If they have nothing to hide.....why not just let the inspectors come in, look around and interview the children that are being held here??
The American Civil Liberties Union today called on the U.S. government to explain why it is denying a United Nations independent expert access to the Hutto immigrant detention facility in Taylor, Texas.
According to the U.N. human rights office in Geneva, Dr. Jorge Bustamante, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, was scheduled to tour the Hutto facility on Monday as part of an official fact-finding mission. But according to news reports, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency is denying Dr. Bustamante access to the facility.
?We are deeply disappointed that the U.S. government is not living up to its human rights commitments,? said Jamil Dakwar, Advocacy Director of the ACLU Human Rights Program. ?The U.S. government claims it is a beacon for human rights, yet it keeps a shroud of secrecy over its own policies.?
The ACLU said the U.S. has a history of blocking international experts from access to controversial detention facilities. In 2005, four U.N. human rights experts issued a statement rebuking the government for not allowing full access to detainees at the Guantánamo Bay prison. In 1998, the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women was denied access to women?s prisons in Virginia and Michigan, despite prior agreements with corrections officials.
The Special Rapporteur is conducting a three-week fact finding mission at the request of the U.S. The Rapporteur is an independent expert appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council with the mandate to monitor, advise and publicly report on human rights situations in specific countries and on human rights violations worldwide. The tour of Hutto ? a converted prison that houses about 400 immigrants, including children and asylum seekers ? was considered a major part of the Special Rapporteur's mission. Earlier this year, the ACLU filed federal lawsuits on behalf of 12 children detained at the Hutto facility, charging that the children are subject to inhumane treatment.
According to the official terms for fact-finding missions, the Special Rapporteur must have ?access to all prisons, detention centers and places of interrogation.? The terms also mandate that the Rapporteur be given confidential and unsupervised contact with witnesses and potential victims of human rights violations.
The ACLU sent a letter today to the U.S. State Department and the Department of Homeland Security seeking answers on why the Hutto facility tour was cancelled.
?It is imperative that the United States give the Special Rapporteur full access to facilities like Hutto,? Dakwar said. ?This raises serious questions about what the government is trying to hide by denying access to independent experts.?
The ACLU has brought several lawsuits against Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and six officials from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on behalf of 12* children detained at the T. Don Hutto detention facility in Taylor, Texas. Ten lawsuits were filed on March 6, and two more were filed on April 20. The lawsuits contend that the conditions inside Hutto violate numerous provisions of Flores v. Meese, a 1997 court settlement that established minimum standards and conditions for the housing and release of all minors in federal immigration custody.
Pursuant to a contract between ICE and the private prison company, Corrections Corporation of America, Inc. (CCA), Hutto is a converted medium-security prison that bills itself as a "Family Residential Facility." While Hutto authorities maintain that "residents" are treated humanely, they are, in many ways, treated like prisoners. At the time of the ACLU?s initial court filings, child detainees had to wear prison garb. They received one hour of recreation per day and opportunities to spend this hour outdoors were very rare. Children were detained in small cells for about 11 or 12 hours each day, and were prohibited from keeping food and toys in these cells, which lack any privacy. Although some of these conditions have improved slightly, they are still far from adequate.
In addition, access to adequate medical, dental, and mental health treatment is severely limited and, as a result, many children suffer from chronic ailments that worsen as they are left undiagnosed and untreated. Children are not afforded meaningful educational opportunities. Guards frequently discipline the children by threatening to separate them from their families.
The lawsuits ask that the children are released and not separated from their families, utilizing other alternatives such as reasonable supervision that would achieve both law enforcement goals and provide humane treatment.
* Since the ACLU filed its initial lawsuits on March 6, 10 of the children have been released from Hutto and are staying with relatives in the U.S. or Canada.
Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Not allowing UN inspectors means you have WMDs... OH NO!
Originally posted by: chucky2
There can't be a problem with this since Saddam and Iran did/have done the same thing numerous times, and we all know they are totally innocent.
I'm sure once the UN is allowed access at the convenience of the facility, all will be well.
And of course, the American loving UN would definitely have no interest in waving bad treatment of perfect children around for the world to see...same with the ACLU.
Right right... :roll:
OK, back to regularly scheduled "Bush&Co" bashing...
Chuck
Originally posted by: dahunan
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: dahunan
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
I could care less who it's run by honestly. While I was raised Catholic, I'm not a rapid Catholic lover (unless it's some single hot Catholic chick who's not rabidly Catholic herself...then maybe I'd think about coming back into the fold )
While the ACLU sounds all great in theory, I find many of the causes they take up to be over the top...I just don't really trust them anymore than I do a normal politician. Which means about 0% until proven otherwise...and even then...
The UN doesn't even rate as well with me as the ACLU, so I'm not getting too worked up that the UN can't get access to a facility here in the states.
IMHO, no matter how bad it supposedly is at this facility, things are far far far more worse at other places in the world, and the UN ought to be putting its limited resources there instead of running around in bed with the ACLU so they can enjoy - and blow totally out of proportion - watching one place in America allegedly treating minors (who are there for some reason) badly.
The US is not a sub-3rd world country...we don't need the UN here watching over our shoulder. We have infrastructure in place the ACLU can go to to get attention put on something they have a problem with...and the ACLU is a large enough group that whoever they went to would listen.
Chuck
Originally posted by: Corn
Why spend the time detaining, why not just immediately deport?
...lawsuits contend that the conditions inside Hutto violate numerous provisions of Flores v. Meese, a 1997 court settlement that established minimum standards and conditions for the housing and release of all minors in federal immigration custody.
...in many ways, treated like prisoners. At the time of the ACLU?s initial court filings, child detainees had to wear prison garb. They received one hour of recreation per day and opportunities to spend this hour outdoors were very rare. Children were detained in small cells for about 11 or 12 hours each day, and were prohibited from keeping food and toys in these cells, which lack any privacy. Although some of these conditions have improved slightly, they are still far from adequate.
In addition, access to adequate medical, dental, and mental health treatment is severely limited and, as a result, many children suffer from chronic ailments that worsen as they are left undiagnosed and untreated. Children are not afforded meaningful educational opportunities. Guards frequently discipline the children by threatening to separate them from their families.
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: chucky2
There can't be a problem with this since Saddam and Iran did/have done the same thing numerous times, and we all know they are totally innocent.
I'm sure once the UN is allowed access at the convenience of the facility, all will be well.
And of course, the American loving UN would definitely have no interest in waving bad treatment of perfect children around for the world to see...same with the ACLU.
Right right... :roll:
OK, back to regularly scheduled "Bush&Co" bashing...
Chuck
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: chucky2
There can't be a problem with this since Saddam and Iran did/have done the same thing numerous times, and we all know they are totally innocent.
I'm sure once the UN is allowed access at the convenience of the facility, all will be well.
And of course, the American loving UN would definitely have no interest in waving bad treatment of perfect children around for the world to see...same with the ACLU.
Right right... :roll:
OK, back to regularly scheduled "Bush&Co" bashing...
Chuck
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: chucky2
There can't be a problem with this since Saddam and Iran did/have done the same thing numerous times, and we all know they are totally innocent.
I'm sure once the UN is allowed access at the convenience of the facility, all will be well.
And of course, the American loving UN would definitely have no interest in waving bad treatment of perfect children around for the world to see...same with the ACLU.
Right right... :roll:
OK, back to regularly scheduled "Bush&Co" bashing...
Chuck
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
Well there is an effing surprise!!!!!!
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
All that's left to do is stack the kids up naked in the hall and take pictures of them while vicious dogs bark at them and Hutto will be up to U.S. standards...
Originally posted by: Shivetya
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: chucky2
There can't be a problem with this since Saddam and Iran did/have done the same thing numerous times, and we all know they are totally innocent.
I'm sure once the UN is allowed access at the convenience of the facility, all will be well.
And of course, the American loving UN would definitely have no interest in waving bad treatment of perfect children around for the world to see...same with the ACLU.
Right right... :roll:
OK, back to regularly scheduled "Bush&Co" bashing...
Chuck
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
Well there is an effing surprise!!!!!!
Anandtech BIGOTS FTW!!!!!!! YEAH FOR THE BIGOTS! :disgust:
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Shivetya
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: chucky2
There can't be a problem with this since Saddam and Iran did/have done the same thing numerous times, and we all know they are totally innocent.
I'm sure once the UN is allowed access at the convenience of the facility, all will be well.
And of course, the American loving UN would definitely have no interest in waving bad treatment of perfect children around for the world to see...same with the ACLU.
Right right... :roll:
OK, back to regularly scheduled "Bush&Co" bashing...
Chuck
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
Well there is an effing surprise!!!!!!
Anandtech BIGOTS FTW!!!!!!! YEAH FOR THE BIGOTS! :disgust:
Who is the bigot,me? Dude I am Catholic and it doesnt surprise me catholics would be running some center for immigrants. They get their hands into that kind of stuff all the time and actively work to bring people from other parts of the world here so the rest of society can pay for it.
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: Corn
Why spend the time detaining, why not just immediately deport?
Home country doesn't want them? People can apparently come into the country and become impossible to remove. There?s also nothing we?re willing to do about it, except give them legal status here and raise them here.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: dahunan
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
I could care less who it's run by honestly. While I was raised Catholic, I'm not a rapid Catholic lover (unless it's some single hot Catholic chick who's not rabidly Catholic herself...then maybe I'd think about coming back into the fold )
While the ACLU sounds all great in theory, I find many of the causes they take up to be over the top...I just don't really trust them anymore than I do a normal politician. Which means about 0% until proven otherwise...and even then...
The UN doesn't even rate as well with me as the ACLU, so I'm not getting too worked up that the UN can't get access to a facility here in the states.
IMHO, no matter how bad it supposedly is at this facility, things are far far far more worse at other places in the world, and the UN ought to be putting its limited resources there instead of running around in bed with the ACLU so they can enjoy - and blow totally out of proportion - watching one place in America allegedly treating minors (who are there for some reason) badly.
The US is not a sub-3rd world country...we don't need the UN here watching over our shoulder. We have infrastructure in place the ACLU can go to to get attention put on something they have a problem with...and the ACLU is a large enough group that whoever they went to would listen.
Chuck
Come on man, just because it's worse somewhere else doesn't mean it's not bad there. :rolleyes;
What's next? Disbanding Police in the US because crime is worse in Russia?
That's a fair point. On the other hand, the UN is there to monitor human rights around the world, so this is within their scope. I doubt sending one investigator is really detracting from their resources much.Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: dahunan
You do realize that the facility is run by the Catholic Brotherhood of America, right?
I could care less who it's run by honestly. While I was raised Catholic, I'm not a rapid Catholic lover (unless it's some single hot Catholic chick who's not rabidly Catholic herself...then maybe I'd think about coming back into the fold )
While the ACLU sounds all great in theory, I find many of the causes they take up to be over the top...I just don't really trust them anymore than I do a normal politician. Which means about 0% until proven otherwise...and even then...
The UN doesn't even rate as well with me as the ACLU, so I'm not getting too worked up that the UN can't get access to a facility here in the states.
IMHO, no matter how bad it supposedly is at this facility, things are far far far more worse at other places in the world, and the UN ought to be putting its limited resources there instead of running around in bed with the ACLU so they can enjoy - and blow totally out of proportion - watching one place in America allegedly treating minors (who are there for some reason) badly.
The US is not a sub-3rd world country...we don't need the UN here watching over our shoulder. We have infrastructure in place the ACLU can go to to get attention put on something they have a problem with...and the ACLU is a large enough group that whoever they went to would listen.
Chuck
Come on man, just because it's worse somewhere else doesn't mean it's not bad there. :rolleyes;
What's next? Disbanding Police in the US because crime is worse in Russia?
I'm not saying it is or isn't bad there. What I'm saying is the ACLU doesn't need to be engaging the UN to go to an American facility to check how people there are being treated. It should be going to the local, county, state, and then federal contacts and working it that way. I highly doubt given the publicity (whether true or not) the ACLU is known to be able to raise, that once it gets to state or federal level, they'd be ignored.
The police here in America are necessary, whether or not Russia even exists or not. That's really not a good analogy...
Chuck