Judge turns down bid to end Guantánamo force-feeding
Source: Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- A federal judge Tuesday turned down a bid by three Guantánamo Bay detainees on a hunger strike to stop the government from force-feeding them.
Judge Rosemary M. Collyer ruled that she doesn't have jurisdiction in the case, because Congress has removed Guantánamo detainees' treatment and conditions of confinement from the purview of federal courts. She said there was "nothing so shocking or inhumane in the treatment" that would raise a constitutional concern.
Collyer wrote that even if she did have jurisdiction, she would deny the detainees' motion for an injunction.
While the effort is framed as a motion to stop force-feeding, the prisoners' "real complaint is that the United States is not allowing them to commit suicide by starvation," she wrote. She said that the United States cannot allow a person in custody to die of self-inflicted starvation, and that numerous courts have recognized the government's duty to prevent suicide and to provide life-saving nutritional and medical care to people in custody.
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/16/3502724/judge-turns-down-bid-to-end-gitmo.html
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)"that numerous courts have recognized the government's duty to prevent suicide and to provide life-saving nutritional and medical care to people in custody."
Would they insist that the inmates have open heart surgery for some malady? What about an organ transplant? Would the court also insist that an inmate be forced to undergo the ravages of chemotherapy if the inmate was opposed on personal or religious grounds?
The judge seems to be quite comfortable with torture. If it were a just world the judge would have to witness the forced feeding of the inmates.
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)The force feedings are being done to stop the prisoners from starving to death.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)I'll come over to your place, grab you in the middle of the night, tie a bag around your head, fly you thousands of miles from everything you know, imprison you for years with no trial or charges, forcibly restrain you, and then ram a tube down your throat against your will. Then you can tell me whether it's torture or not.
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)Here is a description from a doctor who has done thousands of these procedures.
"The procedure is this: after squirting a lubricant into one nostril, a two-foot long clear plastic tube of varying caliber, usually about as thick around as fat pencil, is snaked through the nose, down the back of the throat, and into the stomach. An X-ray is then performed to make certain the tube is placed correctly into the stomach or small intestine and not into the lung. Once confirmed, a liquid diet can be delivered and up to 2,000 calories a day providedmore than enough to keep a person alive.
Without question, it is the most painful procedure doctors routinely inflict on conscious patients. The noseas anyone knows who ever has received a stinger from an errant baseballhas countless pain fibers. Some patients may scream and gasp as the tube is introduced; the tear ducts well up and overflow; the urge to sneeze or cough or vomit is often uncontrollable. A paper cup of water with a bent straw is placed before the frantic and miserable patient and all present implore him to Sip! Sip! in hopes of facilitating tube passage past the glottis and into the esophagus and stomach.
The procedure is, in a word, barbaric. And thats when we are trying to be nice."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/02/the-writhing-miserable-reality-of-force-feeding-at-guant-namo-bay.html
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/07/10/200751527/why-doctors-oppose-force-feeding-guantanamo-hunger-strikers
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)You? American pride?
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)FirstLight
(13,364 posts)what the HELL is wrong with this country? Those men have NO rights, not even to die... seriously, they have been in legal no man's land for a decade and they want OUT, I think they deserve to have the dignity to make that choice.
But if every inmate in Gitmo was to commit suicide, whether this way or by some other means, then there wouldn't be anyone left to torture.
Yes, Mr. President...YOU said you would CLOSE this horrific place during your FIRST TERM... remember?
former9thward
(32,082 posts)Gitmo is just a bunch of buildings. The issue is charge and try these people or release them. They can be released whether Gitmo stays open or not.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)"Judge Rosemary M. Collyer ruled that she doesn't have jurisdiction in the case, because Congress has removed Guantánamo detainees' treatment and conditions of confinement from the purview of federal courts."
former9thward
(32,082 posts)The federal courts have every right to try them for whatever crimes they are charged with. That is the problem, the U.S. refuses to charge them with anything and they refuse to release them.
SamKnause
(13,110 posts)The government of the United States, with the backing of its military machine are the number one threat to this planet and its inhabitants.
The United States is a rogue nation.
The United States has decided it is above the law.
Anything the United States has done in foreign countries, or to the people in foreign countries, it will do at home and to its own citizens.
Empire building is a dirty business and it is evident the United States government is up to the task.
The Stranger
(11,297 posts)Appointed by George W. Bush to the bench.
The Stranger
(11,297 posts)On January 13, 2010, the American Civil Liberties Union and American Civil Liberties Union Foundation (collectively, the ACLU) submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), seeking records pertaining to the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) -- commonly referred to asdrones . . . -- by the CIA and the Armed Forces for the purpose of killing targeted individuals.
. . . .
On September 9, 2011, the district court granted the CIAs motion for summary judgment. Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Dept of Justice, 808 F. Supp. 2d 280, 284 (D.D.C. 2011). The court agreed with the CIA that the existence vel non of responsive records was exempt under both Exemptions 1 and 3, and that there had been no official acknowledgment sufficient to override those exemptions. As a consequence, the court held, the CIA was not required to confirm or deny that it had any responsive records, let alone describe any specific documents it might have or explain why any such documents were exempt from disclosure. The ACLU filed a timely appeal.
American Civil Liberties Union v. Central Intelligence Agency, No. 1:10-CV-00436; in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)Socal31
(2,484 posts)This ball was dropped years ago, and nobody knows what to do.
If they are guilty, they should be in a US Federal Prison. If they are not, they should have been sent home. Now, even the innocent ones surely harbor insane resentment to this country, and who can blame them.
That is our problem as a country, not the prisoners'. Something needs to be done.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Just in case any Dems feel the need to defend this.
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)forestpath
(3,102 posts)Joe Hyperion
(58 posts)That is their day of fast. It was an insensitive move in my view.
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)So they can be the next "second-in-line" in Yemen and be killed there.