US 'erodes' global human rights

[cbacon 0]

US 'erodes' global human rights

Handcuffs at Guantanamo Bay

The report is critical of the 'coercive interrogation techniques' of the US

Violations of human rights by the US are undermining international law and eroding its role on the world stage, a leading campaign group says.

 

Human Rights Watch says the US can no longer claim to defend human rights abroad if it practises abuses itself.

 

It urges the creation of an independent US commission to examine prisoner abuse at Iraq's US-run Abu Ghraib jail.

 

Washington is currently investigating alleged abuses at that facility and at its jail in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

 

'Defiance'

 

HRW says the US can no longer claim the moral high ground and lead by example.

 

 

A Guantanamo Bay inmate in his cell

Attacks on repressive regimes cannot justify attacks on the body of principles that makes their repression illegal

Human Rights Watch

 

Guantanamo 'torture letter'

Abu Ghraib inmates remember

 

It cites coercive interrogation techniques at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib jail as particularly damaging.

 

The group, the largest US-based rights organisation, says the actions of the US in such detention centres have undermined Washington's credibility as a proponent of human rights and a leader of the war against terror.

 

"Its embrace of coercive interrogation [is] part of a broader betrayal of human rights principles in the name of combating terrorism," HRW says.

 

The group calls for the Bush administration to set up a fully independent investigative commission, similar to the 9/11 Commission, to look into the Abu Ghraib allegations.

 

It also urges a special prosecutor to be appointed to determine what went wrong and to hold those responsible to account.

 

Last August, an independent commission came to the conclusion that the American soldiers who ran the Iraqi jail were mainly to blame.

 

Trials of a group of soldiers accused of being at the heart of the Baghdad prison scandal are under way at a military court in Texas.

 

Last week the US defence department announced a new investigation into allegations of prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay.

 

'Inaction'

 

However, according to the report, the impact of the abuse scandals has already seriously damaged the US's role as champion of human rights, reverberating worldwide.

 

When the US classified what was happening in Sudan's Darfur region as genocide it was immediately accused by the country's government of using Darfur as part of "a global American assault on Islam and Arabs", the report notes.

 

HRW criticises the US and other Western powers for handing the situation to the relatively inexperienced African Union.

 

"The situation cries out for the involvement by major military powers but they have chosen to be unavailable," the report says.

 

"Continued inaction risks undermining a fundamental rights principle: that the nations of the world will never let sovereignty stand in the way of their responsibility to protect people from mass atrocities," HRW concludes

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4171177.stm

 

After 'officially' learning that there were no WMD, the other reason that war apologists fall back on is liberating the Iraqi's and bringing democracy. Given the human rights violations in the name of 'protecting' Americans, this is all so contradictory.

[Guest SideFXs]

Human Rights Watch arose as a joint venture of George Soros and the State Department, during the Clinton regime.

 

Therefore, draw your own conclusions.

[MrRant 0]

I think we should take red hot butter knives to their testicles to get any info they may have.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Human Rights Watch arose as a joint venture of George Soros and the State Department, during the Clinton regime.

 

Therefore, draw your own conclusions.

-We successfully led an international coalition to press for the adoption of a treaty banning the use of child soldiers. Currently, as many as 300,000 children are serving in armies and rebel forces around the world. The treaty raises the minimum age for participation in armed conflict to eighteen.

-We and our partner organizations in the International Campaign to Ban Landmines won the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize for our work campaigning against this indiscriminate weapon. The mine-ban treaty was approved more quickly than any big multilateral treaty in history.

-We were among the first to call for an international war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and have worked extensively with the tribunal's investigators and prosecutors. Six of the seven counts on which the tribunal finally indicted Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic in 1999 were cases that Human Rights Watch had documented in Kosovo.

-We have provided extensive evidence of human rights abuses to the war crimes tribunal for Rwanda, where the genocide in 1994 killed more than half a million people. Our expert testimony and legal analysis have helped convict several genocidaires.

-We played an active role in the legal action against former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in London and helped to buttress the important principle that even former heads of state can be held accountable for the most heinous human rights crimes. The "Pinochet precedent" has established that dictators who block their prosecution at home can be tried anywhere in the world. Human Rights Watch is also leading a global campaign so that all countries ratify the treaty for a permanent international criminal court, to prosecute those accused of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

-We began reporting on human rights abuses in Kosovo in 1990. As Yugoslav stepped up their campaign of terror there, our up-to-the-minute reports helped to shape opinion and mobilize a response.

 

They seem evil to me.

 

P.S. SideFXs, check this out. Become a comma super hero.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Well, I think it's kind of upsetting that we're holding guys who may not have even done anything, and that even guys that have done something aren't being charged and put through the system already.However, if you go to the countries many of these people come from and see how they treat women, or go see a ritual public beheading...

 

 

Could we do things better? I think so. But, I don't know if you can really say with a straight face that the US is the leading threat to human rights.

[NoCalMike 0]

I wouldn't ever be bold enough to say America is the leaing threat to human rights, but I would also at the same time say that a lot of our policies in general promote indirect violations of human rights abroad, that your average citizen is never going to be akin to as far as just by watching the evening news. A lot of our labor trade laws and relationships with countries that have no such laws create a lot of human rights violations.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Yeah, fuck America. I say we let China tell us how to live our lives. Or better yet those tolerant Arabs...

[Guest INXS]

There's nothing wrong with detaining suspects as long as they are not tortured, their religious beliefs are respected, they are actually charged with something and are allowed contact with a lawyer as well as family. Some of the guys held in Gitmo WILL be terrorists, sadly on the other hand quite a few detainess will not be. The US has an appalling human rights record as of late, with the abuse at the Iraqi and Afghanistan prisons and of course the debacle which is Gitmo. They need to take steps to rectify this ASAP, though to many the damage has already been done. They can't take the morale high ground anymore, that's for sure.

[Jingus 0]

their religious beliefs are respected

 

Do you think the various Iraqis who are kidnapping and beheading people are respectful of their victims' religious beliefs?

 

The US has an appalling human rights record as of late

 

Wrong. "Appalling" would be the genocide going on in Sudan right now, or the atrocity-of-the-week in Somalia, or the several Muslim countries which deny basic human rights to the entire female half of the population, or various child-labor sweatshops around the world, or anyone who uses suicide bombers. Taking naked pictures of convicted felons at Abu Gharib is hardly "appalling" by those standards.

 

They can't take the morale high ground anymore, that's for sure.

 

Yeah. We can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And incidentally, I agree with you on not torturing detainees and that it's wrong to hold people without charging them with any crimes. But I think America over the past few decades has maybe the BEST record on human rights in the world.

[Der Kommissar 0]

But I think America over the past few decades has maybe the BEST record on human rights in the world.

 

I disagree. I can't imagine, say, Sweden having too many human rights violations, if any at all.

[Jingus 0]

Point taken. Alright, rephrased: I think America has one of the best human rights records over the past few decades of any large, wealthy country which is heavily involved in global affairs, militarily or otherwise.

[Guest Loss]

Yeah, fuck America. I say we let China tell us how to live our lives. Or better yet those tolerant Arabs...

I'd prefer the Canadians.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Then move, hippie.

 

A little too socialist/Big Government for my tastes but Canada is one of the better countries to live in, imo.

 

I disagree. I can't imagine, say, Sweden having too many human rights violations, if any at all.

 

Ditto what Jingus said. I love hearing people say we should live like Norway and all those other hippie nations, but yet those places have strict immigration laws that California Judges would trip over each other in the race to rule it unconstitutional...

[Ripper 0]

Then move, hippie.

 

A little too socialist/Big Government for my tastes but Canada is one of the better countries to live in, imo.

 

I disagree. I can't imagine, say, Sweden having too many human rights violations, if any at all.

 

Ditto what Jingus said. I love hearing people say we should live like Norway and all those other hippie nations, but yet those places have strict immigration laws that California Judges would trip over each other in the race to rule it unconstitutional...

So you are blaming our countries problems on foreigners?

 

 

 

~Raycyst!!!

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Not all foreigners -- just the blacks and Mexicans.

 

Now take back your

~Raycyst!!!

claim.

 

EDIT: I almost forgot the Arabs, too...

[Guest Cerebus]

But I think America over the past few decades has maybe the BEST record on human rights in the world.

 

I disagree. I can't imagine, say, Sweden having too many human rights violations, if any at all.

That is because you are stupid:

 

"The exclusive focus on combating illegal immigration in Europe reflects a disturbing and prevailing attitude that migrants have no rights. Consequently, regional and national policies and practices have focused on keeping migrants and asylum seekers out of Europe", says the report.

...

"European governments also contributed to the erosion of the ban on torture by relying on so-called "diplomatic assurances" to return terrorist suspects and foreigners labelled national security threats to countries where they were at risk of torture or ill-treatment", HRW suggested - mainly pointing to cases in Sweden, the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and others.

 

From the same worthless hippy org. that C-Bacon fellatioes in this thread.

[Guest Loss]

Then move, hippie.

I love America, and have no intentions of leaving actually, but I think there's a lot we could learn from Canada.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

And there's a lot that Canada can learn from us. Like hockey...

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

their religious beliefs are respected

 

Do you think the various Iraqis who are kidnapping and beheading people are respectful of their victims' religious beliefs?

If you follow this thought process through, you'll realize how hollow it is. Don't set the United States up so the standard it has to meet is being just a little bit better than fear-mongering murderers.

 

Its implications are also pretty contradictory to this statement:

And incidentally, I agree with you on not torturing detainees and that it's wrong to hold people without charging them with any crimes.

[Jingus 0]

I'm just leery of people who ask for special religious privileges while they're in prison. I assume most regular prisoners don't get a break to pray five times a day or control of what foods they're given, why should Muslim detainees get any special treatment?

[Jingus 0]

I'm just leery of people who ask for special religious privileges while they're in prison. I assume most regular prisoners don't get a break to pray five times a day or control of what foods they're given, why should Muslim detainees get any special treatment?

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

This is pretty funny considering U.N. peacekeepers have a nasty habit of raping the local girls where they tend to be stationed.

[2GOLD 0]

I'm just leery of people who ask for special religious privileges while they're in prison. I assume most regular prisoners don't get a break to pray five times a day or control of what foods they're given, why should Muslim detainees get any special treatment?

 

Does bring up an interesting question.

Do we allow special privileges to those who convert to Muslim in regular general popular American prison?

 

If we do, then yes we should give these detainees the same rights. If not, then no.

 

They should not receive any more or any less rights than those we have in our prisons in the US.

[Highland 0]

Ahh, the usual double standards applied against the US by bodies which engage in far worse atrocities than the US has ever been accused of.

[cbacon 0]

Taking naked pictures of convicted felons at Abu Gharib is hardly "appalling" by those standards. 

Really? Is that all they're doing? The following is just an example of what's going on in Guantanamo, while conditions in Abu Gharib and other US dentention facilities that include amongst other things, somodizing young boys. As INXS mentioned, many of those imprisoned have been found to have no links to Al Qaeda or other terrorist organizations, and if they did this kind of abuse is not justifiable by any means.

 

USA: Guantánamo detentions enter fourth year as torture allegations mount

 

Press release, 01/07/2005

 

The international community must redouble its efforts to persuade the USA to end the human rights scandal at the Guantánamo Bay prison camp, Amnesty International said today on the eve of the third anniversary of detentions at the US naval base in Cuba.

 

"Over the past three years, Guantánamo has become an icon of lawlessness", Amnesty International said. "In its more than 1,000 days of executive detentions, it has become a symbol of a government’s attempt to put itself above the law. The example it sets is dangerous to us all."

 

Full judicial review of detention, and access to lawyers and independent human rights monitors, are basic safeguards against torture and ill-treatment, arbitrary detention, and "disappearance". Evidence that Guantánamo detainees have been tortured and ill-treated continues to mount, with FBI agents now added to the list of those making such allegations. Yesterday, the military announced that it will carry out an internal investigation into these latest allegations.

 

"Another internal review is not enough," Amnesty International said. "A comprehensive independent commission of inquiry into all aspects of the USA’s ‘war on terror’ detention and interrogation policies and practices is long overdue. No agency should be exempt from scrutiny and no individual exempt from prosecution if the evidence supports it."

 

The administration of President George W. Bush has sanctioned detention conditions and interrogation techniques in Guantánamo that violate international standards. Previous military reviews and inquiries, let alone the administration itself, have yet to denounce such treatment.

 

Interrogation techniques authorized for use in Guantánamo have included stress positions, isolation, hooding, sensory deprivation, and the use of dogs. Among the abuses reported by FBI agents are the cruel and prolonged use of shackling, and the use of loud music and strobe lights. They have also reported witnessing the use of dogs to intimidate detainees in Guantánamo. Yet military officials, including those involved in earlier investigations, have previously given assurances that no dogs have been used in this way in the naval base. A full independent commission of inquiry, as called for by Amnesty International since last May, is clearly required.

 

President Bush has made it a mantra of his time in office that the USA is committed to the rule of law and the "non-negotiable demands of human dignity." The USA’s own National Security Strategy and National Strategy for Combating Terrorism stress that respect for such standards must be central to the pursuit of security. The administration’s policy in Guantánamo is now the most notorious symbol of its failure to live up to its promises.

 

"The administration’s words alone, that it will remain wedded to human rights and the rule of law even as it wages its ‘war on terror’, are no longer to be believed", Amnesty International said. "It must show such commitment by its actions and change course fully in line with international law and standards."

 

Six months after the US Supreme Court ruled that the federal courts have jurisdiction to hear appeals from the detainees, the administration is trying to keep any review of the lawfulness of individual detentions as far from a judicial process as possible. It has argued in federal court that administrative review by so-called Combatant Status Review Tribunals -- panels of military officers that may rely on secret or coerced evidence to label as "enemy combatants" detainees who have no access to legal counsel -- is more than enough due process.

 

More than 500 detainees of many nationalities remain detained without charge or trial in Guantánamo. Four have been charged for trial by military commission, trials which would violate international law and standards. Commission proceedings have been suspended since November following a ruling by a federal judge. The administration has appealed the ruling, intent on continuing with the military commissions, bodies which entirely lack independence from the executive.

 

"Along with the individual detainees and their families, the rule of law is falling victim to this disdain for the judiciary", Amnesty International said. "The example being set by Guantánamo is of a world where basic human rights are negotiable, and where arbitrary detention and selective second-class justice become acceptable in the name of security."

 

Amnesty International reiterates its call for the Guantánamo detainees to be brought to fair trial or released -- with proposed trials by military commission terminated once and for all. All allegations of torture or ill-treatment in Guantánamo or elsewhere must be independently investigated, and anyone responsible for torture or ill-treatment brought to justice. All secret and incommunicado detention must be ended immediately, as must secret transfers of detainees between countries.

 

http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGAMR510032005

[Vern Gagne 0]

No links? Why the hell were they fighting along side the terrorist in Iraq, and Al Qaeda and Taliban members in Afghanistan? Just happpened to be carrying a AK-47 in the same vicinity.

[Guest sek69]

A military jury found Spc Graner guilty of 9 out of 10 charges in the prisoner abuse case, so take that for what you will.

[NoCalMike 0]

A military jury found Spc Graner guilty of 9 out of 10 charges in the prisoner abuse case, so take that for what you will.

Something tells me the worst of the charges isn't "put hood on head" like people on this board claim is the worst offenses going on.

[Guest sek69]

From the CNN.com article:

 

In another message, the article said, Graner responded to someone's e-mail about a "Take Your Children to Work Day" by writing, "How about send a bastard to hell day?" He attached "a photograph of a detainee's head bloodied beyond recognition," the article said.

 

I'd love to hear some blowhard right wing radio host spin that as good clean innocent fun.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

There are cases of sodomizing and such, but most of the people here on this board probably won't believe it until it is proven without a shadow of a doubt, where they might not believe the people who make such claims. I don't see why the prisoners might lie about it especially considering that the charges just keep getting worse, so it's not out of the question.

 

It's understandable though, their stance I mean, since it should take a lot of evidence when it comes to serious crimes like these. Ironic, considering they didn't need much evidence to believe that there were WMD's in Iraq LOL2004~!