Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Veterans
Related: About this forumA Hundred Hungry Men at Guantánamo
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/05/guantanamo-hunger-strikes-hundred-hungry-men.htmlA Hundred Hungry Men at Guantánamo
May 1, 2013
Posted by Amy Davidson
Is Guantánamo falling? The Navy sent reinforcements to the prison there on Mondayforty medics, added to the cohort guarding a hundred and sixty-six prisoners, watching them in their cells, and, increasingly, pulling them into rooms where they are strapped to chairs and have rubber tubes stuck into their noses and snaked down to their stomachs, then pumping in a cans worth of a liquid nutritional supplement. That is what our sailors are assigned to do now. Two weeks ago, according to press reports, guards in riot gear were sent into what had been a cell block for compliant prisonersa raid on our own jailto transfer more than sixty of them into single-cell lockdown. It took five hours. The guards ended up firing what the military called less-than-lethal roundsrubber bullets and pelletswhile the prisoners threw improvised weapons at them. But mostly the prisoners have been starving themselves.
A hundred prisoners are taking part in the hunger strike at Guantánamo nowa hundred angry men, or ones who are in a state of despair. There may be more, since that is the militarys count, and the lawyers for the prisoners have been saying for some time that the number is higher. There are not, it should be said, a hundred prisoners at Guantánamo who even the United States government considers dangerous enemy combatants; that means its a mathematical necessity that there are hunger-strikers who shouldnt be there, either. Eighty-six prisoners have been cleared for release, one way or the other, many of them years ago now, but have not been released. (For many, the problem is that they are from Yemen.) That leaves just eighty. They are roughly divided between those the Administration says it might bestir itself to bring a case against someday, and those it acknowledges it doesnt have enough evidence against, but finds somehow unsettling, and so is locking up anyway. There are only six prisoners who are now facing military commissions. A month ago, there were only thirty-one hunger strikers by the militarys count, or five times as many as those being tried. Now the ratio is more than sixteen to one.
One doesnt need to do the math to know that some of the prisoners trying to kill themselves are not enemy combatants, or suspected terrorists, or militants, or any of the phrases we turn to when we are scared and give up on courts. The military hasnt released the names of all the hunger-striking prisoners, but, as Carol Rosenberg of the Miami Herald, whose coverage of Guantánamo at every stage has been invaluable, notes, it does tell their lawyers when it decides they are weak enough to put on a list for force-feeding. There are twenty-one in that category now. (There are five who are hospitalizedthe top level in the hunger-strike hierarchy. The Herald has a timeline showing the growth of the strike.) Rosenberg learned the names of eight, four of whomJihad Diyab, a forty-one-year-old Syrian; Mohammed al-Hamiri, a Yemeni in his thirties; and Nabil Hadjarab, thirty-three, and Ahmed Bel Bacha, forty-four, both Algerianshad been cleared for release. The others hadnt been charged with any crime.
Is it any surprise, really, that they would prefer death rather than have no end in sight to their confinement? a reporter asked during a White House press conference on Tuesday. President Obama was aware: It is not a surprise to me that weve got problems in Guantánamo, he said, and then talked about how he said so back in 2007, and how that was part of his campaign, and how Congressional Republicans had made things very hard. They have; but he, for a couple of years now, has made it easy for them to do so. He said he knew that it wasnt sustainable.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
0 replies, 1537 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post