Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Quitting Gitmo? Nope. - - New Wings And New Spin

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-18-06 03:18 PM
Original message
Quitting Gitmo? Nope. - - New Wings And New Spin

This week, the Bush regime - feeling downright cocky as one of their chickenhawks broke through his life of noncombat and actually got to openly shoot someone and get away with it - took a big leap and grab at the pinnacle of their imperious power, and looked down on the world as its leaders tried to reign them in.

Yesterday Kofi Annan timidly backed a U.N. report which called for the closure of the torture prison at Guantanamo Bay. The report boldly, naively, lashed out at the Bush regime and declared that he should "without further delay . . . either try the roughly 500 detainees held there or release them."

The U.N. report singled out the DoD for the barbaric interrogation methods its agents have been documented using on the prisoners there, saying they violate the Convention against Torture, "particularly if used simultaneously."

The U.N. report also called on Bush to end the rendition of suspects to countries around the world where there are "substantial grounds for believing" torture might take place.


Torture Secretary Rumsfeld got angry. By golly, he said, the U.N. chief was "flat wrong". What's more, Annan's never even been to Gitmo, but medical folks have. The Red Cross "stayed there, lived there 24 hours a day." he argued. (No mention of the agreement with the agency to keep their findings secret)

Why, these folks lie, he said. They're dangerous terrorists who would kill us all if we let them go. Would they be gunning for us if we released them? Maybe. But not necessarily because of any predisposition to do us harm. Thing is, the Pentagon just released to their home countries, 127 of the 496 men who they had detained at Gitmo without charges, and without access to counsel or contact with their families or relatives. I'm sure though, these presumably innocent folks were more than happy to provide the Bush regime their bodies and minds as Bush's cover for not producing any instigator of the 9-11 attacks.


Amnesty International, who called for the closure of the Gitmo torture prison a year ago, said the U.N. report "confirms everything that AI has repeatedly said about the detention camp.

Gitmo, AI echoed, is just the 'tip of the iceberg'. "The U.S. also operates detention facilities at Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan, Abu Ghraib prison and elsewhere in Iraq," they wrote, "and has been implicated in the use of secret detention facilities in other countries, also known as "black sites." There has been nothing but silence and implicit denial by the Bush regime of the existence of the rendition program of which every affected country has extensively documented and taken measures to hold our CIA accountable.

In fact, in a view shared and encouraged by his superiors, Rumsfeld regards all of the attention and exposure of the Pentagon's sanctioned torture to be the problem rather than the offensive and illegal acts themselves. Rumsfeld bemoaned his own perception that our government isn't as successful a liar as al-Qaeda and other enemies of the state.

Our enemies have skillfully adapted to fighting wars in today's media age, but our country has not adapted," Rumsfeld said. "While al Qaeda and extremist movements have utilized this forum for many years ... we in the government have barely even begun to compete in reaching their audiences."

It must be quite an embarrassment that after spending $1.6b over three years for public relations, this administration has not gotten the quality of lies the Commander-in Chief expects he deserves from his military arm in the Pentagon. There was that $300 million Pentagon psych-operation run by the conservative-connected firm, the Lincoln Group, that schemed to place pro-American messages in foreign media outlets.

I guess that's why he deployed the Army's brilliant children, gleaming with their imperious spit shine, to Gitmo to run interference for the coming assault of sunlight on the torture island from a chastened world community of human rights observers. It's going to be "a fabulous mission for the soldiers," said a reservist unit commander.

"My job is to get the media to the location, let them talk to subject-matter experts, and then it's up to the reporters to report what they see." she said. Whatever we want them to see, she means. It's not likely reporters who inquire about the torture prison would need the assistance of military helper to 'report what they see'. But, that's the job of these new propagandists, engaged in the 'long war', where they believe, as one general described it, that "information is just as critical as firepower"

Tucker showed that she was hitting the ground at Gitmo running as she wondered out loud why none of the five U.N. officials had visited Guantanamo. She forgot to mention that they canceled a visit in Nov. because the Bush regime would'nt allow them to talk to the detainees.


Quit Gitmo? Not only won't they leave but they've started adding on. Voice of America reports finding on a visit to Gitmo, a building under construction that will be known as Camp Six. "Large cranes, hard-hatted construction workers and piles of building material do not look like part of any facility that is going to be abandoned anytime soon." the report states. Perhaps it's a wing for dissenting reporters who will get the water board treatment while Tucker and the other brilliant children school them on the benefits of absolute power, cosseted by mindless, fawning loyalty to Bush.

"Every once in a while someone pops up and gets some press for saying, 'Oh, let's close Guantanamo Bay.'" said Mr. Rumsfeld. Well, if someone has a better idea, I'd like to hear it."

Would you now, Donny boy? Would you really?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-18-06 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. One better idea would be
to close Guantanamo, try the inmates in US courts with legal representation, and try the Rumsfeld et al for war crimes.

Army "journalists" giving us "the real story". :rofl:

good post :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joanski0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-18-06 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
2. I distinctly recall, because I was so shocked
when it happened, watching the Senate working on Budget amendments. A republican put in an amendment for around $75 million to build a permanent prison in Gitmo. Senator Robert Byrd was the only one who got up and spoke against that prison. I remember being aghast that the other Dem Senators voted for this permanent prison amendment.

So I am not surprised that construction of this prison is underway. Why didn't that reporter do some research and find out where that money came from to build this new prison? That shouldn't be too hard. If I knew it, a whole hell of a lot of other people should, too. No wonder we are all in the dark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-18-06 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. the first one was built by Haliburton
there was money left over in the contract so I wouldn't be surprised to find that they are constructing the new wing(s) as well.


Brown & Root Services, a division of Kellogg Brown & Root, was awarded a $16,000,000 task order for construction of the 408-unit detention camp at the Radio Range area of U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Units were to be of modular steel construction. Each unit was to measure 6 feet 8 inches by 8 feet and includes a bed, a toilet, and a hand basin with running water. The total contract amount could run as much as $300,000,000, according to the Navy: (sorry, broken govt. link)

related article: http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/37/11948
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joanski0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-18-06 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. How disgusting. Maybe they're building
a fort down there, so they can get Castro. Oh my God, who knows???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-18-06 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-19-06 04:21 AM
Response to Original message
6. Set them free?
Edited on Sun Feb-19-06 05:03 AM by bigtree
http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-oppar194632294feb19,0,4109153.story?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

The problem is that the conflict with al-Qaida is neither a war nor a criminal investigation, and the detainees are neither prisoners of war nor criminal suspects. Rather, as the UN report recognizes, Guantanamo exists for an entirely separate purpose. The detainees are there to be interrogated in ways that often violate international law and that sometimes - as with the use of dogs and sleep deprivation - may amount to torture.

The goal of this interrogation is not to gain evidence for later criminal proceedings but to obtain information about al-Qaida. Indeed, at this point few of the detainees could ever be tried in a U.S. court. Most of the evidence against them would be inadmissible because of the way it was extracted, although that fact may not prevent trials of some detainees before military tribunals. Further, many detainees are not wanted by their own governments, who may be more than happy to allow the United States to continue housing them. There is also the risk that releasing the detainees would allow them to tell their stories to a world increasingly skeptical of U.S. policy.

Guantanamo, then, is more like a concentration camp or even - as Amnesty International infamously claimed last year - a gulag from which some detainees will never return, at least not with sound mind and body. Readers who recoil from those terms might prefer to think of supermax prisons, in which we house criminals deemed to be the "worst of the worst." Indeed, just as the UN report raises concerns about conditions and treatment of detainees at Guantanamo, human rights groups have long contended that supermax prisons are cruel and inhuman under the best of circumstances. Modern societies, it turns out, seem to generate facilities for warehousing people they consider dangerous in a manner that puts them out of sight and out of mind.

full article: http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-oppar194632294feb19,0,4109153.story?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC