I heard on the news and interview with an Iraqi woman whose 16-year-old cousin was arrested for writing some anti-government stuff in her notebook at school. She, her parents, siblings, aunts and uncles and cousins were all arrested.

The 16-year-old girl was tortured for 11 months and sentenced to 3 years in prison.

Her siblings, mother, aunts and cousins were sentenced to 3 to 6 months in prison.

Her maternal uncles were sentenced to about a year in prison (I believe I have that right)

Her paternal uncles were killed.

Her father was sentenced to years in prison.

No matter what the official reasons or hidden reasons that we are fighting Iraq, to me, the war is about this kind of thing.

It's terrible if this is really true... Does anyone have a decent newssource (preferrably not Fox or CNN, no offense) to confirm this news?

[ 03-29-2003, 03:07 PM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

This story originated from a BBC documentry and exerpts were shown at a pentagon news briefing as I heard it on the radio.

Certainly terrible, but the same and similar kinds of torture and political persecution happen in N. Korea, and many other nations for crimes that are as trivial or worse than writing anti-goverment graffiti on the wall. The coalition would have alot of enemies to face if it were truly out to liberate all the oppressed people of the world.

This story originated from a BBC documentry and exerpts were shown at a pentagon news briefing as I heard it on the radio.

Certainly terrible, but the same and similar kinds of torture and political persecution happen in N. Korea, and many other nations for crimes that are as trivial or worse than writing anti-goverment graffiti on the wall. The coalition would have alot of enemies to face if it were truly out to liberate all the oppressed people of the world.</font>[/QUOTE]I don't quite understand your comment. Does that fact that it exists in other places provide a reason to ignore it in a situation in which we can do something about it?

I do listen to something other than Fox and CNN. This story did not come from that but from, as Chebaca said, a pentagon news briefing.

This story originated from a BBC documentry and exerpts were shown at a pentagon news briefing as I heard it on the radio.

Certainly terrible, but the same and similar kinds of torture and political persecution happen in N. Korea, and many other nations for crimes that are as trivial or worse than writing anti-goverment graffiti on the wall. The coalition would have alot of enemies to face if it were truly out to liberate all the oppressed people of the world.</font>[/QUOTE]I don't quite understand your comment. Does that fact that it exists in other places provide a reason to ignore it in a situation in which we can do something about it?</font>[/QUOTE]I dont understand your assessment of my comment [img]smile.gif[/img]

Just because there is an invasion going on against a nation that commits brutal political persecution should we not mention that this sort of evil and injustice occurs the world over. Also it follows logic taht if the coalition were to be consistent in the ideaology of using military force to end this sort of suffering world round that it would be a widescale conflict well beyond the scope of invading Iraq. I really was just making an observation.

[img]smile.gif[/img] Peace!

It was a question, not a reproach. Don't worry. ;)

This story originated from a BBC documentry and exerpts were shown at a pentagon news briefing as I heard it on the radio.

Certainly terrible, but the same and similar kinds of torture and political persecution happen in N. Korea, and many other nations for crimes that are as trivial or worse than writing anti-goverment graffiti on the wall. The coalition would have alot of enemies to face if it were truly out to liberate all the oppressed people of the world.</font>[/QUOTE]I don't quite understand your comment. Does that fact that it exists in other places provide a reason to ignore it in a situation in which we can do something about it?</font>[/QUOTE]I dont understand your assessment of my comment [img]smile.gif[/img]

Just because there is an invasion going on against a nation that commits brutal political persecution should we not mention that this sort of evil and injustice occurs the world over. Also it follows logic taht if the coalition were to be consistent in the ideaology of using military force to end this sort of suffering world round that it would be a widescale conflict well beyond the scope of invading Iraq. I really was just making an observation.

[img]smile.gif[/img] Peace!</font>[/QUOTE]Prehaps the coalition will, or prehaps the other countries where this type of oppression exists will decide that it is not worth the risk to continue their oppression.

So what are you saying Chewbacca that evil regimes are too numerous so we should not bother trying? Lets all bury our heads and ignore the evil that manifests itself in all corners of the globe? I hope not. As much as I have doubts as to the "why Iraq and not some other regime" motive, and also would have liked the UN involved *who would not*. The fact that evil is being fought deserves praise and support in my opinion.

Surely those that stand idly by while acts of terror are being carried out are guilty of some crime themselves especially when they have a power to bring change.

[ 03-29-2003, 07:33 PM: Message edited by: wellard ]

<font color = lightgreen>Then perhaps the time has come to form a semi-permanent Coalition to oppose regimes who are committing crimes against humanity or widespread violations of human rights. Suspect nations can be given a time limit during which such crimes or violations must cease and situations in the country improve (perhaps 1 year) or Coalition forces will enter the country and forcibly enact a regime change. Any nation may sign up to join the Coalition if they so choose or opt out; there should be no negative repercussions for opting out of any sort. Note that any nation can be investigated and found suspect, even the US (should crimes or violations begin happening here).

The UN, as it exists now, is a nice idea but is insufficient to deal with the problems that exist in the world today. The problem is that it doesn't have any power to enforce decisions and one nation can veto the desires of many nations.
A restructured UN could make decisions voted upon by all nations with the majority opinion winning out and then decisions enforced by a combination of member nation militaries. This would solve the problems of "cowboy" nations (no names mentioned [img]graemlins/beigesmilewinkgrin.gif[/img] ) and nations who flagrantly violate the human rights of its citizens.</font>