America : Human Rights Abuser

From Truthout.org

United Nations - A running gag at the United Nations is that whenever the United States takes a defiant stand against an overwhelming majority of the 191 member states, there are only three countries that predictably vote with Washington most of the time - whether it is right or dead wrong.

As expected, this incongruous voting pattern was repeated Wednesday when the three loyal US allies - Israel and the two tiny Pacific Island nations of Palau and the Marshall Islands - were the only member states to stand in unison with the United States when it rejected a resolution calling for the creation of a new Human Rights Council.

The vote in the General Assembly was 170 in favor and four against (United States, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau), with three abstentions (Venezuela, Iran and Belarus).

...

But such an effort [to allow the U.S. to "work with" the new Human Rights Council] should be rejected, [Phyllis Bennis, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Institute for Policy Studies] said, as countries evaluating human rights records keep in mind the continuing patterns of US human rights violations both within the United States itself and internationally, where US military or political officials are in power.

"No country with such a record of torture, secret detentions, 'extraordinary renditions,' rejection of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC), denial of due process and generations of capital punishment, even for minors and the mentally disabled - all as a matter of official policy - should be allowed to serve on the new Human Rights Council," said Bennis, author of "Challenging Empire: How People, Governments and the UN Defy US"

If the General Assembly does indeed allow the United States a seat, she argued, special care should be taken to insure that the mandatory human rights evaluation carried out of all members be taken very seriously when it comes to the US, so that the claim that the so-called "indispensable nation" should be somehow exempt from human rights scrutiny will be rejected.

Detainee rests inside his cell, Camp Delta, Guantánamo Bay US Naval Base, Cuba. © AP GraphicsBank

Four years ago, the USA transferred the first “war onNow, I'm sure those on the right would consider this to be "America Bashing", but I have to point out that what Bennis is saying here is simply true. America's Human Rights Record is a failure.

Amnesty International Reports:

Many cases of torture and ill-treatment of detainees held in facilities controlled by the Iraqi authorities have been reported since the handover of power in June 2004. Among other methods, victims have been subjected to electric shocks or have been beaten with plastic cables. The picture that is emerging is one in which the Iraqi authorities are systematically violating the rights of detainees in breach of guarantees contained both in Iraqi legislation and in international law and standards – including the right not to be tortured and to be promptly brought before a judge.

Amnesty International is concerned that neither the MNF nor Iraqi authorities have established sufficient safeguards to protect detainees from torture or ill-treatment. It is particularly worrying that, despite reports of torture or ill-treatment by US and UK forces and the Iraqi authorities, for thousands of detainees access to the outside world continues to be restricted or delayed. Under conditions where monitoring of detention facilities by independent bodies is restricted – not least, due to the perilous security situation – measures which impose further limitations on the contact detainees may have with legal counsel or relatives increase the risk that they will be subject to torture or other forms of abuse.

A screenshot from the Amnesty International flash movie "Connecting the Dots," shows a photo of Canadian citizen Maher Arar, who was arrested by U.S. officials and sent to Syria, where he was reportedly tortured. He was never charged with a crime.

There is also the Habeas Schabeas Report from NPR where for Gitmo detainees were interviewed. The vast majority (over 90%) of those who have been and were held at Gitmo and subjected to torture - are completely innocent of any crime or connection to al Qaeda or terrorism.

Some would argue that the UN has no standing following the Oil For Food Scandal, however it should be pointed out that the U.S., as a member of the UN Security Council had full veto power over any deals made with Iraq to provide for Humanitarian aide, and that the best estimates on the money siphoned by Saddam Hussein under OFF ($1.7 Billion) are far less than the amount of money squandered by the Coalition Provisional Authority ($8.8 Billion) long after "Mission Accomplished" was declared. So what makes the credibility of the U.S. (Government) any greater than that of the UN?

Clearly America has a right to protect itself from acts of brutal and violent terrorism. But it also has a responsibilty to abide by the rule of law in the process. If we not only throw out the Geneva Conventions, but our own Constitution (which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment) what exactly is it we're protecting - certainly not our way of life if we allow it to be degraded to a point where illegal surveillance, detention, torture and even murder of uncharged and unprosecuted persons?

I for one am glad that the new UN Human Rights Council has been formed, and also the likelyhood that U.S. involvement will increase once (temporary) Ambassador John Bolton - who has vehemently opposed the Council - is retired at the end of the year.

Vyan