that there are people like Michael ratner who will fight for the rights of individuals. I'm also glad that there are people who will work to safeguard the country like those working and running Guantanomo.

Torture. Secret prisons. Death camps. (Gitmo has an execution chamber now - guess they don't let the lawyers see that!) Laws changed to accomodate previous illegalities.

Is it fascism yet?

I haven't heard any Democrats talking about rescinding the laws that Congress passed to make Gitmo "legit." Does their silence imply consent?

Is it fascism yet?

"Terrorists are not human, so human rights don't apply." This rationale, espoused by the Bush administration and many Americans, has a familiar ring to it. I've heard this "not human, therefore no rights" argument before. Perhaps Karl Rove can get someone in Hollywood to produce a propaganda piece showing terrorists' rat-like ways, or how they wait, like ravenous dogs at the door, for our children.

Is it fascism yet?

The government is peeping into our mail, reading our email, listening to our phone calls. The President routinely declares his intent to ignore or disobey law. Congress murmurs, "There's nothing we can do."

Is it fascism yet?

Today what is illegal will be legal tomorrow perhaps. Perhaps what is legal today will be a crime tomorrow. Today's human is tomorrow's animal. Who knows?

Truth and law appear to be outdated concepts. Justice, government, the Constitution - these are all just relics of the past. Why cling to them? The glory of empire calls. Amerika uber alles.

I'm also glad that there are people who will work to safeguard the country like those working and running Guantanomo.

-- joe

Joe, explain to me, a clueless NYC liberal not in touch with anything even resembling the real world, where the causal/logical connection lies between "running Guantanamo" and "safeguarding the country." That's the confusing part for me.

The DOD was originally planning on moving forward with the $125 million courthouse at Guantánamo. After the passage of the MCA, the DOD informed Congress that to build this courthouse, it was going to draw from already authorized funds, thereby bypassing explicit Congressional approval.

The DOD has since, however, informed Congress that it has postponed any plans to construct a courthouse until formal Congressional approval is secured. With the shift in Congressional power, this is unlikely.

because some of the people there deserve to be there and they want to hurt us.

Joe: Yes, a lot of people in Guantanamo would undoubtedly love to see all Americans dead -- even though they didn't feel that way before they were swept up and sent to Cuba. If we let most of them out now, they'll probably go straight to the nearest Al Qaeda recruiting camp, and we have absolutely no one to blame for it but ourselves. See the article yesterday about the bloody tragedy of revenge that has played out since 9/11 for futher explanation.

Lecastor...

because some of the people there deserve to be there and they want to hurt us.

-- joe

(1) Ah, so even Joe admits that only SOME of the people are problematic. What about the others?

(2) Do you believe in trials and juries and all that stuff? If you don't, maybe you belong in Gitmo too, since you're diametrically opposed to American ideals. And if you do, how do you support Gitmo?

(3) There are lots of people out there in the world who may want to "hurt us." Should be put them all in Gitmo, without trial, proof, anything like that, indefinitely?

(4) what exactly is "hurt us" mean here? The situation, i think you realize, is much more complicated than that. Americans want to hurt Iraqi insurgents, so would the insurgents be justified in capturing Americans and putting them into a detention center with no due process possibly for the rest of their lives? You and I agree that that is not acceptable. so, "they want to hurt us" is not enough of that kind of treatment.

(5) The existence of Gitmo, the publicity from it, has made us less safe. If there are truly bad people there, then we should charge them, convict them and put them into prison. If there is not enough evidence to charge and convict them, then they shouldn't be imprisoned. It's a basic principle of justice. If we could charge and convict people, and the release the rest, we would eliminate this stain on our reputation. No one believes the US stands for human rights any more -- everyone is cynical, other countries don't trust us or take us seriously. Surely that does not help fight international terrorism.

The only reason that there is a "Sisyphean struggle" over Guantanamo is that BOTH sides on this issue cannot admit that there is a fundamental flaw in the current system to deal with an non-governmental international militia. Is this a police problem, is this a military problem or is this something else? Shoehorning the Geneva Conventions into this "war" just makes it worse, since they were never meant to deal with a situation like this - they were designed for conventional or guerrilla war.

The fundamental problem is that modern technology has enabled such potential destructive power into the hands of small groups that no government can afford to ignore the threat. But again - with groups that operate internationally - is it a police or a military problem? With such potential destruction - governments (read politicians) are going to act preemptively because they would be crucified if they don't - or act like they do not.

The trick is how to keep this from becoming Big Brother.

Let's be blunt - the only realistic alternative to Guantanamo at this time is battlefield executions - no prisoners to handle. But that is not going to happen as long as anyone thinks that they can pry, coerce or wear down information from one of these people.

And let's also be blunt - many of the people in Guantanamo were just scooped up and dumped there because there was no other place. Many there deserve it - and many probabaly do - the Tipton 3 and their lame "search for the perfect naan" fall into that category. But there are those that do not.

So - can someone try to design and implement a new international code on how to deal with this situation - this grey area that so badly needs some hard and fast rules? Because until that happens - places like Guantanamo are going to exist - whatever administration is in power. and it will be a lot longer than 5 years before the situation on these people is resolved.