Gitmo or Gitno?

In 2002, a detention camp and interrogation facility was established on the oldest overseas U.S Naval Base, Guantanamo Bay (or Gitmo). Originally leased as part of the Cuban-American Treaty of 1903, the base contains the only U.S military facility located in a country with which it has no diplomatic relations. Today, however, its use is an extremely controversial issue. Of course, there is no mystery as to why Guantanamo Bay was chosen, instead of somewhere on U.S land. It isn’t “Hawaii Bay” facility for a reason: the constitution. The U.S gets away with bending the rules every which way, constitutional laws alike, but the level of sheer disregard for human rights that occurs now at Guantanamo Bay is simply too obvious to get away with on U.S soil.

The truth is, if all of their claims of spreading democracy and believing in/defending the constitution- the entire reason for our Supreme Court and balance of power- are contingent upon land restrictions, then what does it really mean at all? Clearly the constitution isn’t a moral pull/agreement or any true deep-seeded belief at all costs, but rather a pesky set of laws that can be tweaked and tricked in order to get whatever benefits the government at any cost. America apparently doesn’t agree that these laws and rights should be extended to all humans, but rather only those who are lucky enough to have citizenship ( including the various levels) or be on U.S soil in order to enjoy it. Ok, so it’s politics right? There’s always a need to bend the rules (“for the sake of ‘we, the people’”), there’s never any real moral, it’s all a game, it’s revolting, we get it.

Human Rights

Then of course there is the argument that the prisoners have lost their rights because of the heinous crimes they’ve committed, not unlike the way felons and criminals in the U.S are stripped of certain freedoms. Honestly. at least if Guantanamo detainees were given those same restrictions as U.S felons, it would be exponentially more tolerable when compared with realities like statistics showing that a large number of Guantanamo Bay detainees have never held trial, never had a chance to defend themselves and never been proven of a single crime in any legal way. This reflects a cornerstone of American justice that we learn early on, everyone is guilty until proven innocent. Right? Right.

With sheer disregard to legal writ such as habeas corpus or protection under the Geneva Convention, it is not as if these prisoners are awaiting trial or on some long list to eventually see a judge, but rather there aren’t any concrete plans or intentions whatsoever of allowing them these basic U.S rights. Even the way they are detained violates multiple laws (habeas corpus ensures that situations be assessed as to whether there is any authority to detain the individual at all, and if not, that individual shall be released). It is entirely shameful, biased, hypocritical and still happening right now. That shame falls fully on the shoulders of the Stars and the Stripes, the self-proclaimed poster boy of freedom, equality and democracy.

Now come the arguments that these criminals/ terrorists are not Americans and that they do not have good intentions towards the U.S., so there is no need for them to be afforded these rights. Once again, holding a piece of paper documenting citizenship is apparently the justification for rights. One would think a country adopts a constitution because it believes it to be the best set of governance for people (i.e in any situation), not only individuals residing within its borders.Yet, somehow, whenever there’s oil involved we’ll go ahead and call it a fight for freeing citizens of other countries now. To the argument about the detainees not having “good intentions” or being “terrorists”, once again a majority of inmates haven’t held trial or been proven of anything.Take a look at the infamous case of...continue reading

N.W.S