Doublespeak undermines war on terrorism: Amnesty
Amnesty International has condemned the behaviour of both the US and the UK saying that both country's doublespeak has undermined their own war on terrorism and increased human rights violations from Colombia to North Korea.
It's actually depressing beyond words. Since 9-11 the West appears to have lost it's moral compass almost as completely as the people who slammed the planes into the buildings on that dreadful day.Accusations that the United States — with the complicity of some European nations — while banning torture at home had been flying prisoners around the world for interrogation by countries with no such qualms had dented their moral authority, it said.
"Duplicity and doublespeak have become the hallmark of the war on terror," the human rights watchdog's secretary general Irene Khan told a news conference to publish its annual report.
"There is evidence of widespread torture in U.S. detention centers," she said. "The United States outsources torture to countries like Morocco, Jordan and Syria."
She said that at least seven European countries had sanctioned or turned a blind eye to the use of their airspace for so-called extraordinary rendition flights carrying prisoners for interrogation outside the United States.
"Powerful governments are playing a dangerous game with human rights," Khan said. "The scorecard of prolonged conflicts and mounting human rights abuses is there for all to see."
"Nothing can justify torture or ill-treatment … You cannot extinguish a fire with petrol."
Bush can say what he likes about the US not engaging in torture but the cumulative evidence is mounting against him.
Nor are Amnesty the only group that implies this. Human Rights Watch have also condemned the American approach to human rights under the Bush administration.
Human Rights Watch’s Response to the United States
Human Rights Watch take apart the American position and reveal just how clearly the Bush regime are attempting to circumnavigate the current rules banning torture.
When a regime makes the claims that Bush is making, it becomes impossible to believe that they are not encouraging torture.
Click on the link above for the full report, but for a taster:
The US refuse to give any information regarding the CIA, giving the obvious impression that torture is okay if it is an intelligence agency that is carrying out the torture.
The US takes the position that their Article 3 obligation not to send someone to a country where they will be in danger of being subjected to torture does not apply if a person is initially arrested or detained outside the territory of the United States.
That's insane. And it seems to be ignoring the whole point of Article 3, which is to prevent prisoners being sent to regimes where they may be tortured. Article 3 makes no reference at all to the location where any suspects may have been arrested.
Again, why would the US seek to make this distinction?
The US continues to promote its policy of relying on diplomatic assurances as a safeguard against a return to torture.
But the US makes no attempt to even monitor what happens to prisoners that it does hand over to suspect regimes. More importantly:
When asked whether the United States would continue to rely on diplomatic assurances if the country had previously tortured an individual returned to its custody, in violation of prior diplomatic assurances, the United States answered that the past practices would be “highly relevant.” The answer should have been, “no.”The US position is that they wouldn't automatically rule out sending a person to a country known for torture, even if that country had previously given a reassurance and had been found to have violated that reassurance.
Read the report for yourself. It's depressing beyond words.
The entire US case is based on mendacity and a deliberate reading of the rules that skewers the original meaning of all international law regarding torture.
I ask again, why would they reveal this mindset if they did not intend to torture? What reasonable person could even formulate the argument that they are putting forth?
For some indication of what this torture entails, click here.
If you're a blogger, when you have read that, click here.
Click title for article on Amnesty's findings.
2 comments:
Kel..
I have to tell you, I could not finish reading it, I felt so disturbed by it. It makes the hair stand up and the more I find out (in general), the more depressed and 'lost' I feel. Lost as in, is there no safe place? To think (and I am writing from the US) that there will be so many people who will refuse to even consider that these things go on because they've been propagandized about their country...how do the Brits feel about these things?
Ingrid
Ingrid,
I feel exactly the same as you do.
It numbs me.
It's not just that I read these things and despair that it is happening and that my country is involved in it, it's more the fact that I only ever read about this stuff online, it's the total lack of outrage from our national press that I find so disturbing. People should be resigning over this stuff, and yet they're not.
There appears to be a public apathy about this.
We should be screaming to make them stop doing this in our name.
An outrage is being done, and if we don't shout about it, then I fear we are being complicit in it.
Kel.
Post a Comment