Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

Some "human rights" orgnisations are slamming India for hanging. Where were the so called "human rights" organisations when US killed Osama in cold blood? Why could not he be captured and given a fair trial in US. or better still - in Pakistan or Afghanistan - his own country?

Tags: india, rights, sports
Asked by Cynic, 10 Feb '13 03:24 pm
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (10)

1.

It is always going to happen be it the hanging of Kasab or Afzal or any other such terrorists. Protests are bound to happen but what we need to ensure is we take a tough stand against any such terror activities to deter the terror outfits from doing so!!
Answered by dharamender nebhnani, 10 Feb '13 10:04 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
2.

The very word 'human right' has become a historical fun.
Credit goes to modern politics and diplomacy.
May God save the human civilisation.
Answered by Prakash Chandra, 11 Feb '13 12:10 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

In all cases the bodies are vanishing . and trial is last thing as may be truth would come out
otherwise what is need to have a guentanemo bay , why not simply a trial like any other trials , the Judge is quite capable of giving the verditcs
Answered by truth exposed, 10 Feb '13 10:46 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
4.

It seems, u r making the whole point weak.
Osama was a terrorist and he deserved the treatment he to by US. But our angels like human rights, green peace, etc. should be sent to China and Pakistan to convince them about humanitarian and turn them in to saints instead of going on protest in India.
Whether a membership in human rights organisation can immune a person from getting abused, terrorised or get killed by one of those terrorists, then whole India will stand behind them.
Answered by MAdhavan Avadhany, 10 Feb '13 03:39 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
5.

But the same so called HUMAN RIGHTS organisation never spoke a word when Terrorists in J&K have killed the Kashmir Pundits like worms and insects .... but they are swarming in to deliver dialogues rgarding the exucution of a legitimate right of the biggest democracy of the world.....just their pertinent double standard.....
Answered by Pradipta pati, 10 Feb '13 03:35 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
6.

No compromise should be done on terrorism in the name of human rights or religion. if any one is found terrorist against india he must be hanged without any question whether he is a hindu or a muslim or a christian or any religion. terrorist has no religion but terrorism is the only his religion.
Answered by Panneer Selvam, 10 Feb '13 03:34 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
7.

Your looses all its authenticity as you are mixing two things which are poles apart. Osama was a self-proclaimed terrorist and a self-proclaimed enemy of America and the Non-Muslim world. he had to be eliminated. Mohammad Afzal was a small time terrorist who kept on saying that he was innocent even though all the evidence was against him. Like any ordinary criminal would say. So, Law of the Land took its course in case of Afzal.
BTW, Osama 'won country' was NOT Afghanistan. He was an Arab and his country was Saudi Arabia which declared him Persona non Grata and threw him out of their (and his) country.
Answered by QueSera Sera, 10 Feb '13 03:31 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
8.

We have given enough trials and discussions before verdict.
Answered by saranathan Narasimhan, 10 Feb '13 03:28 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
9.

He has been given -- a fair trial, and proved guilty beyond doubt !
Answered by ajit kulkarni, 10 Feb '13 03:27 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
10.

And why were these "human rights" employees quiet when the matter was in the trail court? Why did they not come forward to provide "good" lawyers to their beloved terrorists?
Answered by Vikram, 12 Feb '13 03:29 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (0)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining