Military Under Fire For Not Starving Detainees
Posted on February 9, 2006
United States military authorities have taken tougher measures to force-feed detainees engaged in hunger strikes at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, after concluding that some were determined to commit suicide to protest their indefinite confinement, military officials have said.
In recent weeks, the officials said, guards have begun strapping recalcitrant detainees into “restraint chairs,” sometimes for hours a day, to feed them through tubes and prevent them from deliberately vomiting afterward. Detainees who refuse to eat have also been placed in isolation for extended periods in what the officials said was an effort to keep them from being encouraged by other hunger strikers.
The measures appear to have had drastic effects. The chief military spokesman at Guantánamo, Lt. Col. Jeremy M. Martin, said yesterday that the number of detainees on hunger strike had dropped to 4 from 84 at the end of December.
Some officials said the new actions reflected concern at Guantánamo and the Pentagon that the protests were becoming difficult to control and that the death of one or more prisoners could intensify international criticism of the detention center. Colonel Martin said force-feeding was carried out “in a humane and compassionate manner” and only when necessary to keep the prisoners alive. H e said in a statement that “a restraint system to aid detainee feeding” was being used but refused to answer questions about the restraint chairs.
Lawyers who have visited clients in recent weeks criticized the latest measures, particularly the use of the restraint chair, as abusive.
This is actually recycled, and dated news. Apparantly the NY Times wants to stir up a stink over it. It is quite ridiculous. The ACLU, and media can’t help themselves when it comes to smearing our military. Your damned if you do, and your damned it you don’t. I think we should let them starve themselves, but that is just because I’m a cruel hearted guy. Can you imagine the cries of abuse if we were to let them starve? One would then lie to some ACLU lawyer that they were not being fed, and it would be all over the front pages.
Michelle Malkin sums it up nicely.
If we let these enemy combatants waging publicity-seeking hunger strikes starve themselves to death, we’re torturers of the worst kind.
If we force them to eat and save their lives, we’re torturers of the worst kind.
You can’t win.
» Filed Under ACLU, News, War On Terror
Trackback URL
Comments
18 Responses to “Military Under Fire For Not Starving Detainees”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Did you read the article? Where does the NY Times take a position on letting detainees starve themselves? There were a few quotes in favor of it, and a few quotes not in favor of it. What’s that called again? Oh yeah: balance.
I read the article, and while it comes across balanced, it isn’t really news since we new about this back in November. Why they decided to recycle it is my question. Either way, it isn’t so much the NY Times I have a problem with, but the stupid lawyers that want to bash the military over it.
Related Post:
Oh the Horror! U.S. Won’t Let Detainees Commit Suicide!
http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/2006/02/oh_the_horror_u.html
Will the abuse of Guantanamo detainees never end?
It is the new Catch Twenty Two.
If you are crazy, but realize you are crazy, you cannot be crazy, even if you are crazy. The reason is because only a sane person has the ability to realize that they are insane.
Letting people starve themselves to death is cruel and inhumane, even though they want to die. Force feeding them is cruel and inhumane to keep them alive, even if they want to die.
Pardon me for stating the obvious, but really, it sometimes is helpful.
First the NYT and their radical left have no concern whatsoever about the welfare of the ememy at Gitmo. Their objective is to damage President Bush, hurt the war effort, and get a left wing Congress and President back in power. That way the NYT keeps its power.
Second, the radical left are still living in a pre-internet world where they spoke the TRVTH and we all had to fall in line. Those days are over, thank God. More blogs, more blogs!
Finally, the radical left see there are rapid changes occurring in our world and they want to affect it as best they can without risking their life or money. They know the violent Muslims are against everything free and decent in the West. But, they are also terrified of offending people who fight back with bombs and bullets. So, like most bullies they attack who they think won’t fight back.
This is why many of us are disappointed in President Bush. Why does he still fawn over the radical left and its MSM? He only demeans himself and the office of the president in going to things like the King funeral where radicals like Jimmy Carter can attack him. Mr. Bush, a visit by the President is still a great honor. Please use it wisely and for those have earned it.
Let them starve.
Who are we to force them to eat?
Eating is, after all, heroic, life saving measures….ask Terri Schiavo.
Put them in a room with access to fresh food at all times…pipe in the kitchen scents and lace the water with appetite enhancing drugs….see how long they can hold out then.
Test their will.
But don’t force feed them.
Let them starve.
I agree they don’t want to eat who cares. That is less of them we have to put up with. Are we supposed to care if they eat or not?
You have GOT to be kidding. Thanks for posting this. I’m on liberal overload today. They just cannot stop being idiots.
Is it not standard policy in ALL cases to force-feed prisoners engaged in hunger strikes? If this is the policy in other cases, then it should be the case in Guantanamo. What bothers me are the undocumented claims that some vague “left wing conspiracy” is criticizing the Administration for force-feeding the prisoners and at the same time criticizing the Administration for NOT force-feeding the prisoners. Could we please get our story straight? Who is issuing these criticisms? Can somebody offer direct quotes? And are such criticisms widespread, or are they confined to a few odd people? What have leading Democratic Senators said on this issue? Is this a right-wing version of the current Islamic manufactured outrage over the Danish cartoons?
OK so since this clearly a damned if u , damned if u dont situation..what exactly is their idea of a solution?..o wait they have none…jus more rocks to throw..ugh.
I outlined the solution…place in front of them the constant temptation of food.
If their will is strong enough to starve themselves to death who are we to take away their freedom to do that?
Angel, when you ask, “what exactly is their idea of a solution?”…
Who is “they”?
I still say we are missing an excellent tax saving opportunity. I say we put them in tiger cages and parade them down the main streets of every American city and town starting with New York. And if they refuse to eat, stick them with a tranquilizer and force feed them while they are out. Remember, they see death at the hands of the enemy as heroic. We need to keep them alive and humiliated.
After the parade, set up a side-wall freak show on the edge of town in the manner of the old Circuses and charge a fee for Americans to go in and laugh at the poor caged diaperheads.
Gribbit, what policy benefits will your proposal provide the USA with? Will it inspire our friends to provide us with more support? Will it lead our enemies to desist in their attacks upon our troops in Iraq?
I think Gribbit’s proposal is kinder than holding someone hostage and sawing off their head on TV when nobody will negotiate with you….a parade of our vanquished foes would be very entertaining, and a pay-per-view event where an auction winner got to shoot them with pepper filled paint balls could offset the costs of keeping these animals in the New Jihadi Zoo.
Policy Benefits? Who cares. Humiliating those terrorists and preventing them from achieving their goals of dieing in the Jihad as martyrs is more important. We win when they are humbled. That is the problem, they have had little to no humility in their existance. It’s time they learn some.
The fear of being a side show freak is what prompted Hitler to kill himself. Just keep that in mind.
OK, Gribbit, so you say that you don’t care about any policy costs or benefits of your proposal; you propose this as a means of personal revenge, a form of entertainment to make you feel better. And if it causes more American soldiers to die in Iraq, that’s not your primary concern. Is that the idea? Or am I misinterpreting you?
“And if it causes more American soldiers to die in Iraq, that’s not your primary concern.”
Left-wing media misinformation and baseless allegation gets American soldiers killed in Iraq. Not any policy.