
Gitmo Is Killing Me - bcn
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/15/opinion/hunger-striking-at-guantanamo-bay.html
======
SoftwareMaven
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.

~~~
Locke1689
The problem is that to close Guantanamo, you need funding to a least move the
prisoners to another facility. Introducing them to the justice system would
require the same.

As every American _should_ know, Congress holds the purse strings here and has
denied said request. The President has no power here.

~~~
dantheman
The president can pardon them, the president can use private money to move
them. The president can be on the news every night making this an issue.

~~~
lukifer
> The president can be on the news every night making this an issue.

This is why the legal technicalities are irrelevant. The President has the
ultimate bully pulpit, and it sure ain't getting used on Gitmo.

~~~
david927
If the prisoners are ever released without being charged or tried (which won't
happen because there's no evidence), they can each file a civil suit against
the U.S. Government, each worth potentially hundreds of millions. I think this
plays a role as well.

~~~
PeterisP
And if they are never released, then it can't happen?

Please don't tell me that it's a reasonable (legally or ethically) argument
for keeping them imprisoned for decades.

~~~
david927
It's the equivalent of keeping the neighbor's daughter in your basement
because letting her out would get you into _so much trouble_.

Gitmo is already shockingly illegal or dangerously unethical; I don't see any
interest by the US government to end it and take some of the heat for that.

~~~
Amadou
As an American I've come the same conclusion. But it is a cowardly conclusion.
We need to take our medicine and correct the wrong-doings of Gitmo. I don't
really care if it costs a couple of hundred million dollars, that's chump
change compared to the federal budget.

If a guy like Nixon can get a pardon so that the country can move forward,
then we can certainly do the same for whatever ahats are culpable for setting
up Gitmo in the first place. Pardon the military and politicians responsible
for their misguided patriotism and then start treating these unfortunate souls
like humans again as one small step towards making the US live up to its lofty
ideals again.

------
jpxxx
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
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

~~~
rthomas6
"Dear 2013,

Nostalgia tells me that your time was a simpler time, when people cared about
politics/kids had morals/people were nicer. Also I learned in history class
that Barack Obama was a great president who took the first steps toward
universal healthcare. They talked about Guantanamo Bay for part of one day.
The necessities of war are horrible sometimes; too bad they had to do that."

Seriously though, this is just one of the things that will be glossed over and
never really talked about by future generations, similar to former practices
such as the US's sterilization of minorities, or engineering bloody coups in
Latin America to instill brutal dictators. Or our injustice to Native
Americans.

~~~
ricardobeat
Maybe in the US, but elsewhere the Latin American coups and Native American
genocide are not, and will never be, "glossed over".

------
linuxhansl
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
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
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>

~~~
jeltz
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
I think he was using "witch hunt" in a generic term like we use it today.

~~~
elliptic
Well, in that case the analogy is virtually meaningless, since "witch hunts"
have always occurred.

------
lbarrow
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
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.

~~~
twoodfin
_I understand that it looks bad if people released from custody in Gitmo
return to action in 'violent non-state actor' groups._

Just for the record, if you're a victim of one of these released prisoners, it
would be more serious for you than simply bad press.

~~~
femto
If that is something that needs to be taken into account, we should all be
locked up, just in case we do something wrong in the future. If a prisoner has
done something wrong charge and try him, otherwise he is innocent and should
be released. If we dismantle that principle, we are in far greater danger from
our own than from any external force.

------
richardjordan
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.

~~~
natrius
The events you've outlined don't require intellectual dishonesty at all. It's
possible to have thought war was a prudent course of action in 2003, then to
have changed one's mind by 2013.

~~~
cma
Not to mention the question of whether a newspaper have "a" mind...

~~~
richardjordan
They may not have a mind but they have a voice. And the NYT has or at least
had a particularly influential voice.

------
ck2
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
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
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
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
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.

------
jchimney
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
Did you know that due process was violated in WW2 and WWI and many other major
wars?

------
pixelcort
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.

~~~
atsaloli
If you're in the US, pixelcort, may I invite you to consider the Downsize DC
effort? (<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.

~~~
peterwwillis
_make it law to read aloud each bill before signing it into law_

Not only is this the stupidest solution to a complex problem i've ever heard,
it's depressing that some people take it seriously.

~~~
a-priori
Maybe it's because I'm Canadian, but I think it's stupid not to read bills out
loud at least once before they become law.

In our House of Commons the procedure is to read each bill, out loud, three
times before it is passed. Then it gets sent to the Senate where it's also
read three times (mind you the Senate typically rubber stamps everything).

So every law in Canada has been read out loud a total of _six times_ , and
(assuming they're present) every member of the legislature has heard it _three
times_.

~~~
jackpirate
That's downright amazing. I can't imagine it would be physically possible to
read aloud all US bills passed in a year that many times. My impression is
that some bills are upwards of a thousand pages.

I would be really interested in comparing the average length of Canadian
legislation with American legislation.

~~~
a-priori
I have no ideas about the average length, but I'd guess a normal length would
about 10-15 pages. You can check out recent bills passed here if you're
interested:

<http://openparliament.ca/bills/>

(Hat tip to openparliament.ca, it's an awesome site)

In fact, our current government got in trouble in the last few years for
passing two very large omnibus bills, C-10 (the "Safe Streets and Communities
Act", which makes many changes to the criminal code) and C-45 (the "Jobs and
Growth Act", which makes many fiscal changes, among other things).

<http://openparliament.ca/bills/41-1/C-10/>
<http://openparliament.ca/bills/41-1/C-45/>

They weigh in at 114 pages and 430 pages, respectively, in their normal two-
column (English & French) layout. These are not typical and they caused a lot
of commotion in the media and from the opposition when the government tabled
them, mostly because of their lengths but also because of the limited amount
of debate that was allowed about them.

------
sequoia
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
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution>

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Milita...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists)

Fair disingenuous so say the President started wars without congressional
approval.

~~~
sequoia
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
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantana...](http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantanamoDetentionFacilities)

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>

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.

~~~
sequoia
If this decision is so clearly and unequivocally not his to make, why did he
promise to do it in the first place? Is he stupid or a liar? I don't think
he's stupid.

~~~
parfe
Are you American?

A majority of Presidential campaign platforms are issues which also need
Congressional approval. Tax Reform, healthcare, domestic policy, spending
cuts, and budgets. Obama did what he said, but congress blocked him. He's
neither stupid, nor a liar for that. Any more than he would have been lying if
Congress blocked healthcare reform.

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

~~~
biesnecker
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>). 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.

~~~
astrec
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.

------
jussij
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.

~~~
rayiner
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.

~~~
jussij
> It's a bunch of nice sounding words

I suspect the founding fathers put a lot of thought into those _nice sounding
words_ in the hope they would define a nation.

Those _nice sounding words_ where powerful enough to start a civil war over
the topic of slavery and basic human rights.

However, in a way I think you are right. Those words may well have lost there
meaning and been devalued by big business and big money :(

Maybe today they are indeed just words, but the end result will be the USA has
lost a lot more than just a bunch of words :(

------
scrapcode
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.

~~~
WesternStar
Nobody wants these people. 15 American lawyers went to Yemen to expose the lie
that Yemen didn't want these people back. No one from the Yemeni govt would
meet with them. We haven't gotten rid of them because we don't know anyone who
is willing to accept them. Go ahead and read it in the Yemeni Observer.
<http://www.yobserver.com/front-page/10012301.html>

~~~
scrapcode
This is correct.

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

~~~
moconnor
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.

------
Shinkei
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.

~~~
raganwald
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?

------
patrickaljord
> 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.

~~~
cskau
> 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.

~~~
natrius
Nitpick: Afghanistan isn't an Arabic country.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people>

------
EGreg
You can read the history of Obama's and Congress' battle here:

[http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-
meter/promises/obameter/pr...](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-
meter/promises/obameter/promise/177/close-the-guantanamo-bay-detention-
center/)

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?

------
tibbon
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...

~~~
digitallogic
Presidential candidates have been getting security briefings since Eisenhower:
[https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-
intellig...](https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-
intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/cia-briefings-of-
presidential-candidates/index.htm)

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
Oh interesting. Well that blows that theory out of the water.

------
andrelaszlo
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.

------
sytelus
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.

~~~
gokhan
> _Lot of things mentioned here are not that easy._

It's US' burden to solve the Gitmo issue, whether it's easy or hard. America
can't keep telling people that it's the land of democracy and freedom, and
ignore Gitmo at the same time.

> _To legally bring citizens of other countries in American justice system..._

Gitmo is 100% American. If you think what US did there is outside of
jurisdiction, it's fuckin politics and not reality. Stop ignoring the facts
and face it.

> _The next best thing however might be have them as prisoner of war..._

Either there's no war or it's already over. Those people in Gitmo are there
because US don't know how to clean up it's own shit without facing
international humiliation when the press arrives at the door of the released
prisoners.

> _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..._

So you're OK with a system if military or let's say a central authority
decides if someone is guilty or not, without giving the man his right to
defend himself. Where do you draw the line? Is it OK if military tells you
that your friend is a terrorist? How about you father? " _it is hard to
imagine that military doesn't do any accounting of these people_ ", after all.

------
tamersalama
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
It's been tried. Somebody should probably try again.

[https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-
guantanamo-d...](https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/close-guantanamo-
detention-center-give-every-prisoner-there-speedy-trial-or-release-keep-
campaign/VvgqpXX5)

~~~
laurent123456
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
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-g...](http://www.gallup.com/poll/124727/americans-oppose-closing-
gitmo-moving-prisoners.aspx)

------
jonaldomo
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.

------
D9u
"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
...so I told them "Hey, you forgot about the Iranians, and I can tell you
where they are!"...

------
beedogs
It's time to release these innocent men.

America, this is fucking shameful.

------
cpursley
Wait, didn't Obama close Gitmo?

Oh, that's right. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

------
vxNsr
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.

~~~
lifeformed
It doesn't matter if he's guilty or not, he could be Hitler for all I care. He
should be charged and tried, not tortured for 10 years.

~~~
vxNsr
Should he be?

What are the official laws regarding a POW? Certainly not that of naturalized
citizens...

After skimming the UN Laws for POWs[1] and reading the parts that seemed to
deal with internment and time length, it's not really clear to me why he
should have to be tried.

Once he's be associated with the enemy he can be held until the end of
Hostilities at which point the "host" country can decide when and how to
exchange him with "ex-enemy" . That last part will be a little difficult
because I don't think Al-Qaeda takes many prisoners.

That said, they might be violating laws regarding torture but that's a whole
nother ball of wax.

[1][http://www.un.org/arabic/preventgenocide/rwanda/text-
images/...](http://www.un.org/arabic/preventgenocide/rwanda/text-
images/Geneva_POW.pdf)

~~~
jeltz
If he is a POW he should be released since the war was over 10 years ago.

~~~
twoodfin
It was? That's news to the Taliban.

~~~
acjohnson55
Is he part of the Taliban??

~~~
sigzero
Sadly, it doesn't matter since we are now in the ethereal "War on Terror".

------
tomohawk
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>

About 1/3 of detainees released have gone right back to the fighting:
[http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/03/latest_gitmo_...](http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/03/latest_gitmo_recidiv.php)

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.

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

------
ankitml
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

------
varjag

        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...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2005/12/17/AR2005121700018.html)

------
sq1020
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
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
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-
bas...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/05/obamas-birthday-bash-jay-
z_n_919292.html)

------
arbuge
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
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.

------
ed_blackburn
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?

------
ritonlajoie
'MURICA as it's finest ! Well done !

------
joshuaheard
Why does HN link to this propaganda?

~~~
andrewfelix
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
Political articles are off topic on Hacker News.

~~~
andrewfelix
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>

~~~
davidw
> 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.

------
timini
This is disgracefully inhumane.

------
norswap
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).

------
weareconvo
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.

------
spin
Proud to be an American.

------
anuraj
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.

------
goggles99
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
> 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>

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.

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

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

------
samholmes
What does this have to do with hacking?

