How Dangerous
An article in today's NY Times about the complications the US is facing in trying to release some of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay contained some rather frightening language.
In recent weeks, Pentagon officials have publicly described a vision of a pared-down Guantánamo. Their goal is to release as many as 150 of the 360 men currently there, which would leave about 210 who they say could be eligible for war crimes trials or should be held indefinitely. ...
If and when the Pentagon reaches its stated goal of transferring as many as 150 detainees, the remaining Guantánamo population would fall into two categories, military officials said. They estimate that they might have sufficient evidence on as many as 80 to try them for war crimes.
As for the final 130, some officials have said that while there might not be the kind of evidence against them to support a prosecution, they may be deemed too dangerous to release. [Emphasis added]
Well over one third of the men currently being held can't be tried because there is insufficient evidence to do so, even under the dog-and-pony show trial rules of the Military Commissions Act. The Pentagon has just admitted that these men could never be convicted of any crime, which means (or at least used to) that they are innocent. If that is the case, then why were they detained in the first place and why are they still being held years later?
The answer the Pentagon gives is rather startling: "they may be deemed too dangerous to release."
Pardon me?
We are holding at least 130 men because they might be dangerous? Who decided and on what basis? Because they were fighting against American troops, or because they drove Taliban officials around? Frankly, I find the act of holding people without charges and incommunicado for years to be far more dangerous to our purported way of life than anything those people could do.
How shameful this country has become.
In recent weeks, Pentagon officials have publicly described a vision of a pared-down Guantánamo. Their goal is to release as many as 150 of the 360 men currently there, which would leave about 210 who they say could be eligible for war crimes trials or should be held indefinitely. ...
If and when the Pentagon reaches its stated goal of transferring as many as 150 detainees, the remaining Guantánamo population would fall into two categories, military officials said. They estimate that they might have sufficient evidence on as many as 80 to try them for war crimes.
As for the final 130, some officials have said that while there might not be the kind of evidence against them to support a prosecution, they may be deemed too dangerous to release. [Emphasis added]
Well over one third of the men currently being held can't be tried because there is insufficient evidence to do so, even under the dog-and-pony show trial rules of the Military Commissions Act. The Pentagon has just admitted that these men could never be convicted of any crime, which means (or at least used to) that they are innocent. If that is the case, then why were they detained in the first place and why are they still being held years later?
The answer the Pentagon gives is rather startling: "they may be deemed too dangerous to release."
Pardon me?
We are holding at least 130 men because they might be dangerous? Who decided and on what basis? Because they were fighting against American troops, or because they drove Taliban officials around? Frankly, I find the act of holding people without charges and incommunicado for years to be far more dangerous to our purported way of life than anything those people could do.
How shameful this country has become.
Labels: Guantanamo Bay
posted by Diane at 4:14 AM
2 Comments:
they deem them too dangerous because they realize what they've done to them is unforgivable and fear that if the world were told in a firsthand testimony of the prisoner/victims it would show the mistakes that were made. In the criminal neo-con world making mistakes is fine, but accounting for mistakes is not an option. The administrators of "justice" at Guantanamo have indirectly made statements admitting quite proudly they urinated and defecated on the food served to these people. It doesnt take a huge leap of imagination when wondering what other truly disgusting inhuman things they had a thrill administering. One of the few people bargained for release by the Australian government was given specific stipulations not to speak about his incarceration. I think I know why.
Abusers always like to keep things secret.
Post a Comment
<< Home