Home | About | Donate

In 'Tacit Admission' of Cruelty, DHS Says It Too May End For-Profit Prisons


#1

In 'Tacit Admission' of Cruelty, DHS Says It Too May End For-Profit Prisons

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

On the heels of the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ's) "important and groundbreaking decision" to phase out the use of private prisons, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has just signaled that it may follow in those footsteps—a move that would heed human rights advocates' call for the agency to end "prison profiteers in our inhumane immigration system."


#2

Grijalva sez: "(DHS) association with this industry will continue to besmirch their reputation as servants of the American people ..."

Wait ... a reputation as servant of the people? Vaterland security?
I seem to have missed another memo. I thought it was a servant of the PNAC mission statement.


#3

Wonderful, it can't happen soon enough. The people running these prisons should be in one.
We need to remember with climate change comes refugees. We will have our own one day. God help us if any are treated the way these refugees have been.
Especially since it is the result of American involvement in these Latin American states that has caused this refugee crisis.


#5

Bernie is getting things done. Was he right to drop out and work within the Senate?


#6

Let's hope DHS follows through on this and closes private detention centers (aka prisons).


#7

We should keep one private prison open. Just one.
We should fill that prison with every politician who voted to support Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Obama/Hillary's wars in Syria, Yemen and Libya.
Then we should turn that prison into a zoo and parade people through it daily for a look-see at the inmates.


#8

Cutting private contracts in overseas
Department of Defense prisons should be looked at as well. These are also contracts hid from public.


#9

Private Prison equals Gulag. What are they waiting for? Their broker to dump their shares of Gulag Prison stock.


#10

Tacit admissions are not admissions; they're evasions of admissions. We need an actual admission for everyone involved in cruelty in all the prison systems in the US. (and Guantanamo), followed by firing and prosecution.

Then we need a Truth and Reconciliation process like that for climate and other criminals, in which the accused or convicted people can plead guilty and publicly admit everything they did, in writing and in person to those they did it to.

In return
1. sentences can be suspended
2. they agree never to hold another position of responsibility in govt, business, non-profit or religion.
3. all money made during the period they were profiting from cruelty is confiscated
4. if in the future it turns out they hid anything, lied about anything or otherwise evaded the process, they serve their sentences, and have to abide by the agreement anyway.
5. other forms of restitution may be required in individual cases.


#11

It is a wonderful fantasy!


#12

It was a wonderful fantasy in South Africa, Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, Canada, and Germany. Until it happened in each of those places.

It's never been as effective as we'd like, and sometimes has outright flopped, but if put in place by a massive peaceful revolution (which is what we need in the US in the next 5 years, if we want civilization to survive the next century)... it could be very productive.

We need to start advocating for it now, and advocate for more laws against climate and other ecological and political lies so the process has more teeth. Certainly we already have SEC and other violations and fraud by Exxon and other corporations, API, Kochs, et al. We need to make sure they're prosecuted for those, sentenced as harshly as possible and then given the choice to come clean. Or at least non-dirty. Even just injecting the thought into the conversation will help move our agenda for avoiding climate catastrophe.


#15

obviously you did not read the article, because it is already happening and prison stocks are tanking.


#16

You had me until you decided to drag Obama & Hillary into this.

While Libya turned out to be clusterf#@k, people forget that at the time, unlike with Iraq, people were clamoring that something be done vis-à-vis protecting those that Kaddafi was murdering.

Iraq was an illegal war based on lies. Libya & Syria were not handled properly. There is a big difference.


#20

Same thing - legal or illegal, cluster bombs and barrel bombs KILL.
If your home is hit and your kids are killed or maimed, you don't start to think about whether this was a 'legal' bomb - do you? Would you keep a copy of some UN document defining the legality of wars in your home? And when that home was reduced to rubble, would you then try to dig for that precious document?
Only a lawyer could think like that!


#21

I do not recall us dropping cluster bombs in Libya.

What does that say about you when you try to imply that?

Going for the Donald Trump look? Just make crap up and pull it out of your butt.

In the future I suggest you take it up with you fellow Conservative, the war criminal Bush who was the one who used cluster bombs.


#25

No, it is not the same thing.

You gotta love Conservatives with their "Yes, we know our politicians are evil cretins who, if there was any justice in the universe, would be strung up from lampposts by piano wire. But a Democrat farted in a crowded elevator, so there is no difference."