human rights

weighing the benefits of torture

A top-secret document [revealed] how MI6 and MI5 officers were allowed to extract information from prisoners being illegally tortured overseas ...

The interrogation policy – details of which are believed to be too sensitive to be publicly released at the government inquiry into the UK's role in torture and rendition – instructed senior intelligence officers to weigh the importance of the information being sought against the amount of pain they expected a prisoner to suffer. It was operated by the British government for almost a decade...

One section states: "If the possibility exists that information will be or has been obtained through the mistreatment of detainees, the negative consequences may include any potential adverse effects on national security if the fact of the agency seeking or accepting information in those circumstances were to be publicly revealed.

"For instance, it is possible that in some circumstances such a revelation could result in further radicalisation, leading to an increase in the threat from terrorism."

The policy adds that such a disclosure "could result in damage to the reputation of the agencies", and that this could undermine their effectiveness.

whitewashing torture

In August, 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder -- under continuous, aggressive prodding by the Obama White House -- announced that three categories of individuals responsible for Bush-era torture crimes would be fully immunized from any form of criminal investigation and prosecution:  (1) Bush officials who ordered the torture (Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld); (2) Bush lawyers who legally approved it (Yoo, Bybee, Levin), and (3) those in the CIA and the military who tortured within the confines of the permission slips they were given by those officials and lawyers (i.e., "good-faith" torturers).  The one exception to this sweeping immunity was that low-level CIA agents and servicemembers who went so far beyond the torture permission slips as to basically commit brutal, unauthorized murder would be subject to a "preliminary review" to determine if a full investigation was warranted -- in other words, the Abu Ghraib model of justice was being applied, where only low-ranking scapegoats would be subject to possible punishment while high-level officials would be protected.

letter to an extremist

Dear David Cameron,

I neither voted for you, nor do any of your policies or positions represent my interests. Your enormous majority means that I have no representative under this so-called democracy - and am not likely to have one for as long as I live in this constituency. But I would like at least to be added as a statistic: someone who finds your policies abhorrent, dangerous, and imbued with the most distasteful ideology which both fails to understand the difficulties normal people face and which threatens to kill off the structures and social values which have been built up over centuries.

You will kill off people too: this is happening already. If you look at the suicide rates of people with mental health, forced to undergo humiliating, unsympathetic and narrow 'work assessments' you will see that these have increased just in the time you have been in power. If you look at the closure of care homes and removal of care for the elderly and mentally ill, you will see that you are already condemning these people to an even more miserable existence, through no fault of their own. If you look at the record of commissioned out (privatised) health and social care services, you will see that they are both more expensive and of lower quality than those provided by the NHS.

bp and the turkish kurds

A BP-led consortium is breaking international rules governing the human rights responsibilities of multinational companies in its operations on the controversial Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, the UK Government ruled...

The ruling states that BP failed to investigate and respond to complaints from local people of intimidation by state security forces in Turkey guarding the pipeline. Local human rights defender Ferhat Kaya, for instance, has reported that he was detained and tortured by the paramilitary police for insisting on fair compensation. Villagers allege that they are routinely interrogated when they raise concerns over the pipeline.

The pipeline passes through an area of north-east Turkey with a substantial Kurdish minority who have been subject to state repression for decades. Since the pipeline's inception over a decade ago, human rights campaigners in Turkey and the UK have highlighted the risk of local people, particularly Kurdish minorities, being intimidated by state security forces. Today's ruling has found that, despite widespread awareness of this "heightened risk intimidation", BP failed adequately to respond to or investigate allegations of abuse that were brought to its attention.

The Complaint argued that such intimidation deterred local people from participating in BP's consultations about the pipeline's route and compensation negotiations for loss of land and livelihoods.

obama delivers on healthcare (2)

The 2,000-page piece of legislation, according to figures compiled by Physicians for a National Health Plan (PNHP), will leave at least 23 million people without insurance, a figure that translates into an estimated 23,000 unnecessary deaths a year among people who cannot afford care. It will permit prices to climb so that many of us will soon be paying close to 10 percent of our annual income to buy commercial health insurance, although this coverage will only pay for about 70 percent of our medical expenses. Those who become seriously ill, lose their incomes and cannot pay skyrocketing premiums will be denied coverage. And at least $447 billion in taxpayer subsidies will now be handed to insurance firms. We will be forced by law to buy their defective products. There is no check in the new legislation to halt rising health care costs. The elderly can be charged three times the rates provided to the young. Companies with predominantly female work forces can be charged higher gender-based rates. The dizzying array of technical loopholes in the bill—written in by armies of insurance and pharmaceutical lobbyists—means that these companies, which profit off human sickness, suffering and death, can continue their grim game of trading away human life for money...

The health care reform bill, to quote a statement released by PNHP, has instead “saddled Americans with an expensive package of onerous individual mandates, new taxes on workers’ health plans, countless sweetheart deals with the insurers and Big Pharma, and a perpetuation of the fragmented, dysfunctional, and unsustainable system that is taking such a heavy toll on our health and economy today.”

too broad and subjective

UPDATED: A public ponging

Correspondence:
Ping (me)
Pong (Rentoul)
Ping (me)
Pong (Rentoul)
PING...
POOOONG (You shill, you)
NO PINGS ALLOWED

John Rentoul, chief political commentator at the Independent on Sunday, has also boarded the We Hate The Human Rights Act bandwagon, along with the Daily Mail, the Sun and Daily Torygraph. How Independent. How liberal.

He joins other esteemed correspondents at the Indy who hate human rights - or who hate them when they get in the way of our middle class 'freedoms'. Mary Dejevsky believes in deportation of the Roma, on the grounds that they are criminal and parasitic, and too expensive for the richer nations to support. Bruce Anderson believes we have a duty to subject the families of terrorists (suspected terrorists?) to torture: 'torture the wife and children' if the terrorist won't talk. And Rentoul, who is a bit more circumspect about the details of which rights he would withdraw, and from whom, thinks the concept of inhuman and degrading treatment 'is too broad and subjective', and therefore probably is fine for terrorists, suspected terrorist (and foreigners).

I wrote to complain about a single paragraph in one of his (two) recent articles against the HRA:

From his article
A Pincer movement on No 10

[Blair] and his home secretaries talked of "revisiting" or even "repealing" the Chahal judgment of the European Court of Human Rights that would not allow the UK to deport a suspected terrorist. Which, needless to say, could not be done.

Syndicate content