Hunger Strike at Guantanamo Bay Continues, Obviously

No sign of policy changes after President Obama's renewed rhetoric

Reason 24/7

So apparently some people thought President Obama's statement on the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay would be enough to stop the hunger strike there.

From the AP:

The Guantanamo Bay hunger strike is apparently still on despite President Barack Obama's renewed vow on closing the prison on the U.S. base in Cuba.

A U.S. military spokesman says there are still 100 prisoners refusing to eat as of Wednesday. Lt. Col. Samuel House says 23 are being force fed to prevent starvation.

President Obama's (renewed) commitment to closing Guantanamo Bay remains highly suspect. Former prisoners, meanwhile, describe the military's force feeding techniques as torture. There has been no policy change since the president spoke about Gitmo yesterday.

Follow these stories and more at Reason 24/7 and don't forget you can e-mail stories to us at [e-mail] and tweet us at @reason247.

Comments

[LTC(ret) John]

"Former prisoners, meanwhile, describe the military's force feeding techniques as torture."

OK, so they starve and its torture/inhumane as well. Everything is alleged as torture there.

Should they tickle them and pop a bit of ice cream in their mouths when they laugh?

But seriously, I think they could be shipped back to their points of origin...not that that is much of an option. Ask a Uighur.

[$park?]

not that that is much of an option

Why?

[LTC(ret) John]

The places they would be returned would do worse, or just kill them outright (hence the Uighur reference - China was salivating at the chance to make examples of them).
If they are to be released, as in "go forth and terrorista #1 no more!" I would hope we would let them go to a third country that would shelter them.

[$park?]

Why is it our problem what happens to them after they're set free? Drive up, pitch them out the door, drive away.

[Austrian Anarchy]

If they wish to starve, that right should be respected, even as prisoners. Any prisoner or free man has this right.

[$park?]

Lt. Col. Samuel House says 23 are being force fed to prevent starvation.

Why?

[Hugh Akston]

Waterboarding an emaciated corpse just isn't the same.

[Hugh Akston]

It's almost as though the detainees don't believe the Presidents promises.

[db]

I bet they'd still vote for him.

The Onion needs to get on this right now.

[Ed]

+1000

[Jerryskids]

I was going to say that the detainees seem to be immune to his Jedi mind-meld trick that convinces normal people that they have actually witnessed Obama do what he merely says he intends to do.

[Rich]

"The notion that we're going to continue to keep over a hundred individuals in a no man's land in perpetuity," [Obama said], "is contrary to who we are"

Very well, Mr. President, just drop the "in a no man's land" part. 8-(

[entropy]

This is all because of that damned sequester. I tried to tell Habib we can't afford the frosted pop tarts anymore and he'll have to make due with regular, but he won't listen!

[Jerryskids]

Seriously though, can't Obama - as head of the executive branch and CinC - simply order the military and whatever other agencies are involved to find some other place for the detainees and order the Justice Department to either produce charges or prepare to release the detainees? Is being able to blame those nasty Republicans for obstructing his intent to close Gitmo more important than actually stopping fundamental human rights violations?

It's not like 'closing Gitmo' is the isue here, the issue is what's being done in Gitmo. I don't give a rat's ass if Gitmo gets closed or not, I don't want my government to be disappearing undesirables like this is Brazil. I don't think Obama can tell Congress what it can and cannot appropriate funds for but I certainly think he can tell the people he does legitimately boss around to do their jobs.