Over 130 Prisoners on Hunger Strike, Dozens Being Force Fed

[dixiegrrrrl]

This is huge, the numbers keep growing.
These guys are willing to die rather than endure being locked up forever with no charges, no trial.

The latest:
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/4/29/a_desperate_situation_at_guantnamo_over

[Newest Reality]

1. Well that's

a deplorable situation and a gross violation of human rights and what we consider decency.

Thank goodness we Americans aren't committing such atrocities...oh, wait.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

2. The torture described in the Constitution Project Task Force's Report on Detainee Treatment

can be read online here:
http://detaineetaskforce.org/read/
and downloaded from here:
http://detaineetaskforce.org/pdf/Full-Report.pdf

From the Report:

"Finding #16
For detainee hunger strikers, DOD operating procedures called for practices and
actions by medical professionals that were contrary to established medical and
professional ethical standards, including improper coercive involuntary feedings early
in the course of hunger strikes that, when resisted, were accomplished by physically
forced nasogastric tube feedings of detainees who were completely restrained.
Recommendations
(1) Forced feeding of detainees is a form of abuse and must end.
(2) The United States should adopt standards of care, policies and procedures regarding
detainees engaged in hunger strikes that are in keeping with established medical
professional ethical and care standards set forth as guidelines for the management of
hunger strikers in the 1991 World Medical Association Declaration of Malta on Hunger
Strikes (revised 1992 and 2006), including affirmation that force-feeding is prohibited
and that physicians should be responsible for evaluating, providing care for and advising
detainees engaged in hunger strikes. Physicians should follow professional ethical
standards including: the use of their independent medical judgment in assessing detainee
competence to make decisions; the maintenance of confidentiality between detainee and
physician; the provision of advice to detainees that is consistent with professional ethics
and standards; and, the use of advance directives.
(3) The Task Force recognizes that as a matter of public policy the United States has a
legitimate interest regarding detainees whom it is holding to prevent them from starving to
death. In doing so, it should respect the findings and processes reflected in the above-noted
standards and recommendations.

[librechik]

3. too bad the a-holes who could do something about G'tmo, i.e.the Republican House

don't give a shit.

Obama already said close the place down--they said no way in hell. And until we take back the House (which will happen on the 10th of Never, thanks to gerrymandering) there's nothing Democrats can do about it.

Send a postcard or fax to your Republican Congressman. A postcard bearing the picture of someone being forcefed would be appropriate, I think.

[NCTraveler]

4. I don't think Obama....

I don't think Obama needs congress to relocate/release individuals who are not charged with any crime. Why are we holding people, indefinitely, without charges. Obama does not need congress to release these men.

[librechik]

7. yeah, NO. You can't relocate these guys without money. TONS of money. Obama doesn't have that power.

Only the House (which writes the checks) can make it happen. And they'll block it if only to make Obama look bad.

Not to me. Obama already ordered them released--DOJ says no reason to hold most of them.

It can't happen without Republicans voting to fund a program. And they won't even debate it. THEY are doing this, no one else.

[NCTraveler]

12. Obama can release persons who are not charged.

He does not need congressional approval.

[librechik]

22. he has done that. For most of them.

But others are in charge of making it happen. MONEY IS NEEDED AND ONLY THE HOUSE CAN PROVIDE THAT.

And they aren't co-operating.

[former9thward]

28. Untrue.

Money has nothing to do with releasing people. That is up to the DoJ. The money issue is whether to keep Gitmo open. They could keep the prison open without a single person in it. Obama wanted them transferred to another prison in the U.S. That meant nothing about releasing them. The vast majority have been released. Bush released 500 and Obama has released 113. There are 166 left.

http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/USLS-Fact-Sheet-Gitmo-Numbers.pdf

[AnotherMcIntosh]

29. Gitmo is open to the sea. If Obama really wants to do something, such as releasing those

who the Obama Administration has determined to not be terrorists, he could invite other countries to come ashore and take the now-Gitmo prisoners with them.

Gitmo also has a large gate to Cuban soil. If he really wanted to do what you apparently believe that he wants to do, he could open the gate.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

6. What a pity that Obama cares so much but just doesn't have the power to do anything.

Poor, weak Obama.

[librechik]

9. He can't order the House to budget for removal/ relocation of the prisoners.

And that will require million$$$$. He ordered it to close. What's he supposed to do, pay for it out of his own pocket? Would that satisfy you?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

10. Just too weak? What a shame.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. But, he could order the DOJ to arrest the torturers and bring them to trial.

[librechik]

14. force feeding is obviously torture--but try proving it in court.

not sure who he's supposed to arrest--the medical staff at Gitmo? Or are you speaking more generally, say Rumsfeld and Cheney. I'm more and more persuaded that those vermin are better dealt with in an international court. Obama (as we can see with our own eyes) obviously doesn't have the power to do that.

It's a mess--but I also blame republicans for the legal mess. They have been tirelessly working over decades to undo our democracy, and we have been blind to it. Now we are virtually unable to stop them through the system. .

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. Anyone involved in torture should be arrested and tried.

If nothing else, as commander in chief, he can order the torture stopped.

[librechik]

20. which torture? I believe he already ordered torture to stop in our military--

at least as far as he was legally allowed. Again, the rules were changed--by Republicans. But history shows us that force feeding is not counted as torture for obvious reasons. of course IMO, it should be. But if Obama orders the forced feeding to stop, isn't he essentially ordering the deaths of these people?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. If it's not torture, then the perpetrators should have nothing to fear from a trial.

He has alternatives. Such as releasing them or bringing them to trial.

[librechik]

24. again, after ordering it's close, Obama's powers ended.

He can't executive order someone to trial. He can't order the DOJ to bring them to trial, they have already said no. Should he challenge them on the field of honor? How can Obama make them (the actual people who deal with the legal status of the prisoners) do what they are clearly not going to do? Arrest those people and send them to trial? They are the trial!

He can't order the release without a place to send them. He can't send them to anyplace in the US. (Republicans block that) He has limited powers elsewhere.

There are many things I disagree with Obama over. But I believe they have him boxed up here. And s just declaring he should do this or that doesn't mean it's possible from a procedural standpoint.

[rug]

25. I see. The DoJ is not part of the Executive branch.

[librechik]

31. IMO, the DOJ is a separate entity from the Obama administration

and feels privileged to defy his orders anytime they feel like it. He learned that quickly and now is too cautious with them. Doesn't want to wind up like JFK, go figure.

[rug]

32. What?!?

[librechik]

37. read Ron Susskind's "Confidence Men" if you think I'm wrong

those criminal RW burrowed-in assholes, because of their criminality, are far more powerful than Obama can dream of.

[rug]

39. It sounds more like a White House losing control than an independent DoJ.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/us/politics/suskinds-confidence-men-details-recession-dissension.html?_r=0

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

34. Or...he could fire Holder and put someone in the job who would.

The president of the United States is not some delicate flower with no power. He doesn't have to "close Guantanamo at great expense to transport a bunch of prisoners here to stand trial. Hell, he could hire a cruise ship on the money saved by skipping a few brunches and golf games.

[librechik]

36. would heartily endorse that strategy

good luck getting the Senate to confirm the new "tough" guy or gal which will be giving them oversight. Don't think so.

[L0oniX]

18. Don't promise to do what you can't or won't do. n/t

[librechik]

21. easy to say first day on the job.

how was he supposed to know it was a dead issue from day one and not issue the order to close Gitmo? He obviously thought that was the right thing to do, and never imagined that it would prove impossible with the corrupt Congress. I guess he should have known that in advance, since he's a time traveler.

[mike_c]

38. I'm tired of partisan arguing about whom to assign the blame....

Guantanamo is America's shame. It brings shame to us all, equally. I heard the lawyer representing 11 of the inmates on Democracy Now! this morning lamenting as long as Obama spends time practicing his WH Correspondent's dinner jokes instead of trying to resolve the Guantanamo issue there will be no progress toward erasing that shame. The lawyer also said that he is convinced that some inmates will die, that the U.S. government has no interest in preventing their deaths. He described the forced feeding using the largest size tube available just to make it hurt more. In our names.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. No doubt the DOJ will bring those pepetrating the torture to justice.

Right after they're awarded medals for their efforts.

[KG]

8. the US gleefully joins the pantheon of stinking torture states

[ladjf]

13. What a sordid, cruel mess! Let those men go. Close the prison. nt

[L0oniX]

16. I am sure to get a TS or at least get hidden if I said what I think about Obama...

and his promises. He got 4 votes from me and my wife and I feel like I have been taken for a sucker. Every POTUS does something good however small that may be but this guy was going to do some things for us for a "change" and only made it worse than its ever been for us and not the banksters or corporations. How anyone can still call him a honourable core Democrat is just beyond me. What a mockery of the justice system and rule of law from Guantanamo to Wall Street and war criminals run wild.

[Mnemosyne]

17. Yeah, Constitutional lawyer.

And that was the only reason I gave him my vote, thought it might matter.

[grahamhgreen]

19. They so bad, we CAN'T bring them to trial!

[sabrina 1]

26. Why is that human rights crime still standing? Most of the detainees there have been

cleared for release. What is WRONG with this country??

Take them out of there, provide temporary, humane housing for them while they wait to be returned, if there is some reason for these criminal delays, to their own countries.

This should shock the conscience of anyone calling themselves a human being.

[Joseph Ledger]

27. Seems like something of a self-correcting problem in the long run.

Prisoner: I refuse to eat!

Guard: (shrugs) Suits me.

[GitRDun]

30. Obama cannot escape culpability here.

He has the power of the bully pulpit to highlight the hunger strikes and get the story in the main stream and put pressure on Congress to act.

Get an ally to transport releasable prisoners out...you don't need money, just a will to get something done.

He's a good man standing by while this travesty happens..he is part of the problem.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

33. Forced feeding is a bad sign

I remember another instance of forced feeding which precipitated the 19th Amendment.

On October 17, Alice Paul was sentenced to seven months and on October 30 began a hunger strike, but after a few days prison authorities began to force feed her. After years of opposition, Wilson changed his position in 1918 to advocate women's suffrage as a war measure.

Lucy Burns, Anne Henrietta Martin, Alice Paul, Doris Stevens and Elizabeth Selden Rogers all spent time at the Occoquan Work House.

In a protest of the conditions in Occoquan, Paul commenced a hunger strike, which led to her being moved to the prison’s psychiatric ward and force-fed raw eggs through a feeding tube. "Seems almost unthinkable now, doesn’t it?" Paul told an interviewer from American Heritage when asked about the forced feeding. "It was shocking that a government of men could look with such extreme contempt on a movement that was asking nothing except such a simple little thing as the right to vote."

Paul and other suffragettes picketed outside the White House with banners containing slogans such as “Mr. President, How Long Must Women Wait For Liberty?”. Although the suffragettes protested peacefully, their protests were not always met kindly.

On the night of November 15, 1917, known as the Night of Terror, a group of protesters was beaten by the police. Many women were beaten to the point of unconsciousness, while others received concussions, lacerations, and broken ribs. None of them received medical assistance. Despite the brutality of the intervention, Paul remained undiscouraged.

[Comrade Grumpy]

40. Kick for more attention to the abomination that is Guantanamo.