The crisis at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp keeps growing in size and intensity. According to the military's own count, 100 of the 166 men held in the prison there are now on hunger strike, and the 27 most in danger of dying are being force-fed.This is a total fuckup. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld set up this disaster, then tortured the prisoners for useless information that makes it impossible to bring them to trial, and now the cowards in Congress won't let these guys go. Obama promised to end this travesty, and has not delivered. And Alberto Gonzales is pathetic in his defense of the place. Find a way to bring these guys to trial or find somewhere to send them, they just aren't that big of a threat to us.
Last month, guards had to forcibly subdue a camp where even the most cooperative detainees are held.
The hunger strike was triggered by a February search of inmates' Qurans, though the details are hotly disputed. What's remarkable, however, is that everyone — including detainees, lawyers and the military — agrees that the real reason for the unrest is simply the frustration that the camp has stayed open so long.
If the hunger strike is intended to draw attention, it's working. After months of silence on the issue, President Obama renewed the pledge he made four years ago to close the prison.
"It is not a surprise to me that we've got problems in Guantanamo," he said at a press conference last month. "I continue to believe that we've got to close Guantanamo."
There hasn't been any will in Congress to do that, however. No one — neither Republican nor Democrat — wants detainees kept in their state. Polls also show a majority of Americans don't want Guantanamo to close. And even though 86 prisoners have recently been cleared for release, nobody seems to be leaving.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Gitmo Shame Continues
All Things Considered:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ignorance is bliss. . . . Clearly not a threat. . . . .
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2205825/Sufyan-Ben-Qumu-Former-Gitmo-inmate-planned-al-Qaeda-attack-Libyan-consulate.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_former_Guantanamo_Bay_detainees_alleged_to_have_returned_to_terrorism
So we should lock people up without a trial because they might plan an attack that kills 4 people? By that logic, banning the ownership of firearms makes a lot of sense. Personally, I think that is an overreaction and unwarranted, but I also think that torturing and imprisoning people who might be a threat is cowardly and shameful. A question: was that guy a threat before we arrested him and imprisoned him for several years, or did we further radicalize him?
ReplyDeleteAnd I haven't found very much actually linking this guy to the planning of the attack. The Daily Mail isn't a very good source, especially when that story was published in September.
ReplyDeleteFrom Brietbart, of all the Godawful sources:
This was clearly a risk in arming the rebels in the first place. As Breitbart News reported, Benghazi was controlled by terrorist group Ansar Al-Shariah. And terrorists like Sufyan Ben Qumu, who was originally rumored to be the planner of the Benghazi attack (sources later denied he was the planner), were armed and supplied by the United States in their war against Muammar Qadaffi.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/12/05/NYT-Benghazi-weapons-funneled