June 16, 2008

Bush Justice

McClatchy investigates those detained at Gitmo and learns a few things.
"McClatchy interviewed 66 released detainees, more than a dozen local officials — primarily in Afghanistan — and U.S. officials with intimate knowledge of the detention program. The investigation also reviewed thousands of pages of U.S. military tribunal documents and other records.

This unprecedented compilation shows that most of the 66 were low-level Taliban grunts, innocent Afghan villagers or ordinary criminals. At least seven had been working for the U.S.-backed Afghan government and had no ties to militants, according to Afghan local officials. In effect, many of the detainees posed no danger to the United States or its allies.

The investigation also found that despite the uncertainty about whom they were holding, U.S. soldiers beat and abused many prisoners."

I noticed over the weekend that Newt Gingrich had loudly decried last week's SCOTUS ruling that said these detainees had constitutional rights--and he was just one of the many conservatives angry about the court. Gingrich said that such a ruling was worse than Dred Scott and would result in a terrorist attack on our cities. But Gingrich and his ilk never seem to acknowledge the huge cost that Gitmo has on our safety. Every innocent person ever detained or tortured by our government is a potential future terrorist--or at the very minimum, highly unlikely to help us fight terrorism.

3 comments:

steves said...

Newt also said that this decision would cause us to lose a city. I have read most of the decision. I understand the holding and I just don't see the logic in what the naysayers have said. Fortunately, there are many conservatives who have also applauded the decision. I say bravo and I wish they would do this kind of stuff more often.

Streak said...

I am heartened by the conservatives speaking in favor of the decision as well, but simply scared by the far right wing. I don't think they have much faith in our system.

steves said...

While they are right wing, I wouldn't call them far right. I could be wrong, but I always view the far right as the Libertarians and similar folk. The people deriding this decision are statists. They believe the gov't should be able to do whatever they want to combat a variety of ills, such as terrorists, drugs, and various other crimes.