U.S. Quietly Breaks U.N. Treaty

On Friday, at a United Nations meeting in Geneva, the United States broke a series of legal promises. Keeping those promises would have proved extremely embarrassing to the United States government by pointing out that human rights abuses are being committed here at home, and at U.S. military installations abroad.

In 1994 the United States senate ratified the U.N. Convention on Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination promising to provide reports every two years on racial discrimination in the United States. The reports were to include anywhere in the world where the U.S. military is in charge. In other words, the United States military no matter where it was on the globe, agreed to report discrimination. That now includes Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.

The treaty is the "supreme law of the land" under the U.S. Constitution, article 6, clause 2. Every nation that signed the treaty was charged with giving a national report on such basic areas of discrimination as health care, education, and prison terms. According to the Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute and the National Lawyers Guild, the United States on Friday presented a report to the United Nations Committee, never mentioning Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, or the behavior of U.S. corporations working under U.S. military contracts.

Instead, U.S. officials presented facts on the federal level explaining (for instance) how much money was given to education, how much money was supplied to prisons etc. Only four states: Oregon, Illinois, New Mexico and South Carolina were mentioned, and officials in those states who were contacted by local activists, say they never received any phone calls of inquiry by government officials.

At least one hundred human rights groups were represented in Geneva on Friday anxious to hear what the government had to say about racism here at home and abroad.

According to the founder of the Meiklejohn Institute, Ann Fagan Ginger, her organization's independent report also delivered in Geneva on Friday, provides statistics on racism toward Katrina victims, as well as discrepancies in life expectancy and other health care problems among African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans and Native Americans. In regard to U.S. military interrogation centers, Wayne county circuit court judge Claudia Morcom, (ret.) representing the Meiklejohn Institute, told U.N. officials in Geneva what the world now knows.

The basic racism practiced by the U.S. military in both Abu Ghraib and in the detention centers of Guantanamo includes torture, degradation, and illegal detention of hundreds of prisoners in these two facilities based on race, nationality, ethnicity and religions of those arrested.

Meiklejohn founder, attorney Ann Fagan Ginger wrote,"There is no way any U.S. citizen will be safe, even if Caucasian and native born, if the United States government can treat human beings as the U.S. military has treated the men it sent to those two facilities."

To view the reports, go to www.mcli.org

Comments

[jfortier]

I don't understand all this shock and outrage about this, the US government has been breaking treaties with sovereign nations for over 200 years. You don't believe me? That's because we don't learn about it in our school system here, and whenever it is mentioned, it's always couched in some kind of "oh that's so shameful, but you know, it was inevitable" hand wringing. I'm talking about the over 380 treaties between the US Government and Indian tribes, sovereign nations when the treaties were signed, and still semi sovereign today, yet every one of them was broken by the US. If you want to learn more about this I would highly recommend Tribes, Treaties and Constitutional Tribulations by the late Vine Deloria Jr.

[goofticket]

In the last part of Dec 2008, impeachment can proceed, and even when bush leaves office; once that criminal process begins...it does not end with his term.

The new Congress takes it's oath weeks before Bush is done, and they can begin civil criminal proceedings against him. Welcome Back, Mr. Special Prosecutor.

Then we can convict him and give him and Cheney a rendition ride, in a CIA GIV to Brussels.

[Durango]

This brings up a VERY interesting point.

Since treaties must be approved by 2/3 of the Senate in their capacity to advise and consent how can the President unilaterally abrogate any treaty?

My thinking is that he can't. When the USA needs to modify or quit a treaty the President MUST consult the Senate. Which this President refuses to do.

The treaties this President has abrogated are simple grounds for impeachment. As well as crimes against humanity and war crimes.

[Macready]

they are more grounds for impeachment of the chimp and the big dick . . . when is pelosi going to put in on the agenda . . . will she have to be hog-tied to do it . . . she is a DLC bushie . . . time she was thrown out

[SILLYME]

Thanks Ms. Griffith, I wasn't aware of this legal promise of the US government to report "racial discrimination" at home or abroad. Sounds like a broken record to me, skipping constantly. What can be done which hasn't been tried already?

[springsm]

Well if the United States is not breaking some rule noisely they are doing it quietly. The leadership in this country either brags or hides. Cowardly and corruptly. I am so sorry and I mourn for those who would like to see things done correctly and rightly. Unfortunately we are not into that business anymore. When leadership has no soul..the people all suffer.

[Dionita]

Thanks Ms.Griffith. I have been a fan of yours for more years than I care to admit here in this forum. We are very fortunate to have a journalist of your caliber reporting on this incredibly censored subject. Keep up the good work.

[Karen80]

Thank you for exposing this.
Their absence speaks volumes and perhaps says more than any defense they might have tried to put up if they had attended.

[SamThornton]

Although it's not much discussed these days, one of the consequences of our long war in Vietnam was a serious breakdown in morale and performance by Army troops toward its last phase, including refusals by entire units to undertake missions, "fragging" -- the practice of lobbing a grenade into an unpopular superior's tent, and similar mutinous behavior.

In the eyes of most career Army officers, Vietnam broke the Army and the succeeding 20 years were devoted to attempting to repair the damage.

Now we are embarked on another similar exercise, this time placing even greater stress on frontline troops and this time including the practice of systematically turning our young men and women into torturers. During Vietnam, individual soldiers were seldom called on for more than a single deployment and torture was not an official policy as it is today.

Career officers in the professional ranks recognize and have warned repeatedly and in vain about once again destroying the military it has taken them so long to reconstitute. How many broken and angry individuals, inured to the practice of torture, have been released back into the general population is anyone's guess, as is the further price we will have to pay for these outrages.

[LeslieGriffith]

can you get me a report on this?

[larry278]

You could read the MSM, progressive blogs & the literature of the militay portion of the USA's Military/Industrial complex or wait till a knowledgable person compiles, sifts & edits the existing material into a report.
The officers who survive the Afghanistan/Iraq operation could compile a case study or studies for use at the Air/War College or similar institutions. It could also become a series of case studies for students at MBA or higher programs.
There may also be reports of the US Congress sub-committies who will investigate the outcomes of this most controversial operation which may include material gleaned & declassified from classified reviews & studies on the problems of & costs to the armed forces of this increasingly unsustainable situation with appropriate conclusions & reccommendations for recovering from this most unsatisfactory situation & possibly reccommendations to prevent recurrence of similar situations in the future.
It's probable that highly classified studies of the situation already exist. These studies won't be declassified &/or revised in the near future.
If you have access to this classified material or studies of foreign or non-governmental agencies a search by the appropriate search engine will identify & send you the report[s] you desire. Good luck.

[Dap]

Thanks for the report Ms. Griffith, although it is not real surprizing.