home

More On Gitmo

Guantanamo Bay and torture continue to make headlines and blog posts. Some more to read:

In MSM:

it was a relief to watch the hearing this week by Senator Arlen Specter's Judiciary Committee on the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and to hear Mr. Specter declare that it was time for Congress to do its job and bring the American chain of prison camps under the law.

While the hearing was too long in coming, its timing was useful - one day after Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who should have been fired for bungling the Iraq war and for the prison abuse scandal, offered the bizarre declaration that "no detention facility in the history of warfare has been more transparent" than Guantánamo. Mr. Rumsfeld seems to be confusing transparency with invisibility.

....The Bush administration says 9/11 changed the rules and required the invention of new kinds of jails and legal procedures. Even if we accept that flawed premise, it is up to Congress to make new rules in a way that upholds American standards. The current setup - in which politically appointed ideologues make the rules behind closed doors - has done immense harm to the nation's image and increased the risk to every American in uniform.

A trial "says as much about the society that holds the trial as it does about the individual before it," Commander Swift reminded the Senate. "Our trials in the United States reflect who we are."

The detention camps should meet no less of a standard.

< Double Standards in Sex Offense Reporting | Newt Gingrich Jumps on Sen. Dick Durbin >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    Here also is a forum discussion on Senator Durbin - which includes my position on Gitmo: EO Forum

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#2)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    There is a growing consensus that Christina Aguilera is not sufficiently stressful to get the terrorists to give up what we want to know. In the spirit of democracy, Americans across the country are weighing in. The lead candidate for breaking these guys fast is "Muskrat Love" by Captain and Tennille. This is too important to stop there. We need more suggestions. OT, since the Downing Street Memos have gone off the board: The reporter who found them decided to hide their provenance by typing them on plain paper and destroying the originals. Protecting his source, apparently. This sure would have saved Dan Rather a bunch of trouble.

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#3)
    by Al on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    Aubrey, re Downing Street memos:
    The reporter who found them decided to hide their provenance by typing them on plain paper and destroying the originals. Protecting his source, apparently.
    Can you give a reference for that? The minutes were published by The Sunday Times. The Times article says that
    The July meeting was later mentioned by Lord Butler in his report on the use of intelligence on WMD as a “key stage” in the road to war; but its details have never been revealed until now.
    and that
    Downing Street claimed the document contained “nothing new”.
    Are you saying that the minutes are fraudulent?

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#4)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    "more on gitmo" send the boys to state prison and watch the fun. but i would also send congress to state prison.

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    Speaking of Christina Aguilera (and other artists like rappers or heavy rockers), I doubt they pay royalties for using her music. Maybe the music company should file a civil suit for copyright infringement.

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#6)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    RA, Are you saying the DS minutes are fabricated?

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#7)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    mar - I assume the DVD has been purchased for the entertainment of the detainees. ;-)

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#8)
    by jimcee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    It is starting to look like the memos could possibly be fakes. The reporter who wrote the article first said he returned the memos to his source and then the next day he said he destroyed them. It sounds rather fishy to me. As far as the contents (or possible fictions) of the "memos" are concerned it doesn't appear to be a big deal either way except to those who are so desperate to grab at any straw that helps them justify thier Irrational hatred of "BushHitler". I doubt the reprecussions will amount to a hill of beans. Sort of like in "Peanuts" when Lucy pulls the football away just as Charlie Brown tries to kick it. I thought you guys would have learned your lesson with the Rather episode but I guess your just hard learners.

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#9)
    by Al on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:14 PM EST
    jimcee, I'm still not hearing where you get this information. You uncorroborated opinion is not by itself very convincing, especially since the British government itself is not disputing the validity of the documents. So, where does you belief that the minutes are fabricated come from?

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#10)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:14 PM EST
    Al. The reports are pretty much all over. I saw it in an AP report. The tactic of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming loudly may impress you, but you're kind of by yourself. I have no idea whether the memos are fake. However, proving they're legit just got harder. Really, really tough. One commenter observed that if you were going to make something up, it would be more damning. It wouldn't contain references to concerns that the gas and biologicals Saddaam was presumed to have could be defended against properly. Just making the point that this suddenly became a matter of faith on your part and ho-hum on the part of normal people. There is no smoking gun for your side and lots of references proving, among other things, that Brit and US high command thought the WMDs existed. No "lies", in other words. You'd better hope nobody actually reads the things, and instead reacts to your misrepresentations. That's, as I say, presuming they're legit.

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#11)
    by Al on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:14 PM EST
    For all your ranting, Aubrey, you are unable to produce a reference that corroborates your implication that the minutes were not legitimate. AP report my foot. Here's the document, from The Times Online, for everyone to read. Isn't the internet wonderful?

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#12)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:14 PM EST
    It is still a simple solution. Charge them, try them or let them go. It's the american way. Our whole way of life is fouded on due process, if we ignore it, then OBL, (remember him? george, dick, don, dick ... ferris ... anyone?) has won.

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#13)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:14 PM EST
    Al. I didn't say the minutes were illegitimate. I said proving they were legit just got harder. I lean toward the case that they are legit, not least because they show that the various higher commands were seriously worried about the WMD. That spikes your "Bush lied" nonsense. And if you're making stuff up from nothing, there'd be no reason to do skim milk when you have the opportunity to do a triple-thick shake with extra vanilla. You can insist that something typed by a reporter on plain paper is definitive, if you wish, but I'd be careful. Somebody might type on plain paper that Hillary contracted Vince Foster's murder, or that Sen. Durbin gets big bucks from Syria, or that Bill Clinton got big bucks from China. Oh, wait. Anyway, you get my drift. Belief now is a matter of faith. You pick whichever you think is most convenient.

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#14)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:15 PM EST
    The minutes' accuracy has been confirmed by the british gov.

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#15)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:15 PM EST
    Sailor. Good. They show zilch. They prove that the US and the Brits thought they had excellent reason for going to war and, moreover, were concerned about the battlefield use of WMD. You got bupkus on this, which is why I'm glad they're confirmed. Maybe you should switch your view of what is real. Ya think?

    Re: More On Gitmo (none / 0) (#16)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:17 PM EST
    What fools! First they try to say the minutes are illegitimate, and when proven wrong they say 'that just proves my point'. Sheesh! The minutes of those meetings prove that bush and blair started a war they KNEW was illegal. Illegal by brit and american standards, illegal by int'l standards, and ethically & morally wrong. Read the memos that you agree are legitimate, lay off the kool aid, and start calling for truth, justice and the american way.