U.N. grills U.S. on torture ban

[warrens]

GENEVA, Switzerland (AP) -- The U.N. has grilled the United States on its compliance with the global ban on torture for the first time since Washington declared war on terrorists, rejecting U.S. refusals to discuss intelligence matters like alleged secret CIA prisons and flights transferring suspects for possible torture in other countries.

The U.N. Committee Against Torture, the global body's watchdog for a 22-year-old treaty forbidding prisoner abuse, asked U.S. officials about a series of issues ranging from Washington's interpretation of the absolute ban on torture to its interrogation methods in prisons such as Abu Ghraib, Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

U.S. officials acknowledge mistakes had been made and that 29 detainees in American facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan had died of what appeared to be suspected abuse or other violations of U.S. law.

U.S. State Department lawyer John B. Bellinger III, who led the U.S. delegation at Friday's hearing, defended Washington's commitment to its international obligations and read prepared answers to written questions submitted in advance from the committee in writing.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/05/05/un.us.torture.ap/index.html

[saigon68]

1. Thugs and War Criminals

[0007]

3. Maybe this is the prelude to the Hague for these thugs and WAR

criminals?

[saigon68]

9. They have to be indicted by someone first

[warrens]

2. 29 tortured to deah

That's what they admit. Wonder what the number really is.

[katinmn]

4. uggh. This should be the top news

[ixion]

5. if you include the innocent civillians in Iraq and Afghanistan

it's over 100,000. :cry:

[Psephos]

6. Does no one else feel the irony of this?

I'm thinking about what the U.N. "peacekeepers" did to those children in Congo, the twelve-year-olds in Liberia, the women in Sierra Leone, Haiti, Cambodia, Bosnia, and East Timor.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1445537,00.html

OTOH, if the U.N. doesn't grill the U.S., who else is gonna do it?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Juvenal, 95 A.D.) - "Who will guard the guards?"

What a fucked-up planet. One thing for sure: anyone who thinks the U.N. has moral authority does not know what has been done in its name.

[NavyDavy]

7. they have more authority than the outlaw administration

we have here in the US.....

[Psephos]

8. I agree, but that's not saying much. n/t

[jukes]

10. K&R, n/t

[Moderator]

11. Kick

[Robbien]

12. U.S. Explains Itself to U.N. on Torture Charges

<snip>

ohn B. Bellinger III, the legal adviser to the State Department, who led the delegation, said that criticism of United States policy has become "so hyperbolic as to be absurd." He added: "I would ask you not to believe every allegation that you have heard." Speaking before the United Nation's Committee Against Torture, he also reiterated the "absolute commitment" of the United States to eradicating torture globally and said the abuses that took place at Abu Ghraib were isolated incidents that have been, or will be, investigated and punished.

But the United Nations legal experts charged with ensuring that nations keep their commitments under the Convention Against Torture appeared skeptical. Fernando Mariño Menéndez of Spain cited data from human rights groups that of 600 United States personnel alleged to have been involved in the torture or murder of prisoners, only 10 received prison terms of a year or more.

<snip>

"The timing of our report comes at a difficult time for the United States," Mr. Bellinger said, referring to recent prisoner abuse scandals, reported kidnappings and the severe treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. "But we did not shy away from coming." However, Gabor Rona, legal director for Human Rights First International, a nongovernmental group, said the American delegation "failed to resolve serious questions about the U.S. commitment to fully implement Congress's recently enacted ban on cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment."

<snip>

In cases where the American government has sent prisoners to countries with poor rights records — a policy the administration defends, saying it helps to get dangerous individuals out of the United States — it seeks assurances they will not be tortured, Mr. Bellinger added. The panel was dubious. "The very fact that you are asking for diplomatic assurances means you are in doubt," said the committee's chairman, Andreas Mavrommatis.

<snip>

An expert from Senegal, Guibril Camara, said it was the committee's interpretation — not that of the United States — that would set the global definition of torture. "One of the parties is going to have to give way," Mr. Camara said. "And I think it's probably going to have to be you."

More
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/05/world/05cnd-rights.html?_r=1&oref=login

The panel will resume questioning on Monday.

[Spazito]

13. Oh my, I love this comment...

"An expert from Senegal, Guibril Camara, said it was the committee's interpretation — not that of the United States — that would set the global definition of torture. "One of the parties is going to have to give way," Mr. Camara said. "And I think it's probably going to have to be you."

Gee, Gonzales won't like that, lol.

[Robbien]

16. Me too, these UN guys aren't being a bunch of pushovers

The panel appeared to be very aggravated at the US team who kept saying over and over the US was obeying all the torture rules. (Ha, these rules must be included in the 700 or so rules BushCo feels do not pertain to him.)

The panel said the US team has to come back on Monday with specific details (I guess all that GOP mealy-mouth talk isn't working on them).

No wonder BushCo is pushing to get rid of the UN.

[Spazito]

17. Yep, the UN stands between the neocons and their plans

and that will never do.

[JuniperLea]

14. I'm surprised daily

By the fact that the UN has not levied sanctions against the US. BushCo begs for them constantly.

[Rex]

15. "Well ya see, your honor, these guys were swarthy and should not

have any protections under international law." That is basically what the US is saying. It is our legal right to hold people indefinitely and without any kind of due process.

[understandinglife]

18. ZZEEEEEEEERROOOOOOOOO credibility ... Mr Bellinger - zip, nada, none.

Never Forget: George W. Bush willfully violated National Security to cover-up his willful launch of a war of aggression and illegal occupation of Iraq.