The continuing problem of Guantanamo Bay

The US prison facility at Guatanamo Bay continues to be a thorny problem. Almost two thirds of Americans surveyed recently opposed closing the prison there. That's despite allegations of torture, the facility continuing to provide fuel for jihadi nutcases and suicide bombers and Barak Obama's promise to close the facility.

Those being detained at Guantanamo Bay are not going to be charged with any crime. For many, there's no evidence other than hearsay reports. Others have been tortured and their trials would reveal just to what extent. There's also the small problem that some of those detained and subsequently release have gone on to become involved in terrorism.

People detained for five years, tortured, never charged let alone convicted of a crime, held in solitary confinement, subjected to routine humiliation, unable to see their families, etc. may go home, get a job, keep a low profile. Or they may write a book about what they've been through. Or they may find they actually have a reason to be pissed off with the United States military and a government that allowed (or, if you like, encouraged) it all to happen.

Guantanamo will cease to be a problem for the US when it's closed. If they've not got enough evidence to charge the people there, they should let them go. And expect law suits to follow.

American torture

With no sense of shame, American politicians and the political pundits close to them, have sought to exculpate themselves from the torture of prisoners of war, suspected terrorists and "enemy combatants". The evidence is stark (thanks to the tireless work of the ACLU and others):

• members of the administration actively sought ways to avoid the United State's obligations under international law, the Geneva Convention, etc. and George Bush's public and personal promise to prosecute torturers
• in practice, those people torturing detainees and suspected terrorists went further than the criminal guidance they had already been given
• Colin Powell and William Taft understood the necessity of keeping to the rules of the Geneva Convention, but were ignored - realising that once America abandoned those rules, they put their own people at risk
• the FBI were against it and complained about it

Despite the fact that Japanese torturers were executed at the end of the Second World War for the very crimes that have been permitted and committed;

• blowhards claim either "water-boarding isn't torture..." (which is clearly is - visit any European museum of torture and you can see the same devices that were being used hundreds of years ago)
• or by revealing these memos the United States' enemies will know the limits of what the US will do (which should have already been clear from treaties signed, the Constitution and what the President has said to the world)

Why has Barack Obama said he won't prosecute the people who have violated so many laws? Because he is weak and unwilling? Or because he does not feel any public pressure to prosecute these people? The recent example of Somali pirate hostage-takers being killed ought to offer a counter-balance. With safety and security for detainees, POWs and prisoners and a strong stance against torture the US ought to be able to say to its enemies, those interfering with American citizens abroad, etc. "If you fight us, you will be killed. If you surrender, you will not be harmed."

Americans and torture

58% of Americans are against torture and we're supposed to take comfort in that. The so-called Greatest Nation on Earth, a beacon of freedom, hope and democracy still has 40% of it's population in favour of torture. There are enough people there that think people don't matter. Their rights don't matter. Even though anyone with a clue says torture has no intelligence value. Too many nights spent watching 24 and not even flinching when someone... you know... has to be tortured to reveal where the ticking bomb is planted. Even Slumdog Millionaire makes light of torture. The main character is abducted by the police, held without charge, electrocuted and then, seemingly none-the-worse, set free to go and win 25 crore rupees.

In countries where torture is commonplace and seen as a valuable tool for breaking opposition movements, political dissidents and "enemies of the people", many people look to the United States as a place where these kinds of things can't happen. A place where a tried and true belief in liberty protects people from the state. Yet stories leek out about policemen beating people, shooting innocent citizens in cold blood and planting weapons, killing people held in cells, abusing their power, etc. These are the kinds of things people like to brush off as "rogue elements" or "cops stepping over the line", but maybe they aren't. And they're shielded from punishment by public complacency.

Maybe they aren't Lethal Weapon-style kill-all-the-bad-guys excesses, rugged individualists against the corrupt system crap, but are indicative of something far more corrosive in American society -- that the state knows what's best and people don't matter.

Let's hope Barack Obama and his new administration take a real stand against torture and send out a clear message -- the USA does not torture, will not torture, nor will freedom-loving Americans stand by and allow others to torture.