26 ms·

Gitmo Is Killing Me

1333 points by bcn 13y ago

tamersalama 13y ago
As a non-American - can I ask an American to submit a white-house petition. Perhaps as a form of the least that can be done.
- Zak 13y ago
  It's been tried. Somebody should probably try again. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-detention-center-give-every-prisoner-there-speedy-trial-or-release-keep-campaign/VvgqpXX5 https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-d...
  - laurent123456 13y ago
    It's strange that the result of the petition is apparently not public. I would expect this kind of petition to largely meet the signature threshold.
    - Zak 13y ago
      I wouldn't. Due process for people who are perceived to be terrorists is not actually an especially popular viewpoint with the majority of the American public[0]. The rest of the world wants due process for these detainees. Most people in hacker communities tend to lean far more libertarian or liberal than the average American and want due process for these detainees. These are not the people who determine the outcome of elections. [0] http://www.gallup.com/poll/124727/americans-oppose-closing-gitmo-moving-prisoners.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/124727/americans-oppose-closing-g...
  - pekk 13y ago
    That's not a formal petition, it's a post on a website
lbarrow 13y ago
The defenders of Gitmo in this era will be remembered by our descendants with the same shame and disgust we feel when remembering the slave holders and segregationists of the previous eras.
- skyraider 13y ago
  I hope that the defenders of the legal theories that allow people to be held without trial for many years get their fair share of the blame. Gitmo itself is bad, but the legal theories that let almost anyone be held there without due process are worse. I understand that it looks bad if people released from custody in Gitmo return to action in 'violent non-state actor' groups. But is looking bad in the media worth human dignity? There's a reason that US citizens have rights like due process (and you can see why everyone should get them, including Gitmo prisoners): If you can't prove it but refuse to let the defendant maintain the freedom that should be associated with presumption of innocence, you get incarceration of the type described in the original posting.
  - mattkopecki 13y ago
    > But is looking bad in the media worth human dignity? Of course not. But, is you looking bad in the media worth someone else's human dignity? That's a much easier sell.
  - lbarrow 13y ago
    I hope so, but it doesn't seem to be happening: after John Yoo finished his work at the Bush DoJ, he got a cushy position at Berkeley. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo
    - pacdavidson 13y ago
      Actually, as the wikipedia entry states, he has been on Berkeley's faculty since 1993. His return to Berkeley after being seconded to Bush's DoJ was met with heated resistance and continual protest (e.g. waterboarding enactments outside the law school). As a tenured professor, though, he couldn't be tossed out.
richardjordan 13y ago
The hypocrisy of the New York Times in printing this is shocking. The newspaper which did so much to whip up hysteria during the years of the Bush administration now trying to raise concerns about the inmates of Guantanamo is shockingly cynical. It's a shameful state of affairs that our political process is so broken we cannot deal with this situation in a civilized fashion, with investigations, trials and an end result. Instead we live in an Orwellian state of perpetual war, one which the New York Times was happy to goad us into back in the days when they actually sold newspapers and profited from a nation's feelings of hurt and lust for vengeance.
- droopyEyelids 13y ago
  I wonder if this indicates a change in the NYT's moral leadership, or if Washington is ready to close gitmo and wants to drive public opinion in a way that'll make it more acceptable politically. I suppose we'll be able to tell by whether the NYT starts asking the hard questions on drones in the next few months. And by the way, I'm all for hypocrisy when it means moving against the cruelty and injustice of the past.
- cjh_ 13y ago
  In this case I think the hypocrisy is positive; I would much rather NYT be hypocritical by speaking out against Guantanamo rather than holding their old position.
  - richardjordan 13y ago
    Yes this is a great point. One thing that I don't want to fall into the habit of doing, and I got close to in my initial point, in my disgust for their hypocrisy is something I see as a problem in modern politics. Hypocrisy isn't the greatest sin in the world, but we sometimes act like it is and make the consequences of hypocrisy (or changing your mind) so great (electoral defeat) that people will hold onto a bad policy and continue bad or harmful action in favor of not flip flopping or being hypocritical. So you make a good point, and it's better that they at least attempt to remedy some of the harm they have contributed to, than hold onto a morally bankrupt position.
thornjm 13y ago
Reading things like I can't help but understand why some groups of people can hate America. (I am Australian)
- NewAccnt 13y ago
  Good, we could use more enemies. Gitmo is a very expensive way to manufacture them. It's only effective if it pisses off a lot of people.
- biesnecker 13y ago
  It's the entire Western sense of superiority (I'm American). Gitmo is America saying that the rules we hold ourselves to don't apply to "others." It's hypocritical bullshit, and we deserve what we get because of it. But it's not just the US (or just Gitmo) -- read about the treatment of refugees in Australia (tl;dr: it's better than Gitmo, but not good by a long shot -- http://mitahungerstrike.wordpress.com http://mitahungerstrike.wordpress.com). And I don't mean to pick on Australia, because the Australian government is no more (or less) guilty than the governments of much of the developed world, I just want to make a point that we all are having terrible things done to other human beings in our names. It's a damn sad state of affairs.
  - femto 13y ago
    On the subject of Australia and Refugees, a relatively recent book called "The People Smuggler"[1] is a fascinating read. It's the story of an Iraqi man, called Ali Al Jenabi, and how he ended up ferrying people from Indonesia to Australia. [1] http://www.thepeoplesmuggler.com/ http://www.thepeoplesmuggler.com/
  - astrec 13y ago
    I don't think it's better than Gitmo at all. Refugees, including children, are held in prisons. Sometimes for many years. All without trial. Why no trial? Largely because they have not committed any crime -- it is quite legal to seek asylum. This is wedge politics, pure and simple.
- mathieuh 13y ago
pixelcort 13y ago
With this story of Guantanamo Bay and the story of children born into prison camps in North Korea, as a mere software engineer, it makes me feel hopeless as to how to help.
- skyraider 13y ago
  Build better proxies/tools of resistance, generally fight authority, just be a hacker and be on the lookout for ways to empower the downtrodden. The hacker instinct is to get around the system and fight authority. There's another hacker instinct, too, which is being totally and absurdly pedantic. Maybe there is an idea here. Sometimes the first world chooses leaders who are, at day's end, okay with a some of the horrors of barbaric legal systems (usually in exchange for increased security or the illusion thereof). One solution might be to be politically pedantic (seriously!) and not let them get away with even a bit of it.
  - nwh 13y ago
    Unfortunately if people can go to jail for increnting a variable in a public URL, any effort of this nature is sure to draw the fire of United States law. I don't even live in the place, and it still scares the crap out of me.
- atsaloli 13y ago
  If you're in the US, pixelcort, may I invite you to consider the Downsize DC effort? (http://www.downsizedc.org/ http://www.downsizedc.org/) Here is a quick summary of what DownsizeDC.org is about: We believe the federal government has grown too centralized, too intrusive, and too expensive. We believe in constitutional limits, smaller government, civil liberties, federalism, and low taxes. We want to end laws and programs that don't work, cause harm, and violate the Constitution. We want to restore the full force of the 9th and 10th amendments, which reserve most social functions to the people and the states. The strategy of Downsize DC is to leverage technology to make it easier for people to make their voices heard to the State. They make it easier to contact your Senate and House representatives regularly. The primary bill DownsizeDC is advocating is the Read the Bills Act -- make it law to read aloud each bill before signing it into law. That action alone would slow down the legislating machine. The other one is the One Subject at a Time act -- make each bill deal with one subject at a time, instead of bundling subjects, which would make it very clear about politician's positions on various issues, and let each issue stand on its own merit.
ck2 13y ago
Obama could order it closed tomorrow. Congress could refuse to fund that action but it would still be ordered closed and his hands would be a tiny bit cleaner. But he likes his drones and gitmo now, so that's pretty much it until Hillary becomes president and I think she likes the idea of gitmo too.
- BHSPitMonkey 13y ago
  Closing it would mean having the prisoners moved elsewhere, but not a change to how they are being dealt with. That's the real issue; the location isn't what matters.
  - skyraider 13y ago
    He could also order due process to start tomorrow. Maybe there are a few issues with sending people back to their countries, but certainly not in all cases.
    - scotty79 13y ago
      That would be devastating hit on US gov reputation, all this people available to the press. I think they are just hoping meteor will hit this place eventually and wipe it out without any concern on their part.
      - gsnedders 13y ago
        In the UK at least it's continuing to do harm for the US government reputation every time the media bring it up, or worse yet, bring up the fact that there are British citizens still there whom the British government wants to repatriate yet the US won't release. The majority of the British citizens who have formerly been in there have made front-page news (at least in the UK) every time any have been released.
    - cynwoody 13y ago
      > He could also order due process to start tomorrow. The correct course of action, obviously. > Maybe there are a few issues with sending people back to their countries, but certainly not in all cases. Well, as Commander in Chief, he could just order the Marines to cut a hole in Gitmo's perimeter fence and shoo the prisoners into Cuber though it. I'm sure Fidel and Raúl would be pleased to handle their homeward travel arrangements, albeit not quietly. Hell, Obama could even save some postage by having the Marines entrust the prisoners to a deliver a $4085 check to the Treasurer General of the [Cuban] Republic, in payment of Gitmo's annual rental[1]. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/17/idUSN17200921 http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/17/idUSN17200921
SoftwareMaven 13y ago
Gitmo was the first thing that clued me that I had made a mistake voting for Obama's promises (not that McCain would have ever gotten it instead!). It was such a complete reversal that I immediately knew his promises were completely worthless. I appreciate that there may be anger outs people in Gitmo, but they have every right to a trial I have. The double standard of what human rights mean if you are a US citizen and if you aren't makes me physically ill. As a country, in many ways we deserve the disdain directed at us. That said, we are not only Gitmo, and we actually do a lot of good things for the world. We just need to get our government to respect our borders.
- dublinben 13y ago
  Congress deserves as much or more blame for this situation. They've prevented the President from carrying out his intended solution to this problem. Without their support, he is powerless to release these people.
  - lwat 13y ago
    What was his solutions? Moving the detainees to another facility? Or did he actually want to give them trials and send the innocent ones home?
    - twoodfin 13y ago
      Move them to another facility on U.S. soil. And presumably hope the Supreme Court would then "force" his hand on moving them into the domestic judicial system. I will be snarky because it's late, and I'm annoyed this topic is on hn: President Obama loves nothing more than to vote "present".
    - daegloe 13y ago
      No state will have them. Literally.
  - mattstreet 13y ago
    Well I think he could put a bit more public pressure on them then. I really don't hear him bringing it up too often.
jebblue 13y ago
When I first saw the title I thought "git", this must be some derivative of git and the author didn't like it.
jchimney 13y ago
In Canada we remember with shame the WW2 Japanese internment camps. Gitmo will be this generations great shame. Marriage equalization, and reasonable pot legislation are happening... But gitmo remains a black mark. Due process should not be malleable.
- pekk 13y ago
  Did you know that due process was violated in WW2 and WWI and many other major wars?
linuxhansl 13y ago
Guantanamo Bay is like the witch hunts in the medieval ages in the sense that when somebody was accused of being a witch there was no meaningful recourse. Gitmo is the same. Most inmates have not been tried, some have been tortured (and are hence considered "untriable"). For a country that claims to follow the "rule of law" this is a strange affair to be in. The "rule of law" way of out this is to bring these people to the US, and try them. If they cannot be convicted they are free. I believe that the long term cost/risk of not doing this is higher than any potential damage the inmates could do.
- elliptic 13y ago
  Witch hunts were primarily a phenomenon of the early modern period, not the middle ages, during which both the political authorities and the Church repeatedly cautioned against blaming e.g poor crops on supposed witches. Also, I believe about half of witchcraft trials ended in execution - I'm not sure what the comparable rate is for Gitmo (although obviously there are no trials).
  - eric-hu 13y ago
    Perhaps witch hunts were just performed under a different name. See also: the Medieval Inquisition (1184–16th century) the Spanish Inquisition (1478–1834) the Portuguese Inquisition (1536–1821) the Roman Inquisition (1542 – c. 1860) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
    - jeltz 13y ago
      The medieval inquisition was indeed a witch hunt in the figurative sense but it did not hunt witches. It was primary occupied with hunting heretics (particularly Cathars). Its involvement in hunting witches started in the late 15th century at the very end of the middle ages.
      - sigzero 13y ago
        I think he was using "witch hunt" in a generic term like we use it today.
jpxxx 13y ago
Hi, future generations! Political prisoners are being raped with food intubators to prevent themselves from committing suicide in America's secret torture prison, with the express consent and approval of President Obama, the American Congress, and the numerical majority of the American people. Love, 2013
- gitmothrow 13y ago
  Dear future generations, Clueless middle class Western programmers on Hacker News believed everything some guy in prion said and thought they understood national security realities better than the president of the US. And they made a bunch of brave comments. Much karma was exchanged. Love, 2013
  - Andrew_Quentin 13y ago
    Now you guys invent a time machine and come to tell us which of these two commenter is right. Although technically they both can be right, what we are interested to know is if you future guys, like us, consider the right to a free trial as a fundamental and unbreachable right in any circumstances. Sure, we believe you can kill enemy combatants, but if they surrender, we believe they have a right to a free trial within 60 or 90 days of detention. So come back and tell us how our government is able to flounder the most fundamental rules and principles of law.
    - gitmothrow 13y ago
      In order to convict someone you need sufficient evidence. When someone is captured in a war zone, usually by non-Western forces, evidence collection is not a top priority. So either you hold them indefinitely or release them. Obviously Obama believes that it is too risky to let these people go.
  - sequoia 13y ago
    'Someone deserves the right to a defend himself in court and face specific charges before being thrown in a dungeon for life, being tortured and denied even the right to die? Ha- what a naive perspective.' It must make you feel very clever and worldly-wise to dismiss people thus.
samholmes 13y ago
What does this have to do with hacking?
jussij 13y ago
So much for the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
- josscrowcroft 13y ago
  The missing amendment: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Americans are created equal..."
  - jussij 13y ago
    All me/women are created equal but in reality some are more equal than others. As always history repeats :( Edit: It truly disappoints me how human rights always run a long second to personal interest.
    - jussij 13y ago
      Further: Given a big enough of a profit it is easy to turn a blind eye. That simple fact is a massive problem for humanity going forward. Greed before humanity is now a reality.
  - nullc 13y ago
    > "that all Americans are created equal..." Except the ones the executive branch orders to be assassinated: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/us-targeted-killings-eric-holder_n_1320515.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/us-targeted-killing...
- rayiner 13y ago
  The declaration of independence is a document with zero legal force. It's a bunch of nice sounding words to justify our attempt to separate from the British, nothing more.
  - gfodor 13y ago
andrelaszlo 13y ago
Who cares whose fault this is? It has to end now. If you feel overwhelmed but still want to do something, the least you can do is to support Amnesty International.
vxNsr 13y ago
I think the most important part about this OpEd is the comments appearing here and elsewhere: Lots of righteous indignation for this poor fellow who claims that he's completely innocent of any charges brought against him and if he could only talk to someone they would understand. He feels the need to kill himself to prove a point, such conviction. What do they say about a prisoner and his crime? oh yeah: there's no such thing as a guilty prisoner in Jail.
- sgpl 13y ago
  From the article: "I have never been charged with any crime. I have never received a trial." There haven't been any charges brought against him, and his life for the past DECADE (10+ years) has been stuck in a fucking limbo. The US Government won't even let him commit suicide by way of hunger, so in essence he has absolutely no hope or choice as it currently stands.
  - vxNsr 13y ago
    Once again these are things he is claiming, I haven't done any research into his situation and I doubt anyone here has either. All I'm saying is that taking the word of someone who is in prison for possible terrorism is a mistake. Clearly there was someone who felt this dude was dangerous or else they wouldn't have flown him halfway around the world to "sit in limbo" there are prisons in Afghanistan and Iraq and it's MUCH cheaper to keep prisoners there, the only ones flown to cuba are those deemed "a higher security risk". A hint at possible charges is hidden in the third paragraph of his plea for attention: "Years ago the military said I was a “guard” for Osama bin Laden..." he of course qualifies this by saying it's not true. But if true is fairly serious because it would imply he was highly trusted if he was a personal guard for OBL. Again I haven't done any actual research into his situation but he most probably doesn't deserve nearly half the self-righteous indignation that everyone here is displaying.
    - sgpl 13y ago
      TL:DR: This dude was at the wrong place at the wrong time; and unless the US Government can prove otherwise, they should either release him, or if he is a terrorist, it would be a net-win if they just let him die of hunger (As their reputation w.r.t Gitmo has already been sullied). -- In a parallel universe, I claim that you are committing conspiracy to overthrow the reigning King. You say you were just walking by the forest to check out wildlife. I say nonsense; I have the power to capture you. The extent of your crime is that you were in the forest. I then capture you and throw you in a dungeon/prison, parade you naked, urinate you, rob you of basic dignity, flog you when I have a bad day or just for my amusement. I also feed you the same bland food daily. This is your reality [1] I do this continuously for 20 years == 7300 days in a row. You either start growing crazy or realize it would be better to end the misery yourself. At this point you have been robbed of the aspirations you had to contribute to scientific discovery by cataloguing flora and fauna. You realize that you haven't seen your children for ~20 years. Because you have been labeled an enemy of the state, your wife was thrown out of the city limits, etc. You choose the only option that is remotely viable: deprive yourself of nutrition till you die. I rob you of that choice. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY FUCKING CHOICE NOW. I strap you to a cot, and force feed you a disgusting liquid diet for the next N years of your life. You live like this for the rest of your life or till I decide otherwise. Because in this scenario, I have power, I can do whatever I please in the name of protecting the life of this King. [1] As an experiment, lock yourself in a room for a day/week with some bland nutritious food & pots & pans for bodily functions. No books, no computers, no phone or music players, or any other distractions. For added effect, wear noise canceling headphones & blindfolds. And just chill. Repeat this for a long period of time, and you'll either want to kill yourself because your existence has been reduced to nothing, or you'll go crazy. In reality you'll get pretty restless and bored within the hour.
joshuaheard 13y ago
Why does HN link to this propaganda?
- andrewfelix 13y ago
  Dissent is a powerful and useful thing. If you feel this is article is a lie and part of a wider political strategy, then present your case. Making sweeping statements without context or reason will not win you friends on HN. FYI HN doesn't control the links, its users post links and vote on them.
  - davidw 13y ago
    Political articles are off topic on Hacker News.
    - andrewfelix 13y ago
      Firstly, this is not a political article per se. It has political connotations like most things, including hacking. Secondly, it most certainly "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity." http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - davidw 13y ago
        > Secondly, it most certainly "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity." Does it really? It looks to me much more like an article meant to engender outrage at something injust in the world. Note: I'm not saying I don't agree with the outrage, just that it's very much about something highly political and I feel it does not belong here.
    - fossuser 13y ago
      Even worse the quality of comments are very similar to reddit or at least reddit during its decline. These types of political articles are what usually work their way in first as the site degrades.
joshuaheard 13y ago
Why does HN link to this propaganda?
sytelus 13y ago
Lot of things mentioned here are not that easy. To legally bring citizens of other countries in American justice system and have them fair trial you need to have respect various treaties - many of which may simply require sending them back to their respective country to be handled by their own governments which usually is not the best thing especially for terrorist suspects. The next best thing however might be have them as prisoner of war kept out side of US justice system. What is missing here is other side of the coin, however. Keeping people in Gitmo takes money, planning, book keeping and plenty of other administrative hassles. Even though there was no trial it is hard to imagine that military doesn't do any accounting of these people and they are just kept there, fed, clothed every day without any justification or reasoning. I know govt can't be trusted from wasting taxpayer money but it looks over the top that such a high profile place will keep people for 11 years straight without any convincing reasoning. Without response from govt to this story we only know one side.
- cynwoody 13y ago
  > Lot of things mentioned here are not that easy. To legally bring citizens of other countries in American justice system and have them fair trial you need to have respect various treaties - many of which may simply require sending them back to their respective country to be handled by their own governments which usually is not the best thing especially for terrorist suspects. Bureaucratic considerations are of no consequence. The reputation of the United States of America is at stake. It's 2013. These cases need to be resolved. The innocent should be sent home with apologies and fat Treasury checks. The guilty should be executed. And Gitmo should go back to being a Caribbean naval base with a cheap annual rent[2]. I can't say if the current case is valid, but I am reminded of the case of Ahmed Errachidi[1], Guantánamo Prisoner 590, who turned out to be a London chef who had journeyed to Pakistan in 2001 and was kidnapped by crooked Pakis and sold to the credulous US for $5000. Errachidi was finally sprung in 2007. But you have to wonder how many similar cases there are. [1] http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2011/09/16/ahmed-errachidi-guantanamo-prisoner-590-the-cook-who-became-the-general/ http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2011/09/16/ahmed-errachidi-... [2] http://books.google.com/books?id=atTyCI8ZwboC&pg=PA243&dq=guantanamo+annual+rent&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ObZrUanbL8qL0QHfjoGQCQ&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=guantanamo%20annual%20rent&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=atTyCI8ZwboC&pg=PA243&#...
EGreg 13y ago
You can read the history of Obama's and Congress' battle here: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/177/close-the-guantanamo-bay-detention-center/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/pr... This is very sad ... but what do you think is the reason they can't close this center since 2008? Who is responsible for this state of affairs and what can be done?
patrickaljord 13y ago
> When I was at home in Yemen, in 2000, a childhood friend told me that in Afghanistan I could do better than the $50 a month I earned in a factory, and support my family. I’d never really traveled, and knew nothing about Afghanistan, but I gave it a try. Sorry but this account is troubling. He went to Afghanistan during the Taliban extremely insane cruel anti-woman Islamist totalitarian regime and expected a better life? That's like someone saying he traveled to Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime and expected a better pay as he didn't know anything about Cambodia at the time. This alone takes the credibility away from this story for me. The rest is an account about how they are force feeding him because of is voluntary hunger strike. Anyone knows how hunger strikes are handled in other penitentiaries? Not sure they can just let the prisoners die.
- ncallaway 13y ago
  "Sorry but this account is troubling. He went to Afghanistan during the Taliban extremely insane cruel anti-woman Islamist totalitarian regime and expected a better life? That's like someone saying he traveled to Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime and expected a better pay as he didn't know anything about Cambodia at the time." And this is enough to condemn him to an indeterminate amount of time in prison without a trial? If we have compelling evidence of wrong-doing then we should grant him a trial. Let the actual judicial process decide his punishment, rather than an arbitrary declaration. If we don't have enough compelling evidence then we should release him. The entire point of habeas corpus is to prevent people from being held for extended time on the mere suspicion from arbitrary authorities. What's the point of having a judicial system if we can send arbitrarily selected people around it and deny writs of habeas corpus? What will you do if one day an authority finds something you've done suspicious and throws you in jail? The protection afforded by writs of habeas corpus should apply to all of us, or it's a meaningless protection.
- cskau 13y ago
  > Sorry but this account is troubling. He went to Afghanistan during the Taliban extremely insane cruel anti-woman Islamist totalitarian regime and expected a better life? That's like someone saying he traveled to Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime and expected a better pay as he didn't know anything about Cambodia at the time. This alone takes the credibility away from this story for me While it might sound "insane" to you because of the stark contrast to your own life, you fail to put yourself in his shoes. You know, not everyone was born into your (or my) privilege, freedom and education here in life. If you've lived your whole life in poor, rural Yemen with only limited local media as your one window to the world, maybe Afghanistan, a fellow Arabic/Muslim state isn't such bad a place. I'd say it's equally insane for, say, a Frenchman to travel to the United States while they operate secret military prisons with complete disregard for human rights.
yoster 13y ago
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
davepage 13y ago
Subject's DoD dossier: http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees/43-samir-naji-al-hasan-moqbel http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees/43-samir-na...
- moconnor 13y ago
  This is a fascinating insight into what the DoD thinks the story is, and a frightening example of why fair trial and due process should be required to incarcerate people.
beedogs 13y ago
It's time to release these innocent men. America, this is fucking shameful.
Shinkei 13y ago
Who are these "medical personnel" performing these acts? I am a physician and I can tell you that force feeding these people is against our code of ethics. The physician overseeing their treatment should be 'outed' so that we can report this behavior to his/her licensing board.
- darxius 13y ago
  I totally agree with you. However, I can easily see how those physicians can justify their actions to themselves. "Do no harm" can be extrapolated in many ways by cruel people suffering from delusion.
- raganwald 13y ago
  Atul Gawande covers something very much like this in his book "Better." WHo are the medical personnel assisting with executions? WHat are the arguments for and against participating in the death of a human being?
gogobyte 13y ago
I hope this islamic monster dies ASAP.
goggles99 13y ago
What did you expect him to say? I am guilty of contributing to terrorism and the purposeful killing of innocent woman and children civilians? I like how everyone here takes this guys word for everything. It is all a government conspiracy that has put him in there. After all, the US government likes to round up random people around the world and put them in max security detainment as kind of a boredom fighting game right? Go on death row in any detention center in the world and you'll get the same story from about 95% of the inmates there. The government set them up. They are all innocent. I think that it is always wise to look at everything that your government does with a certain level of suspicion and cynicism, but I also wouldn't bet money on a Gitmo prisoner's "honest" word either.
- tripzilch 13y ago
  > I like how everyone here takes this guys word for everything. It's not very different from the alternative, which is taking the word of whoever put/keeps him there without trial. Now one of these parties is well-known for enacting cruelties on human beings in situations exactly like these, and the other we really don't know anything about, at all. Therefore the only right and humane thing to do is to give the latter some benefit of the doubt. > After all, the US government likes to round up random people around the world and put them in max security detainment Well yes, such fuck-ups have happened before, as a matter of fact: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jan/14/usa.germany http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jan/14/usa.germany And that's just the first example I pulled from the top of Google. There's many more. So truly, there is ALL the reason to assume at least some of the Gitmo prisoners are innocent and kept simply because they are the result of a fuck-up nobody wants to own up to. > but I also wouldn't bet money on a Gitmo prisoner's "honest" word either. Why? What do you know about why they are there? There's been no trials, they are only prisoners because the people keeping them say they're guilty of something. So you can't use the fact they are prisoners to decide their honesty, that would be circular reasoning. Both parties have an interest in lying that is almost completely independent of guilt: One has been kept in a secret prison for 11 years subjected to inhumane treatment, and the other side wants to keep a lid on the whole Gitmo thing (maybe even especially if they weren't guilty). Also, 11 years, man. As I said, you don't know what he did, you don't even know what he's being accused of. Stepping aside from the (very real) possibility of him being completely innocent, what if he did do something, maybe it was terrible, or maybe it was something small and stupid that in no way warrants being locked up in Gitmo for 11 years. And in a year from now you'll have to argue that all those people are guilty of a crime that warrants at least 12 years in a terrible prison, and the year after that, and after that, etc. All the while not having a single clue what these people did, what they are accused of. It's pretty obvious that at least one of the sides here is guilty.
D9u 13y ago
"First they came for the Yemeni, but I was not one so I thought nothing of it. Then they came for the Afghani, but I was not one, so I didn't mind. ... Then they came for my neighbors, and I hid. ... By the time they came for me there was no one to stop them..."
- brazzy 13y ago
  ...so I told them "Hey, you forgot about the Iranians, and I can tell you where they are!"...
ritonlajoie 13y ago
'MURICA as it's finest ! Well done !
arbuge 13y ago
It mystifies me why this is still going on. I'm sure the President sees the injustice of what's happening. If he doesn't have the political capital to shut the entire operation down, can he at least let selected detainees go free?
sigzero 13y ago
I understand what the author is saying. However, the title is wrong. He is killing himself with the hunger strike. Gitmo isn't doing that.
spin 13y ago
Proud to be an American.
scrapcode 13y ago
I know for a fact that much of these claims are completely wrong and, being told by a detainee, are completely biased. Detainee's that refuse meals are required to receive their nutrients in liquid form. They have the option to drink this themselves. When they refuse, they are put in the feeding chair which restrains their arms, legs, and waist. It does not restrain a detainees head whatsoever. When a detainee refuses to drink the liquid themselves, and refuses to go to the restraint chair themselves, they're carried to the chair by a Forced Cell Extraction team. ERF is a term that the detainee's created themselves. There are 6 guards, not 8, and it is for the safety of the detainee, as there is one guard to handle each body part (2 legs, 2 arms, head), and then one at the door to ensure that the detainee does not escape. Every FCE is video taped to ensure that safe and humane practices are being followed. They do this for this exact reason. Publicity. We wont send them back to Yemen because we don't want their heads to be severed by their Government. No one wants this place to be open. Don't be foolish, America. Don't be gullible, America. We are still the good guys.
- zethraeus 13y ago
  Publicity for their situation - which is terrible. A prisoner's attempt to get publicity does not influence the morality or legality of practices at Guantanamo Bay.
- ucee054 13y ago
  Yeah it's for their own good, the same way Bradley Manning had to be naked in his cell for his own good. Yeah right </sarcasm>.
- spacemanaki 13y ago
  You know this for a fact? Not to be too cynical here, but do you have a citation for any of your claims? Who is able to review these taped feedings in order to confirm that they're being carried out in a humane way? Could I, as a citizen do this? Could a reporter for the NYT? The absurdity of the censorship at the KSM trial makes me think your claims would be hard to verify. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/01/secrecy-around-ksm-guantanamo-hearings.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/01/secrec... And frankly, your nationalistic sign off makes me less inclined to believe you without references. "We are still the good guys" is kind of vapid.
timini 13y ago
This is disgracefully inhumane.
ankitml 13y ago
Here goes my respect for obama, for democracy which he stands for, for the whole nobel peace prize community. Now I know why Gandhi never won it. He would have felt disgraced today. US is a disgrace to human rights, a hypocritical country who brings democracy to the world
gitmothrow 13y ago
Lot's of bravery on HN today. Pretty disgusting to see.
jonaldomo 13y ago
I just sent my congressman an email outlining that I would like to see everybody given a trial and either deported or moved to a federal prison. I would recommend that others reach out to their representatives and do the same. I imagine that if we, the people, do not make any noise about this then we are going to get more of the same.
sequoia 13y ago
Somehow it strikes me as odd that the executive can go around starting wars, one of the most costly (blood & gold) behaviors a gov't can engage in, and one that explicitly requires the approval of congress, without congressional approval, but when it comes to closing a torture dungeon it's 'well gee whiz I'd love to but mean old congress won't let me. Sorry- my hands are tied!' horseshit. There's more than one way to skin a cat and with the unchecked might of the US military (which is basically what the executive commands these days with our spineless-vis-a-vis-war congress), I do not believe the president couldn't figure out a way to dissolve Gitmo if he wanted to. He doesn't want to, this torture happens because Obama wants it to happen. EDIT: I'm probably wrong here in my first paragraph ^
- parfe 13y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Milita... Fair disingenuous so say the President started wars without congressional approval.
  - sequoia 13y ago
    My statement that wars were started "without congressional approval" may be wrong. That said, I still do not believe that it's outside the president's power to shut down gitmo. As many other commenters here have pointed out, he could simply order marines to free those prisoners with no charges to Cuban soil; this would cost no money at all; congress would not be able to prevent it. Could the president not do this? Furthermore, he promised to do so repeatedly during his campaign. Was the president, a constitutional scholar, merely mistaken about his powers as the executive? I apologize for muddying the waters with discussion of other presidential actions.
    - parfe 13y ago
      http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantanamoDetentionFacilities http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantana... Obama issued the order to close the prison his second full day in office. Congress then blocked any funds whatsoever from being used to close the prison. http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/111/senate/1/196 http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/111/senate/1/196 No, the president can't just release prisoners into Cuba because A) Cuba is a sovereign country and the US doesn't get to just deposit individuals there, terrorist or not. B) The president literally cannot pay for any operation, at all, to close the prison. I suggest you read up more on the issue before forming such a strong opinion.
anuraj 13y ago
rule of law, right to fair trial, upholding dignity of human kind and the farce of democracy. Feed the rabble with trivia they need to know and all is well.
tibbon 13y ago
I make no apologies for Obama- he should have closed Gitmo. Yet, there's one tiny tiny possibility that I have considered for why he hasn't. Before becoming president, you make promises, have goals, and overall think you know what you're going to do on day one. However, after inauguration you go for your first big debriefing with the CIA, FBI, etc... The things you learn there completely change the course what you want to do, or can do. You find that we were constantly in significantly more danger than any citizen could have anticipated. Now, I don't find this to be likely, but just something I've considered. Why in the world would have Obama gone from wanting to close Gitmo, to being pretty much against it? Politics alone don't seem to cover it, since pretty much everyone wants it closed. Logistics? It doesn't seem that hard...
- pstuart 13y ago
  It's not like he's getting full cooperation from congress on this.
- digitallogic 13y ago
  Presidential candidates have been getting security briefings since Eisenhower: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/cia-briefings-of-presidential-candidates/index.htm https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intellig... So it's not the case that there was a huge cache of information that he didn't have access too until entering office. It could have been the case that there were some details that weren't made available to him, but that seems unlikely to amount to anything that would lead to a complete reversal of policy.
  - tibbon 13y ago
    Oh interesting. Well that blows that theory out of the water.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
cpursley 13y ago
Wait, didn't Obama close Gitmo? Oh, that's right. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
sq1020 13y ago
Another example of the hypocrisy of our goverment which claims to champion ideals like freedom and equality before the law. As long as there are innocent people like this suffering grave injustices in gitmo, as long as drones are killing innocent Pakistani villagers, as long as the U.S. brazenly continues to financially and militarily support Israel, the president and every member of congress have blood on their hands. Let me tell you something, these clowns in office couldn't care less about your or me or the homeless guy on the street. They care about being famous, having money and power and going on free vacations paid for by John Q. average tax payer!
- redeemedfadi 13y ago
  The leadership of this country is made up of citizens of this country. I think John Q. average tax payer would do the same thing if he were in office. Our leadership is a representation of us. The government is made up of US Citizens. We can't just blame the government for it's bad decisions, because in truth it is our decisions. If we want to change the government, we must first change ourselves. How kind are we to our neighbors, who live across the street?
  - sq1020 13y ago
    Listen, people in office have a much greater responsibility than you or me to make the right choices because their decisions affect all of us and that's also why it's incumbent upon us to make these crooks accountable for their actions and to criticize them because, in the words of Howard Zinn "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." It's a shame that the president of our country is out throwing lavish birthday parties for himself inviting useless celebrities and paying a guy $100,000 to play the music. Are you freakin kidding me???? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/05/obamas-birthday-bash-jay-z_n_919292.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/05/obamas-birthday-bas...
verve 13y ago
I posted a new We the People petition about this issue: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-bay-detention-camp-end-2013-and-either-transfer-or-release-remaining-prisoners/wZlM5BG8 https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-b... .
weareconvo 13y ago
What's the full story? Why was he detained? Is he actually a terrorist? There can't possibly be absolutely no other side to this story.
varjag 13y ago
In 1971, while in Lefortovo prison in Moscow (the central KGB interrogation jail), I went on a hunger strike demanding a defense lawyer of my choice (the KGB wanted its trusted lawyer to be assigned instead). The moment was most inconvenient for my captors because my case was due in court, and they had no time to spare. So, to break me down, they started force-feeding me in a very unusual manner -- through my nostrils. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/17/AR2005121700018.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12...
ed_blackburn 13y ago
What concerns me is that as I understand it, my own country (UK) has been complicit with these detentions. I'm also concerned that the UK and other developed nations have similar black-ops illegal detention centres too, Guantanamo is public knowledge. Are there other centres?
tomohawk 13y ago
Legally, these guys are non-lawful enemy combatants. They have put themselves in a legal grey area, not by committing crimes, but by committing acts of war. Many, if not all of them have been trained, if captured, to try to disrupt the legal system by any means necessary. They are fighting a war. Here is what happened to some German non-lawful combatants during WWII: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pastorius http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pastorius About 1/3 of detainees released have gone right back to the fighting: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/03/latest_gitmo_recidiv.php http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/03/latest_gitmo_... And these were the low risk ones. According to the US Constitution, it is Congress that establishes courts (except the supreme court) and decides what their purpose is. The President does not get to decide this. Military commissions have been accordingly established by Congress to try the detainees. The current President halted this process. Thus the detainees are in legal limbo until either Congress establishes a different court to hear the cases or the President decides to comply with the current law.
norswap 13y ago
I am always puzzled about the cognitive dissonance between this and all the (justified) outrage over the Shoah. It's still happening, even in the United States (let's not even talk about Africa, North Korea, etc).

1333 points by bcn 13y ago

As a non-American - can I ask an American to submit a white-house petition. Perhaps as a form of the least that can be done.

Zak 13y ago
It's been tried. Somebody should probably try again. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-detention-center-give-every-prisoner-there-speedy-trial-or-release-keep-campaign/VvgqpXX5 https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-d...
- laurent123456 13y ago
  It's strange that the result of the petition is apparently not public. I would expect this kind of petition to largely meet the signature threshold.
  - Zak 13y ago
    I wouldn't. Due process for people who are perceived to be terrorists is not actually an especially popular viewpoint with the majority of the American public[0]. The rest of the world wants due process for these detainees. Most people in hacker communities tend to lean far more libertarian or liberal than the average American and want due process for these detainees. These are not the people who determine the outcome of elections. [0] http://www.gallup.com/poll/124727/americans-oppose-closing-gitmo-moving-prisoners.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/124727/americans-oppose-closing-g...
- pekk 13y ago
  That's not a formal petition, it's a post on a website

lbarrow 13y ago

The defenders of Gitmo in this era will be remembered by our descendants with the same shame and disgust we feel when remembering the slave holders and segregationists of the previous eras.

skyraider 13y ago
I hope that the defenders of the legal theories that allow people to be held without trial for many years get their fair share of the blame. Gitmo itself is bad, but the legal theories that let almost anyone be held there without due process are worse. I understand that it looks bad if people released from custody in Gitmo return to action in 'violent non-state actor' groups. But is looking bad in the media worth human dignity? There's a reason that US citizens have rights like due process (and you can see why everyone should get them, including Gitmo prisoners): If you can't prove it but refuse to let the defendant maintain the freedom that should be associated with presumption of innocence, you get incarceration of the type described in the original posting.
- mattkopecki 13y ago
  > But is looking bad in the media worth human dignity? Of course not. But, is you looking bad in the media worth someone else's human dignity? That's a much easier sell.
- lbarrow 13y ago
  I hope so, but it doesn't seem to be happening: after John Yoo finished his work at the Bush DoJ, he got a cushy position at Berkeley. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo
  - pacdavidson 13y ago
    Actually, as the wikipedia entry states, he has been on Berkeley's faculty since 1993. His return to Berkeley after being seconded to Bush's DoJ was met with heated resistance and continual protest (e.g. waterboarding enactments outside the law school). As a tenured professor, though, he couldn't be tossed out.

richardjordan 13y ago

The hypocrisy of the New York Times in printing this is shocking. The newspaper which did so much to whip up hysteria during the years of the Bush administration now trying to raise concerns about the inmates of Guantanamo is shockingly cynical. It's a shameful state of affairs that our political process is so broken we cannot deal with this situation in a civilized fashion, with investigations, trials and an end result. Instead we live in an Orwellian state of perpetual war, one which the New York Times was happy to goad us into back in the days when they actually sold newspapers and profited from a nation's feelings of hurt and lust for vengeance.

droopyEyelids 13y ago
I wonder if this indicates a change in the NYT's moral leadership, or if Washington is ready to close gitmo and wants to drive public opinion in a way that'll make it more acceptable politically. I suppose we'll be able to tell by whether the NYT starts asking the hard questions on drones in the next few months. And by the way, I'm all for hypocrisy when it means moving against the cruelty and injustice of the past.
cjh_ 13y ago
In this case I think the hypocrisy is positive; I would much rather NYT be hypocritical by speaking out against Guantanamo rather than holding their old position.
- richardjordan 13y ago
  Yes this is a great point. One thing that I don't want to fall into the habit of doing, and I got close to in my initial point, in my disgust for their hypocrisy is something I see as a problem in modern politics. Hypocrisy isn't the greatest sin in the world, but we sometimes act like it is and make the consequences of hypocrisy (or changing your mind) so great (electoral defeat) that people will hold onto a bad policy and continue bad or harmful action in favor of not flip flopping or being hypocritical. So you make a good point, and it's better that they at least attempt to remedy some of the harm they have contributed to, than hold onto a morally bankrupt position.

thornjm 13y ago

Reading things like I can't help but understand why some groups of people can hate America. (I am Australian)

NewAccnt 13y ago
Good, we could use more enemies. Gitmo is a very expensive way to manufacture them. It's only effective if it pisses off a lot of people.
biesnecker 13y ago
It's the entire Western sense of superiority (I'm American). Gitmo is America saying that the rules we hold ourselves to don't apply to "others." It's hypocritical bullshit, and we deserve what we get because of it. But it's not just the US (or just Gitmo) -- read about the treatment of refugees in Australia (tl;dr: it's better than Gitmo, but not good by a long shot -- http://mitahungerstrike.wordpress.com http://mitahungerstrike.wordpress.com). And I don't mean to pick on Australia, because the Australian government is no more (or less) guilty than the governments of much of the developed world, I just want to make a point that we all are having terrible things done to other human beings in our names. It's a damn sad state of affairs.
- femto 13y ago
  On the subject of Australia and Refugees, a relatively recent book called "The People Smuggler"[1] is a fascinating read. It's the story of an Iraqi man, called Ali Al Jenabi, and how he ended up ferrying people from Indonesia to Australia. [1] http://www.thepeoplesmuggler.com/ http://www.thepeoplesmuggler.com/
- astrec 13y ago
  I don't think it's better than Gitmo at all. Refugees, including children, are held in prisons. Sometimes for many years. All without trial. Why no trial? Largely because they have not committed any crime -- it is quite legal to seek asylum. This is wedge politics, pure and simple.
mathieuh 13y ago

pixelcort 13y ago

With this story of Guantanamo Bay and the story of children born into prison camps in North Korea, as a mere software engineer, it makes me feel hopeless as to how to help.

skyraider 13y ago
Build better proxies/tools of resistance, generally fight authority, just be a hacker and be on the lookout for ways to empower the downtrodden. The hacker instinct is to get around the system and fight authority. There's another hacker instinct, too, which is being totally and absurdly pedantic. Maybe there is an idea here. Sometimes the first world chooses leaders who are, at day's end, okay with a some of the horrors of barbaric legal systems (usually in exchange for increased security or the illusion thereof). One solution might be to be politically pedantic (seriously!) and not let them get away with even a bit of it.
- nwh 13y ago
  Unfortunately if people can go to jail for increnting a variable in a public URL, any effort of this nature is sure to draw the fire of United States law. I don't even live in the place, and it still scares the crap out of me.
atsaloli 13y ago
If you're in the US, pixelcort, may I invite you to consider the Downsize DC effort? (http://www.downsizedc.org/ http://www.downsizedc.org/) Here is a quick summary of what DownsizeDC.org is about: We believe the federal government has grown too centralized, too intrusive, and too expensive. We believe in constitutional limits, smaller government, civil liberties, federalism, and low taxes. We want to end laws and programs that don't work, cause harm, and violate the Constitution. We want to restore the full force of the 9th and 10th amendments, which reserve most social functions to the people and the states. The strategy of Downsize DC is to leverage technology to make it easier for people to make their voices heard to the State. They make it easier to contact your Senate and House representatives regularly. The primary bill DownsizeDC is advocating is the Read the Bills Act -- make it law to read aloud each bill before signing it into law. That action alone would slow down the legislating machine. The other one is the One Subject at a Time act -- make each bill deal with one subject at a time, instead of bundling subjects, which would make it very clear about politician's positions on various issues, and let each issue stand on its own merit.

ck2 13y ago

Obama could order it closed tomorrow. Congress could refuse to fund that action but it would still be ordered closed and his hands would be a tiny bit cleaner. But he likes his drones and gitmo now, so that's pretty much it until Hillary becomes president and I think she likes the idea of gitmo too.

BHSPitMonkey 13y ago
Closing it would mean having the prisoners moved elsewhere, but not a change to how they are being dealt with. That's the real issue; the location isn't what matters.
- skyraider 13y ago
  He could also order due process to start tomorrow. Maybe there are a few issues with sending people back to their countries, but certainly not in all cases.
  - scotty79 13y ago
    That would be devastating hit on US gov reputation, all this people available to the press. I think they are just hoping meteor will hit this place eventually and wipe it out without any concern on their part.
    - gsnedders 13y ago
      In the UK at least it's continuing to do harm for the US government reputation every time the media bring it up, or worse yet, bring up the fact that there are British citizens still there whom the British government wants to repatriate yet the US won't release. The majority of the British citizens who have formerly been in there have made front-page news (at least in the UK) every time any have been released.
  - cynwoody 13y ago
    > He could also order due process to start tomorrow. The correct course of action, obviously. > Maybe there are a few issues with sending people back to their countries, but certainly not in all cases. Well, as Commander in Chief, he could just order the Marines to cut a hole in Gitmo's perimeter fence and shoo the prisoners into Cuber though it. I'm sure Fidel and Raúl would be pleased to handle their homeward travel arrangements, albeit not quietly. Hell, Obama could even save some postage by having the Marines entrust the prisoners to a deliver a $4085 check to the Treasurer General of the [Cuban] Republic, in payment of Gitmo's annual rental[1]. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/17/idUSN17200921 http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/17/idUSN17200921

SoftwareMaven 13y ago

Gitmo was the first thing that clued me that I had made a mistake voting for Obama's promises (not that McCain would have ever gotten it instead!). It was such a complete reversal that I immediately knew his promises were completely worthless. I appreciate that there may be anger outs people in Gitmo, but they have every right to a trial I have. The double standard of what human rights mean if you are a US citizen and if you aren't makes me physically ill. As a country, in many ways we deserve the disdain directed at us. That said, we are not only Gitmo, and we actually do a lot of good things for the world. We just need to get our government to respect our borders.

dublinben 13y ago
Congress deserves as much or more blame for this situation. They've prevented the President from carrying out his intended solution to this problem. Without their support, he is powerless to release these people.
- lwat 13y ago
  What was his solutions? Moving the detainees to another facility? Or did he actually want to give them trials and send the innocent ones home?
  - twoodfin 13y ago
    Move them to another facility on U.S. soil. And presumably hope the Supreme Court would then "force" his hand on moving them into the domestic judicial system. I will be snarky because it's late, and I'm annoyed this topic is on hn: President Obama loves nothing more than to vote "present".
  - daegloe 13y ago
    No state will have them. Literally.
- mattstreet 13y ago
  Well I think he could put a bit more public pressure on them then. I really don't hear him bringing it up too often.

jebblue 13y ago

When I first saw the title I thought "git", this must be some derivative of git and the author didn't like it.

jchimney 13y ago

In Canada we remember with shame the WW2 Japanese internment camps. Gitmo will be this generations great shame. Marriage equalization, and reasonable pot legislation are happening... But gitmo remains a black mark. Due process should not be malleable.

pekk 13y ago
Did you know that due process was violated in WW2 and WWI and many other major wars?

linuxhansl 13y ago

Guantanamo Bay is like the witch hunts in the medieval ages in the sense that when somebody was accused of being a witch there was no meaningful recourse. Gitmo is the same. Most inmates have not been tried, some have been tortured (and are hence considered "untriable"). For a country that claims to follow the "rule of law" this is a strange affair to be in. The "rule of law" way of out this is to bring these people to the US, and try them. If they cannot be convicted they are free. I believe that the long term cost/risk of not doing this is higher than any potential damage the inmates could do.

elliptic 13y ago
Witch hunts were primarily a phenomenon of the early modern period, not the middle ages, during which both the political authorities and the Church repeatedly cautioned against blaming e.g poor crops on supposed witches. Also, I believe about half of witchcraft trials ended in execution - I'm not sure what the comparable rate is for Gitmo (although obviously there are no trials).
- eric-hu 13y ago
  Perhaps witch hunts were just performed under a different name. See also: the Medieval Inquisition (1184–16th century) the Spanish Inquisition (1478–1834) the Portuguese Inquisition (1536–1821) the Roman Inquisition (1542 – c. 1860) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
  - jeltz 13y ago
    The medieval inquisition was indeed a witch hunt in the figurative sense but it did not hunt witches. It was primary occupied with hunting heretics (particularly Cathars). Its involvement in hunting witches started in the late 15th century at the very end of the middle ages.
    - sigzero 13y ago
      I think he was using "witch hunt" in a generic term like we use it today.

jpxxx 13y ago

Hi, future generations! Political prisoners are being raped with food intubators to prevent themselves from committing suicide in America's secret torture prison, with the express consent and approval of President Obama, the American Congress, and the numerical majority of the American people. Love, 2013

gitmothrow 13y ago
Dear future generations, Clueless middle class Western programmers on Hacker News believed everything some guy in prion said and thought they understood national security realities better than the president of the US. And they made a bunch of brave comments. Much karma was exchanged. Love, 2013
- Andrew_Quentin 13y ago
  Now you guys invent a time machine and come to tell us which of these two commenter is right. Although technically they both can be right, what we are interested to know is if you future guys, like us, consider the right to a free trial as a fundamental and unbreachable right in any circumstances. Sure, we believe you can kill enemy combatants, but if they surrender, we believe they have a right to a free trial within 60 or 90 days of detention. So come back and tell us how our government is able to flounder the most fundamental rules and principles of law.
  - gitmothrow 13y ago
    In order to convict someone you need sufficient evidence. When someone is captured in a war zone, usually by non-Western forces, evidence collection is not a top priority. So either you hold them indefinitely or release them. Obviously Obama believes that it is too risky to let these people go.
- sequoia 13y ago
  'Someone deserves the right to a defend himself in court and face specific charges before being thrown in a dungeon for life, being tortured and denied even the right to die? Ha- what a naive perspective.' It must make you feel very clever and worldly-wise to dismiss people thus.

samholmes 13y ago

What does this have to do with hacking?

jussij 13y ago

So much for the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

josscrowcroft 13y ago
The missing amendment: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Americans are created equal..."
- jussij 13y ago
  All me/women are created equal but in reality some are more equal than others. As always history repeats :( Edit: It truly disappoints me how human rights always run a long second to personal interest.
  - jussij 13y ago
    Further: Given a big enough of a profit it is easy to turn a blind eye. That simple fact is a massive problem for humanity going forward. Greed before humanity is now a reality.
- nullc 13y ago
  > "that all Americans are created equal..." Except the ones the executive branch orders to be assassinated: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/us-targeted-killings-eric-holder_n_1320515.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/us-targeted-killing...
rayiner 13y ago
The declaration of independence is a document with zero legal force. It's a bunch of nice sounding words to justify our attempt to separate from the British, nothing more.
- gfodor 13y ago

andrelaszlo 13y ago

Who cares whose fault this is? It has to end now. If you feel overwhelmed but still want to do something, the least you can do is to support Amnesty International.

vxNsr 13y ago

I think the most important part about this OpEd is the comments appearing here and elsewhere: Lots of righteous indignation for this poor fellow who claims that he's completely innocent of any charges brought against him and if he could only talk to someone they would understand. He feels the need to kill himself to prove a point, such conviction. What do they say about a prisoner and his crime? oh yeah: there's no such thing as a guilty prisoner in Jail.

sgpl 13y ago
From the article: "I have never been charged with any crime. I have never received a trial." There haven't been any charges brought against him, and his life for the past DECADE (10+ years) has been stuck in a fucking limbo. The US Government won't even let him commit suicide by way of hunger, so in essence he has absolutely no hope or choice as it currently stands.
- vxNsr 13y ago
  Once again these are things he is claiming, I haven't done any research into his situation and I doubt anyone here has either. All I'm saying is that taking the word of someone who is in prison for possible terrorism is a mistake. Clearly there was someone who felt this dude was dangerous or else they wouldn't have flown him halfway around the world to "sit in limbo" there are prisons in Afghanistan and Iraq and it's MUCH cheaper to keep prisoners there, the only ones flown to cuba are those deemed "a higher security risk". A hint at possible charges is hidden in the third paragraph of his plea for attention: "Years ago the military said I was a “guard” for Osama bin Laden..." he of course qualifies this by saying it's not true. But if true is fairly serious because it would imply he was highly trusted if he was a personal guard for OBL. Again I haven't done any actual research into his situation but he most probably doesn't deserve nearly half the self-righteous indignation that everyone here is displaying.
  - sgpl 13y ago
    TL:DR: This dude was at the wrong place at the wrong time; and unless the US Government can prove otherwise, they should either release him, or if he is a terrorist, it would be a net-win if they just let him die of hunger (As their reputation w.r.t Gitmo has already been sullied). -- In a parallel universe, I claim that you are committing conspiracy to overthrow the reigning King. You say you were just walking by the forest to check out wildlife. I say nonsense; I have the power to capture you. The extent of your crime is that you were in the forest. I then capture you and throw you in a dungeon/prison, parade you naked, urinate you, rob you of basic dignity, flog you when I have a bad day or just for my amusement. I also feed you the same bland food daily. This is your reality [1] I do this continuously for 20 years == 7300 days in a row. You either start growing crazy or realize it would be better to end the misery yourself. At this point you have been robbed of the aspirations you had to contribute to scientific discovery by cataloguing flora and fauna. You realize that you haven't seen your children for ~20 years. Because you have been labeled an enemy of the state, your wife was thrown out of the city limits, etc. You choose the only option that is remotely viable: deprive yourself of nutrition till you die. I rob you of that choice. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY FUCKING CHOICE NOW. I strap you to a cot, and force feed you a disgusting liquid diet for the next N years of your life. You live like this for the rest of your life or till I decide otherwise. Because in this scenario, I have power, I can do whatever I please in the name of protecting the life of this King. [1] As an experiment, lock yourself in a room for a day/week with some bland nutritious food & pots & pans for bodily functions. No books, no computers, no phone or music players, or any other distractions. For added effect, wear noise canceling headphones & blindfolds. And just chill. Repeat this for a long period of time, and you'll either want to kill yourself because your existence has been reduced to nothing, or you'll go crazy. In reality you'll get pretty restless and bored within the hour.

joshuaheard 13y ago

Why does HN link to this propaganda?

andrewfelix 13y ago
Dissent is a powerful and useful thing. If you feel this is article is a lie and part of a wider political strategy, then present your case. Making sweeping statements without context or reason will not win you friends on HN. FYI HN doesn't control the links, its users post links and vote on them.
- davidw 13y ago
  Political articles are off topic on Hacker News.
  - andrewfelix 13y ago
    Firstly, this is not a political article per se. It has political connotations like most things, including hacking. Secondly, it most certainly "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity." http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - davidw 13y ago
      > Secondly, it most certainly "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity." Does it really? It looks to me much more like an article meant to engender outrage at something injust in the world. Note: I'm not saying I don't agree with the outrage, just that it's very much about something highly political and I feel it does not belong here.
  - fossuser 13y ago
    Even worse the quality of comments are very similar to reddit or at least reddit during its decline. These types of political articles are what usually work their way in first as the site degrades.

joshuaheard 13y ago

Why does HN link to this propaganda?

sytelus 13y ago

Lot of things mentioned here are not that easy. To legally bring citizens of other countries in American justice system and have them fair trial you need to have respect various treaties - many of which may simply require sending them back to their respective country to be handled by their own governments which usually is not the best thing especially for terrorist suspects. The next best thing however might be have them as prisoner of war kept out side of US justice system. What is missing here is other side of the coin, however. Keeping people in Gitmo takes money, planning, book keeping and plenty of other administrative hassles. Even though there was no trial it is hard to imagine that military doesn't do any accounting of these people and they are just kept there, fed, clothed every day without any justification or reasoning. I know govt can't be trusted from wasting taxpayer money but it looks over the top that such a high profile place will keep people for 11 years straight without any convincing reasoning. Without response from govt to this story we only know one side.

cynwoody 13y ago
> Lot of things mentioned here are not that easy. To legally bring citizens of other countries in American justice system and have them fair trial you need to have respect various treaties - many of which may simply require sending them back to their respective country to be handled by their own governments which usually is not the best thing especially for terrorist suspects. Bureaucratic considerations are of no consequence. The reputation of the United States of America is at stake. It's 2013. These cases need to be resolved. The innocent should be sent home with apologies and fat Treasury checks. The guilty should be executed. And Gitmo should go back to being a Caribbean naval base with a cheap annual rent[2]. I can't say if the current case is valid, but I am reminded of the case of Ahmed Errachidi[1], Guantánamo Prisoner 590, who turned out to be a London chef who had journeyed to Pakistan in 2001 and was kidnapped by crooked Pakis and sold to the credulous US for $5000. Errachidi was finally sprung in 2007. But you have to wonder how many similar cases there are. [1] http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2011/09/16/ahmed-errachidi-guantanamo-prisoner-590-the-cook-who-became-the-general/ http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2011/09/16/ahmed-errachidi-... [2] http://books.google.com/books?id=atTyCI8ZwboC&pg=PA243&dq=guantanamo+annual+rent&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ObZrUanbL8qL0QHfjoGQCQ&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=guantanamo%20annual%20rent&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=atTyCI8ZwboC&pg=PA243&#...

EGreg 13y ago

You can read the history of Obama's and Congress' battle here: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/177/close-the-guantanamo-bay-detention-center/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/pr... This is very sad ... but what do you think is the reason they can't close this center since 2008? Who is responsible for this state of affairs and what can be done?

patrickaljord 13y ago

> When I was at home in Yemen, in 2000, a childhood friend told me that in Afghanistan I could do better than the $50 a month I earned in a factory, and support my family. I’d never really traveled, and knew nothing about Afghanistan, but I gave it a try. Sorry but this account is troubling. He went to Afghanistan during the Taliban extremely insane cruel anti-woman Islamist totalitarian regime and expected a better life? That's like someone saying he traveled to Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime and expected a better pay as he didn't know anything about Cambodia at the time. This alone takes the credibility away from this story for me. The rest is an account about how they are force feeding him because of is voluntary hunger strike. Anyone knows how hunger strikes are handled in other penitentiaries? Not sure they can just let the prisoners die.

ncallaway 13y ago
"Sorry but this account is troubling. He went to Afghanistan during the Taliban extremely insane cruel anti-woman Islamist totalitarian regime and expected a better life? That's like someone saying he traveled to Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime and expected a better pay as he didn't know anything about Cambodia at the time." And this is enough to condemn him to an indeterminate amount of time in prison without a trial? If we have compelling evidence of wrong-doing then we should grant him a trial. Let the actual judicial process decide his punishment, rather than an arbitrary declaration. If we don't have enough compelling evidence then we should release him. The entire point of habeas corpus is to prevent people from being held for extended time on the mere suspicion from arbitrary authorities. What's the point of having a judicial system if we can send arbitrarily selected people around it and deny writs of habeas corpus? What will you do if one day an authority finds something you've done suspicious and throws you in jail? The protection afforded by writs of habeas corpus should apply to all of us, or it's a meaningless protection.
cskau 13y ago
> Sorry but this account is troubling. He went to Afghanistan during the Taliban extremely insane cruel anti-woman Islamist totalitarian regime and expected a better life? That's like someone saying he traveled to Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime and expected a better pay as he didn't know anything about Cambodia at the time. This alone takes the credibility away from this story for me While it might sound "insane" to you because of the stark contrast to your own life, you fail to put yourself in his shoes. You know, not everyone was born into your (or my) privilege, freedom and education here in life. If you've lived your whole life in poor, rural Yemen with only limited local media as your one window to the world, maybe Afghanistan, a fellow Arabic/Muslim state isn't such bad a place. I'd say it's equally insane for, say, a Frenchman to travel to the United States while they operate secret military prisons with complete disregard for human rights.

yoster 13y ago

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

davepage 13y ago

Subject's DoD dossier: http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees/43-samir-naji-al-hasan-moqbel http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees/43-samir-na...

moconnor 13y ago
This is a fascinating insight into what the DoD thinks the story is, and a frightening example of why fair trial and due process should be required to incarcerate people.

beedogs 13y ago

It's time to release these innocent men. America, this is fucking shameful.

Shinkei 13y ago

Who are these "medical personnel" performing these acts? I am a physician and I can tell you that force feeding these people is against our code of ethics. The physician overseeing their treatment should be 'outed' so that we can report this behavior to his/her licensing board.

darxius 13y ago
I totally agree with you. However, I can easily see how those physicians can justify their actions to themselves. "Do no harm" can be extrapolated in many ways by cruel people suffering from delusion.
raganwald 13y ago
Atul Gawande covers something very much like this in his book "Better." WHo are the medical personnel assisting with executions? WHat are the arguments for and against participating in the death of a human being?

gogobyte 13y ago

I hope this islamic monster dies ASAP.

goggles99 13y ago

What did you expect him to say? I am guilty of contributing to terrorism and the purposeful killing of innocent woman and children civilians? I like how everyone here takes this guys word for everything. It is all a government conspiracy that has put him in there. After all, the US government likes to round up random people around the world and put them in max security detainment as kind of a boredom fighting game right? Go on death row in any detention center in the world and you'll get the same story from about 95% of the inmates there. The government set them up. They are all innocent. I think that it is always wise to look at everything that your government does with a certain level of suspicion and cynicism, but I also wouldn't bet money on a Gitmo prisoner's "honest" word either.

tripzilch 13y ago
> I like how everyone here takes this guys word for everything. It's not very different from the alternative, which is taking the word of whoever put/keeps him there without trial. Now one of these parties is well-known for enacting cruelties on human beings in situations exactly like these, and the other we really don't know anything about, at all. Therefore the only right and humane thing to do is to give the latter some benefit of the doubt. > After all, the US government likes to round up random people around the world and put them in max security detainment Well yes, such fuck-ups have happened before, as a matter of fact: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jan/14/usa.germany http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jan/14/usa.germany And that's just the first example I pulled from the top of Google. There's many more. So truly, there is ALL the reason to assume at least some of the Gitmo prisoners are innocent and kept simply because they are the result of a fuck-up nobody wants to own up to. > but I also wouldn't bet money on a Gitmo prisoner's "honest" word either. Why? What do you know about why they are there? There's been no trials, they are only prisoners because the people keeping them say they're guilty of something. So you can't use the fact they are prisoners to decide their honesty, that would be circular reasoning. Both parties have an interest in lying that is almost completely independent of guilt: One has been kept in a secret prison for 11 years subjected to inhumane treatment, and the other side wants to keep a lid on the whole Gitmo thing (maybe even especially if they weren't guilty). Also, 11 years, man. As I said, you don't know what he did, you don't even know what he's being accused of. Stepping aside from the (very real) possibility of him being completely innocent, what if he did do something, maybe it was terrible, or maybe it was something small and stupid that in no way warrants being locked up in Gitmo for 11 years. And in a year from now you'll have to argue that all those people are guilty of a crime that warrants at least 12 years in a terrible prison, and the year after that, and after that, etc. All the while not having a single clue what these people did, what they are accused of. It's pretty obvious that at least one of the sides here is guilty.

D9u 13y ago

"First they came for the Yemeni, but I was not one so I thought nothing of it. Then they came for the Afghani, but I was not one, so I didn't mind. ... Then they came for my neighbors, and I hid. ... By the time they came for me there was no one to stop them..."

brazzy 13y ago
...so I told them "Hey, you forgot about the Iranians, and I can tell you where they are!"...

ritonlajoie 13y ago

'MURICA as it's finest ! Well done !

arbuge 13y ago

It mystifies me why this is still going on. I'm sure the President sees the injustice of what's happening. If he doesn't have the political capital to shut the entire operation down, can he at least let selected detainees go free?

sigzero 13y ago

I understand what the author is saying. However, the title is wrong. He is killing himself with the hunger strike. Gitmo isn't doing that.

spin 13y ago

Proud to be an American.

scrapcode 13y ago

I know for a fact that much of these claims are completely wrong and, being told by a detainee, are completely biased. Detainee's that refuse meals are required to receive their nutrients in liquid form. They have the option to drink this themselves. When they refuse, they are put in the feeding chair which restrains their arms, legs, and waist. It does not restrain a detainees head whatsoever. When a detainee refuses to drink the liquid themselves, and refuses to go to the restraint chair themselves, they're carried to the chair by a Forced Cell Extraction team. ERF is a term that the detainee's created themselves. There are 6 guards, not 8, and it is for the safety of the detainee, as there is one guard to handle each body part (2 legs, 2 arms, head), and then one at the door to ensure that the detainee does not escape. Every FCE is video taped to ensure that safe and humane practices are being followed. They do this for this exact reason. Publicity. We wont send them back to Yemen because we don't want their heads to be severed by their Government. No one wants this place to be open. Don't be foolish, America. Don't be gullible, America. We are still the good guys.

zethraeus 13y ago
Publicity for their situation - which is terrible. A prisoner's attempt to get publicity does not influence the morality or legality of practices at Guantanamo Bay.
ucee054 13y ago
Yeah it's for their own good, the same way Bradley Manning had to be naked in his cell for his own good. Yeah right </sarcasm>.
spacemanaki 13y ago
You know this for a fact? Not to be too cynical here, but do you have a citation for any of your claims? Who is able to review these taped feedings in order to confirm that they're being carried out in a humane way? Could I, as a citizen do this? Could a reporter for the NYT? The absurdity of the censorship at the KSM trial makes me think your claims would be hard to verify. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/01/secrecy-around-ksm-guantanamo-hearings.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/01/secrec... And frankly, your nationalistic sign off makes me less inclined to believe you without references. "We are still the good guys" is kind of vapid.

timini 13y ago

This is disgracefully inhumane.

ankitml 13y ago

Here goes my respect for obama, for democracy which he stands for, for the whole nobel peace prize community. Now I know why Gandhi never won it. He would have felt disgraced today. US is a disgrace to human rights, a hypocritical country who brings democracy to the world

gitmothrow 13y ago

Lot's of bravery on HN today. Pretty disgusting to see.

jonaldomo 13y ago

I just sent my congressman an email outlining that I would like to see everybody given a trial and either deported or moved to a federal prison. I would recommend that others reach out to their representatives and do the same. I imagine that if we, the people, do not make any noise about this then we are going to get more of the same.

sequoia 13y ago

Somehow it strikes me as odd that the executive can go around starting wars, one of the most costly (blood & gold) behaviors a gov't can engage in, and one that explicitly requires the approval of congress, without congressional approval, but when it comes to closing a torture dungeon it's 'well gee whiz I'd love to but mean old congress won't let me. Sorry- my hands are tied!' horseshit. There's more than one way to skin a cat and with the unchecked might of the US military (which is basically what the executive commands these days with our spineless-vis-a-vis-war congress), I do not believe the president couldn't figure out a way to dissolve Gitmo if he wanted to. He doesn't want to, this torture happens because Obama wants it to happen. EDIT: I'm probably wrong here in my first paragraph ^

parfe 13y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Milita... Fair disingenuous so say the President started wars without congressional approval.
- sequoia 13y ago
  My statement that wars were started "without congressional approval" may be wrong. That said, I still do not believe that it's outside the president's power to shut down gitmo. As many other commenters here have pointed out, he could simply order marines to free those prisoners with no charges to Cuban soil; this would cost no money at all; congress would not be able to prevent it. Could the president not do this? Furthermore, he promised to do so repeatedly during his campaign. Was the president, a constitutional scholar, merely mistaken about his powers as the executive? I apologize for muddying the waters with discussion of other presidential actions.
  - parfe 13y ago
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantanamoDetentionFacilities http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantana... Obama issued the order to close the prison his second full day in office. Congress then blocked any funds whatsoever from being used to close the prison. http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/111/senate/1/196 http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/111/senate/1/196 No, the president can't just release prisoners into Cuba because A) Cuba is a sovereign country and the US doesn't get to just deposit individuals there, terrorist or not. B) The president literally cannot pay for any operation, at all, to close the prison. I suggest you read up more on the issue before forming such a strong opinion.

anuraj 13y ago

rule of law, right to fair trial, upholding dignity of human kind and the farce of democracy. Feed the rabble with trivia they need to know and all is well.

tibbon 13y ago

I make no apologies for Obama- he should have closed Gitmo. Yet, there's one tiny tiny possibility that I have considered for why he hasn't. Before becoming president, you make promises, have goals, and overall think you know what you're going to do on day one. However, after inauguration you go for your first big debriefing with the CIA, FBI, etc... The things you learn there completely change the course what you want to do, or can do. You find that we were constantly in significantly more danger than any citizen could have anticipated. Now, I don't find this to be likely, but just something I've considered. Why in the world would have Obama gone from wanting to close Gitmo, to being pretty much against it? Politics alone don't seem to cover it, since pretty much everyone wants it closed. Logistics? It doesn't seem that hard...

pstuart 13y ago
It's not like he's getting full cooperation from congress on this.
digitallogic 13y ago
Presidential candidates have been getting security briefings since Eisenhower: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/cia-briefings-of-presidential-candidates/index.htm https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intellig... So it's not the case that there was a huge cache of information that he didn't have access too until entering office. It could have been the case that there were some details that weren't made available to him, but that seems unlikely to amount to anything that would lead to a complete reversal of policy.
- tibbon 13y ago
  Oh interesting. Well that blows that theory out of the water.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

cpursley 13y ago

Wait, didn't Obama close Gitmo? Oh, that's right. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

sq1020 13y ago

Another example of the hypocrisy of our goverment which claims to champion ideals like freedom and equality before the law. As long as there are innocent people like this suffering grave injustices in gitmo, as long as drones are killing innocent Pakistani villagers, as long as the U.S. brazenly continues to financially and militarily support Israel, the president and every member of congress have blood on their hands. Let me tell you something, these clowns in office couldn't care less about your or me or the homeless guy on the street. They care about being famous, having money and power and going on free vacations paid for by John Q. average tax payer!

redeemedfadi 13y ago
The leadership of this country is made up of citizens of this country. I think John Q. average tax payer would do the same thing if he were in office. Our leadership is a representation of us. The government is made up of US Citizens. We can't just blame the government for it's bad decisions, because in truth it is our decisions. If we want to change the government, we must first change ourselves. How kind are we to our neighbors, who live across the street?
- sq1020 13y ago
  Listen, people in office have a much greater responsibility than you or me to make the right choices because their decisions affect all of us and that's also why it's incumbent upon us to make these crooks accountable for their actions and to criticize them because, in the words of Howard Zinn "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." It's a shame that the president of our country is out throwing lavish birthday parties for himself inviting useless celebrities and paying a guy $100,000 to play the music. Are you freakin kidding me???? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/05/obamas-birthday-bash-jay-z_n_919292.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/05/obamas-birthday-bas...

verve 13y ago

I posted a new We the People petition about this issue: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-bay-detention-camp-end-2013-and-either-transfer-or-release-remaining-prisoners/wZlM5BG8 https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-b... .

weareconvo 13y ago

What's the full story? Why was he detained? Is he actually a terrorist? There can't possibly be absolutely no other side to this story.

varjag 13y ago

In 1971, while in Lefortovo prison in Moscow (the central KGB interrogation jail), I went on a hunger strike demanding a defense lawyer of my choice (the KGB wanted its trusted lawyer to be assigned instead). The moment was most inconvenient for my captors because my case was due in court, and they had no time to spare. So, to break me down, they started force-feeding me in a very unusual manner -- through my nostrils. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/17/AR2005121700018.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12...

ed_blackburn 13y ago

What concerns me is that as I understand it, my own country (UK) has been complicit with these detentions. I'm also concerned that the UK and other developed nations have similar black-ops illegal detention centres too, Guantanamo is public knowledge. Are there other centres?

tomohawk 13y ago

Legally, these guys are non-lawful enemy combatants. They have put themselves in a legal grey area, not by committing crimes, but by committing acts of war. Many, if not all of them have been trained, if captured, to try to disrupt the legal system by any means necessary. They are fighting a war. Here is what happened to some German non-lawful combatants during WWII: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pastorius http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pastorius About 1/3 of detainees released have gone right back to the fighting: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/03/latest_gitmo_recidiv.php http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/03/latest_gitmo_... And these were the low risk ones. According to the US Constitution, it is Congress that establishes courts (except the supreme court) and decides what their purpose is. The President does not get to decide this. Military commissions have been accordingly established by Congress to try the detainees. The current President halted this process. Thus the detainees are in legal limbo until either Congress establishes a different court to hear the cases or the President decides to comply with the current law.

norswap 13y ago

I am always puzzled about the cognitive dissonance between this and all the (justified) outrage over the Shoah. It's still happening, even in the United States (let's not even talk about Africa, North Korea, etc).