

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The Dow Chemical Company (Dow) cannot
run from its responsibility for the ongoing impacts of the 1984 Bhopal
gas leak by sponsoring Live Earth 'Run for Water' events, Amnesty
International said today.
Thousands of people died and more than 100,000 continue to suffer
from serious health problems as a consequence of 1984's deadly leak of
toxic chemicals from a Union Carbide pesticide plant in Bhopal, India.
Dow became 100% owner of the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) in 2001.
The Dow Chemical Company (Dow) cannot
run from its responsibility for the ongoing impacts of the 1984 Bhopal
gas leak by sponsoring Live Earth 'Run for Water' events, Amnesty
International said today.
Thousands of people died and more than 100,000 continue to suffer
from serious health problems as a consequence of 1984's deadly leak of
toxic chemicals from a Union Carbide pesticide plant in Bhopal, India.
Dow became 100% owner of the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) in 2001.
Since then survivors and human rights groups have been campaigning
for Dow to address the ongoing impacts of the disaster, including
contamination of water by chemical waste, but the company has
consistently ignored these calls, denying any responsibility for UCC's
liabilities in Bhopal.
On 18 April Dow is sponsoring a series of running events across the
globe, organized by environmental organization Live Earth to raise
awareness about water scarcity.
"Sponsoring an event that highlights water scarcity while ignoring
ongoing problems with access to clean water and medical care, amongst
other issues, in Bhopal is at best hypocrisy, at worst, a flagrant
attempt by Dow to try to white-wash its image," said Audrey Gaughran,
Director of Global Issues at Amnesty International.
"Dow may be trying to run away from the legacy of Bhopal, but it
can't be allowed to hide behind sponsorship of 'Run for Water' events."
For more than 25 years both the government of India and the
companies involved have failed to address the human rights abuses that
have been the lasting legacy of the Bhopal gas leak.
"Bhopal raises fundamental questions about the accountability of
corporations and the capacity and willingness of governments to address
corporate-related human rights abuses, "said Audrey Gaughran.
 
"For
years the government of India, UCC and Dow have played 'pass the
parcel' over the issue of responsibility, while the people of Bhopal
have struggled to obtain even basic relief such as clean water."
Amnesty International has called on Live Earth to reconsider the
sponsorship unless Dow publicly commits to the forthcoming government
clean up process in Bhopal. Dow has not done this. 
Amnesty International shares Live Earth's concerns about the impact
of climate change and the urgent need to take action to protect human
rights, including the right to water. But the organisation fears that
Dow's sponsorship poses a serious risk to the credibility of the Live
Earth "Run for Water" events.
"Companies must understand that they cannot escape responsibility
for human rights abuses in one area by engaging in positive action
elsewhere.  Human rights abuses cannot be 'offset' by corporate good
works," said Audrey Gaughran.  
"The only way for Dow and UCC to finally put the legacy of Bhopal to
rest is to work with the affected communities and government of India
to fully, and effectively, address the human rights impact of the
disaster."
Background
Shortly before midnight on 2 December 1984, thousands of pounds of
deadly chemicals leaked from Union Carbide's pesticide plant in Bhopal,
central India. Around half a million people were exposed. Between 7,000
and 10,000 people died in the immediate aftermath and a further 15,000
over the next 20 years. More than 25 years later, the site has not been
cleaned up, the leak and its impact have not been properly
investigated, more than 100,000 people continue to suffer from health
problems without the medical care they need, and survivors are still
awaiting fair compensation and full redress for their suffering.
Leaking waste material has polluted groundwater on which thousands of
people depend for drinking water and other domestic uses.
Dow has consistently denied any responsibility for the liabilities
of UCC in Bhopal, but in stark contrast, Dow accepted asbestos-related
liabilities of UCC in the United States that were incurred as early as
1972.
Amnesty International works in partnership with organisations such
as The International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal to help support
survivors and activists to demand justice, accountability and an end to
25 years of human rights violations. 
Their unstinting campaign for adequate clean-up, access to clean
water and proper medical care, compensation and accountability has seen
survivors and supporter groups, including children and people with
disabilities, repeatedly make the 800-kilometre march from Bhopal to
New Delhi. 
More than 100 Bhopal survivors are launching an indefinite protest
in New Delhi today, urging the Indian government to resolve the
liabilities in Bhopal.
Amnesty International's work on the Bhopal disaster is part of its
Demand Dignity campaign, calling for an end to the human rights
violations that drive and deepen poverty. The campaign mobilizes people
all over the world to demand that governments, corporations and others
who have power listen to the voices of those living in poverty and
recognize and protect their rights. 
On 26 March 2010 Amnesty International wrote to Live Earth to
express concern about Dow's involvement in the "Run for Water" events. 
The organization has not received a response to that letter.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
"Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food," one lawyer said.
As the Trump administration continued its illegal freeze on food assistance, the US Department of Agriculture sent a warning to grocery stores not to provide discounts to the more than 42 million Americans affected.
Several grocery chains and food delivery apps have announced in recent days that they would provide substantial discounts to those whose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have been delayed. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children.
But on Sunday, Catherine Rampell, a reporter at the Washington Post published an email from the USDA that was sent to grocery stores around the country, telling them they were prohibited from offering special discounts to those at greater risk of food insecurity due to the cuts.
"You must offer eligible foods at the same prices and on the same terms and conditions to SNAP-EBT customers as other customers, except that sales tax cannot be charged on SNAP purchases," the email said. "You cannot treat SNAP-EBT customers differently from any other customer. Offering discounts or services only to SNAP-eligible customers is a SNAP violation unless you have a SNAP equal treatment waiver."
The email referred to SNAP's "Equal Treatment Rule," which prohibits stores from discriminating against SNAP recipients by charging them higher prices or treating them more favorably than other customers by offering them specialized sales or incentives.
Rampell said she was "aware of at least two stores that had offered struggling customers a discount, then withdrew it after receiving this email."
She added that it was "understandable why grocery stores might be scared off" because "a store caught violating the prohibition could be denied the ability to accept SNAP benefits in the future. In low-income areas where the SNAP shutdown will have the biggest impact, getting thrown off SNAP could mean a store is no longer financially viable."
While the rule prohibits special treatment in either direction, legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold argues that it was a "perverted interpretation of a rule that stops grocers from price gouging SNAP recipients... charging them more when they use food stamps."
The government also notably allows retailers to request waivers for programs that incentivize SNAP recipients to purchase healthy food.
Others pointed out that SNAP is currently not paying out to Americans because President Donald Trump is defying multiple federal court rulings issued Friday, requiring him to tap a $6 billion contingency fund to ensure benefit payments go out. Both courts, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have said his administration's refusal to pay out benefits is against the law.
One labor movement lawyer summed up the administration's position on social media: "Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food."
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy.
After failing to use the government's might to bully Jimmy Kimmel off the air earlier this fall, President Donald Trump is once again threatening to bring the force of law down on comedians for the egregious crime of making fun of him.
This time, his target was NBC late-night host Seth Meyers, whom the president said, in a Truth Social post Saturday, "may be the least talented person to 'perform' live in the history of television."
On Thursday, the comedian hosted a segment mocking Trump's bizarre distaste for the electromagnetic catapults aboard Navy ships, which the president said he may sign an executive order to replace with older (and less efficient) steam-powered ones.
Trump did not take kindly to Meyers' barbs: "On and on he went, a truly deranged lunatic. Why does NBC waste its time and money on a guy like this??? - NO TALENT, NO RATINGS, 100% ANTI TRUMP, WHICH IS PROBABLY ILLEGAL!!!"
It is, of course, not "illegal" for a late-night comedian, or any other news reporter or commentator, for that matter, to be "anti-Trump." But it's not the first time the president has made such a suggestion. Amid the backlash against Kimmel's firing in September, Trump asserted that networks that give him "bad publicity or press" should have their licenses taken away.
"I read someplace that the networks were 97% against me... I mean, they’re getting a license, I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump said. "All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.”
His FCC director, Brendan Carr, used a similar logic to justify his pressure campaign to get Kimmel booted by ABC, which he said could be punished for airing what he determined was "distorted” content.
Before Kimmel, Carr suggested in April that Comcast may be violating its broadcast licenses after MSNBC declined to air a White House press briefing in which the administration defended its wrongful deportation of Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on social media following Trump's tirade against Meyers. "Why? Because Trump believes he—not the people—decides the law. This is why we are in the middle of, not on the verge of, a totalitarian takeover."
"An ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien," said the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee.
Immigration agents are using facial recognition software as "definitive" evidence to determine immigration status and is collecting data from US citizens without their consent. In some cases, agents may detain US citizens, including ones who can provide their birth certificates, if the app says they are in the country illegally.
These are a few of the findings from a series of articles published this past week by 404 Media, which has obtained documents and video evidence showing that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents are using a smartphone app in the field during immigration stops, scanning the faces of people on the street to verify their citizenship.
The report found that agents frequently conduct stops that "seem to have little justification beyond the color of someone’s skin... then look up more information on that person, including their identity and potentially their immigration status."
While it is not clear what application the agencies are using, 404 previously reported that ICE is using an app called Mobile Fortify that allows ICE to simply point a camera at a person on the street. The photos are then compared with a bank of more than 200 million images and dozens of government databases to determine info about the person, including their name, date of birth, nationality, and information about their immigration status.
On Friday, 404 published an internal document from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) which stated that "ICE does not provide the opportunity for individuals to decline or consent to the collection and use of biometric data/photograph collection." The document also states that the image of any face that agents scan, including those of US citizens, will be stored for 15 years.
The outlet identified several videos that have been posted to social media of immigration officials using the technology.
In one, taken in Chicago, armed agents in sunglasses and face coverings are shown accosting a pair of Hispanic teenagers on bicycles, asking where they are from. The 16-year-old boy who filmed the encounter said he is "from here"—an American citizen—but that he only has a school ID on him. The officer tells the boy he'll be allowed to leave if he'll "do a facial." The other officer then snaps a photo of him with a phone camera and asks his name.
In another video, also in Chicago, agents are shown surrounding a driver, who declines to show his ID. Without asking, one officer points his phone at the man. "I’m an American citizen, so leave me alone,” the driver says. "Alright, we just got to verify that,” the officer responds.
Even if the people approached in these videos had produced identification proving their citizenship, there's no guarantee that agents would have accepted it, especially if the app gave them information to the contrary.
On Wednesday, ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), told 404 that ICE agents will even trust the app's results over a person's government documents.
“ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person’s status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien,” he said.
This is despite the fact that, as Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told 404, “face recognition technology is notoriously unreliable, frequently generating false matches and resulting in a number of known wrongful arrests across the country."
Thompson said: "ICE using a mobile biometrics app in ways its developers at CBP never intended or tested is a frightening, repugnant, and unconstitutional attack on Americans’ rights and freedoms.”
According to an investigation published in October by ProPublica, more than 170 US citizens have been detained by immigration agents, often in squalid conditions, since President Donald Trump returned to office in January. In many of these cases, these individuals have been detained because agents wrongly claimed the documents proving their citizenship are false.
During a press conference this week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem denied this reality, stating that "no American citizens have been arrested or detained" as part of Trump's "mass deportation" crusade.
"We focus on those who are here illegally," she said.
But as DHS's internal document explains, facial recognition software is necessary in the first place because "ICE agents do not know an individual's citizenship at the time of the initial encounter."
David Bier, the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, explains that the use of such technology suggests that ICE's operations are not "highly targeted raids," as it likes to portray, but instead "random fishing expeditions."