Iran takes UK human rights breach to UN

Originally posted by andy1972
reply to post by oozyism

 

Question - what "right's" have actually been abused, in the UK by the UK, to make Iran get on it's high horse??

edit on 15-12-2010 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)

Attacking protesters for protesting is a human rights violation.

Attacking a disabled person who was absolutely no threat to anyone, is a human rights violation..

blablabla

More detail will eventually come forward.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


I'm not sure where you're going but I think you need a reality check. I'm sorry to say it but nothing will be done by the UN, Not even a chance. So than what good is Iran really doing? Standing up for the students? That's the biggest joke I've ever heard. Unfortunately there is nothing funny about any of this. What makes this even worse from my perspective is that a country that does not allow free speech or any political opposition is perceived as the preacher of human rights. Even sadder than that is the fact that many are buying this crap.

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by andy1972

 

so because that guy used a chair to smash a window it means all u.k. citizens human rights were void?
there were many people on the demonstration who did nothing wrong, yet hand their human rights and freedoms trampled on..

How exactly??
2nd.

Originally posted by endlessknowledge
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

 

I'm not sure where you're going but I think you need a reality check. I'm sorry to say it but nothing will be done by the UN, Not even a chance. So than what good is Iran really doing? Standing up for the students? That's the biggest joke I've ever heard. Unfortunately there is nothing funny about any of this. What makes this even worse from my perspective is that a country that does not allow free speech or any political opposition is perceived as the preacher of human rights. Even sadder than that is the fact that many are buying this crap.

It must be something in the water...
This thread has gone like Wikileaks..
Everyone attacking the messenger instead of reading and debating the message...

Originally posted by endlessknowledge
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

 

I'm not sure where you're going but I think you need a reality check. I'm sorry to say it but nothing will be done by the UN, Not even a chance. So than what good is Iran really doing? Standing up for the students? That's the biggest joke I've ever heard. Unfortunately there is nothing funny about any of this. What makes this even worse from my perspective is that a country that does not allow free speech or any political opposition is perceived as the preacher of human rights. Even sadder than that is the fact that many are buying this crap.

Well I would shut my mouth if you say the same about US, because US is the world's violent abuser of human rights, and at the same time the forefront of human rights accusations.

The fact of the matter is, that Iran only started these criticism of the West, only because the West turned the UN human rights council in to a political tool, by continuing to attack Iran, the US being the head of the dragon.

reply to post by endlessknowledge


we all know that will be the likely outcome.

what iran would be gaining is the right to tell everybody to mind their own business when moaning about irans human rights, as no other country seems concerned about theirs or takes action when in breach.

reply to post by andy1972


being kettled for hours on end with no toilets or drink, even though they had not committed an offense.
that's just one of the things. i surely do not need to list them all i am sure you know all about some of the things that happened, if not there are plenty of things around to get the FULL picture.

Originally posted by oozyism


Well I would shut my mouth if you say the same about US, because US is the world's violent abuser of human rights, and at the same time the forefront of human rights accusations.

Deal!!! I don't believe the US has any credibility to speak on human rights violations. How's that? Will you shut up now?

I think the point is that none of these political games are going to bring about any change so don't fall for the tricks and don't be a tool for such evil regimes to spread their propaganda.

Originally posted by endlessknowledge


Deal!!! I don't believe the US has any credibility to speak on human rights violations. How's that? Will you shut up now?

I think the point is that none of these political games are going to bring about any change so don't fall for the tricks and don't be a tool for such evil regimes to spread their propaganda.

OK my mouth is shut.

Hopefully next time you show the same rage towards US for criticizing Iranian Human Rights Violation.

Ta Ta.

reply to post by lifeform11


Good god, a chronic abuse of human right's...i cant believe the UN arn't going to sanction the UK after that.

As for no toilets, the majority of students piss in the street anyway.

What a lame #ing excuse for human right's abuse.

reply to post by andy1972


i did not say it was the only one. i thought you were going to look around for the rest as you know so much about what happened.

i love the way you make it seem that human rights can be trampled on because you deem them unimportant.

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by andy1972

 

being kettled for hours on end with no toilets or drink, even though they had not committed an offense.
that's just one of the things. i surely do not need to list them all i am sure you know all about some of the things that happened, if not there are plenty of things around to get the FULL picture.

Iranian security forces opened fire on the 2009 election result protesters,many killed, many more were and still are imprisoned.
Comparing Irainian HR's to the UK's is nothing but a joke.

I can do without the Iranians standing up for my Human Rights, they stone women don't they.

reply to post by dizzylizzy




it is not just bullets that kill people, or violate human rights.

so what your also saying is we must wait in the U.K. to be shot at protests before any human rights violations can be pointed out?

Originally posted by dizzylizzy
]

Iranian security forces opened fire on the 2009 election result protesters,many killed, many more were and still are imprisoned.
Comparing Irainian HR's to the UK's is nothing but a joke.

I can do without the Iranians standing up for my Human Rights, they stone women don't they.

OMG, have they installed an automatic response in you guys heads?

This just sounds more and more ludacris.

The only one who is comparing Iranian Human Rights and UK Human Rights is you and the other two (sorry for not naming you).

Anyways, the thread is about UK human rights violation.

1. Iranian human rights is not connected to UK human rights.
2. Iranian human rights is a complete different issue.
3. UK human rights is on topic, considering the OP.

All you did was compare UK and Iran human rights, then claim it is ridiculous to compare it.

Duuh.

You are the one who compared it.

and

When did Stoning become a human rights issue?

reply to post by oozyism


Human rights violations must be brought to justice, irregardless of country of origin or political machinations. Thanks for pointing this out.

When did Stoning become a human rights issue?

Are you insane? Stoning is an abhorrent abuse of the most basic human rights. Any country or culture that practices it is not worth respecting.

Universal declaration of human rights, article 5:
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

reply to post by endlessknowledge


Oh?

And what execution rate does the US have then?

Since 1976, the US has murdered..sorry, 'executed' 1233 people, or roughly 36 per year.

China (a valued trading partner of the US) has consistently 'officially murdered' the most prisoners in the world.
(although i feel the official figures from North Korea would be terrifyingly high, if we ever got to see them)

The US incidentally, is the *only* Western country to murder it's prisoners, and the *only* country to do so in the entire Americas.

In 2008, the US was fourth on the list of 'top' killers of prisoners in the world. Beaten to the top slot by China (by a huge % margin) followed by Iran, then Saudi Arabia (another valued US partner), then the US who easily beat Pakistan to fourth place.

So, your point is what?

The US is just as barbaric and murderous of it's prisoners as Iran is? Not exactly news when you look at the stats.

The phrase 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones', springs to mind!

Originally posted by oozyism

When did Stoning become a human rights issue?

That says it all. Your bias is becoming more transparent by the minute.

You should have stuck to your word and kept a lid on it.

reply to post by spikey

And what execution rate does the US have then?

If you want to compare execution rate, look at per capita figures, thats what is important.

biasedreports.wordpress.com...

Also, execution procedure must not be cruel and crime commited must aslo be really serious to justify it, not minor or even victimless crimes. This is even more important than execution rate figures IMHO.

That said, I do not support death penalty in any form.

reply to post by oozyism

When did Stoning become a human rights issue?

I'll not labour the point, others have already made reference to your comment above, but i would add that whether method is used in the official murder of a prisoner, be it stoning, hanging, lethal injection or anything else, they are *all* human rights violations...all of them.

Human beings have a basic right to life.

To murder a prisoner is denying them that basic human right, and so is the very definition of a human rights violation.

So, yeah, stoning is very much a human rights issue, especially if you or a family member happens to be on receiving end.

Originally posted by spikey

The phrase 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones', springs to mind!

edit on 15/12/2010 by spikey because: add info

Maybe you should read the entire thread before throwing stones, that way you could save yourself the embarrassment. You could have also avoided sounding redundant since your phrase has already been used.