SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
June, 04 2009, 03:46pm EDT
Contact:
Brenda Bowser Soder
(202) 370-3323,
bowsersoderb@humanrightsfirst.org
As International Hate Crimes Escalate, Human Rights First Urges Senate to Strengthen US Laws
Passage of Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act Provides Crucial Protections, Offers United States the Opportunity to Lead by Example
WASHINGTON
Human Rights First (HRF) is urging the U.S. Senate to pass
legislation that would strengthen protections against hate crimes
throughout the nation and abroad. According to a letter sent to
Senators today, passage of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention
Act (S. 909) would fortify existing laws by permitting federal
authorities to assist local and state governments in hate crimes
investigations, a step that enables the United States to demonstrate
its commitment to fighting hate crimes at home and lead by example
abroad.
"Hate crimes are on the rise in the United States and around the
world," said Paul LeGendre, Director of HRF's Fighting Discrimination
Program. "In addition to giving U.S. authorities the tools they need to
combat bias-motivated violence and protect Americans from a pernicious
form of discrimination, this legislation will allow the United States
to lead by example and help other nations combat these harmful acts of
violence."
In 2007, the Federal Bureau of Investigations documented 7,624 U.S.
hate crimes directed against institutions and individuals because of
their race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, or
disability. According to HRF's 2008 Hate Crimes Survey,
similar crimes are on the rise across Europe and the former Soviet
Union, a region where the majority of governments are failing to
adequately address the problem. Though the United States has led
efforts to confront this scourge through its foreign policy and
engagement in multilateral institutions such as the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe, HRF today told the Senate that
passage of S. 909 would carry significant weight to encourage foreign
leaders to toughen their own hate crimes response.
"Behind the statistics are individuals, families, and communities
deeply impacted by these violent crimes. By undermining the shared
value of equality and nondiscrimination, violent hate crimes also
threaten the very fabric of the increasingly diverse society in which
we live," HRF Chief Executive Officer Elisa Massimino wrote in the
organization's letter to the Senate.
"Enactment of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act would
demonstrate enhanced global leadership by the United States on this
issue, enabling the United States more effectively to encourage other
governments to strengthen their responses to hate crimes."
The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act has been endorsed by 26 state
Attorneys General, a number of the nation's most important law
enforcement organizations, more than 275 national civil rights,
professional, civic, education, and religious groups. The Senate
expects to take up this measure within the coming weeks. A similar bill
won widespread support in the 110th Congress, including 60 Senate
votes. Last month, by a vote of 249-175, the U.S. House of
Representatives overwhelmingly passed the Local Law Enforcement Hate
Crimes Prevention Act (H.R. 1913), its own version of S. 909. The Obama
Administration has indicated that it supports the bill and plans to
sign it into law.
Human Rights First is a non-profit, nonpartisan international human rights organization based in New York and Washington D.C. Human Rights First believes that building respect for human rights and the rule of law will help ensure the dignity to which every individual is entitled and will stem tyranny, extremism, intolerance, and violence.
LATEST NEWS
'Disgraceful Show of Violence': Cops Attack Protesters Outside Melbourne Arms Expo
"People are standing up, risking everything, to protest the sale of weapons that have slaughtered millions," said one activist, who lamented that "instead of being celebrated as the heroes they truly are, they're met with violence."
Sep 11, 2024
Police in the southern Australian state of Victoria on Wednesday attacked anti-war protesters with so-called "less lethal" weapons including stun grenades, hard foam projectiles, and pepper spray outside a major international arms convention in Melbourne amid Israel's Australia-backed annihilation of Gaza.
Protesters gathered outside the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Center, where the three-day Land Forces International Land Defense Exposition kicked off on Wednesday. Organizers describe the event as "the premier gateway to the land defense markets of Australia and the region, and a platform for interaction with major prime contractors from the United States and Europe."
Protest organizers—who included the groups Students for Palestine and Disrupt Wars—said the demonstration was a stand against the arms trade in general and Australia's and other countries' support for Israel, which is on trial for genocide at the International Court of Justice.
"We're protesting to stand up for all those who have been killed by the type of weapons on display at the convention."
Protesters shouted slogans including "Free Palestine!" and "Shame!" as attendees entered the expo venue.
"We're protesting to stand up for all those who have been killed by the type of weapons on display at the convention," Students for Palestine organizer Jasmine Duff explained. "Many of the weapons inside the convention center are advertised as battle-tested. In the context of Israeli weapons firms, which are present, this means tested through killing civilians in Gaza."
Since the Hamas-led October 7 attack on Israel, Israeli bombs and bullets have killed or maimed more than 145,000 Palestinians in Gaza. The Australian government has approved more than 300 export permits for military and dual-use equipment to Israel since 2016.
Duff said police "used serious weapons on peace activists that should be banned for use on demonstrators, including pepper spray, which is classified as a chemical weapon."
"They hit us with batons, including hitting one man so hard he had to go to hospital, and they shot us with rubber bullets," she added.
Police say they acted after some protesters pelted officers with rocks, bottles, horse manure, and a liquid substance they claimed was acid. They also said that protesters mistook hard foam projectiles for rubberized bullets. Officials said 39 people were arrested for alleged offenses including assault, obstruction, arson, and blocking roads. At least two dozen officers reportedly required medical treatment.
Human rights groups decried the heavy-handed police response to the mostly peaceful protest.
"As reports emerge of police using tear gas, pepper spray, and stun grenades during protests in Melbourne, Australia, Amnesty calls for all allegations of misuse of force to be promptly and impartially investigated," said Amnesty International Australia.
Activists said they will keep up pressure on the Australian government for as long as it supports Israel's slaughter in Gaza. The organizers of Wednesday's protest said they are planning another demonstration outside Hanwha Defence Australia, followed by a vigil in Batman Park.
"Direct action is a bedrock of democracy," Disrupt Land Forces organizer Caroline da Silva toldThe Age. "Directly acting to prevent harm is in the DNA of all people of conscience."
"The anti-militarist movement on this continent has grown and matured very rapidly since Israel's attacks on Gaza began," she added. "We are deeply committed, and we are growing stronger. Change will come."
On Tuesday, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong said the Labor-led government of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese supports the recent decision by Britain's Labour government to suspend some arms export licenses to Israel.
"I welcome the decision of my U.K. counterpart," Wong toldThe Guardian. "It reflects what we have been advocating throughout this conflict. Palestinian civilians cannot be made to pay the price of defeating Hamas."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Groups Say Trump Threat Is Dire, But Harris Must Prove She Can Be a 'Climate President'
"This election is going to be incredibly close," said one Sunrise Movement organizer. "To win, Harris needs to show young people she will fight for us."
Sep 11, 2024
Up until the very last question of the debate between U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump Tuesday night, American voters heard little about fossil fuels and the climate, other than arguing over which presidential candidate is more committed to continuing fracking and its high rate of planet-heating methane emissions.
"One hour in. Still no climate questions," said journalist Emily Atkin at 10:00 pm.
But campaigners said that the brief coverage of energy and the climate emergency in the debate—which took place days after scientists reported the summer of 2024 was the hottest on record—made clearer than ever that if given a second term in office, Trump would fulfill the promise he made to oil executives earlier this year to slash the Biden-Harris' administration's climate regulations and clean energy development in favor of expanding oil and gas drilling.
Trump attacked the Biden-Harris administration for rescinding a key permit for the Keystone XL pipeline and bragged about getting "the oil business going like nobody has ever done before."
But JL Andrepont, a campaigner and analyst at 350 Action, said Harris' promises to continue fracking and statement boasting that she has helped oversee "the largest increase in domestic oil production in history" left much to be desired for U.S. voters, a majority of whom believe policymakers must do more to address the climate emergency.
"The climate crisis worsens daily, and yet Trump and VP Harris debated for 90 minutes and climate change was only mentioned at the end," said Andrepont. "We'll be upfront—the only way to ensure a safe and affordable future for Americans and beyond is to transition swiftly and justly from all fossil fuels, including fracked gas, and to renewable energy."
But while "Trump is singing 'drill baby drill' and Big Oil is holding up the mic," added Andrepont, Harris "knows that the climate crisis is real and already affecting far too many communities."
They suggested that choosing between Trump and Harris is a matter of choosing which president climate campaigners would rather push and negotiate with in order to expand renewable energy in the U.S., protect people from pollution and its threats to public health, and cut the country's greenhouse gas emissions.
"VP Harris is the only candidate who believes in climate change or even claims to represent the people, and we will hold her accountable to what that means. But we must fight for that chance," they said.
Ilie Rosenbluth, campaign manager at Oil Change U.S., added that Harris must fulfill her promise to debate viewers that as president, she would "chart a course for the future and not go backwards to the past."
"That means taking decisive action to end fossil fuels and ensuring a just transition to renewable energy," said Rosenbluth. "We need a climate president—one who will invest in clean energy, end fossil fuel subsidies, and phase out fossil fuels to protect the communities most exposed to oil and gas pollution and the climate crisis. It's time for Harris to show she can be that president.”
Rosenbluth was among those who noted that Harris' comments on fracking, which she said she would allow to continue in Pennsylvania, where the debate took place, showed her willingness to take a "dangerous [position] that will keep us on the path towards catastrophic climate impacts and continue exposing frontline communities to deadly levels of fossil fuel pollution."
As Harris reminded voters that the Inflation Reduction Act, one of President Joe Biden's signature laws, expanded leases for fracking, the cancer-causing chemicals used in the oil and gas extraction method and its release of planet-heating methane went unmentioned.
Also ignored was the fact that polls in 2020 and 2021 showed majorities of Pennsylvanians opposed fracking.
What Harris could have said, Elizabeth Sawin of the Multisolving Institute wrote, was: "We are going to ban fracking because it is bad for air, water, people, and climate. Then we are going to take care of the people who are employed in that sector, helping them re-skill for jobs in the clean economy with good healthcare, childcare, and pay."
In a move that one climate leader said summed up "the American mainstream media's approach to the issue," co-moderator Linsey Davis of ABC News asked the candidates in the debate's final moments what they would each do to fight climate change.
Trump said nothing about the climate emergency in response to the question—instead accusing Biden of sending manufacturing jobs overseas and alluding to a debunked claim about money the president's son received from the wife of a Russian official.
Harris noted that Trump has previously called the climate crisis "a hoax" and acknowledged people who have faced the destruction of extreme weather in the U.S., and pointed to the investments the Biden administration has made in "a clean energy economy."
While Trump made clear that he would "give oil and gas CEOs exactly what they want," said Stevie O'Hanlon, communications director for the Sunrise Movement, Harris overall "missed a critical opportunity to lay out a stark contrast with Trump and show young voters that she will stand up to Big Oil and stop the climate crisis."
The Sunrise Movement has not endorsed Harris but has launched a voter outreach campaign supporting Harris, with a plan to knock on 1.5 million doors in swing states, and O'Hanlon reported that "we hear people asking every day, 'What are Democrats going to do for us?'"
"Young voters want more from Harris. We want to see a real plan that meets the scale and urgency of this crisis. Seventy-eight percent of young voters in key swing states say climate change is a major issue shaping their vote," said O'Hanlon. "This election is going to be incredibly close... To win, Harris needs to show young people she will fight for us."Keep ReadingShow Less
Germany Corrects Trump on Energy Policy—'PS: We Also Don't Eat Cats and Dogs'
"We are shutting down—not building—coal and nuclear plants," the German foreign ministry said. "Coal will be off the grid by 2038 at the latest."
Sep 11, 2024
The German foreign ministry on Wednesday issued a rejoinder to Republican nominee Donald Trump's debate claim that Germany had reverted back to a "normal" energy policy after, as he implied, failing to transition away from fossil fuels.
Near the end of the televised presidential debate, Trump addressed Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, saying:
"You believe in things that the American people don't believe in. You believe in things like we're not going to frack. We're not going to take fossil fuel. We're not going to do, things that are going to make this country strong, whether you like it or not. Germany tried that and within one year they were back to building normal energy plants."
The Germans replied forcefully and included a snarky reference to Trump's baseless claim, made earlier in the debate, that immigrants were eating Americans' pets.
"Like it or not: Germany’s energy system is fully operational, with more than 50% renewables," the German foreign ministry, which is led by Annalena Baerbock of the country's green party as part of a coalition arrangement, wrote on social media. "And we are shutting down—not building—coal and nuclear plants. Coal will be off the grid by 2038 at the latest. PS: We also don't eat cats and dogs."
Like it or not: Germany’s energy system is fully operational, with more than 50% renewables. And we are shutting down – not building – coal & nuclear plants. Coal will be off the grid by 2038 at the latest. PS: We also don’t eat cats and dogs. #Debate2024 pic.twitter.com/PiDO98Vxfo
— GermanForeignOffice (@GermanyDiplo) September 11, 2024
"The former president is not famous for his grasp of the finer details of European energy policy," Bernd Radowitz wrote Wednesday in Recharge, a trade news publication.
Radowitz and other commentators took Trump's "normal" to mean fossil fuel-driven energy production.
"As usual with Trump, it takes some patience to interpret his incoherent line of argument, but what most U.S. viewers and potential voters likely understood from this statement is that Germany tried to ditch fossil fuels, but within a year had to give that up. The assumption here is also that Trump by 'normal energy plants' meant fossil-fired generation."
Germany has since 2010 undertaken an Energiewiende aimed at drawing down on fossil fuel use and nuclear-powered energy and ramping up renewables. The transition plan hit a rough patch in 2022 following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russia had supplied more than half of Germany's natural gas, as well as some of its oil and coal. German authorities turned some nuclear plants back on, added more coal consumption into the energy mix, and imported more natural gas from elsewhere, drawing criticism from climate campaigners.
However, those changes were meant to be temporary and Germany has since made progress on implementing its green transition plans. In March, the government declared itself on target to reach its 2030 climate goals. Over 60% of the country's electricity was powered by renewables in the first half of this year, a marked increase from 2022.
The foreign ministry's social media post had been viewed by over 1 million people as of Wednesday morning. It was not entirely clear why the ministry raised Trump's pet remarks, which were seemingly aimed at immigrants of color from low-income countries. Trump's claim, which The New York Timescalled "false and outlandish," was based on a rumor that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating pets for sustenance. Trump's running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), had spread the racist rumors on Monday.
As president, Trump had a scratchy relationship with Germany, which he frequently criticized for its export surplus to the U.S. and its lack of defense spending. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, of the center-left Social Democratic Party, made remarks in July that indicated that he hoped Harris would win the election. Scholz, who's held office since 2021, had last year endorsed President Joe Biden for reelection, speaking in unusually direct terms about the U.S. race.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular