neci
flagged
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2008
- Posts
- 38,120
The Haitian Cholera Endemic and Legal Responsibility
UN soldiers dumped raw sewage close to a river whose water was used for drinking.
The soldiers came from Nepal where cholera is endemic.
Haiti - a country that had not seen cholera in over 100 years, experienced an outbreak of the Nepalese strain of cholera.
More than 8,000 people died as a result of cholera.
Hundreds of thousands became sick.
A river was contaminated in a third world country, and this time it was not an international corporation who did the contaminating. This time it was the United Nations. Suits have been filed on behalf of the victims in New York. I find this fascinating, because this is not just about the cholera endemic in Haiti, but lawyers have found a way to set the standard for international water contamination. Outsiders go into a country in the name of good business. They bring their people, their people create waste, the waste is dumped into the river, water is contaminated, people die, the business stays or goes depending on the market, not the cost to human life.
It is a story that repeats itself all around the world. Shit. It's a story that Americans are currently fighting the Canadians over with regard to fracking.
Don't contaminate our drinking water!
Fuck you! I'm above the law, and this is for your own good!
I beg you! This is the water my children drink!
Get out of my way. I have a court order. This land is my land. I am an Island. You can not touch me. I am above your law.
gets sick.
buys more control over lawmakers.
dies.
eats lobster for dinner.
This case will set the stage for legal responsibility on an international level. I find it reprehensible that the UN will not own up to dumping their own shit, will not put money directly into the victims hands, and will not take a stand for good in a case where a standard for water contamination could be set at the world level. This case directly addresses pollution at the base root. Why do they shy away from their responsibilities? So much could change. So much good could be done. A case for true justice could be made. Rivers would not only be cleaned, but protected for future generations - legally - despite any international "good-doers" law or intention.
Better is the enemy of Best.
跳跃
UN soldiers dumped raw sewage close to a river whose water was used for drinking.
The soldiers came from Nepal where cholera is endemic.
Haiti - a country that had not seen cholera in over 100 years, experienced an outbreak of the Nepalese strain of cholera.
More than 8,000 people died as a result of cholera.
Hundreds of thousands became sick.
A river was contaminated in a third world country, and this time it was not an international corporation who did the contaminating. This time it was the United Nations. Suits have been filed on behalf of the victims in New York. I find this fascinating, because this is not just about the cholera endemic in Haiti, but lawyers have found a way to set the standard for international water contamination. Outsiders go into a country in the name of good business. They bring their people, their people create waste, the waste is dumped into the river, water is contaminated, people die, the business stays or goes depending on the market, not the cost to human life.
It is a story that repeats itself all around the world. Shit. It's a story that Americans are currently fighting the Canadians over with regard to fracking.
Don't contaminate our drinking water!
Fuck you! I'm above the law, and this is for your own good!
I beg you! This is the water my children drink!
Get out of my way. I have a court order. This land is my land. I am an Island. You can not touch me. I am above your law.
gets sick.
buys more control over lawmakers.
dies.
eats lobster for dinner.
This case will set the stage for legal responsibility on an international level. I find it reprehensible that the UN will not own up to dumping their own shit, will not put money directly into the victims hands, and will not take a stand for good in a case where a standard for water contamination could be set at the world level. This case directly addresses pollution at the base root. Why do they shy away from their responsibilities? So much could change. So much good could be done. A case for true justice could be made. Rivers would not only be cleaned, but protected for future generations - legally - despite any international "good-doers" law or intention.
Better is the enemy of Best.
跳跃
