Iran takes UK human rights breach to UN

Originally posted by fonenyc
Who is anyone to accuse anyone of inhumanity? What country is without flaw? Let that country throw the proverbial 1st stone.What Iran is doing should be encouraged, as they attempt to become a part of the world community. Isnt that how we can begin camaraderie amongst Nations?
reply to post by oozyism

 

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

Exactly, no one should be silenced.

Iran is part of UN, and has obligation to bring forward other countries Human Rights violation.

It is a members duty and right to bring forward human rights violation, when seen.

We can't see our own human rights violations ourselves, because every country has its own bias, no doubt.

It's amusing that Iran is preaching about human rights. The same government executes homosexuals but yet preaches to the UK about treatment of protesters? Give me a BREAK.

I'd like to add that Iran has had Numerous protesters in it's time executed for what? Protesting. I smell BS and hypocrisy from Iran.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
It's amusing that Iran is preaching about human rights. The same government executes homosexuals but yet preaches to the UK about treatment of protesters? Give me a BREAK.

I'd like to add that Iran has had Numerous protesters in it's time executed for what? Protesting. I smell BS and hypocrisy from Iran.

edit on 16-12-2010 by SeventhSeal because: (no reason given)

So non of UK abuses matter and should be ignored, because Iran has its own abuses?

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
It's amusing that Iran is preaching about human rights. The same government executes homosexuals but yet preaches to the UK about treatment of protesters? Give me a BREAK.

I'd like to add that Iran has had Numerous protesters in it's time executed for what? Protesting. I smell BS and hypocrisy from Iran.

edit on 16-12-2010 by SeventhSeal because: (no reason given)

so because iran does it, that makes it o.k. for the u.k. to start taking away human rights in their country?
should irans case be properly investigated by the U.N.?

do you feel that the u.k. has broken any human rights acts during protests over the last few years towards protesters, or anything else?

just trying to get your thoughts on the actual subject.

Originally posted by lifeform11

do you feel that the u.k. has broken any human rights acts during protests over the last few years towards protesters, or anything else?

England took some ships to Diego Garcia and loaded them up with alll the people that lived there....then shipped them out and stole the island from them.

England also has a Territory on the UN Decolonization List they refuse to let go. When the people on that island were talking of Decolonization 1-2 years ago England ran in....arrested everyone for "corruption" and took full control over it again.

England's got lots of human rights violations going on.

Originally posted by Pervius

England's got lots of human rights violations going on.

They just learned propaganda from Nazi Germany therefore can easily foul their own public.

Yup

reply to post by oozyism


What abuses? You mean of protesters that attacked police with violence? Both sides were wrong, but thats what happens during rioting. It's not new. Should it be ignored? No but it will be, just like the violence against protesters in the 1999 WTO Seattle riots, the Toronto riots, the Pittsburgh riots, the Copenhagen riots, and beyond. Any mass protest clashing with police usually results in some violent manner...it just happens and it'll be forgotten within a month.

Also, I just felt the need to point out the irony in Iran preaching "human rights" issues upon other nations. With a bit of research and denial of ignorance, you can see that Iran is quite guilty of human rights violations against protesters and gays in the country.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
reply to post by oozyism

 

What abuses? You mean of protesters that attacked police with violence? Both sides were wrong, but thats what happens during rioting. It's not new. Should it be ignored? No but it will be, just like the violence against protesters in the 1999 WTO Seattle riots, the Toronto riots, the Pittsburgh riots, the Copenhagen riots, and beyond. Any mass protest clashing with police usually results in some violent manner...it just happens and it'll be forgotten within a month.

So it should be looked at.

Whether you agree this was human rights violation or not is not important.

The protesters' lawyers state that the police violated EU human rights.

Let's see where that goes.

And

Let's see what Iran puts on the table in UN.

It will be interesting.

Non the less, you don't beat all the protesters, just because some act like idiots.

By the way

Iranian protests were much more violent and deadly, they also clashed with police, attacked them, burned their vehicles, many died due to those violent protests.

Originally posted by HEREFORD 1969
This is just a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
* * * *

What's that supposed to mean? Do you mean we should discount everything the pot says because we can accuse the pot of similar behavior? Amongst the blackest pots on the planet is our own government right here at home. If you apply that pot vs black kettle standard across the board, who would ever listen to our government, whose shade of black seems to be darkening as we type, again?

If the kettle is in fact black, then the pot would be correct in saying so, would it not?

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by endlessknowledge

 

What's wrong with execution?

I would be interested in knowing your ideas regarding how execution is wrong/bad.

Thanks in advance.

The only problem with executions are that people are fallible. That being said, innocent people who have done nothing wrong will be executed. That is a crime as bad as any murder.

Originally posted by nightbringr


The only problem with executions are that people are fallible. That being said, innocent people who have done nothing wrong will be executed. That is a crime as bad as any murder.

I would rather die for false reasons than to spend all my life in a cell false reasons.

In prison you will probably go crazy knowing that you haven't done anything wrong, and yet you are here.

I know I would.

The above being said, if you are religious, justice will be given to you in the judgement day, in that sense, I would rather die again.

From an Atheistic point of view, death is much easier than mental and physical torture, worse, mental and physical torture at the expense of law abiding citizens.

reply to post by oozyism


Think of the families ruined of those wrongly accused. It's easy to say you would rather die, but would they rather you? A very selfish decision.

I would agree 100 percent in the death penalty in certain circumstances if there was no chance in error on their pronouncement of guilt. But one innocent put to death is inexcusable under any circumstances.

Originally posted by nightbringr
reply to post by oozyism

 

Think of the families ruined of those wrongly accused. It's easy to say you would rather die, but would they rather you? A very selfish decision.

I would agree 100 percent in the death penalty in certain circumstances if there was no chance in error on their pronouncement of guilt. But one innocent put to death is inexcusable under any circumstances.

I think many would agree with you, but many would agree with me.

The fact of the matter is, I wouldn't want my money to be wasted on criminals, murderers, rapists, child molesters, torturers, war criminals etc..

If there is a small group of innocent who has been given the death sentence, it is a sad fact, but the solution that problem is already available, people just don't want to accept the solution.

Now, I support the students cause, the tuition fees suck, however, Oozy, picture this for one second:

Your a police officer, your in the middle of the street and your facing a crowd that outnumbers you 10 - 1, they are coming at you throwing bricks, metal fences, flares and god knows what else, your fearing for the life of yourself and your colleagues and innocent bystanders. Do you a) ask politely that they stop? or b) crack some of the little buggers over the head with your nightstick and hope it puts others off a little bit.

If it was my job, I'd say let the blood flow. For the most part, those police officers will be decent human beings with family's, and they have a job, someone has to do it.

Ragging that dude out of his wheelchair was wrong, but then, the whole situation got messed up.

Some of them protesters were out of line too you know.

By the way, please stop saying Britain has adopted Nazi crap, I don't see any concentration camps or showers or ethnic cleansing going on.

reply to post by oozyism

The fact of the matter is, I wouldn't want my money to be wasted on criminals, murderers, rapists, child molesters, torturers, war criminals etc..

The money saved will be very little, if any. People are often held in prison for years before the death penalty is done anyway, and the amount of people that recieve death penalty is very small compared to all the prisoners. The only way to really save money by this is to dramatically increase the amount of death penalties, including lighter offenses, but I doubt anyone wants to go this way. Ending the war on drugs is much better solution to save billions wasted in prison system.
Also, the question if the state should have legal ability to kill its citizens is an important philosophical and legal matter, and the argument that it could save a bit of money is simply not what it takes to decide it.

reply to post by Maslo


I'm talking about the life sentence and other prison sentences etc..

Over a million people is in US prisons right now, it is obviously not working, there has to be other solutions.

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by Maslo

 

I'm talking about the life sentence and other prison sentences etc..

Over a million people is in US prisons right now, it is obviously not working, there has to be other solutions.

There has to be other solution, indeed. But death penalty is not the solution. Even if every criminal that currently gets life without parole would get death penalty (ridiculously high execution rate), it would save just a few percents of the money that goes to prison system. Money savings of death penalty are negligible.

reply to post by Maslo


No, I'm not saying everyone who commits crime should be killed.

There needs to be solutions other than sending everyone to prison.

Have you thought about physical punishment?

It is evidence that psychological punishment (prison), hasn't worked.

Physical punishment, hence chop a thieves hand, then see how many thieves steal after that

In that sense, the thief whose hand got chopped will still be forced to survive in the real world just like everyone else, working for his/her own money, building his own house, marrying etc.

It is ridiculous to lock people up for all and every reason.

It hasn't worked, how long are we gonna continue this? They say insanity is when you try the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

Why don't we take in to consideration other solutions to simple problems?

I know the answer.

It is

culture

We have frozen in time, thinking we can't do better than our forefathers. We praise our forefathers, as if they were somehow smarter than us, wiser than us. We are suppose to learn from the past, not copy it.

reply to post by oozyism


Because that is barbaric and here in the west we have moved beyond such neanderthalic behaviour.

Executions (and torture) are the last primitive hurdle to jump for SOME western countries to fully abolish and then alls good. Everyone can be rehabilitated, and that's the steps we need to perfect.

reply to post by oozyism


The problem with such drastic punishments like execution or dismembering is that they are irreversible. There will always be always mistakes, and we cannot allow irreversible punishments being done to innocents.

I would even agree with some reversible physical punishments for most serious crimes (not simple stealing) in addition to jail time. Another way to increase economy of the prison system is mandatory work for the prisoners - we already took their basic right for liberty away, so what would be the difference anyway?

It is ridiculous to lock people up for all and every reason.

We have also fines, court orders, mandatory public work and other forms of different punishments for less serious crimes.

It hasn't worked, how long are we gonna continue this? They say insanity is when you try the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

It has worked adequatelly, I think the crime rate in most of the western world is at acceptable levels. If we legalize soft drugs and limit high immigration, it could be even lower.

We have frozen in time, thinking we can't do better than our forefathers. We praise our forefathers, as if they were somehow smarter than us, wiser than us. We are suppose to learn from the past, not copy it.

No, we do exactly the opposite - thats why we dont allow cruel punishments, unlike our forefathers.