'I am asking for anyone out there to talk about what’s going on here. To ask why Trump is letting us slowly die. I don’t have many days left."
I assume he is on a hunger strike so as to get some attention to his plight. American forces, who detain him illegally, have shown that they won’t give him any attention regardless of whether he dies of hunger or old age. Once all of the inmates die there, the U.S. is hoping that Americans will forget about this monument to injustice and wait for the next influx of innocent inmates when the country launches another illegal war.
The person in charge of Guantanamo has been hand picked clearly for his racist views and lack of empathy for human beings. The same types were chosen by Hitler to start up his Gestapo. No matter what atrocities are ordered in Guantanamo, every soldier is expected to never question their orders and to carry out the inhumane treatment or expect consequences for disobeying a direct order.
By the time they start sending Americans to Guantanamo, it will be too late to protest anything.
I found this confusing too. Of course, I don’t expect someone who hasn’t eaten for 3 weeks to be coherent (I couldn’t even make it to 5 days back when I was interested in fasting in my 30s), but his lawyer could have explained things better.
All of us know the whole Guantanamo thing is a mess - innocent people with no rights, some guilty people probably who are nevertheless treated in ways that are against our rules, and we aren’t welcome tenants to that land either (I don’t think Cuba has ever accepted the ridiculously small amount of rent we are offering). Completely unjust and completely against majority US interests. Will this type of thing ever stop? Obama sure didn’t seem like he was trying that hard to fulfill this particular campaign promise.
Maybe a refresher course on the Geneva Conventions, which we are clearly violating --making us guilty of war crimes. Whether this young man is fasting (his choice) or being deprived of nourishment ( torture) is not clear, but he obviously is stating that there is more going on than a hunger strike.
Convention I: This Convention protects wounded and infirm soldiers and medical personnel who are not taking active part in hostility against a Party. It ensures humane treatment without discrimination founded on race, color, sex, religion or faith, birth or wealth, etc. To that end, the Convention prohibits torture, assaults upon personal dignity, and execution without judgment (Article 3). It also grants the right to proper medical treatment and care.
Convention II: This agreement extended the protections described in the first Convention to shipwrecked soldiers and other naval forces, including special protections afforded to hospital ships.
Convention III: One of the treaties created during the 1949 Convention, this defined “Prisoner of War,” and accorded such prisoners proper and humane treatment as specified by the first Convention. Specifically, it required POWs to give only their names, ranks, and serial numbers to their captors. Nations party to the Convention may not use torture to extract information from POWs.
I emailed this plea to several international human rights bodies. We must demand not only an end to this abuse but international attention and pressure on the US regarding its flagrant abuse of human rights and breach of international law.
Maybe he likes cabrito.
No, he has no choice.
The evil US government - in our name - has deprived Mister Qasim of EVERY RIGHT and EVERY CHOICE he had.
His only choice is: To sit alone forever until death finally overtakes him, eating the food his torturers feed him, or: Stop eating that food, in a desperate effort to get ANYONE’s attention to the horrific crime being committed.
Some choice you insist he freely has.
You have a choice: Be a decent human being, or a smug arrogant turd. You delight in your cruel stance toward the world.
He has complete choice. Any time he wants to eat, he’s welcome to eat.
Hunger strikers are the moral equivalent of a small child saying “I’m going to hold my breathe until I die, and then you’ll feel sorry…”
If someone chooses to die for their beliefs, that’s entirely up to them. It’s no one else’s fault, and no one else should feel any of the blame.
The Geneva accords do not apply to unlawful combatants.
They have never been charged with a crime. They have never had a trial, and they never will. Choice, for them, is an illusion. Study the Uighurs and how they came to be falsely imprisoned at GB.
What an ignorant, asinine response. If he is to be believed, he’s one of the many innocent individuals grabbed by Afghanistan police/“authorities” and presented to the U.S. military as an unlawful combatant in exchange for a monetary reward. If you’ve read anything about the Afghanistan “war” over the past many years, you would understand that we paid many, many such rewards for many Arab males, just on the say so of questionable Afghanistan “authorities”. Do you think the Afghanistan police are any more truthful than the police in the U.S.? There are reports of them grabbing anyone whom they disliked and trading them to the U.S. for such a bounty.
This guy truly deserves the opportunity to prove he is who he says he is. He should have his day in court. We are an unlawful country to not provide him that right. At some point, all of this $hit is going to come back to bite all of us; and, that point is steadily drawing near.
Khalid Qassim has been held at Guantánamo Bay for 15 years. He has never been charged with a crime or had the chance to prove his innocence at trial. Khalid comes from a small town in Yemen and travelled to Afghanistan in search of work in 2000. He was detained by Afghan police and handed over the US forces in a case of mistaken identity. It emerged later that the US offered large financial incentives to local law enforcement to hand over Arab prisoners for interrogation.
What an impartial contribution…
“If he is to be believed…”
I’m sure a war zone like Afghanistan was flooded with legitimate job seekers in 2000, when there were no jobs available in such more difficult to reach places as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Iran…
Somehow, I don’t believe the story.
What do you think that means? I think it means, “maybe he’s telling the truth; maybe not”
Well, call me skeptical, but given he’s the brother of one of the bombers of the USS Cole, and that he was at Tora Bora, I tend to doubt his story…
Prove it in court
Don’t have to. He was captured on foreign soil and classified by the capturing parties as an unlawful combatant. Not entitled to US jurisprudence
Sounds like you’re U.S.government.
Far from it. Just looking at the law and the preponderance of the evidence
Difficult to tell whether the “evidence” is actually factual. Plus,the “law” is rather convoluted; and, somewhat depends on who’s applying it. I would prefer to see all of this evaluated in an open federal court, rather than in a questionably impartial military tribunal.
Federal Court has absolutely no jurisdiction. Even legal combatants can be held until the end of hostilities.