Saddam's Tribe, a docu-drama based on interviews by Raghad Hussein, a.k.a the bitch of Baghdad, a flatering nickname considering she is the daughter of the butcher of Baghdad. Truth be told it isn't a bad film. I discovered Saddam and his henchmen were actually humans with feelings...they sleep, eat, hate and love like other human beings, that was the first shock for me. Raghad, at the time, really believed that the Iraqi people loved her father but whats extraordinary is that today, she still can't see the difference between 'love' and 'fear'. Her father was a lovely man who loved his family (albeit the few murders here and there), his people (not including the hundreds of thousands of them he slaughtered) and his country (which he destroyed).
The film starts in 1995, so thats after the bloody coup d’état, after the Iraq-Iran war, after the Anfal massacre, after the Gulf War and after the genocide in 1991. Yes granted that part was "difficult" for poor Raghooda but not nearly as difficult as fleeing to Jordan and eventually becomming a divorcee. Cue the violins please...
Warning: A few graphic scenes
News
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Thursday, July 03, 2008
Torture...
Am I the only person in the world who thinks torture, in certain circumstances, is ok?
Lets take a hypothetical scenario for example. In reality things are not so black and white, and there is a lot of grey matter, but let us assume;
The security forces have intelligence reports that indicate three massive suicide car-bomb attacks are planned to be executed by three different cells of the same group. The attacks are being planned in places with a high civilian population and the aim is to kill as many innocent people as possible. The security forces manage to capture the ringleaders responsible for one of the three attacks.
The security forces have a choice now:
Option 1: They give the terrorists their "human rights". The terrorists stay silent and the other two attacks go ahead as planned. 'X' number of innocent civilians are killed and 'X times 3' are injured. Al-Qaeda has a victory celebration. The terrorists who killed themselves realise the 72 beautiful virgins in heaven promised by the obese Sheikh, turn out to be 72 sexually frustrated clones of the Sheikh himself.
Option 2: The security forces torture the terrorists. The terrorists eventually crack and give names, places, times e.t.c. The security forces then capture the other two cells and the entire operation flops. '0' amount of people die and '0' are injured. Al-Qaeda goes back to the drawing board and the terrorists would have rather been martyred and gone to heaven than spend the rest of their lives in prison.
If someone knows for an absolute certainty that torture, in and by itself, will lead directly to the prevention of an innocent life being lost, than what is so wrong with torture per se?
Lets take a hypothetical scenario for example. In reality things are not so black and white, and there is a lot of grey matter, but let us assume;
The security forces have intelligence reports that indicate three massive suicide car-bomb attacks are planned to be executed by three different cells of the same group. The attacks are being planned in places with a high civilian population and the aim is to kill as many innocent people as possible. The security forces manage to capture the ringleaders responsible for one of the three attacks.
The security forces have a choice now:
Option 1: They give the terrorists their "human rights". The terrorists stay silent and the other two attacks go ahead as planned. 'X' number of innocent civilians are killed and 'X times 3' are injured. Al-Qaeda has a victory celebration. The terrorists who killed themselves realise the 72 beautiful virgins in heaven promised by the obese Sheikh, turn out to be 72 sexually frustrated clones of the Sheikh himself.
Option 2: The security forces torture the terrorists. The terrorists eventually crack and give names, places, times e.t.c. The security forces then capture the other two cells and the entire operation flops. '0' amount of people die and '0' are injured. Al-Qaeda goes back to the drawing board and the terrorists would have rather been martyred and gone to heaven than spend the rest of their lives in prison.
If someone knows for an absolute certainty that torture, in and by itself, will lead directly to the prevention of an innocent life being lost, than what is so wrong with torture per se?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)