If you haven't yet read Spiegel's weekend article on Javal Davis and "Hajj Ali," you really should. It's a chilling reminder of how blessed Americans are to have the protections of a "bill of rights" included in our constitution, and how perilous is the fate of the innocent when the legal presumption of innocence is taken away.
Having said that, we can agree that this is all well and good:
But wait a second....I'm confused. We did this as a "goodwill gesture?" Is that smart? Didn't we know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that these detainees, because US forces had captured them, were, ipso facto, dangerous terrorists? Can you allow dangerous terrorists to go free as a "goodwill gesture?" Isn't that rather insane?U.S. and Iraqi authorities freed 500 detainees from the notorious Abu Ghraib prison on Monday in a goodwill gesture to Sunnis ahead of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Earlier, insurgents killed at least 10 people with a suicide bomb targeting police and government workers.
After a brief ceremony outside the prison on the outskirts of Baghdad, the 500 freed detainees left the area on public buses. They were the first of 1,000 to be freed before Ramadan begins next week, the U.S. military said.
Statement by White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, February 2002: Al Qaeda is an international terrorist group and cannot be considered a state party to the Geneva Convention. Its members, therefore, are not covered by the Geneva Convention, and are not entitled to POW status under the treaty....The American people can take great pride in the way our military is treating these dangerous detainees.Listen, this is either a terrible mistake which shows national suicidal tendencies, or the people we are about to let go are not now and never have been terrorists. Which means, like, "...Are you saying we could have let these people go free any time we wanted? Were any of these "detainees" among the abused of two years ago?"
The US Defense Department American Forces Information Service, February 2004: Detaining dangerous enemy combatants prevents their return to the fight and provides intelligence to help prevent future terrorist acts, the secretary told members of the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce....These men are dangerous, and their detention is a "security necessity," Rumsfeld said.
NewsMax, May 2004: ...we have only speculation as to where lies the specific blame for the humiliating treatment of what were apparently a crew of insurgent thugs being caged in a cell block for the worst and most dangerous detainees.
It goes without saying I have always been a little skeptical of the suggestion that, in the shadow of 9/11, in the heat of the battle, with the fervor of patriotic (and perhaps divine) vengeance in their hearts, US soldiers would never capture anyone who was not unambiguously evil. Terrorism is used as a rationale for suspending the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth amendments, and America remains silent.
We let Abu Ghraib happen by keeping silent. And the proof of the injustice lies in the sentence "U.S. and Iraqi authorities freed 500 detainees from the notorious Abu Ghraib prison on Monday in a goodwill gesture to Sunnis ahead of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan."
No comments:
Post a Comment