Tortured Kenyans win historic ruling in Britain - Christian Science Monitor [getdailynow.blogspot.com]
NCAA Football 13 - NCAA Football 13 - Barry Sanders | Week 8 at Oklahoma State CowboysDon't forget to give this video a "like" ;D Follow me as I try to recreate Barry Sanders' Heisman winning season with the Iowa State Cyclones. Barry Sanders was offered a scholarship to Iowa State, but chose Oklahoma State in real life so this is a "what if" series for NCAA Football 13 in the Heisman Challenge game mode. #15 Oklahoma State got back on the winning track with a 49-21 win over Missouri as Sanders gained a season low 156 yards and two scores. Barry scored 2+ TD's in all 12 games, scoring 4+ TD's in 7 games. Twitter: twitter.com Facebook: www.facebook.com
Three tortured Kenyans who suffered abuses by British forces in the 1950s won the right to take their case to trial. The ruling could pave the way for future cases from Britain's former colonies.
A historic legal ruling in London today could leave Britain’s government facing dozens of new court cases alleging systematic torture by the officers of its former empire dating back decades.
Skip to next paragraph-
In Pictures: The African Union's mission
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
Three elderly Kenyans who say Britain’s imperial administration beat, raped, or castrated them in the 1950s have won the right to take their allegations to a full trial after a three-year legal battle. The claimants are asking for compensation and a government apology.
The High Court in London today dismissed arguments from Britain’s Foreign Office that a fair trial was impossible because many potential witnesses have already died and because the events in question happened so long ago.
“It’s a seismic ruling, with implications in multiple other former British colonial territories,†says Caroline Elkins, a Harvard University professor and author of “Imperial Reckoning,†a study of Britain’s conduct during its imperial administration in Kenya.
“This case didn’t come out of thin air. There are other colonial theaters â€" Palestine, Northern Ireland, Malaya, Aden,
The three claimants involved in yesterday’s historic ruling, Paulo Muoka Nzili, Wambuga Wa Nyingi, and Jane Muthoni Mara, all in their 70s and 80s, say they were violently assaulted during their detention by British forces ruling Kenya in the 1950s and 1960s.
They were interned during the Mau Mau rebellion, a revolt by mostly rural Kenyans against their imperial masters that led to thousands of arrests, detentions, and violent assaults on Kenyans. Thousands died.
Find More Tortured Kenyans win historic ruling in Britain - Christian Science Monitor Issues Question by Gnosisquest: What is your personal objection to the "Nanny State"? Is it the fact that we never had a "State" who was a nanny state, we were just moving towards a more humane society that cared for the unfortunate that due to accident or illness would be taken care of? Or is your objection to a nanny state the fact that if the nation take care of the needy there won't be enough left over to care for the Greedy that took risks which backfired? Best answer for What is your personal objection to the "Nanny State"?:
Answer by Got Lost
No objection! I love the idea of a Nanny State who will watch out for me in all instances. It's a great idea.
Answer by Brian B
power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely
Answer by Rankin
I object to being ticketed and fined for not wearing a seat belt. I wear one anyway, but it sucks to have the government taking over so much control of peoples everyday lives. Their job is to keep other countries from attacking me and to keep the potholes filled, not to control everything I do.
Answer by Aegis of Freedom
I think individual liberty is more important. Yes, if I am a slave, I get free food, free shelter, free health care, etc. But I am still a slave. I would prefer to be free, even if you think there is more risk that way. Either your friends, family, neighbors, employer, church, etc. take care of your needs by being forced at gun point to pay taxes... Or your friends, family, neighbors, employer, church, etc. take care of your needs because they care about you.. Either way it is the same people that take care of you in your time of need. The only difference is if they are doing it out of love and compassion, or fear of federal prison.
Answer by September
I don't fall for all the spin talk. We are people. We all have different needs. Im not going to be controlled about how I speak or what I feel. The Republicans want a controlled state of mind. And they are all wrong about America. They are slowing trying to swift boat this country into dictatorship. I would rather die.
Answer by daddio
the government doesn't know what's good for me. or you. there's more to it than just the downtrodden.
Answer by Peace through blinding force
> It's IMPOSSIBLE to support lawfully. > It's IMMORAL unless you consider yourself and all others to be State PROPERTY > In every case - everywhere - in all of time - it ALWAYS makes matters MUCH worse. Centralizing control ALWAYS: > Escalates poverty > Shortens life > Makes life more brutal > Eliminates any hope that "the needy" might EVER do any better YOUR ONLY objection - "care for the Greedy that took risks which backfired" - is a feature OF the nanny State
Answer by Jeff77042
I have several objections to the nanny-state. At the top of the list is the fact that the U.S. Constitution doesn't authorize the creation of a cradle-to-grave nanny-state. The Constitution, to include all amendments, only assigns about twenty functions to the federal government: national defense; deliver the mail; collect taxes; issue currency; negotiate treaties with foreign powers; address certain issues that cross state-lines, etc. Providing retirement-plans, health-care, getting involved in education, so-called aid to the poor, etc. isn't listed among those functions. I'm 53. My parents grew up in truly *extreme* poverty during the Great Depression, poverty that was *far* worse than what so-called poor-people experience today. They didn't' have plumbing or electricity, for example. There was no nanny-state; they had to learn to take care of themselves--and they did. I'm all for helping the poor and less-fortunate. I've read numerous times that Conservative consistently give more to charity than liberals. I just don't want the government holding a gun to my head, figuratively speaking, and *forcing* me to give to programs that frequently make poverty worse and not better.
Answer by David
What you are wanting is a socialist utopia. It sounds great and looks good on paper. That said, its been tried and failed many times. When people figure out they can do little or nothing and get by - more and more people quit trying. Those who are productive are so heavily taxed -to pay for non producers that they have no motivation to produce. You can't support all of your needs on the backs of others. Right now over 50% of Americans pay no federal taxes but you hear them scream that the wealthy should pay more Why dont you demand those who use the most and contribute nothing pay something toward the common good?
Real Steel = Rock'em Sock'em Robots the Movie? - Film StateToday we bust out the trailers for Real Steel, Final Destination 5, Horrible Bosses and Martha Marcy May Marlene. Plus new set picks! Real Steel trailers.apple.com Martha Marcy May Marlene trailers.apple.com Horrible Bosses trailers.apple.com Final Destination 5 trailers.apple.com Real Steel: trailers.apple.com Final Destination 5: trailers.apple.com Horrible Bosses: trailers.apple.com Martha Marcy May Marlene: trailers.apple.com Ryan - www.twitter.com www.facebook.com/filmstate www.twitter.com/filmstate ~~~~ Like This Video? Comment, Share & Favorite! Never Miss an Episode- Subscribe For New Shows Every Tuesday: www.youtube.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment