Archive for the ‘Human rights’ Category

POLITICS: Rights Groups Appeal For UN Investigation of Rendition

August 7, 2009

By William Fisher, Inter Press Service

NEW YORK, Aug 6 (IPS) – Charging that the U.S. government was complicit in the forced disappearance of an influential Muslim scholar four years ago, human rights groups in the U.S., the U.K., and Switzerland have asked the U.N. to investigate.

In a letter to the U.N., the organisations say Mustafa Setmariam Nassar, a Spanish citizen, was arrested by Pakistani officials and handed over to U.S. officials in Oct. 2005 and has not been heard from since.

The letter was sent to the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Human Rights While Countering Terrorism, Martin Scheinin, and the U.N. Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. It was signed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the London-based legal charity Reprieve, and Alkarama in Geneva.

Continued >>

Iraqis speak of random killings committed by private Blackwater guards

August 7, 2009

Times Online, Aug 7, 2008

Suhad Abul-Ameer, mother of Ali Husamaldeen, who was killed by members of Blackwater, carries his picture as she prays at her house in Baghdad

Suhad Abul-Ameer, mother of Ali Husamaldeen, who was killed by members of Blackwater, carries his picture as she prays at her house in Baghdad

Oliver August in Baghdad

Guards employed by Blackwater, the US security company, shot Iraqis and killed victims in allegedly unprovoked and random attacks, it was claimed yesterday.

A Virginia court also received sworn statements from former Blackwater employees yesterday alleging that Erik Prince, the company’s founder, “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe”.

They also accused the company of following a policy of deliberate killings and arms dealing and of employing people unfit or improperly trained to handle lethal weaponry.

In Baghdad yesterday, some Iraqis said they believed that the case was a last chance for justice and an opportunity for America to divorce the behaviour of its military from the private guards.

Farid Walid, who was shot in Nisour Square two years ago during a massacre that killed 17 Iraqis, said: “Everybody here knows of cases where Blackwater guards shot innocent people without a second thought. They are a symbol of the occupation. Nobody will forget. But Iraqis might think at least a little differently of America if the killers are put in prison.”

Mr Walid is among several Iraqis behind an attempt to take Blackwater to court in the US, helped by an American lawyer, Susan Burke, and her local legal team.

Umm Sajjad, whose husband was allegedly shot by Blackwater guards, said: “The US forces have come to our neighbourhood many times and they never harmed anybody. It was Blackwater that wanted to harm people.”

Her husband was working as a security guard at the Iraqi Media Network, a state broadcaster, when a Blackwater convoy passed them one day in 2007. She says that without warning, the Iraqis were fired upon and three of them were killed. The Blackwater convoy never stopped or sent anyone to check what happened.

Umm Sajjad said: “I was told that there was no exchange of fire or any other reason to provoke them to shoot at my husband and his colleagues. They were on a high building but they didn’t have weapons in their hands.”

Other families have tales of shootings allegedly committed by Blackwater, which has since changed its name.

Abu Suhad lost his daughter in 2007 when she was driving her car near the Iraqi Foreign Ministry in central Baghdad. He said: “Eyewitnesses told me that four white Blackwater cars went by her. Three were already past when the last one shot her in the head at close range and killed her. The eyewitnesses said they were very bewildered why they shot her. The bullet came from the driver’s window, which means that he got next to her when he shot her. The bullet entered from under the ear and left from the upper side of her skull. There were bits of her hair and skin on the car roof.”

Mr Walid remembers the Nisour Square shooting on September 16, 2007 — for Iraqis one of the blacker days of the US occupation. Claiming to have come under fire, Blackwater guards stopped in the middle of a large roundabout and began shooting in all directions.

“I left my car and ran away to hide in a petrol station, which was made of concrete. The shooting was so heavy it was like rain,” he said. “I saw lots of people getting shot. The driver who had been in front of me died and his wife fell out of the car. Her child was killed as well. The shooting went on for about ten minutes.”

Iraqis still find it hard to believe that companies such as Blackwater were given such free rein. Until the start of this year its employees were immune from prosecution in the country.

In another alleged incident involving the company, Ali Husamaldeen was walking in Wathba Square, central Baghdad, on September 9, 2007, when he was felled by a single gunshot. Passers-by reported a Blackwater helicopter overhead, from which they say the fatal shot was fired. According to his mother, Umm Ali, her son was unarmed and in no way a threat.

Leqaa al-Yaseen, an MP, said: “I believe the US authorities have the main responsibility for what happened because Blackwater came to Iraq with their permission. Regarding Blackwater smuggling weapons into Iraq, that suggests the US forces didn’t know about it at the time. But I think they did know.

“The tragedies that happened to our Iraqi people at Nisour Square and other places are not separate from the US forces in Iraq. The US Government is trying to avoid responsibility by blaming private companies.”

Officials in Baghdad have told The Times that they are continuing to investigate allegations similar to those made in the US against Blackwater.

Major-General Fathel al-Barwari, commander of the Iraqi Special Operations Forces, said he was gathering evidence of illegal weapons trading by the company. As a result, Blackwater could also face criminal prosecution in Iraq, where it is now banned, but other companies connected to Mr Prince still operate.

Tahseen Al-Shekhli, for the defence ministry in Baghdad, said: “If the allegations of illegally smuggling weapons into Iraq are proven, the Iraqi authorities will definitely take legal measures against this company.”

The Iraqi Government has tightened up rules for private security companies in recent years.

Powerful pro-Israel lobby slams Obama

August 6, 2009

Middle East Online, Aug 5, 2009



For her role as president and as UN human rights commissioner

US President awards America’s highest civilian honor to staunch critic of Israel’s human rights record.

WASHINGTON – Powerful pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC Tuesday criticized President Barack Obama’s decision to grant a top honor to ex-Irish president Mary Robinson, accusing her of bias towards the Jewish state.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee criticized Obama’s decision to award Robinson the Presidential Medal of Freedom, America’s highest civilian honor, citing her role at the UN’s Durban Conference on Racism in 2001, which criticised Israel.

Continues >>

The Myths of Afghanistan, Past and Present

August 6, 2009

William Blum, Counterpunch, Aug 6, 2009

On the Fourth of July, Senator Patrick Leahy declared he was optimistic that, unlike the Soviet forces that were driven from Afghanistan 20 years ago, US forces could succeed there. The Democrat from Vermont stated:

“The Russians were sent running as they should have been. We helped send them running. But they were there to conquer the country. We’ve made it very clear, and everybody I talk to within Afghanistan feels the same way: they know we’re there to help and we’re going to leave. We’ve made it very clear we are going to leave. And it’s going to be turned back to them. The ones that made the mistakes in the past are those that tried to conquer them.” (Vermont TV station WCAX, July 4, 2009, WCAX.com)

Leahy is a long-time liberal on foreign-policy issues, a champion of withholding US counter-narcotics assistance to foreign military units guilty of serious human-rights violations, and an outspoken critic of robbing terrorist suspects of their human and legal rights. Yet he is willing to send countless young Americans to a living hell, or horrible death, or maimed survival.

And for what? Every point he made in his statement is simply wrong.

The Russians were not in Afghanistan to conquer it. The Soviet Union had existed next door to the country for more than 60 years without any kind of invasion. It was only when the United States intervened in Afghanistan to replace a government friendly to Moscow with one militantly anti-communist that the Russians invaded to do battle with the US-supported Islamic jihadists; precisely what the United States would have done to prevent a communist government in Canada or Mexico.

It’s also rather difficult for the United States to claim that it’s in Afghanistan to help the people there when it’s killed tens of thousands of simply for resisting the American invasion and occupation or for being in the wrong place at the wrong time; not a single one of the victims has been identified as having had any kind of connection to the terrorist attack in the US of September 11, 2001, the event usually cited by Washington as justification for the military intervention. Moreover, Afghanistan is now permeated with depleted uranium, cluster bombs-cum-landmines, white phosphorous, a witch’s brew of other charming chemicals, and a population, after 30 years of almost non-stop warfare, of physically and mentally mutilated human beings, exceedingly susceptible to the promise of paradise, or at least relief, sold by the Taliban.

As to the US leaving … utterly meaningless propaganda until it happens. Ask the people of South Korea — 56 years of American occupation and still counting; ask the people of Japan — 64 years. And Iraq? Would you want to wager your life’s savings on which decade it will be that the last American soldier and military contractor leaves?

It’s not even precise to say that the Russians were sent running. That was essentially Russian president Mikhail Gorbachev’s decision, and it was more of a political decision than a military one. Gorbachev’s fondest ambition was to turn the Soviet Union into a West-European style social democracy, and he fervently wished for the approval of those European leaders, virtually all of whom were cold-war anti-communists and opposed the Soviet intervention into Afghanistan.

William Blum is the author of Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, Rogue State: a guide to the World’s Only Super Power. and West-Bloc Dissident: a Cold War Political Memoir.

He can be reached at: BBlum6@aol.com

Taking over Jerusalem

August 6, 2009

Evictions in Sheikh Jarrah and other Palestinian areas are part of a bid to turn East Jerusalem into a unified Jewish Jerusalem

A couple of months ago I spent a fortnight in Palestine with the International Solidarity Movement – activists who help Palestinians non-violently resistactivists. The most pressing of many issues during my stay was the attempts by an Israeli settler company, Nahalat Shimon, backed by the Israeli courts, to cleanse East Jerusalem of its Arab population, focusing its efforts at that time on the neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah.

Continues >>

Police brutalitiy in democratic India

August 4, 2009

Indian villagers’ tales of injustice

BBC News, Aug 4, 2009

In the wake of a Human Rights Watch report alleging widespread abuse by Indian police, BBC South Asia Correspondent Damian Grammaticas visits a village where residents say four innocent men were gunned down by officers.

Janaki and baby with pictures of her late husband

Janaki’s husband was shot dead by police two years ago

As we enter the village of Khanpurkalla, in Uttar Pradesh, a crowd gathers round.

There is a buzz of expectation and soon more than 100 people are jostling to get close, all wanting us to hear their story.

It is a tale of injustice, grief and neglect. People here believe the police, who are meant to protect them, are guilty of getting away with murder, quite literally.

According to the Human Rights Watch (HRW) report released today, their story is far from unusual. Indian police stand accused of human rights violations including arbitrary arrest, detention, torture and unlawful killings.

The village is reached down a bumpy track. It is home to former gypsies who have settled here, surrounded by lush, green sugar cane fields.

Water buffalo wallow in muddy canals. It is poor and appears tranquil enough, but there is real anger beneath the surface.

‘Good man’

A young woman comes forward carrying a child with one hand and a wedding photo in another. Tears flow down Janaki’s cheeks as she remembers the events of two years ago.

The picture shows Janaki in her wedding finery and her husband, 18-year-old Ram Darashi, digitally superimposed on a fancy mansion complete with marble and chandeliers.

It is a far cry from their bare cottage but says much about the hopes the young couple had.

Just a few months after the photo was taken Ram Darashi was shot dead with three friends by the police.

“He was a gentle man, a good man,” Janaki says. “He was not a criminal like the police say. Now he is gone, I have nothing. I want to kill myself, but I can’t because otherwise who will care for my child?”

On her lap, two-year-old Gulshan cries as she talks.

Ram Darashi, she says, had gone with three young men from the village to celebrate his wedding.

Rajender with photograph of his brother

Rajender is still angry over the death of his brother, Jitender

Riding two motorbikes they had gone to the foothills of the Himalayas, where they vanished.

Their bodies turned up in two different locations, all shot dead by police who claimed they were thieves resisting arrest.

Rajender, whose 18-year-old brother Jitender died alongside Ram Darashi, is seething at the injustice.

“When I see Janaki and I see how heartbroken she is, I feel like ending my life too,” he says.

“We just roam around in our grief looking for our lost loved ones.

“We should be allowed to kill the police the way they killed our boys, or at least the government should punish them to make an example of them so nobody ever does the same again.”

Ram Darashi and Jitender died in the town of Dehradun, while their two friends were killed about 45km (28 miles) miles away in Rishikesh.

Police in Dehradun say Ram Darashi and Jitender were criminals who mugged a woman and stole some jewellery in August 2006.

They say that when officers tried to stop the two men – because they matched the description of the attackers – they opened fire. The police shot back and the two died.

Vinod Kumar, senior superintendent of Dehradun police, moved to the town after the killings.

He told the BBC that the magistrates’ report said two guns and ammunition were found on the men, along with three gold chains and some money.

Amateur video shows Indian police beating a suspect

He said an investigation by police from another district found no evidence of wrongdoing by the officers who shot the men and they were given cash rewards for their actions.

But back in their village the families say Ram Darashi and Jitender had never broken the law, and the evidence does not stack up.

The men’s motorbike did not match that used in the mugging and when the families tried to lodge a complaint they were threatened and chased away by the police, they say.

Taking shortcuts

The HRW report includes accounts given by police officers in other areas who say they are often under pressure to show results when tackling crime.

One even admitted that he had been ordered to kill a man by his superior.

HRW says traditionally marginalised communities, like the gypsies of Khanpurkala, are “particularly vulnerable to police abuse”.

Sankar Sen, a former director of India’s National Police Academy, says police are often under great pressure to give results in unreasonably short time.

“Our criminal justice system is not functioning,” he says. “There is pressure on the police to adopt shotgun measures, to take shortcuts.”

“The moment you take human rights in your hands it is the innocent that suffer. Most complaints come from the poor and downtrodden. Resorting to violence brutalises the police,” he added.

Grieving Janaki says she has little hope of justice.

“No, there is nothing we can do,” she says ruefully. “The police officers are men with money, we are poor. We can’t do anything to stop them. They can do anything they want to us.”

British Lance-Corporal Joe Glenton refuses to go to Afghanistan

August 4, 2009

LC Glenton says the Afghan war is unjust

Christopher King, Redress Information & Analysis, 3 August 2009

Christopher King explains why it is the legal obligation of soldiers and officers who have been ordered to carry out illegal orders to disobey them, in accordance with the Nuremburg Principles, and why everyone, from army commanders to rank-and file soldiers, are personally responsible for the orders they carry out.


Lance-Corporal Joe Glenton, facing court-martial for refusing to be redeployed to Afghanistan, has written to Prime Minister Gordon Brown, saying in part:

The war in Afghanistan is not reducing the terrorist risk, far from improving Afghan lives it is bringing death and devastation to their country. Britain has no business there. I do not believe that our cause in Afghanistan is just or right. I implore you, sir, to bring our soldiers home.

Having served in Afghanistan, unlike Gordon Brown who has no services experience, Lance-Corporal (LC) Glenton knows what he is talking about. Further, he says:

It is my primary concern that the courage and tenacity of my fellow soldiers has become a tool of American foreign policy.

LC Glenton is clearly a young man of intelligence and thoughtfulness. Unlike Gordon Brown who stands to be paid off in cash by the Americans and Israelis like his friend Anthony Blair, LC Glenton has earned the right to form, hold and express his views on this war. And to act on them.

Continues >>

World condemnation of Israeli Jerusalem evictions

August 4, 2009

Middle East Online, Aug 4, 2009



53 Palestinians including 19 minors were evicted illegally by Israel

US, EU hit out at Israel’s ‘provocative’ actions saying Tel Aviv breaking international law.

WASHINGTON – The United States and the European Union hit out Monday at Israel for evicting Palestinian families from east Jerusalem, warning that such moves endangered the Middle East peace process.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton led the international condemnation, labeling the evictions “deeply regrettable” and “provocative” and accusing Israel of failing to live up to its international obligations under existing peace initiatives.

Continues >>


The continuing Nakba

August 4, 2009

Timothy Crawley, San Francisco Chronicle, Aug 4, 2009

Walk down what was formerly Al-Borj Street in Haifa, Israel, and you might catch sight of an old Jerusalem-stone building with arched doorways and windows cemented-over and a large Re/Max (an international real estate franchise) banner draped across the front. The house belongs to the Kanafani family, most of whom are living in exile in Lebanon but some of whom are now living as far away from home as San Francisco.

Defined as “absentee property” under Israeli law, the house is one of thousands of properties owned by Palestinian refugees who were forced from their lands by Jewish militias or fled during the war of 1948, in what would be remembered as the Palestinian “Nakba” – the Catastrophe. The Israeli Absentee Property Law of 1950 established the Custodian of Absentee Property to safeguard these homes until a resolution would be reached regarding the right of Palestinian refugees to return.

Continues >>

Bowing to America’s ‘naked political power’

August 3, 2009

Suppressing evidence of torture, as the US is asking Britain to do in the Binyam Mohamed case, is a criminal offence

Over the weekend, the government has identified another way to embarrass itself.

Karen Steyn is the barrister representing David Miliband, who has been arguing that we must suppress evidence of torture in the case of Binyam Mohamed. On Saturday, the high court judges sent the foreign secretary a transcript of their interrogation of Steyn for him to confirm in writing whether he really means what she says.

The issue at stake is whether the government really wants to suppress seven paragraphs that apparently include American admissions that they tortured Mohamed. First, Steyn confirmed that the material that she wanted suppressed had no intelligence value – it did not “conceivably identify anything that is of a national security interest”, it simply identified criminal acts of torture.

Continues >>