Peaceful Protest?

Coptic Christian protesters were demonstrating peacefully on October 9^th when some were plowed down by Egyptian army vehicles that headed for the crowd. The protests started as a reaction to the government not investigating the burning of a church in Marinab. As the protesters moved threw the town toward the television station, civilians began to throw stones at the protesters and the protesters threw stones back. Once at the television station armed vehicles entered the crowd running over protestors. News channels were reporting these events until they were stopped by military personnel. General Adel Emara claimed that the military was not intentionally running over protesters but in actuality were trying to avoid protesters because they were throwing stones at them. Many testimonies and the actual video footage of the incident do not go along with the military’s story. The testimonies and footage do not illustrate a violent crowd.

The use of police force would have been a different story if the crowd was armed and violent, but the crowd was in peaceful protest and was not a physical threat to the military. The military has the authority to arrest those who are committing violent acts or who assault a police officer. However, neither of these instances describes the event of October 9^th. This is just another instance of how Egypt is trying to stop any type of resistance against its military run government whether it is peaceful or not. The military is infringing on its citizens (and the Coptic Christian’s in this article) right to life, security and freedom of assembly and association. It is an international human right that people are permitted to the freedom of assembly and association. Now this right may be taken away if the group displays violence but should not be infringed upon when it is a peaceful gathering.

If there is actual footage showing that the military used unnecessary violence against a peaceful protest, how can the military's story be the exact opposite?

http://english.ahram.org.eg/~/NewsContentP/1/25077/Egypt/Human-Rights-Watch-Report-Egypt-Don%E2%80%99t-Cover-Up-Mil.aspx

Violence in Dominican Prisons

The Dominican Republic is under the scrutiny due to murders police officers have carried out against prisoners. According to Amnesty International, Dominican officers have been mistreating detainees in their prisons. The spokesperson for the Police Department said that officers accused of murders will be prosecuted. However, he also focused on the deaths and injuries of guards and soldiers and wanted their deaths recognized before he spoke about the deaths of prisoners. A total of 260 prisoners were killed in 2010 due to officer violence. Officers have been accused of withholding food and water from prisoners and suffocating or hanging them by handcuffs off the wall.The police claim that the prisoners deaths were caused by an "exchange of gunfire." However, the evidence does not show this statement.

This type of violence should not be occurring in the prison system. A result of this is corruption. It is estimated that 12,000 officers have been let go between 2007 and 2010 due to corruption. The fact that the prison officers are depriving the prisoners of food and water is violating the human right of food. Also they are violating many human rights when they are killing them in prison, such as, life, liberty and security of a person, and humane treatment when detained or imprisoned. It is hard to shed more importance on one human right over another because there are so many that have been violated. Clearly forcing someone’s head into a plastic bag is considered inhumane treatment. A justification may be that some prisoners display violence against the officers and the officers retaliate but officers should not be responsible for so many deaths. Low salaries are a factor as to why police officers are displaying such violence. They only bring in about $140 a month.

Do you think that police officers should be able to continually talk life into there own hands by killing inmates in jail?

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2011/10/26/dominican-police-tortured-and-killed-hundreds-says-amnesty-report/

Sexual Abuses in Indian Country

I have decided to keep with the theme of sexual abuse against women in America for this week. A growing concern that has been making news coverage in recent weeks is the sexual abuses happening against Native American women in the United States. Before reading the entire story I assumed that these women were being abused by Native American men, however, statistics have shown that the majority of the perpetrators are non-Indian men. You may be asking why focus on just Native American women? Well, Native American women are "2.5 times more likely" of experiencing violence against them when compared to other women in the United States. Statistics also show that 1 out of 3 Native American women will be raped at some point in her life and "3 out of 4 will be physically assaulted." The reason that these assaults are able to happen at such dramatic rates is because holes in the system. Indian nations are legally not allowed to persecute non-Indians in their courts. So how are these perpetrators going to be found guilty? It is very uncommon for these men to be held accountable for these actions.

Again this article deals with the issue of liberty and security of a person. These women do not feel safe and have high odds against them that they will fall victim to sexual assault. The article explains that mothers have to teach their daughters what to do when they are raped because the crime is so common. Native American women should not have to feel that they have to prepare their daughters to be raped. In my opinion these women are still citizens of the United States and should be able to take their abuser to court in a fair system. Clearly there are problems with this system and Native American women need to be guaranteed more protection and education against sexual abuse.

Do you believe it is right for non-Indian men to be prohibited from being tried in Indian Nation courts?

http://www.firstperspective.ca/releases/3199-international-commission-hearing-on-violence-against-native-women-in-the-us.html

Sexual Abuses in US Immigrant Detention Facilities

With the recent discussions in lass about illegal immigrants, I found this article interesting because it shows how United States citizens violate international human rights when dealing with detained illegal immigrants. There have been cases across the United States of sexual violence against those held in immigrant detention facilities. Most cases are female detainees being sexually violated by male workers in the facilities.The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) found that the most disturbing part about these sexual assaults was that they were not committed in one or two facilities, but instead they are happening all over the country. (Clink this link to view the map. click) Cases have been found in 22 out of the 50 states, with Texas having the largest reported abuses with 56 allegations. Virginia has 7 allegations against it, specifically at the Rappahannock Regional Facility and the Hampton Roads Regional Jail. The fact that cases are happening at the Hampton Roads jail makes this story hit home more.There has been an increase in immigrants without documentations in the United States resulting in 250 facilities and about 30,000 detainees in each facility. Mexicans make up the largest population in the facilities with more than 60 percent.

You hear about sexual abuses against inmates in other countries but you may not think that it happens in almost half of the states in the US. This article does raise an important question. Are illegal immigrants guaranteed the same rights as citizens of the United States because the undocumented immigrants have entered the country in an illegal way? I believe that this is not an accuse for illegal immigrants to be abused. Illegal immigrants are still human and should not be sexually abused because they broke a law. However, there are other arguments that once someone breaks the law they may not be guaranteed the same rights as others who abide by the law. I believe that this article deals with the violation of liberty and security of a person. When women are in a jail there security should not be at risk, especially from officers that are taking advantage of them. I also believe that this violates humane treatment when detained or imprisoned. These women are being raped, inappropriately touched, and some even fear for their lives.

Do you believe that these women should still be guaranteed their human rights even though they entered into the United States illegally?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/19/sexual-abuse-immigration-detention-aclu?newsfeed=true

Mexico's Drug War

Another Head of State that is accused of violating human rights recently is Mexico’s President, Felipe Calderon. Mexicans are also seeking charges against gang lords such as, Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman. Human rights activists hope to charge these men In International Court for their human rights abuses in the country’s drug war. They believe that Calderon has allowed violence against thousands of Mexicans. There have been over 40,000 people killed since 2006 when Calderon took office. In addition, there have been 230,000 people displaced because of this conflict. The activist have collected 20,000 signatures and have continued to collect them with hopes to charges Calderon, Guzman, and officials of human rights abuses.

The war on drugs in Mexico has been escalating in recent years. When Calderon took office in 2006, he deployed the armed forces which have led to thousands of deaths among Traffickers, drug lords, and civilians. This has infringed on the right to life and the right to hearing before an independent and impartial jury. If criminals are simply being murdered and tortured they are not being granted their right of being tried before a jury. Guzmen is accused of using children as lookouts and militants. This is a direct violation of special protections for children. Children are not supposed to be allowed to work in general, nor should they be forced to fight and kill for Mexican drug lords. There have been at least 1,300 children killed in this conflict.

Though the likeliness of charges sticking to Calderon is unlikely, do you believe that the Mexican president should be arrested?

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Mexicans-demand-international-human-rights-2217770.php
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2011/10/mexico-activists-criminal-court-claim-drug-war-calderon.html

Bush Violates Human RIghts

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are demanding that former President George W. Bush be arrested for crimes he committed during his presidency. He is accused of allowing the torture and “ill-treatment” of prisoners in the custody of the United States. Bush will be attending the economic summit In Canada on October 20th and these human rights organizations want the Canadian authorities to arrest Bush. However, the Canadian government does not desire to arrest Bush saying they will not be “engaging in cheap stunts.”

These accusations against George W. Bush imply that he has broken the right of protection against torture and cruel and inhuman punishment and humane treatment when detained or imprisoned. The use of tactics such as, water boarding should not be used against prisoners in any country. This type of torture infringes on human rights and breaks international law. This is a difficult situation because if Bush was arrested what would that mean for other heads of state that have committed similar crimes? Should these heads of state be held at a higher standard than normal citizens?

Even though Canada refused to arrest Bush, what would be the implications if they agreed?


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/13/amnesty-international-hum_n_1009403.html

Where has freedom of religion gone?

I chose this article because it is a comparison to the article I wrote about a few blogs ago explaining how an Iranian man was not only arrested for being Christian but sentenced to death. This may not be a surprising find in a country very dedicated to its Islamic beliefs like Iran, but would you be surprised if something similar happened in Greece on the island of Crete? A Pentecostal Christian, Damavolitis Emmanuel, was arrested for trying to convert another man to Christianity in 2006. He appealed his verdict but an appeals court agreed with his conviction this month.He was literally convicted of "sharing is faith". He was sentenced to four months in prison and required to pay a fine of 840 euros. However the prison time has recently been dropped. It is no secret that the majority religion of Crete is Greek Orthodox. In fact, out of the 11.3 million people in Greece, 95 percent of them say that they are Greek Orthodox. Regardless, you would not think that the island does not have a tolerance for other religions.



Now while this case is less severe than the case in Iran, it still infringes on the right to religious freedom. Being imprisoned for practicing a different religion than the majority of a country is not acceptable. The State Department of Greece says that it has laws allowing the freedom of religion but does not permit proselytizing (converting). This laws seems contradictory because while people are allowed to practice their own religion, they are basically not allowed to share it with other citizens. I find it very hard to believe that a Greek Orthodox trying to convert an Evangelical Christian would be arrested on grounds of "sharing his faith." Those that practice Greek Orthodoxy are obviously granted special privileges in Greece over other religions, such as, Evangelical Christians and Protestants. Emmanuel is now appealing to the European Court of Human Rights in France to earn back his right of freedom on religion that should be guaranteed in Greece.

Do you think that Greece is valid in having a law allowing freedom of religion but not allowing proselytizing? Why or why not?




http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=351561

The price of a cashew

The country that exports the largest amount of cashews is Vietnam. However, the means in which it has reached this goal has caused quite a controversy. Some of the workers shelling these cashews in factories are recovering drug addicts that are forced into labor as a type of "treatment." Approximately forty thousand drug users work at these "treatment" facilities at any given time. Drug use is not considered a criminal offense. So why are these people being treated like criminals? Human Rights Watch has interviewed men and women who were employed at these facilities. The workers revealed that they did not receive any type of help while at the facility. Instead they were forced into strenuous work, with occasionally being beaten or shocked with a baton. There salary ranged from $.75 to $7.50 a month and workers experience many health risks while shelling these cashews. The article states that, "the work is hazardous: cashew resins can cause itching and burning, and dust from the cashew skins can irritate the lungs." I believe that the proper equipment should be installed for these workers if this type if work is going to continue. However, I believe that it is against human rights for these people to be forced into these facilities and subject to health risks all for the sake of the cashew. A petition has been created demanding that snack companies in the United States provide where they get their cashews from. The deadline is set two days before National Cashew Day, November 22, 2011.




The conditions that these workers are forced under violates the law of work, under favorable conditions. There is not protective gear available for these workers. They are exposed to the resins that cause skin irritations. These facilities also break the law of protection against arbitrary arrest or detention. These workers are not willing to work six days a week set out to make $.75 a month. They also do not have high hopes to breathe in dust from the cashews that can be detrimental to their health. They are forced into these facilities disguised to help them recover from drug addiction. Forced labor not only breaks international law but it also breaks Vietnamese law. It is should not be tolerated in either instance and most certainly is not a substitute for quality rehabilitation for drug addicts. I am not saying that all cashews are produced in this type of environment. Regardless, these types of working conditions should not be tolerated. I guarantee you will think about where your cashews come from the next time you indulge yourself with the snack.

Do you believe that drug users should be forced to work in these "treatment" facilities, even if drug use is not a criminal offense in Vietnam. If you do, should working conditions be more favorable to insure the risk of health complications is minimal?



http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/opinion/110930/vietnam-human-rights-forced-labor-cashew-nuts