Did the U.S. violate an International Ban on Torture?

An excellent article below from the Christian Science Monitor discusses the Convention Against Torture and the US responsibilities to it. Did we violate the CAT convention and use torture in Gitmo Bay, the CIA "black sites" etc.? And if so, what does everyone think about it? Is it the age-old question again: national security vs. individual liberities?

U.S. denies terror suspect torture

This article from the BBC, is quite interesting in the fact that it addresses the allegations against the United States about their tactics in dealing with terror suspects post 9-11. The U.S. Secretary of State for Human Rights claims that the U.S. has laws against torture while testifying in front of the Committee Against Torture in Geneva. However, various human rights groups accuse the U.S. of flouting the Convention Against Torture by allowing torture and inhumane treatment to terror suspects to occur in various detention centers around the world. While the U.S. continue to openly reject their use of torture, they also claim that mistakes have been made and actions have been made to correct those mistakes. However, is this merely just a series of corrections or an acknowledgement of the damage done to America's standing in the world?

Torture in the U.S.

Throughout the class Human Rights/Human Wrongs, we had to fight to keep various people in the US so they would not face persecution and torture in their home countries. I find it quite ironic that we've been fighting for them to stay in a country that Amnesty International has said "is not only failing to take steps to eradicate torture, [but] is actually creating a climate in which torture and other ill-treatment can flourish." An article from CNN.com (see link on title) discusses an Amnesty International Report about the widespread torture and inhumane treatment in US-run detention centers. When searching for country conditions for our asylum/withholding/CAT cases, one expects to find articles outlining the horrible conditions on the countries in question, but who would have thought the US would be in that category. How ironic.

Student's Prize Is a Trip Into Immigration Limbo

This story is about Amadou Ly, an 18 year old boy from Senegal, who faces deportation becuase he is an illegal immigrant.

When he was 13, his mother brought him here, speaking no english at all. She left him in the U.S. to go to school, while she returned to Senegal. He has since become an exceptionally smart young man in a rough situation. He joined a robotics team in NYC and was set to compete in a robot building competition in Atlanta. One problem: He didn't have proper ID to board the plane becuase he was not a legal citizen.

"In the end, his fate could hinge on immigration legislation now being debated in Congress. Several Senate bills include a pathway for successful high school graduates to earn legal status. But a measure passed by the House of Representatives would make his presence in the United States a felony, and both House and Senate bills would curtail the judicial review that allows exceptions to deportation."

Personally, I feel as though he can contribute to society and should be given the opportunity to succeed in the U.S. The immigration reform must take cases like this into account. He has done nothing wrong and doesn't deserve to be treated as if he did do something wrong.

How do you feel? Should someone like Ly be able to stay within the country, or should he be forced to leave as an illegal immigrant?

Bush pushes immigrations reform as Congress returns from break

This is the one of the most recent updates on U.S. immigration policy (following up on Stacy's post). Bush is calling for some sort of middle ground because he believes that it is impossible to send back 11 million illegal aliens, but also is concerned with letting immigrants in to work legally. Bush is currently pushing a bill to allow more foreigners to legally work in the United States, but Conservatives and Democrats have a list of amendments they want to consider. Senator Specter believes differences in opinions will be worked out and that a bill will be passed. Yet Specter does realize that the American immigration system has been broken down and that this bill will not be a quick fix if all problems are not addressed. What will Americans think if this bill is passed? Will they finally voice their opinion? Is this going to be an example of Americans only caring about an issue when that particular issue becomes a controversial topic in the public sphere?

Immigrant Raids

I found an interesting article explaining how 1,000 illegal immigrants were recently arrested from multiple locations in several different states. The article also explains that 9 individuals from the firm employing the immigrants were charged. The 9 individuals knowingly employed the illegal immigrants, asking them to doctor their W-2 tax forms or telling them they did not need to fill out any forms. It's one thing to be unaware of employing illegal immigrants if they seem to have a legitimate social security number, but it is another thing to actually be aware of their status and agree to employ them. It will be interesting to see how increasing penalties for the employers of illegal immigrants will impact illegal immigrantion in the US overall. Will it help? Will it just put more people on the street? It seems like it is too early to tell, but maybe it is best for those Americans enabling illegal immigrants to live in our country to face some consequences.

White House Puts Face on North Korean Human Rights

The article calls to mind Schulz' book "In Our Own Best Interest" and how human rights and politics can get complicated. In anticipation of the Chinese presidents visit to the White House, many groups have been putting pressure on President Bush to take a stand for human rights. Christian groups and other politicians are urging Bush to discuss China's actions in deporting an asylum seeker from N.Korea. A N.Korean woman managed to escape from N. Korea and enter into China. Instead of granting her asylum China sent her back. N.Korea is a well-known abuser of human rights and Bush has previously denounced them for their actions. But, as the article mentions, the U.S. has been too concerned with the nuclear threat posed by N.Korea to bother with "human rights." Since arriving here on Tuesday, Hu Jintao, the Chinese president, has been visiting with important buisness leaders such as Bill Gates and the chairmen of Starbucks. His trip is very much focused around economics, since China is growing in both political and economic power. This presents a tricky situation for President Bush. Will Bush speak out about China's actions or ignore it for fear of disrupting a political relationship?

High Court annuls asylum for white S.Africans

This article discusses "kinship ties" and persecution within the family. The Thomas family has already faced threats (car vandalized, dog poisoned) against their family by blacks in South Africa, but is that enough to constitute persecution? The courts do not think so. The California appeals court ruled that the Thomas family was eligible for asylum or refugee status, but the Supreme Court ruled that this case should have been sent back to the Board of Immigration Appeals. Should "kinship ties" be considered a social group under asylum law? For now, kinship ties are not considered to be a social group and the Thomas family will probably have to pack up and leave America.

Gays not safe anywhere with 'gay bashing'

Last week a U.S. senior news producer with CBS and his co-worker suffered severe injuries after being attacked by 4 men and 2 women outside of a gay bar in St. Maarten. One of the injured men required a titanium plate in his head, the other is still in intensive care, suffering from severe neurological damage.
So, when I read things like this, people like MadMax make my blood boil. It's intolerance and and discrimination that leads to incidents like the one in St. Maarten. What I don't understand is why some "straight people" thing they have the right and duty to gay bash. What did those two men ever do to them?

Asylum detentions 'breaking law'

I thought it might be interesting to look at this article to compare our detention facilities and practices to the U.Ks. Britian believes it is neccesary to detain asylum seekers to control immigration. While others argue that the government can't lock people up simply because they are seeking asylum.