United States in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Violations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

For the text I refer you to http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html.

It seems that the United States is specifically violating Articles 5, 8, 9, 10 in the case of the Guantanamo prisoners (and thousands of others all over the world).

Though not legally binding, it is interesting to note that it was adopted in 1948 by the countries of Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, Canada, Chile, China,Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,Ethiopia, France, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Siam (Thailand), Sweden, Syria, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela.

It is also interesting to note that countries abstaining from the adoption vote were: Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Ukrainian SSR, Union of South Africa, USSR, Yugoslavia. Saudi put itself in some very dubious company.

Similarly, violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:

http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

Articles 7, 9, 10 and 15. These are legally binding on the signatory states. It is interesting to note that the U.S. and Great Britian have ratified this covenant as have Iraq and Afghanistan, but that Saudi Arabia and China have not.

Would anyone care to debate whether the actions of the U.S. are or are not a gross violation of these international norms?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

well here in UK the war criminal fucker Phony Blair has got his pit bull teeth stuck into wanting to severely lengthen the time 'suspected terrorists' are 'detained'...ie., imprisoned. which isn't as long as the US internemnt of innocent people but is of the same ilk

i persnally am exploring that behind all of this is a move towards a a global police state. AFTER ALL THE SAME FUKEING EVIL SCUM who are staging terrorist atrocities are THE same ones who then fight like hell--as Bilderberger Blair is doing, to have our rights taken away from us......! CUI BONO

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Any law that is not enforceable is nothing but political/diplomatic hot air!

Who enforces these "laws" on human rights? How large is their army? What are the punishments for violation of those "laws"?

Anyone can make a law, but enforcing that law is a whole different thing. And if it can't be enforced, what is it? Nothing! Just idealistic bullshit.

Baron Max

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Baron, you SIGNED it!

 

so bmax...theones in Quantanemo Bay are just phantoms are they?...not REAL people locked up by a fascist law?

 

Sure, but what does it mean? And wasn't it under a different administration? And what if some future administration refuses to acknowledge it? We vote into office new/different politicians every term ....isn't that almost like a whole new government? What if we voted into power a neo-nazi group of politicians? Would you expect that they'd follow all that bullshit?

And again .......who enforces those rules and laws? And if no one can enforce them, are they really valid?

And, duendy, ....what the hell are you talking about????? Can you please learn English and learn how to make sentences? Please?

Baron Max

 

oh baron baron...such a little thing to have to learn. but how pray will YOU get back the soul you lost LOOOOOOONG ago?

 

bmax is right, if there is no one to enforce the law, then is it really a law?

 

p.s. although, I believe that when a country signs it, it becomes part of that country's own national laws. but that is only what is supposed to happen. if that were really the case, bush and every senator who voted for the war, would be in prison for attacking another country.

 

Yeah! There's a law in Oklahoma City that makes it illegal (and a jail offense!) to lick an icecream cone in public on Sunday ....now that's LICK, not eat icecream, but to LICK the icecream. That's still a law on the books, but since it is not enforced, ....does that law mean anything at all? To anyone?

If we had a gazillion laws, but no cops and no judges and no courts, .....what does it mean to have laws? ...even if 90% of the people agree with the laws?

So we can talk about/discuss "iinternational laws" if we want to, but does it really mean anything? Perhaps nothing more than ...psycho-babble? Philosophy as discussed by old men sipping port wine and smoking big cigars?

Yes, it is. But I'm trying ....I'm really, really trying. And I just hope you can help me learn by answering some of the above points.

Baron Max

 

Then be honest and just admit you don't give a shit about laws, about the rest of the world and drop the charade about freedom and all that other bullshit like democracy.

At least cancel the treaty. Be a man, and not some pussy. If countries can be men and pussies.

But that is what you look like to the rest of the world, cry babies and pussies. Not some mighty enforcer of freedom. Just a sneaky bully. A loser.

 

Hmm, I thought I was being honest! I don't give a shit about other nations, other people, other groups, other cultures, other (fill in the blank) ....I care about the United States of America. I care about freedom for Americans, I couldn't care less about freedom for (fill in the blank). I care about democracy for Americans, I couldn't care less about democracy for (fill in the blank).

If the US Marines want to invade (fill in the blank), I don't care ...no, I'll cheer them on and do everything I can to help them. If the US Army wants to kill (fill in the blank), then I say, "They need the marksmanship training!"

If America doesn't like (fill in the blank), and American wants to force them to do things our way or how we want, then I say, "Go to it! Good luck, boys!"

If America wants to sink Africa beneath the waves of the ocean, I say, "Go to it, boys! We don't need that fuckin' continent anyway!"

Baron Max

 

I'm talking about your pussy country, not you.

 

Baron... after reading that, I think I love you.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So well are all the "DEATH TO IRAN!" threads?? They have been violating that law for decades. China! What about China! I guess that whole thing with the students and the tanks never happened LOL.

If you pansies are going to sit here and yell at the U.S. then you damn well better apply your wrath to the other countries on there that do the exact same thing (and in many cases a whole lot more. I dont remember the U.S. calling out Tanks to deal with students....).

 

No one will ever accuse you of not being honest, Baron. You would have done a lot better living in the nineteenth century, though. That was the last time your position was a tenable one. Don't you see that it's no longer a matter of us or them anymore? We've reached a point where it can't be us or them; it's got to be us and them - the only other choice is extinction.

You're the one who is constantly harping on hypocrisy in the world - and I applaud you on that. It may also be true that I am just a fucking hypocrite myself for espousing a position (adherence to international standards for all peoples) while not being willing to actually risk my comfortable life to make that happen. My actual actions (or nonactions) speak the same truths you say out loud. Be that as it may, I wonder if your position stops at the water's edge, so to speak. You say you care about freedom for Americans?

Unconditionally?

Absolutely! I wish the U.S. government WOULD apply the same standard everywhere. I could castigate a dozen countries right off the top of my head who violate international standards all the time... let's see - Saudi, Indonesia, Sudan, Colombia, North Korea, China, Russia, Algeria, Israel, Uzbekhistan, Myanmar, Congo. The U.S. has a moral obligation to take on all of these countries' terrible human rights records. But I happen to live in the U.S. and so I think that's the only country I can do much about.

 

I disagree! What ye're saying is just your opinion ...which is no better or no worse than anyone else's. If we'd take a stronger position, instead of cow to the (rioters, insurgents, liberal doo-gooders, whimpy asses, etc.) we'd be much better off. I'm tired of lying down and rolling over for all of those bastards ....it's time to take off the gloves and fight for what we believe in and for our very lives!

Personally, I think most of the problems in the world have been caused by that whimpy, idealistic, liberal doo-gooder crap! People only understand power! And that means guns and bombs!

Some of the rest of your post I don't understand. You've couched it in some kind of psycho-babble crap that hides the actual meanings. Can't people speak/write in plain English anymore?

Baron Max

 

you know, he has a point. international law is bullshit because of how its enforced. its up to the permanent members of the UN security council most of the time, and they almost never subject themselves to the authority of any international body if they can avoid it, but they are constantly singling out some developing nation for sanctions or intervention. the problem with international law enforcement is that half the laws arent binding unless the country agrees after the fact to submit to the enforcing body's authority. do you think the US or the UK or China is ever going to do something that stupid? no way. the fairness of international law pretty much depends on which administrations are in power in the big countries at the time, and to what extent they abuse power and refuse to admit it. everyone knows that in all likelihood the US tortures and kills prisoners of war, but the big difference is that we dont videotape it and send it to the insurgents, we just do it secretly and then deny it later. you think Bush or Rumsfeld stay awake at night worrying that we've violated international law, no they probably laugh at the thought of it.

 

The problem with this bullshit called "international law" is that it's nothing more than a few liberal doo-gooders trying to tell others how to live and what to do. It's nothing more than the OPINION of a FEW! Why is their opinion any better than someone else's opinion on how to live and what to do?

The "few" have been trying to tell the "majority" how to live and what to do since the beginnings of human history, yet here, with "international law", some are actually advocating that we all abide by the wishes of those few people. Why?

High n' mighty ideals, with no power to back it up. But even more interesting, if we gave those people the power to back it up, most of those who now advocate "international law" would be the very first to cry foul!! Now ain't that a kick in the ass?? ...LOL!

Baron Max

 

Why should we then care about the opinion of the few of you?