China has put out thisfine publication listing the US’s “human rights violations”. It’s in response to our state department’s criticism of them.
Any substance to it? What do you think?
My favorite quotes
Let’s hope they don’t plan an invasion to “liberate” us. 
Let’s parse this puppy out.
I don’t think that’s really a human rights violation per se right there.
I suppose that depends on your definition of torture. Physical torture? Not really common at all. Same with forced confession. And I’m curious as to how they know the number of convicts on death row that are wronged and what their definition of “high” is.
Yeah, that’s probably true. Although how many of those 40 times came with legal UN approval?
No reliable evidence that I know of (I haven’t really looked into the issue, though, so take it with a grain of salt) finds a definitive link between normal DU weapons use and any real health problems on a population. And of course, it’s important to note that DU bombs aren’t made entirely of DU. So is that actually the weight of the DU or the weight of the bombs including all the non-DU materials in them?
Anyway, it’s possible.
Probably.
I dunno. What’s the debate?
Here I dare to risk a guess! “the minority”. Anyone bother to check that up?
This is a link to the World Health Organization’s recomendations on use of Depleted Uranium.
This is a more extensive report.
It is a threat, but not a HUGE threat. 'Course, I wouldn’t want a pile of it in my backyard.
Indication of a serious problem though, no? Accusations of a police state are not far behind.
Throw in this from the report too:"Racial discrimination is frequently seen in America’s judicature. Half of the 2 million prison inmates are blacks, and ethnic Latin-Americans account for 16 percent of the total. According to an investigative report published by the United Nations, for the same crime the penalty meted out against the colored can be twice or even thrice as severe as against the white. Blacks sentenced to death for killing whites are four times as many as whites given death penalty for killing blacks. The US Department of Justice reported on March 12, 2001 that threats by the police with force against blacks and ethnic Latin-Americans are twice as possible as against whites. "
Cite please.
Read the report, it’s pretty interesting. But here’s a clue "Since 1973, a total of 99 convicts on the death row have been proven innocent. "
Excellent question. Something tells me you’ve already formed an opinion without doing the research, though.
From the report:“The US side claimed that one of the reasons for the withdrawal of US troops from Kosovo is that “it would not let radiation hurt our boys.” Latest reports say that the United States knew the dangers of depleted uranium bombs and where they were dropped, and that, when dividing up peacekeeping zones, it allocated the most seriously contaminated areas to allied forces.”
China claims we must have felt there were some health problems from them.
errata, why do I get the feeling that you’ve already made up your mind on the side of China? Why don’t you just present your argument? Or are you just running an agenda?
Yeah, and the U.S. runs over protesters in the town square with tanks, too. We kill off a lot of girl babies because boys are better. We smash centuries-old monasteries because we don’t like the brand of philosophy they represent. We force women who have had “too many” babies to have abortions they don’t want. Yeah, we’re a pretty evil bunch, all right.
On the side of China?:dubious:
What an interesting way to phrase things. I’m not a big fan of China, but I think they have a point. I won’t stand behind everything in the report, but I’m interested in what people have to say about it.
The Chinese report clearly references information available here in the US.
If people want to vocally disregard or refute the report they should at least have some information to back them up.
I’m providing some topical information for a debate that I think is interesting. There are some points that are made in the report that I find valid.
What agenda do you suspect me of having?
Tiananmen was 13 years ago, and things have changed considerably including the economy more than doubling. US shot protesters in the 1960’s as well. Neither case is particularly relevant today.
Monastaries were destroyed in the late 60’s. No one in China today thinks that was a smart thing to do. Learn from mistakes perhaps…
What do you suggest China do to limit their population? Do you think that overpopulation in China is a Chinese problem or a global problem (eg, if there are too many people in China, do you think that will have a negative impact on the global envirnment, politics, etc).
There is plenty to criticize China about in the areas of human rights. But you might want to update yourself a bit.
You might want to check out amnesty international’s stuff on the US.
A human rights violation is a human rights violation. The US is guilty of some human rights violations. Is the US worse than China, probably not. Does that excuse the US human rights violations, IMHO no. This is not black and white. The OP is asking if there is any substance to the allegations not whether China has worse human rights.
Sorry missed one MLS. You are implying that the Chinese government has a policy that is carried out throughout the country to abort female foetus’. That is one pretty nasty and insulting insinuation.
Certainly individuals have and are aborting female foetus’, but that is completely different from being State sponsored.
The reason for my harsh tone is that you present a list of statements from China that is critical of U.S. human rights practices and present no argument for or against, just a “what do you think?” Neurotik responds with rebuttals to the presented statements and you come back with a few responses to take a closer look at the report and an accusation that he’s already made up his mind.
By starting a debate and not presenting the grounds for the debate you give yourself the ability to criticize anything anyone claims, while simultaneously not giving a position that others can refute. That’s why I asked if you have an agenda.
Furthermore it seems a bit suspect that you are going to China for your info on human rights violations on the part of the U.S. instead of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, or some other organization that doesn’t have the potential for misinformation and a track record of grievous human rights violations that China has.
I think that the U.S., for all its warts and flaws, has an excellent record in present times of respecting human rights when compared to the majority of other countries in the world, and if the debate is on that topic it should (but wouldn’t) be short. Not saying it hasn’t committed violations, or that it is remotely perfect, and arguments can be made on that basis that the United States should change at least some of its practices. However since you still haven’t presented an argument it’s difficult to know which of those, if either, to debate.
A Human Rights Violation report from China…hmmm…they’re not the most credible reference on the subject. And besides, the arguments they make are pretty weak. Until their oppressive dictatorship dissolves, they’ve got no ground to stand on.
I referenced a report over which a debate could take place. The report outlines some factual, falsifiable claims that would make for a great OP.
So far I think that document has provided a much better argument than it’s critics, so I’ve piped up. There’s no agenda here.
Have you read the report? The report references Amnesty International as well as information sources from the US.
I actually found out about this report from CNN. I wasn’t perusing the Chinese website for propaganda against the US.
I presented a document which makes a very clear argument. Apparently you haven’t read it yet, because you don’t seem to be clear about the point it’s making.
But let me help. Here’s the conclusion:
I don’t entirely agree with that as yet, but I would like to see a factual rebuttal at least of the breadth and depth that the Chinese provided before I accept it. This is recent development, I don’t know of any official US rebuttals of this. The SDMB seemed as good a place as any for the moment.
BTW much of what China claims is pretty muched gleaned from the Amnesty International website.
http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2002.nsf/amr/usa!Open
I think it’s as honest and truthful as any campaign speech. I haven’t noticed any outright lies, though it tries to make implications based on anecdotal evidence. And it doesn’t really claim that China is better than the US in terms of human rights, it just says the US isn’t as good as most Americans claim. I don’t see what there is to debate about.
Actually, it says that US foreign policy aggressively and disingenuously use the human rights issue to further it’s hegemony and therefore it’s hypocritical.
I agree with other parts of your assessment, though. It would be unwise to recognize China’s motivation in this as well. Some parts show a lack of understanding of US culture, but I have a feeling the US is doing the same in it’s criticism of some other countries.
That said, I do think China deserves serious criticism, but could our methodology be just a little too convenient for our political uses? And don’t our own transgressions present serious problems that deserve more attention?
If we are hypocrites how can we really lead the way on these issues?
Any nation is going to wade into an attack of this sort with it’s own politics in mind.
Organizations such as Amnesty International and their dogmatic brethren tend to be more “liberal”, and hence take issue with certain aspects of US policy.
Torture and forced confession are common in the United States, with the number of convicts on the death row that are misjudged or wronged remaining high…
You asked for a cite for this. Alright… there is at least one retired Prison Guard here on the Dope. I have several friends that either were, or are Prison Guards. One of our more well known dopers is a prison doctor. All of these people have stated that the vast majority of prison violence seems to stem from prisoner-on-prisoner assault.
As for the Chinese claim that prisoners are wrongly jailed… how would they know? If someone has gone through the US justice system, the odds are exceptionally high that they are guilty of the crime they have been accused of. The fact that innocent people being discovered and freed makes for headlines would tend to indicate just how rare that is. If it were common, it wouldn’t make such a media splash.
Also:
In the United States, close to 100 companies manufacture and export considerable quantities of instruments of torture that are banned in international trade. They have set up sales networks overseas. In its February 26, 2001 report, Amnesty International said some 80 American companies were involved in the manufacture, marketing and export of instruments of torture, including electric- shock tools, shackles and handcuffs with saw-teeth.
cite? And there are numerous reasons for the sale and ownership of shock tools and shackles that have no “torture” purpose. Also, just because a nation manufactures something, that does not mean that it is used within that nation.
Do you know what “cite” means, Tristan?
You are quoting from the document that errata already cited.
And that document already cites the source of the information, and you even quoted it. “February 26, 2001 report, Amnesty International”.
What exactly do you want?
The report is heavily biased, and I’m sorry, but you don’t seem to be able to see that the whole thing is just politicking and should be taken with a grain of salt. Have I read the whole thing? No, but I perused it and looked at the points you raised and it strikes me as being obvious that this paper does have an agenda and is spinning information presented into the most negative light possible or not giving out all the information. I don’t see much point in reading the whole thing unless my goal is to get a better picture of how China practices international politics, because any info it gives on human rights abuses practiced by the U.S. are suspect.
Using your quote as an example:
The problems with this paragraph are legion.
It makes no mention of the nations that did not vote for the U.S., including China and Cuba and numerous third world nations, many of which had political motivation to not want the U.S. on the committee. It doesn’t take into account that many of the nations practice vote swapping to get desired countries on the committee and the U.S. was considered a shoe-in to retain its seat and therefore not requiring any special backroom negotiations.
Also look at this part: “that it is extremely unpopular for the United States to push double standards and unilateralism on such issues as human rights, crackdowns on drug trafficking, arms control and environmental protection.” IOW, some of the votes against the U.S. were a backlash against the U.S. for recently rejecting the Kyoto treaty, and it’s a jump to claim that that’s a human rights violation.
And all that’s just the tip of the iceberg for reasons countries did not vote for the U.S. to be on the committee other than the U.S. allegedly having a poor human rights record. Furthermore it fails to mention that the U.S. is currently back on the committee, a seemingly glaring omission considering the point the paragraph was trying to make.
As for my “agenda” comment I admit to being a bit hasty in making it, but looking at what you had presented this thread seemed sort of fishy. You have my apology for acting rashly in that manner. However I seem to be on the mark in saying you are on the side of China (as far as this report goes) if you are seriously considering the U.S. to be a human rights violator.
Yes, Amnesty International takes issue with certain aspects of US policy. What facts have they presented about the U.S. that are inaccurate? Aren’t conservatives concerned about human rights violations within US borders? What conservative organizations are working to address issues of human rights in the U.S.?