ChatterBank1 min ago
So who do the British Mau Mau victims claim from then?
58 Answers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19843719
Just another compo feast for the lawyers, you couldn't make it up!
Just another compo feast for the lawyers, you couldn't make it up!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Thatcherite. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
As the torturers were British colonists, it seems fair for those tortured to seek compensation.
Thinking of this - would you deny Jewish victims of the Holocaust retribution against the Germans? didn't Germany have to fork out substantial amounts in reparations?
Should their be a time limit on justice?
Thinking of this - would you deny Jewish victims of the Holocaust retribution against the Germans? didn't Germany have to fork out substantial amounts in reparations?
Should their be a time limit on justice?
Mau Mau attrocities against white settlers were much fewer in number than the Administration's attrocities against locals.
I seem to recall it was a few dozen deaths on one side and a couple of thousand on the other.
But that is hardly the point.
The people in this case were never convicted of any wrong doing - the man who was castrated by the British internment camp official with a reputation for sadism was just picked up for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Arbitrarily cutting off people's balls or sticking boiling hot dildos up women was carried out under our country's authority.
The fact that it has taken 50 years for these chickens to come home to roost is hardly the fault of these now elderly people.
We can hardly dismiss those crimes as inconsequential and still consider ourselves civilised regardless of what anyone else does.
I seem to recall it was a few dozen deaths on one side and a couple of thousand on the other.
But that is hardly the point.
The people in this case were never convicted of any wrong doing - the man who was castrated by the British internment camp official with a reputation for sadism was just picked up for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Arbitrarily cutting off people's balls or sticking boiling hot dildos up women was carried out under our country's authority.
The fact that it has taken 50 years for these chickens to come home to roost is hardly the fault of these now elderly people.
We can hardly dismiss those crimes as inconsequential and still consider ourselves civilised regardless of what anyone else does.
I think there is an interesting issue here and in reagrd to some earlier and controversial posts.
If a person has been harmed, why is it not acceptable for them to seek compensatipn for the harm?
This was a cornerstone of viking and saxon law - a person had their worth (wergild) and being deprived of that worth, through loss of a husband, child, slave, living etc had a financial consequence that was recognised equally for all members of society.
I suppose being civilised and not a viking means you have to accept redress is only accessible to the toffs.
If a person has been harmed, why is it not acceptable for them to seek compensatipn for the harm?
This was a cornerstone of viking and saxon law - a person had their worth (wergild) and being deprived of that worth, through loss of a husband, child, slave, living etc had a financial consequence that was recognised equally for all members of society.
I suppose being civilised and not a viking means you have to accept redress is only accessible to the toffs.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.