<just thinking out of the box again, right?>
The Hawks are, I think, going to be very uncomfortable, trying to come up with an appropriate label for what we are doing in Guantanamo. They haven't had much to say about it, lately. But the prisoners are still there. Remember the debate, the sematic knots they tied themselves in, when they first tried to explain what the prisoners would be called? Not "criminals", as that would imply they had rights to be charged with something, rights to a trial, rights to a lawyer to represent them, rights to be told how long they would be jailed. Not "prisoners of war", as that would imply certain rights under the Geneva Convention, and an eventual exchange of prisoners. The U.S. Government made clear they would not be following the Geneva Convention. So they came up with "enemy combatant", a catagory of persons whose rights are, apparently, nil. And who will, apparently, be held forever, or until they commit suicide. Have any of them been beaten to death with blunt instruments? Would we know, if they had? Are you sure?
"Concentration Camp" is how I think posterity will remember it. Not like the "concentration camp" for Japanese-Americans during WWII. Worse. More like............
But this whole line of thinking is making you uncomfortable, maybe outraged, so maybe the best thing is for you, too, to put me on ignore.
Ignorance is Strength.
War is Peace. |
