Today marks the sixth anniversary of the opening of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba, which is holding suspected terrorists, or “enemy combatants” in government-speak– some of them even Americans.
I think Guantanamo should be closed, for a few reasons. It seems to be a way of just holding people without letting us ever put them on trial, which hardly gets anything accomplished and just allows the US to squander endless taxpayer dollars on their high-profile attorneys’ fees. I have little to no sympathy for these people if they are terrorists, but… are they terrorists? We can’t know unless we have trials, which the American people should be allowed to witness as we did for Jose Padilla (but oh yeah, the administration really didn’t want to give Padilla a trial, but did it to stem off an imminent Supreme Court hearing on whether the treatment of this American citizen was unconstitutional or not, 3.5 years after first detaining him). If there’s no evidence on which to conduct a trial, why are we holding them in the first place? Let’s give the American people what we deserve and, if these people are indeed guilty of terrorist acts, let’s hold public trials and send them to prison for the rest of their lives. It will be a catharsis.
If there’s no evidence against these people, we have to let them go. It’s that simple. For many of them, we’ve had six years to find evidence on them. That should be plenty for what are supposed to be the best security forces in the world,with access to billions in American taxpayer dollars to find their case. Apparently many of them were handed over in Afghanistan for the steep bounty prizes that the Americans were giving to anyone who turned in someone else. That means that many are probably not even guilty– so why are we wasting our time, money and resources on people who aren’t guilty while probably thousands of actual potential terrorists are trolling Afghanistan right now?
And if they are guilty, why would we let them free? Let terrorists free impossible, you say? Well, I heard a top official who’s worked with Guantanamo, David Rudnick, say that very thing on BBC Radio last night. He said that recent prisoners who were released to Britain and Australia were not innocent, but were released as “charity” to their countries from the US. What??? We’re releasing terrorists as charity now? I disagree strongly with that, and that is one more reason to bring these people to trial ASAP. If they’re guilty, they should spend their lives in prison, not as celebrities in their home countries.
I have no problem with an offshore detention camp, if trials are eventually held for its occupants. That doesn’t seem to be either happening or in the works here. In addition to robbing the American people in both dollars and ability to see these terrorists on trial and punished, Guantanamo serves as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda. We certainly don’t want that, do we?
Tags: Guantanamo six years, Guantanamo 6 years, Guantanamo sixth anniversary
My biggest problem with the “offshore detention facility” is the whole argument that checks and balances don’t apply, so it’s okay for the Executive Branch to do whatever it wants, and no one has the authority to say otherwise.
This is VERY dangerous territory.
Wickle
January 16th, 2008
That is an excellent point and a big problem.
When the executive branch has virtually unlimited power (not checked by the balances provided for in the Constitution), anything can be done and the American people can do nothing about it.
Every candidate for president should sign the American Freedom Agenda pledge (started by Richard Viguerie, Bob Barr and Bruce Fein), which professes that the candidate will return to the constitutional power of the executive branch. I believe only one has done this so far– Ron Paul.
libertariangirl
January 16th, 2008