"Poul Nielsen" <mega@lan.dk> wrote in message
news:459fb32a$0$49196$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
>
> "Allan Riise" <ari06@pc.dk> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:459fb08b$0$2091$edfadb0f@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>>
>> > Det mener jeg ikke er tilfældet, Der er enkeltstående tilfælde af
> tortur,
>> > men det kan du jo ikke dømme hele USA´s militær på. For de der er
>> > interesseret i at vide mere om dette emne kan Pentagon channel bruges
>> > (hvis
>> > du har en parabol) ellers kan du læse mere information om dette emne
>> > fra
>> > USA
>> > ´s forsvarsministerium.
>> >
http://www.pentagonchannel.mil/
>>
>>
>> Det vil jo svare til at når du mangler høns i din hønsegård så spørger du
>> Ræven om han har spist om, og så tror du på hans svar, uagtet at han har
>> hønsefjer i munden.
>>
>
> Jamen hvofor skulle de bruge pres??, flere af de anholdte på Guantanamo
> har
> jo selv indrømmet, ja enddog pralet med at de ville begå mere terror imod
> vesten hvis de fik chancen igen, der er tale om enkelstående tilfælde. USA
> har flere gange taget afstand fra tortur.
NEWS BRIEF: "Torture Inc. America's Brutal Prisons", By Deborah Davies,
Global Research, 23 May 2005
"They are just some of the victims of wholesale torture taking place inside
the U.S. prison system that we uncovered during a four-month investigation
for BBC Channel 4 . It's terrible to watch some of the videos and realise
that you're not only seeing torture in action but, in the most extreme
cases, you are witnessing young men dying. The prison guards stand over
their captives with electric cattle prods, stun guns, and dogs. Many of the
prisoners have been ordered to strip naked. The guards are yelling abuse at
them, ordering them to lie on the ground and crawl. 'Crawl, motherf*****s,
crawl.' If a prisoner doesn't drop to the ground fast enough, a guard kicks
him or stamps on his back. There's a high-pitched scream from one man as a
dog clamps its teeth onto his lower leg.
"Another prisoner has a broken ankle. He can't crawl fast enough so a guard
jabs a stun gun onto his buttocks. The jolt of electricity zaps through his
naked flesh and genitals. For hours afterwards his whole body shakes. Lines
of men are now slithering across the floor of the cellblock while the guards
stand over them shouting, prodding and kicking. Second by second, their
humiliation is captured on a video camera by one of the guards.
The images of abuse and brutality he records are horrifyingly familiar.
These were exactly the kind of pictures from inside Abu Ghraib prison in
Baghdad that shocked the world this time last year. And they are similar,
too, to the images of brutality against Iraqi prisoners that this week led
to the conviction of three British soldiers. But there is a difference.
These prisoners are not caught up in a war zone. They are Americans, and the
video comes from inside a prison in Texas They are just some of the victims
of wholesale torture taking place inside the U.S. prison system that we
uncovered during a four-month investigation for Channel 4 that will be
broadcast next week."
"Our findings were not based on rumour or suspicion. They were based on
solid evidence, chiefly videotapes that we collected from all over the U.S.
Each tape provides a shocking insight into the reality of life inside the
U.S. prison system - a reality that sits very uncomfortably with President
Bush's commitment to the battle for freedom and democracy against the forces
of tyranny and oppression."
"In fact, the Texas episode outlined above dates from 1996, when Bush was
state Governor."
Let this fact sink in very, very deeply into your mind and heart. Torture
very similar to that which was occurring in Afghanistan and Iraqi jails was
occurring in American prisons -- including Texas -- in 1996, a year in which
George W. Bush was Governor of the state of Texas! Since this fact is true,
we should not have been too surprised to learn that torture of prisoners
followed the attacks of 9/11 quickly.
Og...
US seeks to block enforcement of anti-torture treaty
By Patrick Martin
5 August 2002
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author
Torture should be added to the list of evils that the Bush administration is
defending, in accordance with a foreign policy based on unilateral American
domination of the globe. On July 24, the American delegation to the United
Nations Economic and Social Council (UNESOC) tried and failed to table an
anti-torture protocol, losing the vote 29-15. The protocol was then approved
by a 35-8 vote and goes to the fall session of the UN General Assembly for
ratification. Since it is not a Security Council resolution, the measure is
not subject to US veto.
The target of the US diplomatic assault was a measure negotiated over the
past ten years to implement the International Convention Against Torture, a
treaty that went into force in 1987 and was ratified by the US Congress in
1994. The anti-torture treaty, like most international human rights
agreements, lacks an enforcement mechanism, because those regimes that are
engaged in human rights abuses are willing to sign a treaty, but oppose any
serious measures to implement its provisions. This is precisely the position
of the US, which is now on record as opposing the implementation of the
treaty on torture.
The proposal brought before the UNESOC called for the establishment of a
system of regular inspections of prisons and detention centers in every
country adhering to the protocol. The purpose would be to seek evidence of
torture or "other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment"
directed against prison inmates, prisoners of war, refugees or other
detainees.
Accepting the protocol would be voluntary, meaning that countries that had
signed the anti-torture convention could block inspections. But even a plan
for voluntary inspections was too much for Washington. The Bush
administration moved to table the protocol and negotiate a new one that
would be less "intrusive"-an effort that human rights groups branded as an
attempt to block any enforcement provision at all.
Martin MacPherson, head of the legal program for Amnesty International,
said, "A vote against the optional protocol would be a disastrous setback in
the fight against torture." Amnesty reported that people were tortured or
ill treated by political authorities in 111 countries last year.
The Bush administration has three major concerns about the treaty. Its
immediate fear is that many countries will demand access to the detention
camp at the US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where more than 500
prisoners of war from Afghanistan are being held as alleged Al Qaeda
members. Many European and Middle Eastern countries have criticized the
conditions at Guantanamo as a violation of the Geneva Convention.
Secondly, there is considerable discussion in official Washington
circles-both government and media-about the possibility of introducing
torture for terrorist suspects following the model of Israel. The Israeli
government follows a policy of permitting "limited physical pressure"
against prisoners in the name of preventing terror bombings. Such language
covers a multitude of practices illegal under international law, from
holding prisoners indefinitely to physical violence such as electric shock
treatment.
Thirdly, international observers may seek access to the US prison system
itself, one of the largest in the world with more than two million
incarcerated, most of them in state prisons and local jails. Bush
administration officials said that giving foreigners the right to enter such
facilities would be unconstitutional because it would violate "states'
rights," since many US states currently refuse entry to foreign inspectors.
Numerous US states also refuse to recognize obligations under international
treaties that give foreign nationals the right to see a consular official
from their home country if arrested abroad. Bush's home state of Texas
actually argued, in the case of an immigrant who was executed without ever
seeing his consul, that since the United States had signed the consular
treaty, but Texas had not, the state was not obligated to obey it.
The vote at the UN produced an unusual line-up, with China and Cuba strongly
supporting the US position, since neither country wishes to open its
extensive prison system to international inspection. Australia, which has
come under mounting international criticism for abuse of refugees, also
voted for the US resolution, along with Libya, Pakistan, Egypt, Japan and
Russia.
Every member of the European Union (EU) on the United Nations Economic and
Social Council, every African country, and all the Latin American and
Caribbean countries except Cuba voted against the US resolution.
The effort to subvert enforcement of the Convention Against Torture
demonstrates how far the Bush administration has moved from norms of
international conduct that were long upheld, at least for propaganda
purposes, by every American government since World War II. As long ago as
1948, the UN General Assembly inserted a prohibition against torture in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states, "No one shall be
subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment."
Similar language, reflecting international revulsion at the bestial methods
of the Nazis, appears in the Geneva Conventions. Torture is such a serious
breach of international law that any state is empowered to exercise
jurisdiction over it, regardless of where the crime took place, the
nationality of the perpetrator, or the nationality of the victim. This means
that charges against US government officials could be brought in the courts
of, say, Belgium or Sri Lanka.
US courts have themselves found torture to be prohibited by the Eighth
Amendment of the US Constitution, which bans "cruel or unusual punishment,"
the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, and the
Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of due process. But the Bush administration,
arguing before UNESOC, cited the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution,
which upholds the right to be free of "unreasonable search or seizure,"
claiming that international inspections of US prisons would constitute such
an violation.
The attempt to sabotage the anti-torture treaty is the latest in a series of
Bush administration moves to rip up international treaty obligations. The
same week, the US became the first country to rescind pledged contributions
to the UN Population Fund, contending that family planning funds might be
used to promote forced abortions in China. The European Union attacked the
US argument as specious and the decision as a cave-in to right-wing
fundamentalist forces at home. The EU voted to provide the UN with $32
million out of the $34 million cut by the US.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/aug2002/tort-a05.shtml
--
Allan Riise