assume dictatorial control over government and to rig elections to ensure retaining his position.

CIA involvement was limited to a minor propagadanda campaign, essentially no more than convincing the Shah to exercise the power he already had to dismiss Mossadegh.

As for the actual overthrow of Mossadegh, most scholars today attribute it to his radical policies causing loss of support among hardline Shia clerics-- the same people ultimately responsible for the deposing of the Shah.

Getting your history from Wikipedia is dicey at the best of times. For articles on controversial, politically charged topics such as this, it's no better than a conspiracy website.


RE: This is a joke right?
By Strunf on 5/24/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By michael67 on 5/24/2008 2:06:48 PM , Rating: 1
Think you also should see the documentaries as it is a british docu how got more knowledge then the Brits a bout the middle east from that time.
btw i also seen a Dutch's and docu and read books a bout it.

Yes the Shah was in power just like our Queen is technical ruling my country doesn't mean she should have absolute power and have a secret police that reined terror

And if you call bombing "a minor propaganda campaign" then you properly right, otherwise I suggest learn more about the history of Iran

quote:
Getting your history from Wikipedia is dicey at the best of times. For articles on controversial, politically charged topics such as this, it's no better than a conspiracy website.

I now that wikipedia is not always reliable, but most tings written down in that article are are historical correct, even do it doesn't say anything about the bombings.


RE: This is a joke right?
By masher2 (blog) on 5/24/2008 2:32:40 PM , Rating: 5
> "Yes the Shah was in power ..."

Meaning the US and British didn't put him in power, nor did they "overthrow the government".

> "doesn't mean she should have absolute power and have a secret police that reined terror"

Both acts that Mossaddegh himself engaged him before being relieved of power by the Shah...something you conveniently forget to mention.

> "but most tings written down in that article are are historical correct"

And what does that article say the US and Britain did? Did they send troops to Iran? No. Weapons and military hardware? No. I'll quote from the article itself:
quote:
[Operation Ajax] centered around convincing Iran's monarch to use his constitutional authority to dismiss Mosaddeq from office
If trying to convince a world leader to exercise his constitional powers in a favorable manner is a crime, then every nation on earth is guilty every day of each year. That's the entire function of each and every diplomat on the planet.


RE: This is a joke right?
By michael67 on 5/24/08, Rating: 0
RE: This is a joke right?
By masher2 (blog) on 5/24/2008 4:23:29 PM , Rating: 4
> "Our Queen in power to that doesnt mean she can dismiss the siting elected government."

But the Shah did have the constitutional power to dismiss Mosaddegh.

> "could you show ware anything he did was even comparable whit what later happen when the Shah was in power"

That's just the point. What Mosaddegh did was worse than anything the Shah had done up to that point in history.

The Shah's later excesses are besides the point. No one can predict the future. In 1953, the US and Britain were supporting the legal government of Iran, a government was attempting to stop the dictatorial ambitions and human rights abuses of Mosaddegh.

> "Despite this he is generally ignored by the government of the Islamic Republic because of his secularism and western manners."

And that's the real reason Mosaddegh lost power. Not because of a few CIA pamphlets...but because his radical policies caused the real power center in Iran -- the Shia clerics and the landed gentry -- to rise up against him.


RE: This is a joke right?
By michael67 on 5/24/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By grenableu on 5/24/2008 10:40:09 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
And Mosaddegh paranoia and actions had noting to do whit a man defending his presidency
So you're willing to excuse Mosadeq's tyranny but not the Shah's? They were both doing the same things for the same reasons, to defend their hold on the government. Seems clear your just looking for reasons to blame the US.


RE: This is a joke right?
By nofranchise on 5/25/2008 7:43:04 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
In 1953, the US and Britain were supporting the legal government of Iran, a government was attempting to stop the dictatorial ambitions and human rights abuses of Mosaddegh.


Haha - yeah. Of course that is always why the US intervenes. Like the last time the US and the UK tried to stop the dictatorial ambitions and human rights abuses of a middle east leader. You did it all for the people!

How nice of you - and you had no economic interest what so ever.

Silly robot.


RE: This is a joke right?
By MrPoletski on 5/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: This is a joke right?
By masher2 (blog) on 5/27/2008 3:30:17 PM , Rating: 3
> "Dude, go and read a history book. Britain paid for and the USA carried out a coup "

While it's difficult to argue with the compelling scholarly weight contained in the word "dude", the fact is that the USA did not "carry out a coup". The Shah was already the titular head of government long before the US or Britain became involved, and that involvement was itself extremely limited. Still worse, in 1953, the "brutal dictator" in Iran was Mossadegh, not the Shah, who was busily engaged in consolidating power, rigging elections, and beating and/or killing anyone who disagreed with his policies.

I suggest you read some of the prior posts in this thread, and learn a bit more about what actually happened in Iran in 1953.


RE: This is a joke right?
By MrPoletski on 5/28/2008 9:46:13 AM , Rating: 2
"The Shah was already the titular head of government long before the US or Britain became involved,"

Mossegedah reduced his power to virtually nil.

"and that involvement was itself extremely limited. Still worse, in 1953, the "brutal dictator" in Iran was Mossadegh, not the Shah, who was busily engaged in consolidating power, rigging elections, and beating and/or killing anyone who disagreed with his policies."

The guy was elected by a LANDSLIDE and riots and such were incited as part of the coup. Where the hell do you get this rubbish from?

"I suggest you read some of the prior posts in this thread, and learn a bit more about what actually happened in Iran in 1953."

I suggest you stop talking out your ass and READ SOME HISTORY. Here you go:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/latulippe/latulippe41.h...

"While I certainly don’t condone his socialistic tendencies or his seizure of the oilfields, it is undeniable that by the time of his elevation to prime minister, Mossadeq had the backing of the overwhelming majority of the Iranian population. For the first time in its long history, Iran had a democratically elected leader."

blah blah blah, here comes the 'that just liberal biased BS' reply I guess.


RE: This is a joke right?
By MrPoletski on 5/27/08, Rating: -1
"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki