It is confirmed that one of the loopholes in the president's anti-torture orders allows the continuance of rendition by the CIA, which consists of secretly snatching suspects off the street without any due process and "rendering" them to jails in other countries. Rendition is at the heart of the state secrecy apparatus, and should be of concern to any civil liberties, human rights, or democracy advocates.
But Human Rights Watch and, apparently, other human rights groups signed off on renditions in talks with the Obama administration, saying publicly that there is "a legitimate place" for the practice.
That's not a position that represents most human rights advocates, and deserves to be reconsidered in the months of drafting the new administration's rules. Human Rights Watch could have celebrated Obama's presidential order while vowing to close the rendition loophole. Instead, according to the LA Times, the proposal "did not draw major protests" among human rights groups because of "a sense that nations need certain tools to combat terrorism." [see LA Times, Feb. 1, 2009]
"You still have to go after the bad guys", says an Obama spokesman in defense of renditions, which have been condemned by the European parliament. A Human Rights Watch representative, Tom Malinowski, says he urged the administration to guarantee public hearings in the countries to which they are rendered, as a protection against torture and disappearances. That would be an important corrective, but leaves unanswered the purpose of the secret abductions in which the CIA is the judge, jury, and in certain cases the executioner.
Italian politics were shaken when it was revealed that the CIA, in cooperation with the Berlosconi government, abducted an Egyptian cleric who was flown to Egypt and tortured in 2003. In another 2003 case, an Egyptian citizen, Khalid Masri, was grabbed by men wearing ski masks, stripped, blindfolded, placed in diapers, shackled and flown from Macedonia to Albania. He was released five months later as a case of mistaken identity. There perhaps have been hundreds of cases of rendition, tracked by European citizens as suspected CIA planes utilized landing rights in other countries. Despite causing an international uproar, the numbers of renditions may never be known.
If the Obama Justice Department wants to defend renditions as constitutional on "executive privilege" and "national security" grounds, human rights groups should perhaps meet them in court and seek a better outcome.
As the policy stands now, Jack Bauer would be pleased.
Just like Torture.
Rendition is terrorism.
Rendition creates more terrorists!
Overwhelming evidence supports the above assessment. Evidence to the contrary is feel-good "freedom" propaganda. If any human right's group advocates the policy of extraordinary rendition either explicitly or implicitly, then they are not a human right's group. Period. If the president advocates the use of extraordinary rendition as a matter of explicit policy or covert practice, he is not the leader of a democratic nation in a free world, but an oligarch representing a military dictatorship. Period.
PTA: "But Human Rights Watch and, apparently, other human rights groups signed off on renditions in talks with the Obama administration, saying publicly that there is "a legitimate place" for the practice."
That assertion is false. It was debunked by Sen. Feinstein who Chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee during an interview with CNN's John King, yesterday. Furthermore, it was debunked by Media Matters in an article yesterday. http://mediamatters.org/items/200902010006
"KING: The renditions, the renditions -- the CIA, under an Obama administration, retain the right for rendition, to scoop up suspected terrorists around the world.
FEINSTEIN: Not in that sense that you mean rendition, which is sending them also to another country or to a black site. What they're talking about is temporary holding. The fine points of it have to be fleshed out and will be fleshed out.
I've met with Greg Craig about the executive order on two occasions now. The Intelligence Committee will be providing oversight over it. And, as you know, I have a bill to close Guantánamo, to end contractors doing interrogations, to have one standard across -- which is the Army Field Manual -- the executive order coalesces with this bill..."
Overwhelming evidence supports what I've just stated. Evidence to the contrary is without exception feel-good freedom propaganda. If human rights groups support a plan for rendition, either expicitly or implicitly, they are not human rights groups. Period. If the current president supports rendition either explicitly or implicitly, openly or covertly, he is not the president of a strong nation in a free world, but a military dictator. Period.
the human animal is essentially the lowest form of animal descended from apes, and "we" are the most destructive creature ever to inhabit this planet. and if God made us like this, he did a bang up job - maybe he was away on vacation and we were put together by the celestial janitor.
our only achievement are those select few who escape the standardized mediocrity and are exceptional. they are the deviations in the bell curve, but do not represent society. the great thinkers, artists, writers, and unique individuals are a minority subset.
such great potential to change the world for the better, and what a shame when the majority are cowardly and weak - but such is the human condition
When the sneaker companies want to exploit labor in third world countries, they use local contractors.
Thus, they don't exploit the workers, the evil local businessmen do.
It's a highly effective and proven "moral" technique.
If there are allegations of exploitation, the company back in the Europe or the States launches an investigation and issues a code of conduct for the contractors. The problem is neatly solved or at least apparently so.
In any case, there is little to worry about here because if we "rend" a suspected terrorist back to his home country, it's likely he'll be sent to Switzerland or Sweden where they don't do these sort of things.
Problem solved.
(Moral: Don't mistake a reform movement for a revolution).
peace
this is classic Americana
Our freedom and democracy only exist if we are all equals in the eyes of the law.
The enemy are just people who have the same inalienable rights we do. Inalienable MEANS no one can give those rights nor take them away. Just because they are not Americans, they still have those God-given rights. Kidnapping and imprisoning people without trial is immoral. No matter who they are, no matter where they live, no matter what they have done. Period.
O Our human rights organizations have been infiltrated by pro-authoritarian moles of the CIA, etc., and they now hold sway on the groups!
O Or these human rights groups bought hook, line, and sinker the whole ridiculous Bush "Global War on Terriers" tripe and hype!
Either possibility is a body blow to PRINCIPLED activism. This is most dismaying.
In what is supposed to The Obama Age of Hope, the principled goal of human rights has been surrendered for the sake of a Myth confabulated by a bunch of Bush Crooks, and we who desire human rights are now left HOPELESS as long as this ridiculous MYTH is perpetrated.
In case anyone reads my post, get one thing clear: A 'terrist' (as Bush called them) is just a criminal with a unique motive, but his crimes do not lie outside the law! The terrist can still be prosecuted for his crimes of assault, murder, arson, vandalism, theft, and so on, and prosecuted BY THE EXISTING LAW ENFORCEMENT AND JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF THE LAW! We don't need no stinking CIA stepping outside the bounds of their charter to act AS IF they ARE the law when, in truth, they act OUTSIDE the law!
Thank you very much for the above article alerting us of the duplicity of human rights groups who support CIA RENDITION and take our donations under FALSE PRETENSES!