Gitmo - A Somber Anniversary
The detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba opened for business six years ago today. It’s time for the Bush regime to come clean about Gitmo, and for Americans to recognize that the Gitmo issues aren’t just about “enemy combatants” - the issues are also about Americans.
When I joined the U.S. Navy back in the early 1970’s, the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba was the joke of the fleet. Even though it’s only 90 or so miles off of the U.S. shoreline, being stationed there was considered a less than desirable assignment. If you wanted to give the world an enema, Gitmo is where you’d stick the hose.
I’m sure that the base held some value during the cold war, though. When the ex-Soviet Union was still a force to be reckoned with, and the U.S. and Soviet fleets played a high seas game of chicken, there’s no question that Guantanamo Bay may have held some value to U.S. intelligence, since Castro was a close ally of the Soviets. (And then, there’s that whole “missiles of October” thing back in ‘62, but that’s another story…)
Six years ago today, the Bush administration found a more nefarious use for this lonely military outpost. It started transporting “enemy combatants” to the island from various points around the middle east at the outset of the global war on terror.
I’m not going to spend my time (or infringe on short-attention reading spans) by talking about the abuses and legal maneuvering that George Bush and Dick Cheney have engaged in, so as to keep the base open, and (ostensibly) keep the detention of prisoners at Gitmo outside of the purview of American courts.
Let’s just stipulate that it’s wrong. Simply wrong. Everything about the concept of indefinite detention, and everything about the small scrap of Cuban soil that the prison resides on, is wrong. Detaining the prisoners housed there without any right of habeas corpus or the ability to challenge military tribunals is wrong. The treatment of the detainees is wrong. The intelligence value of these detainees, some who have been there the entire time the prison has been open, has become negligible. Our national shame in the world community as a result of hosting this facility is not (negligible).
It’s time to close Gitmo. The ACLU is sponsoring a “Gitmo awareness” day today - and suggests that anyone interested in the issue (as we should all be) wear something orange in recognition of the anniversary. Since I don’t have any orange in my wardrobe, the best I can do is provide a short posting, pointing you to the ACLU’s efforts - because let’s be clear about something:
This isn’t just about the current detainees. This is about all Americans and the loss of our own individual rights in the name of keeping the detainees indefinitely housed at Gitmo.
Please click on the link above, or any of the links in the ACLU ad running in the right sidebar of ASZ today. It’s way past time for this travesty to end.
Update: Andy Worthington posts an excellent Gitmo primer on AlterNet.
Update 2: 80 people were arrested today in Washington, DC for protesting Guantanamo Bay outside of the Supreme Court building. The charges?
They were charged with violating an ordinance that prohibits demonstrations of any kind on court grounds. Those arrested inside the building also were charged under a provision that makes it a crime to give “a harangue or oration” in the Supreme Court building.
Dang. Be careful out there with those harangues and orations. I don’t want to have to bail anyone out.
Richard, I know you didn’t want to talk about “legal maneuvering,” but I have to ask: Is that absurd, obscene fiction about jurisdiction still in place? I’m talking about federal courts ruling that because Gitmo is not American but Cuban territory, the rights of the accused don’t apply there.
It’s an American base. American flags fly there. Every weapon on the grounds is American, and no one but Americans give orders there. If that doesn’t mean it’s American territory, then the words “jurisdiction” and “sovereignty” are just gibberish.
bitter scribe - there’s some answers to your questions on the wiki entry for gitmo. apparently in the over 100 year old agreement it is in fact cuban soil, with the usa getting a lease in perpetuity as long as both sides agree. the castro regime, in a quite mild protest, doesn’t even cash the checks though so we’re there for free.
yep, jurisdiction and sovereignty mean nothing. apparently because the castro regime mistakenly cashed one of the piddling ($2000!) checks early on, that’s supposed to mean that they agreed to the pre-revolution agreement.
I would like to point out that the original Guantanamo agreement spells out exactly what uses are permitted at the base, which was originally intended as a fueling station. Operating a prison on the base is certainly not one of the agreed upon uses, and constitutes a substantive violation of the agreement.
Of course, Cuba is powerless to do anything about it, so just add this to the list of treaties which Bush and Cheney don’t need to follow.
Hey, one of our Australian citizens (David Hicks) had a quite a few years stay at the luxury hotel in Guantanamo. He’s now free but is badly damaged psychologically and physically after his hosting by America. He has also been temporarily gagged from speaking to the press about his experience.
America must have much to hide!
I’ve blogged about Hicks before, Daniel. This is a tough one. While Hicks is no saint, clearly, he was a bit of a nutcase well before he ever was lodged at Gitmo. Still, he should not have been there. The only reason he remained for so long was because of Howard’s infatuation with Bush.
We see where that got him, huh?
Can one even keep up with the bad news out of Gitmo? The DC Circuit court ruled that detaines are not people and torture is to be expected.