comsc US Politics | AMERICAblog News: How Can The "Worst of the Worst" Be Average Soldiers?
Join Email List | About us | AMERICAblog Gay
Elections | Economic Crisis | Jobs | TSA | Limbaugh | Fun Stuff

How Can The "Worst of the Worst" Be Average Soldiers?

| Reddit | Tumblr | Digg | FARK

Pakistan -- a corrupt military dictatorship not known for its softness -- released 17 former prisoners of Gunatanamo Bay and said they had absolutely nothing to do with terrorism. Yes, hundreds of Pakistanis went to Afghanistan to fight alongside the Taliban. That certainly makes them enemy combatants (and therefore appropriate to be held under the Geneva Convention). But that doesn't make them terrorists. But Bush insisted that ONLY the "worst of the worst" would go to Guantanamo Bay -- do foot soldiers with no connection to terrorism and with no reasonable expectation of having any useful evidence count as the worst of the worst? Of course not. Are they are buddies or purely innocent? No, they are soldiers who fought on the other side in a war. They were on the wrong side, the losing side and they were supporting a nasty government. But they and countless others who weren't even soldiers -- just innocent villagers handed over by tribal chiefs looking to score a bounty from the US -- make a mockery of Bush's claims about Guantanamo Bay. You can never ignore the rule of law and expect decency and fairness to prevail. It undermines everything the US stands for and everything we are supposedly fighting in the war on terror.

blog comments powered by Disqus