5
5
0
MY COMMENT:
The US military detention operation at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is NOT unlawful. If it were, it would not exist. You're frustrated at what you say is a "lack of transparency" because only the ICRC are given the access you desire, and they are sworn to secrecy and never make reports public. Of course they do this to maintain a neutral and purely humanitarian and non-political reputation, which keeps them safe and productive. You would compromise that for the sake of voyeurism. The truth is that none of the detainees ever held there were entitled to extra legal privileges, and even though they were not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions, the US treats them within the "spirit of Geneva," as per Donald Rumsfeld, then Secretary of Defense in 2002. Detainees are treated with dignity and respect (not torture), and they receive FREE Quran's, prayer rugs/beads, halal and special holy Muslim holiday meals, directions to Mecca, services of a US military Muslim chaplain, white robes, beards, call to prayer, world class health, dental and eye care, recreation, library services, video games, TV, DVD's, other entertainment and sports. 731 detainees have been RELEASED from Gitmo, and NONE have been beheaded, executed, blown up, hacked to death, dragged naked and lifeless through the streets, drowned or burned alive, all things our enemies have done to us and/or our allies. Your myths about Gitmo are fading in the light of REAL information. There is no moral comparison between Gitmo and how our enemies treat their captives. Sincerely, Montgomery J. Granger, Major, US Army, Retired; former ranking US Army Medical Department officer with the Joint Detainee Operations Group, Joint Task Force 160, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, 2002. Author: Saving Grace t Guantanamo Bay: A Memoir of a Citizen Warrior."
The US military detention operation at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is NOT unlawful. If it were, it would not exist. You're frustrated at what you say is a "lack of transparency" because only the ICRC are given the access you desire, and they are sworn to secrecy and never make reports public. Of course they do this to maintain a neutral and purely humanitarian and non-political reputation, which keeps them safe and productive. You would compromise that for the sake of voyeurism. The truth is that none of the detainees ever held there were entitled to extra legal privileges, and even though they were not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions, the US treats them within the "spirit of Geneva," as per Donald Rumsfeld, then Secretary of Defense in 2002. Detainees are treated with dignity and respect (not torture), and they receive FREE Quran's, prayer rugs/beads, halal and special holy Muslim holiday meals, directions to Mecca, services of a US military Muslim chaplain, white robes, beards, call to prayer, world class health, dental and eye care, recreation, library services, video games, TV, DVD's, other entertainment and sports. 731 detainees have been RELEASED from Gitmo, and NONE have been beheaded, executed, blown up, hacked to death, dragged naked and lifeless through the streets, drowned or burned alive, all things our enemies have done to us and/or our allies. Your myths about Gitmo are fading in the light of REAL information. There is no moral comparison between Gitmo and how our enemies treat their captives. Sincerely, Montgomery J. Granger, Major, US Army, Retired; former ranking US Army Medical Department officer with the Joint Detainee Operations Group, Joint Task Force 160, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, 2002. Author: Saving Grace t Guantanamo Bay: A Memoir of a Citizen Warrior."
American Civil Liberties Union
Posted from aclu.org
Guantanamo Bay
Law
Refugees
Edited 5 y ago
Posted 5 y ago
Responses: 5
4
4
0
The ACLU has a long history of twisting the truth to meet their agenda. Anything they say should always be viewed very critically.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
Boy, talk about comparing apples to oranges--no, not even that close, to rocks.
The mission of the Red Cross is completely different from the mission of the ACLU. The Red Cross monitors the conditions of prisoners and provides reports to the detaining country, just like they have always done. A corollary mission to allow prisoners to remain in contact with their families.
The ACLU has a different mission, which is to ensure that the civil liberties of persons under the jurisdiction of the United States is protected. And, based on the fact the there have been three times that cases went to the Supreme Court on prisoner rights, and the government lost each and every time shows that there is a need for oversight.
Unless, of course, the government has something to hide, some form of misconduct that they do not want to allow the public to know about.
The mission of the Red Cross is completely different from the mission of the ACLU. The Red Cross monitors the conditions of prisoners and provides reports to the detaining country, just like they have always done. A corollary mission to allow prisoners to remain in contact with their families.
The ACLU has a different mission, which is to ensure that the civil liberties of persons under the jurisdiction of the United States is protected. And, based on the fact the there have been three times that cases went to the Supreme Court on prisoner rights, and the government lost each and every time shows that there is a need for oversight.
Unless, of course, the government has something to hide, some form of misconduct that they do not want to allow the public to know about.
(3)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger
I believe in oversight. I believe in the mission of the ACLU, even though I also believe the ACLU propagates a political agenda. I certainly believe in the mission of the ICRC. I worked with ICRC physicians at Gitmo and later in Iraq. Both times I was told that "No one does [detention operations] better than the US." Since arriving at Gitmo in early 2002, I have always been disappointed in the legal proceedings. As a coach, and former official and director of athletics on the civilian side, I have always appreciated fair play and CONSISTENT calls on the court and field. There has been nothing consistent about the legal morass that is the US military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. We can't seem to get out of our own way. I feel it's a shame we couldn't just follow the established law for dealing with unlawful combatants at the time. Nothing about 9/11 and other attacks on innocents by Islamist terrorists ever seemed as though they should be afforded any extra legal privileges. The goal posts were moved several times in their favor, for no other apparent reason than it was politically expedient at the time. Now what?
(1)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
MAJ Montgomery Granger - the problem is that the government was not following established law for dealing with prisoners, which is why SCOTUS stepped in on three separate times to tell the government that they were doing it wrong.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
The intent of this op-ed is right on. Immigrants should NOT be sent to Gitmo, period! We do not need to appear to be setting up a concentration camp to deal with out immigrant problems.
If there is a back-log, appoint more judges. But under no circumstances should they be sent to Gitmo or anything else like that.
If there is a back-log, appoint more judges. But under no circumstances should they be sent to Gitmo or anything else like that.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google