Talking Rights

Tags:   China · Human Rights · TiananmenNo Comments.

Sotomayor was one of the appeals judges to hear the case of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen who was suing the US government over his extraordinary rendition in 2002. Suspected wrongly of being a terrorist, Arar was detained at JFK, then flown to Syria, where he underwent 10 months and 10 days of torture.

Unfortinately, the Obama Administration has embraced the state-secrets claims pioneered by the Bush administration, arguing that his suit would reveal too much confidential information. As the New York Times noted in February, “In Mr. Arar’s case, the secrecy claims are even more baseless in light of the widespread publicity about his treatment, and the published findings by the Canadians.”

This clip features Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor grilling a Justice Department lawyer. This actually took place in November 2008, tobefore Obama’s inauguration. She cuts to the chase very quickly…

Tags:   extraordinary rendition · maher arar · Sotomayor · tortureNo Comments.

Worth watching, if only for Stewart’s impassioned defense of human rights:

Jon Stewart’s Extended Interview with Cliff May | Indecision Forever | Comedy Central

Tags: No Comments.

Just as the second invasion of Iraq was a (not so) carefully coordinated campaign of half truths and whole lies, the justfication for torture is beginning to fall completely apart.

Not that it wasn’t already an evident fabrication, but…

Today’s New York Times reports that in late 2007 ABC’s Brian Ross interviewed a former CIA operative who claimed that waterboarding — internationally recognized as torture by most countries, including (pre-George W. Bush) the United States — prompted terror suspect Abu Zubaydah to talk.

John Kiriakou claimed that in 2002, Zubaydah cooperated after being waterboarded for “probably 30, 35 seconds… From that day on he answered every question.”

Except NOT. Kiriakou was not present for Zubaydah’s interrogation. He later claimed that torture had produced information that “disrupted a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks.”

These assertions, which went absolutely unchallenged by Ross, fed a frenzy or pro-torture advocates, who claimed that this proved that “torture works.” The timing of the interview was significant, as the Times reports:

Weeks earlier, the nomination of Michael Mukasey as attorney general was nearly derailed by his refusal to comment on the legality of waterboarding, and one day later, the C.I.A. director testified about the destruction of interrogation videotapes. Mr. Kiriakou told MSNBC that he was willing to talk in part because he thought the C.I.A. had “gotten a bum rap on waterboarding.”

Except we now know that Zubaydah was waterboarded at least 83 times, according to the recently released Justice Department memos. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003, after he had already given the FBI the information that allowed them to foil a planned attack on the west coast.

Former FBI agent Ali Soufan recently described to Newsweek’s Mike Isikoff  how the Abu Zubaydah interrogation actually unfolded. It is a moving, sobering read. Soufan found the suspect handcuffed to a gurney, with bullet fragments in his stomach, leg and groin from his capture in Pakistan. The CIA wanted “to crack” him by stripping him nude, turning down the temperature and bombarding him with loud music.  Soufan discovered a dark wooden “confinement box” that the contractor had built for Abu Zubaydah. It looked, Soufan recalls, “like a coffin.”

(Soufan and FBI colleague Steve Gaudin) began the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah. They nursed his wounds, gained his confidence and got the terror suspect talking. They extracted crucial intelligence—including the identity of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as the architect of 9/11 and the dirty-bomb plot of Jose Padilla—before CIA contractors even began their aggressive tactics.

“I’ve kept my mouth shut about all this for seven years,” Soufan says. But now, with the declassification of Justice memos and the public assertions by Cheney and others that “enhanced” techniques worked, Soufan feels compelled to speak out. “I was in the middle of this, and it’s not true that these [aggressive] techniques were effective,” he says. “We were able to get the information about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a couple of days. We didn’t have to do any of this [torture]. We could have done this the right way.”

In a piece in the New York Times earlier, Soufan explicitly contradicts the assertion that the torture of Zubaydah produced useful intelligence that could not have been obtained using legal methods:

Defenders of these techniques have claimed that they got Abu Zubaydah to give up information leading to the capture of Ramzi bin al-Shibh, a top aide to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Mr. Padilla. This is false. The information that led to Mr. Shibh’s capture came primarily from a different terrorist operative who was interviewed using traditional methods. As for Mr. Padilla, the dates just don’t add up: the harsh techniques were approved in the memo of August 2002, Mr. Padilla had been arrested that May.

It appears clearer and clearer that the Bush administration used torture not because we were so threatened, but instead to manufactuire evidence linking Al Qaeda to Iraq, thereby providing a justification for US involvement there. And like the WMD debate, our journalists — Brian Ross in particular — proved, at best, willing dupes.

Brian, may I introduce you to Judith Miller.

No wonder ABC has removed the video of the Kiriakou interview.

And where is Kiriakou now? According to the Times, on the staff of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

Tags:   Abu Zubaydah · Bush · Human Rights · torture · war on terrorNo Comments.

This Los Angeles Times editorial on accountability for torture seems well thought out — there have been too many hysterics since the Obama administration released the torture memos and not enough calm thought.

An in-depth and impartial investigation, possible targetted prosecution and a full accounting to the American people. Not much to argue with here.

…As we are learning by the day, the Bush administration contorted the Constitution and concocted preposterous legal theories to protect itself while it pursued its war on terror. Its many failings included cynicism, recklessness, distrust of the public and disregard for law and history. To reclaim our heritage and standing, the nation requires rejection of all of those. What is needed now are trust, candor, care and patience — enduring American values temporarily forgotten at great cost.

Tags:   accountability · Bush · Human Rights · Obama · torture · torture memosNo Comments.

An important opinion piece by Ken Roth in the Los Angeles Times. Under the guise of recovering from the 1994 genocide — whose 15th anniversary we mark this month — Rwandan president Paul Kagame has created a nation where dissent is not tolerated and talk of the past is carefully controlled.

Despite the facade of occasional elections, the government essentially runs a one-party state. And ironically, it is the genocide that has provided the government with a cover for repression. Under the guise of preventing another genocide, the government displays a marked intolerance of the most basic forms of dissent.

One of the ways the government does this is by pursuing the charge of  “genocide ideology.” The law is written so broadly that it can encompass “even the most innocuous comments. As many Rwandans have discovered, disagreeing with the government or making unpopular statements can easily be portrayed as genocide ideology, punishable by sentences of 10 to 25 years.”

Many lessons can be drawn from Rwanda’s experience. But one of the most powerful is this. A country that has gone through a period of political violence must find ways to deal with the past in ways that promotes and accepts a diversity of opinion. To shut down debate — as some in the US want to do with the Bush Admin9istration’s legacy — only means that questions fester.

But they never go away.

Tags: No Comments.

Former President of Peru Alberto Fujimori

When the son of Japanese immigrants was elected to Peru’s presidential palace in 1990, most Peruvians were thrilled. Finally, someone “like them” — not white, not born to privilege, a hard worker — was in power. People called him “el chinito,” the Little Chinaman, in an entirely affectionate and appreciative way.

That enthusiasm didn’t last long. First came the economic “shocks,” which left millions with worthless money and goods they couldn’t sell. The war that devastated the highlands moved decisively to the cities. The biggest car bomb in the country’s history killed 24 in the upscale Miraflores neighborhood.

An equally ominous series of death squad killings linked to Peru’s leading teachers’ college made it clear that the government itself was involved in an Argentina-style dirty war.

Yesterday, the politician once heralded as the hope of the cholo, or mixed race, majority was sentenced to 25 years in prison for his hand in creating that death squad. Known as the Grupo Colina, it included former Army and police members. Although some Grupo Colina members were tried, as president, Fujimori signed a law that granted amnesty to anyone accused of, tried for, convicted of, or sentenced for human rights violations perpetrated by the security forces.

Really.

When a court ruled the amnesty unconstitutional, Fujimori responded by signing another law, drafted by his legislative supporters, to bar judicial review of the amnesty laws, thus ensuring that criminals would go unpunished. Eventually, both of these laws were repealed.

Fujimori is not the first to be prosecuted for the Colina killings. Julio Salazar, a former intelligence chief, was sentenced to thirty-five years  for his role in the La Cantuta massacre. His boss, Vladimiro Montesinos, is also in prison, facing trialon dozens of offenses including murder, arms trafficking, drug trafficking, and political corruption.

Human rights advocates should take heart from this. Throughout the world, the idea of justice for serious human rights crimes is gaining real force. It can come through international efforts by the International Criminal Court or special tribunals — or it can come from a national justice system supported by other countries (Chile extradited an unwitting Fujimori to Peru in 2007) and revitalized by investment, support and a new generation of citezens.

Que viva el Peru!

Tags:   Fujimori · Grupo Colina · PeruNo Comments.

A March 20 hearing at the Interamerican Commission on Human Rights, detailing torture by the United States. This is just the beginning of what will be years of investigation into human rights abuses committed in the name of the “war on terror.”

And we are no safer…

The beginning is in Spanish but the speakers are in English.

Tags: No Comments.

from today’s USA Today:

Before her visit to China, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton removed the issue of human rights from the table, saying it could “interfere” with talks on the global economic crisis, climate change and security.

She missed a critical point. Human rights aren’t a side dish on a crowded buffet. Human rights support and frame each of these other important issues. To overlook them is to court failure on the themes she highlights.

How, for instance, does Secretary Clinton plan to secure China’s support for economic reform? Along with the government, she needs people like Bao Tong, once a top Communist Party official who argues that economic health starts with political reform. For that, he spent seven years in prison and lives under virtual house arrest in Beijing.

On climate change and the devastation wrought by poorly regulated Chinese industry, there is no better informed person than Hu Jia. But Hu, one of China’s leading dissidents, who was awarded the prestigious Sakharov Prize last year by the European Parliament, is serving a three-and-a-half year sentence for “inciting subversion of state power,” in part for environmental activism.

Human rights are a beacon to millions. To briskly dismiss them betrays the immense sacrifice so many make for the freedoms Americans can take for granted. If Secretary Clinton misses this point, the Chinese government does not. During her visit, more than a dozen dissidents were questioned, followed or detained.

We cannot reform China from the outside. People like Bao Tong and Hu Jia and hundreds of thousands more need freedom and outside support to make change from within. Human rights protect a country’s brilliant thinkers. Human rights foster debate and the new ideas that improve lives.

Human rights are not a luxury; they are fundamental to economic health, air and water purity, and security. Clinton should correct this blunder. By supporting rights leaders, funding rights work and keeping rights at the center of the agenda, the United States could reassume its role as a leader for freedoms in China and the rest of the world.

Tags:   China · Hillary Clinton · Human Rights · Robin KirkNo Comments.

The history of what is studied in universities is long and abundant in controversy. In his old age, Plato once complained that his star student, Aristotle, was “kick[ing] me, as foals do their mothers when they are born” by refuting his teachings.In more recent times, we’ve seen battles erupt over area, gender and ethnic studies. Some lament a perceived eclipse in traditional disciplines like history and philosophy. Others argue for an expanded and shifting menu that includes new subcategories that reflect the emerging regions or issues of the moment.

One newcomer that hasn’t generated much talk is human rights. I teach a course (full disclosure here) at Duke University that begins with Homer’s account of how Achilles desecrated Hector’s body during the Trojan War and the nearly 1,200-page letter indigenous Peruvian writer Guamán Poma de Ayala wrote to Spain’s King Phillip III. The letter contains 398 line drawings, many depicting the killings and acts of torture by conquistadores that Poma de Ayala asked the king to halt.

I believe that the study of human rights should go well beyond the category of the law and should incorporate questions about how human societies struggle over questions of what is moral and who is human.

But the entrance of human rights into the university classroom is relatively recent. The first American university to create a human rights program was New York’s Columbia University. Founded in 1977, the Center for the Study of Human Rights sought, according to its own mission statement, “[t]o integrate Human Rights into the intellectual and programmatic life of the University.”  more

Tags:   Duke Human Rights Center · Human Rights · Robin KirkNo Comments.