America is World’s Most Prolific Jailer
HRW report that:
Statistics released today by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a branch of the US Department of Justice, show that as of June 30, 2007, approximately 2.3 million persons were incarcerated in US prisons and jails, an all-time high. This represents an incarceration rate of 762 per 100,000 US residents, the highest such rate in the world.
Of course HRW wouldn’t care to mention it but America’s incarceration rate is over 3.3 times the size of Iran’s at around 229 per 100,000. And of course this doesn’t include the millions of political inmates incarcerated by America, or at America’s behest, in foreign countries or in secret floating dungeons in international waters. The title of “leader of the free world” that American Presidents couldn’t be more ironic: the US President is jailer in chief of the free world. Supporters of American imperialism overseas, who argue that America is a defender of liberty and democracy, are deluded – America doesn’t just locks up dissidents and their families, it uses jail as a collective punishment in its colonies and locks up disproportionate numbers of its ethnic minorities at home.
steph
amica
rob
dcbarton
No, don’t put it another way, I understand perfectly clearly what you are saying, it just happens to be complete rubbish. al-Qaeda is not a sovereign government and therefore can’t declare war on one under international law. This is a very simple point of law and this part of the discussion ends here.
On the 23 February 1998, Osama Bin laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri published a fatwa sanctioning attacks on Americans and American interests, if America has evidence of their involvement in crimes against America, they should assist the authorities in the relevant jurisdictions to prosecute them under criminal law, and where such a treaty exists, seek extradition.
To date America has produced no evidence that Bin Laden was involved in 911 and on the 16 September 2001 Bin Laden issued a denial of any involvement.
Whilst I have no sympathy for al-Qaeda, they didn’t actually exist on the 11 September 2001, and it was America who declared war on the Islamic world not the other way round. All America needs to do to end this is end it imperialism in the Middle East, including supporting Israel.
Let me put it this way, I know you will still refuse to understand but I will try. Al-Qaeda was getting safe harbor in Afghanistan, Afghanistan was being ruled by the Taliban, who also supported Al-Qaeda, Al-Qaeda is trying to run a world wide conquest for Islam. In their mind, Islam is a nation-state. The circumstances of 9/11 changed the way we do things to some degree. It is necessary to change with the times. Al-Qaeda did declare war on the US and on the entire world. We have to fight that war or give in. Which do you suggest? As far as going into Iraq, during World War II we went into France, who we were not at war with, did we have that right? Legally, no, morally yes. The lives of every American, and of the entire world are at stake. This war is not just about Afghanistan and Iraq, it is being fought everywhere. I know those on the left have some simple minded idea that “if we are nice to them, they will be nice to us.” It doesn’t work that way. Listen to what they say, and take it to heart. Al-Qaeda and their supporters mean everything they say. Thiis war is not about some preconcieved notion that they have been wronged, it is about converting the entire world to Islam and killing any who won’t convert. They declared war on the US and the US had every right to counter that. Show me where under International Law the US has to sit back and allow 3,000 people to be murdered with responding to the threat.
No it doesn’t stand. You’re talking complete nonsense. You clearly don’t understand international law. As I’ve already explained al-Qaeda cannot declare war they’re are not a nation State and Saddam may have been harbouring people who America considers terrorists but that doesn’t make them so under international law, and the Iraq war was not hot pursuit.
Lets make this simple, quote me the relevant legisaltion that support your claims under international law.
Steph, the comparison to Germany still stands, Al-Qaeda declared war on the US, Germany declared war on the US, the difference is that Germany did NOT attack the US(Japan did). The attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq are different because we were attacked by Al-Qaeda, who had safe haven in and was operating out of Afghanistan. Iraq under Saddam Hussein was supporting terrorists and Al-Qaeda leaders were going to Iraq for medical treatment. Another point would be “there is no threat, to the west from Islam” Have you taken the time to learn what is happening in the Philippines? The Muslims in Mindinao said they wanted autonomous Islamic rule in Mindinao, when they got that, they weren’t happy. Now they want and are fighting for Islamic rule over all of the Philippines. If that is a threat what is? How does 10% of the population of a democratic nation justify demanding control over the 90% that don’t follow the minorities religious beliefs? This is not a war about Islam defending itself. It is, as Bin-Laden and Ahmedinejad said, a war to bring the entire world into Islam.
@ Simon
Der.. *roll eyes* I didn’t say every prisoner should be released or do 3 days. I said the ones “who don’t really need to be in jail or have served half their sentence and aren’t going to be a danger to society”. Not everyone sent to jail needs to be there every day of the week. Some of them could be there Sun -Tue and another lot on Wed to Fri so they could all have Saturday off. It’s still a punishment for less serious crimes. Muppet
Amie – letting the prisoners out would solve the overcrowding problem but you do realise that they are supposed to be there for a reason?
“He should also introduce 3-day-a-week sentences for some crimes to stop prison overcrowding.”
Prisoners only serving 3 days a week inside! Are you completely off your rocker, it’s a prison, not a hotel. Not much of a deterrent.
Steph, I can agree that prisoners are either POWs or civillians, and that the US is in breach of the Geneva conventions but armed robbers – political prisoners?
@ decbarton
You might be one of the few people left who thinks that Bush’s illegal wars against Iraq and Afghanistan were a response to 911, but under International law, as defined at Nuremberg, they are wars of aggression, i.e. America is guilty of the same crimes the Nazis were principally charged with. Justice Robert Jackson’s argument against the Nazis at Nuremberg applies to America now. That is an inescapable legal point.
Also please don’t say, using your logic, and then attribute something to me I’ve never said or doesn’t follow on from anything I’ve said. Germany (a sovereign State) declared war on America first.
Radical Muslims aren’t waging a war of aggression against the West, America is waging a war of aggression (a Crusade) against Islam, and are oppressing Muslims throughout the world – there is no threat, to the West from Islam, that the West didn’t provoke. Of course I think America has a right to take action against those involved in 911 but the problem is that we don’t know who they are, since the terrorists all died and the US Federal government has prevented any proper criminal investigation into the event.
America could give up support for Israel, remove its troops from all of Arabia, and stop propping up pro American despotic regimes in the Middle East. That would do a lot more to protect America from retaliatory violence. But whilst America occupies Iraq and Afghanistan, I don’t fault the resistance in those countries for resisting – that would be insane!!!
Steph, where were you on September 11, 2001? We were attacked by an Islamic Extremist group that day, over 3,000 Americans died. Or does that matter to you? We do have a right to defend ourselves against that, just like we had a right to defend ourselves against Japan when they attacked Pearl Harbor. How about World War II Germany? Using your logic, that would have been an illegal war for the US to get involved in since Germany hadn’t attacked the US. Your assertion that you won’t get your head hacked off since you don’t follow a radical sect of christianity is flawed in that the radical muslims don’t care what sect of christianity you follow. If you haven’t noticed they even go so far as to kill muslims who don’t follow their exact brand of Islam. They have a stated goal, that is the control of the entire world under their brand of Islam. This war isn’t just the US in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is being fought in the Philippines where 10% of the population is trying to control 100% of the population. The most recent elections held in the Philippines were a battle between the police and army against Abu Sayyeff, because the mulsims didn’t want an election, they want an islamic regime. This war is going on in Africa, Europe, Asia and Australia. Everybody is involved in the war, the US and very few others realize it now. Apologists won’t solve the problem, it will take nations like the US that can recognize the threat and move to end it.
That’s two really good ideas Amie. I’ll doubt he’ll have the courage to do it, because he won’t want to look tired, but he should.
@ dcbarton
You can’t say international law support America’s right to defend itself, when America’s actions are not defensive. There is absolutely no legal justification for the American invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, these were illegal wars of aggression.
A war can only be declared between States and America has no legal justification to detain anyone picked up outside its borders, unless extradited through normal legal channels, it certainly has no right as an occupying power to remove detainees picked up in Afghanistan or Iraq, outside those countries.
The fact is that most of the Muslims detained by America have been men, women and children, who have committed no crime against America. The court tribunal have specifically not granted them POW status, so they are by legal default civilians. That is inarguable.
And I’m not going to get my head hacked off because unlike the US President, I don’t follow a radical sect of Christianity, and don’t believe in unproved invasions and occupations of foreign countries – neither Afghanistan or Iraq attacked America. I’m certainly not grateful that America has used Islamophobia as an excuse to wage an imperialist campaign of genocidal violence against innocent Muslims – I don’t hate Muslims.
Steph, they don’t represent a country, but what they have done to the USS Cole, the Kobar Towers, and the Pentagon and the World Trade Center are acts of war. We just retaliated. I’m not saying the US is exempt from international law, I’m saying that international law does NOT prevent the US from defending itself from unprovoked attacks. Your argument about treating the detainees as POWs until their status id determined is flawed in that we do treat them as POWs and are condemned for it. If you listen to what these extremists are saying, I would think that you would be grateful that America is willing to stand up and fight them. Or would you rather have your head hacked off just because you don’t follow their radical Islamic religion?
If Obama is elected President he should have a prisoner amnesty one day a year and release all the inmates, who don’t really need to be in jail or have served half their sentence and aren’t going to be a danger to society. He should also introduce 3-day-a-week sentences for some crimes to stop prison overcrowding.
@ dcbarton
No Islamic radicals have the power to declare war on the US, unless they happen to run a country – it was the the way around: America declared war on Islam, and then specifically declared war on Afghanistan and Iraq.
Also if your argument is that America is exempt from international law, then so is every other State, that not the Bush administrations argument. Also America is a signatory to the third and fourth Geneva conventions, which were ratified by Congress and the Senate, so America is legally bound to treat all detainees of war as POWs until their status as civilian or combatant is determined.
@ heather
The values for which the American revolution was fought and the US was founded on, and the values of the US Empire today. With so much of the population in jail, it’s pretty obvious that America doesn’t work – it’s a failed State.
They are only POWs, according to the Law of War, if they are uniformed members of an organized State army, otherwise, they are merely battlefield combatants. That has been the law of the land since 1863. International law has no jurisdiction in this matter between the US and the Islamic radicals that de3clared war on the US
@ Ric
me too
I knew, I knew!!
Steph…
Bush is a terrorist, who knew?
It’s disgraceful isn’t it? We’re supposed to be the land of the free. Eight years of Bush and Repugs still blame of Dems for the country’s problems.
The reason for the high rate of incarceration in the US is that American courts convict and impose custodial sentences on an exceedingly high numbers or defendants. The reason why there are so many ethnic minority prisoners, must be because their is a social divide between the races. With that level of disparity, black or Hispanic armed robbers can defintely be called political prisoners.
As for battlefield combatants:
a) they have to be picked up on the battlefield, which most American illegally held detainees weren’t, and is now impossible, since America is no longer technically at war with Afghanistan or Iraq
b) they are POWs until determined otherwise, and as none of these prisoners who have come before military tribunals have been afforded POW status, they are civilians. Anyone being held as an “unlawful combatant”, a term that is not recognised in international law is in fact a hostage.
But I was also referring to all the political dissidents that have been incarcerated in Europe Asia, North Africa, South Africa, North America, South America and Australia, at the behest of the American government.
The reason for the high rate of incareration in the US is the welfare state. It encourages people not to work. Combine that with the left’s push to take the power of discipline from parents and you have kids becoming adults with no respect for the law or the rights of others. That leads to people committing crimes, those people then go to prison. The disproportionate numbers of minorities being locked in jail goes back to the discipline/crime problem. If a disproportionate number of minorities commit crimes, a disproprtionate number of minorities will go to jail. I don’t know where you got “political prisoners” unless you are thinking of the battlefield combatants. Those are not political prisoners, they are, by the Law of War, criminals to be tried by military commissions. Some of those have been released only to be recaptured doing what they said they never did, namely, attacking and murdering American soldiers. We don’t jail their entire families, just the battlefield combatants themselves