UN Voices Concern Over Syrian Torture

Syria has dug itself into a whole that it may not be able to climb out of. Syria has been known for committing many human rights violations, including torture, but not excluding any others. The most recent accusation is that Syria has been involved in the torturing of children, which has caught the sight and interest of the United Nations. The Committee Against Torture has begun investigations into the accusations on Syria and what the international response should be to the problems.

In the realm of human rights this may be the most disgusting abuses I have ever encountered. The rights violated here are the right to security of person, freedom from torture and wrongful imprisonment, and right to life. On top of these, Syria is violating several human rights designated to children that are inexcusable.

I cannot justify violence against children in any theater. There is no reason because they are never in the wrong because they do not have full self determination. Syria has done nothing but violate people's rights in reaction to unrest within the country. There is obviously something very wrong with a country if the people are still trying to rise up with all this violent response coming from the government. There is a time when a government needs to understand that they need to step down for the good of their country and their people.

What do you think should be the international response to this issue? Should Syria's government step down at this point?

Egyptian Elections Lead to Violations By the Military

In the recent lead up to parliamentary elections this Monday, Egypt's military has been seen brutally breaking up peaceful protests, arresting demonstrators and bloggers, and neglecting policing operations in the country. The military has been targeting any military dissenters and either imprisoning them or informing them in a stern way that they should step back and reconsider their positions. The history of Egypt explains these occurrences because the military has been known to act in such ways in the past. Human Rights Watch only asks that they act as they said they would and protect the people and the democracy of Egypt rather than their own interests as they have promised.

The human rights violated here are the freedoms of assembly, peaceful protest, policing, wrongful imprisonment and security of self. The Egyptian military seems to have allowed the power they have to get to their head and human rights of the public have become a mute point.

The situation in Egypt has been a very interesting and sad one. The military and police have not been doing their jobs as they should and they should not be allowing the power that they currently have for the protection of the people. The military should not be acting as it is and should definitely not be limiting the freedom of assembly and speech in the position it has taken. It is presumed that the military took the side of the people and in that reality it should protect their rights and lives rather than infringe on them. The military is doing exactly what it promised not to do in taking the side of the people and helping them oust the former President and government regime.

What do you think the military should do? Are they responsible for the people and not infringing on their human rights?

Russia to Silence Homosexuals and Transexuals

Recently, legislation has come before the Russian government that would attempt to make it illegal to produce any form of written media that involved or created awareness about Gay, Lesbian, or Transgender people. President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin could silence an portion of their population by a simple approval. Several efforts are being made to make sure that this does not happen in Russia, including flashmobs, protests, and the sort, all of which could jeopardize activists' freedom.

This quite blatantly violates human rights. Freedom of speech, press, thought, and sexuality specifically. Speech, Press, and Thought all fall under the same category almost. The prohibition of any subject in media of any sort violates these immediately. Freedom of Sexuality is violated just in the act of silencing that entire section of the population. In what way is that fair to them as people?

I, personally, was surprised when this popped up on my facebook newsfeed. A friend of mine sent it to me, obviously knowing how passionate I am about this subject, earlier today and I was outraged. How could any country possibly think of censoring and whole sect of their population. What is so wrong about the subject? I do understand that this is a different country and there might be a context I don't quite have knowledge of, but it seems out of left field since Russia is supposedly considered on of the leading nations in the world (note its presence on the UN Security Council). It is unfortunate and unfair and I hope that the legislation does not pass.

Do you think that there are any grounds to censor such as this? What do you think the Russian government is trying to accomplish with this?

Are His Rights Being Infringed Too?

Welcome, to the wonderful world of Internet Memes (Fads). This one in particular is called the Pepper Spraying Cop Meme, in which Officer Pike, known for pepper spraying the peaceful Occupy UC Davis protest on November 18th, is shown pepper spraying some of our favorite art pieces. This meme has literally started over night and spread like wild fire. Officer Pike has been on indefinite leave since the incident, but, of course, someone caught everything on tape and it has now been seen by the whole world. Millions of people, including myself, have witnessed the madly increasing popularity of the meme almost instantly once it had hit Tumblr (a blogging social network). The meme seemingly originated sometime between late last night and this morning.

Does this raise issues with this man's human rights though? It is a picture of him, not something extremely anonymous, and it has been applied to hundreds of photos by now. The most clear violation of his human rights is the invasion into his privacy. His face has been plastered all over the Internet as part of a meme that may not fully express the best aspects of his character. Shouldn't he be allowed to chose whether his picture goes up on the Internet or on television? Of course, now it is on the Internet and will never go away. Also, I would then worry about his security of self, because now people know his face and can easily identify him and possibly cause him harm in retaliation.

I am no defender of the police in their action during these Occupy Wall street put downs, but I cannot help but worry about this man. He made a huge mistake, we all know that, but to put him through this type of ridicule is cruel. His children may see it, his family, the people he works with. It just does not quite seem fair. What he did was horrible and I do not excuse that at all, but that does not mean that people should lower them selves to a level where they subject someone to the most intense form of cyber bullying I can think of.

Was he asking for it? Is there any way to rectify it? What damages could this bring now that it is everywhere?

Police Shutdown Occupy Encampments

Another camp has been forcibly shut down now in Portland, Oregon. After a stand off between police and protestors attempting to reclaim their encampment, the police started to take down tents and remove them from the area. Protestors held a general assembly meeting in the morning when they were first pushed off the camp ground. Soon they relocated to the street and were told that they could be subject to 'chemical agents and impact weapons' to which their only response was "We are a peaceful protest." Eventually the protestors were cleared out of the street and the police have had the mayor's backing the entire time, he even tweeted a thanks to those who helped get the streets clear.

Human rights violations here encompass the right to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of peaceful protest, and security of self. Freedom of speech is the ever self explanatory right. If you stop them from Occupying you are stifling their political opinion. Assembly and Peaceful Protest go hand in hand here. It is an inherent human right that people are allowed to assemble in a group as well as protest in a peaceful manner without violence or any inherent harm to those around them. Security of self in this case has to do with the absolute lack of concern shown for these people's heath by the police who threatened to use weapons and chemicals against people who would not fight back. It's just unsavory.

I, personally, believe that as long as the Occupy protestors are not being violent or harming anyone that the police should not be allowed to touch them in any way. It is in their human and constitutional rights that they can gather and express their political opinion. Portland, and any other cities, that have attempted to shut down these movements are not working within their boundaries. it just seems ridiculous to me that they would shut these down so violently. To my knowledge, none of these people have caused harm to police, why are the police threatening harm?

Why are the police and the cities reacting in this way? Is it within the protestor human and constitutional rights to do what they are doing? Can an argument be made that it is not?

Syria Commits Crime Against Humanity

Syria, in the past few weeks, has been accused of crimes against humanity. Particularly in a industrial city named Homs, where several protests have broken out and security forces have been placed. Since November 2, it is thought that at least 104 more people have died at the hands of the security forces in Homs and that it could be more. Syria has been suspended from the Arab League pending further investigation and the UN is in talks to embargo arms and enact sanctions. In the article the author states that Homs is a microcosm to the entirety of Syria, making it just a small view of a larger picture that may be much worse than previously believed. With the deaths and seeming violent put downs of the protests what can be expected next?

In the arena of human rights there is the obvious violations of right to life and freedom of speech. The right to life is the most prominent and worrisome violation on the part of Syria. Many protests have broken out in Syria and it has not quite come out of its period of Arab Spring. Anti-government sentiment is high and if the government continues to react as it does, it can only be expected that it will violate the right to life of more and more of its citizens. On freedom of speech, it is pretty plain. The protests are being stopped by the means necessary and it seems that in some cases, if not most, that has been violent means.

I have never supported any sort of violence. I never will. al-Assad, in my opinion, should step down at this point. If there is so much strife in you country that even with the use of force protests will not stop reoccurring, maybe you should reevaluate your decisions. There are times like these where I am happy I live in the US because I know if someone tried to pull this in our own country they'd be evicted from the White House before the paper was out the next morning. Syria's government needs to take a hint from the Arab League and the UN and understand that if they are getting penalized so much they should cut their losses and figure something new out.

How do you feel about these deaths in Homs? Should security personnel be allowed such liberties? Can there be a solution in the future?

UN Scrutinizes Iran

Iran has come under scrutiny from the United Nations for targeted arrests and bad treatment of minorities and other designations. The United Nations Commission of Human Rights expressed concern over the continued discrimination against religious and ethnic minorities and homosexuals, as well as the capital punishment acted on juveniles. These allegations could lead to many problems for Iran if it does not try to relegate its offenses. The committee in question is made up of independent experts monitoring implementation of human rights conventions. Overall, Iran is being put under a spotlight at the moment.

The human rights violated here are right to life, right to religious freedom, and right to freedom from discrimination based on ethinicity, race, sexuality, etc. These are pretty straight forward. Capital punishment is against the right to life on principle. Religious freedom is a given as Iran is openly discriminating and arresting those of the religious minorities. Freedom from discrimination is hands down the most obvious violation from the ethnic and homosexual arrests and prejudices.

I personally have never really understood anything Iran does and often wonder why states sign human rights treaties they are not going to follow. Why not be truthful rather than asking for international scrutiny by signing the paper? Iran is one of many that have a long way to go before they will be up to snuff on human rights. I could not allow this to happen if I were in charge, but there is too much cultural and historical background for this not to have happened at some point in time.

What should be done about Iran? Why even bother making a statement? Will anything come of this scrutiny?

Misrata's Murder Militias

It has been discovered recently that militias in Misrata have been killing indiscriminantly any proposed supporters of Gadhafi. These militias have specifically targeted a town a few miles away named Tawergha. There were upwards of 100 such militias in Misrata and many still exist. The reason for most of the resentment is the continuous assault on the city that occurred during the end of Gadhafi's reign earlier this year. It is obvious that in this post-war time in Libya there is a need for accountability for human rights violations. To get the country back to running there needs to some form of authority and it needs to be shown in the refounding of a state. As the Misratan militia have been seen shooting and killing people of Tawergha unarmed. Their campaign has not been limited to this other city of Tawergha, but also to any other groups that were supporting Gadhafi.

The human rights violated in this case is right to life and the right to freedom of opinion. The right to life is violated in a very blatant sense in this particular case in Libya. There is not any way around it. The right to freedom of opinion is violated in the sense of killing purely because the person's beliefs are different than yours.

It is ridiculous to think that killing people is the only solution to some to get what they need. Though I understand their frustrations and their reasons with their situation and yet they should avoid bloodshed of this magnitude. Now that the war has ended there should have been a decrease in death and murder because now the whole country has a chance to rebuild. It seems that there may be a need for United Nations peace keeping forces to help quell the violence.

How can the murders be stopped? Are UN Peace Keeping forces needed? Should there be any intervention?

Israel is Moving In

Recently, Israel has declared new plans to accelerate settlement in the West Bank due to the admittance of Palestine as a voting member of UNESCO. This follows on a failed attempt at recognition by the UN Security Council by Palestine, which was vetoed by the United States, an Israeli ally. Palestinians have called for a full halt of settlements to continue peace talks, but Israel has not shown any sign of stopping. These settlements are a way for Israel to claim more and more land so to take over most of Palestine's terrirtory. Though Palestine is not considered a legitimate state due to its lack of formal government or territory, it still is seem as a nation due to the shared ethnic and cultural backgrounds of its people. Both countries think there is little chance at peace due to these recent events. These settlements, first and foremost, are illegal as declared by the United Nations and cautioned against by the United States. It is interesting that Israel would chance such a risk of negative consequences.

The human rights violated here are the Palestinians' rights to be a citizen of a country and to exist, in a sense. Israel is preventing Palestine from having its own country and land claim subjecting Palestinians to be people without a country. They are not really considered citizens of any existing country and that in itself limits the rights awarded them by the countries of the world. The right to exist is broken in the sense that to Israel it would be much better if Palestinians did not exist and they do their best to suffocate them as much as possible.

I, personally, have been appalled by many of the things I have seen come out of Israel on their treatment of the Palestinians. I know that it is a two way street, but in the Palestinians case it is almost justified because they have been kicked off their land and treated like second class citizens by the Israelis for several decades. Israel should be held to a somewhat higher standard because they are the most stable democracy in the Middle East and they are considered a relatively developed country. What right do they have to oppress an entire nation? Does it not seem as if they should be the last people who act out oppression on others?

Should the Israelis be allowed to build these settlements even though it is against international law? Why do people overlook these human rights violations so much? Why does the United States continuously support Israel when it continues to perpetrate these acts?

The Iran Paradox

The situation in Iran, for women, is an interesting one. Women in Iran are incredibly liberated in the sense of education, health care, and the like, but the women are still subject to old laws on marriage, divorce, custody, and inheritance. One woman, Sussan Tahmasebi, went to her native country and stayed for ten years. She started the One Million Signatures Campaign, spreading a petition asking the government to pass and change laws for more equal rights to be awarded to women. The job of the people who work for her organization is to go into public places and ask normal Iranians to sign the petition. The women are very educated in Iran, holding jobs in medicine and politics, yet they are still subject to these seemingly primitive laws. In 2006, arrests began, but this only raised their resolve.

The human rights violated here have to do with right to liberty, freedom from forced marriage, free speech, and to think freely. It seems obvious that there should be something done in this case. Imprisoning people for showing an opinion and trying to peacefully see it fixed? It seems absurd. Everything that occurs in this situation is against some human right that is guaranteed to all people.

To me it seems ridiculous to give these women seeming economic liberty, but limit them socially by regulating their marriages, divorces, custody, and inheritance. They are educated women who understand that they are being treat unfairly. The government tries to justify it through religion, but that does not even work if one looks at the Koran deeply enough. It is violating these women's right to be a person and run their own lives. They were even imprisoned for trying to change it in the most peaceful way possible. What can a petition do? Is it a threat? I think not. I hope that one day Iran can take a step forward and equal out their women's rights.

Do you think that Iran is a paradox? Are women's rights as important in such a society as most would consider them? Is it religiously or patriarchically based prejudice?