Keep Guantanamo Bay Open

Look, we could shoot the people we hold at Gitmo with no conflict under international law. They are not POWS, they are terrorists and unlawful combatants. Nor do we have to charge them with crimes. They are not civilian defendants.

Instead, we treat them pretty darned well. I have little patience for the "gulag" crowd that wants to close this prison because they claim we torture there.

For our enemies and the press and NGOs that bolster them, if we didn't have Gitmo, they'd have to invent one.

As indeed they did.

Don't go all wobbly on this.

UPDATE (DECEMBER 2, 2008): A UK outfit has linked to this post. The point of my post was to serve as a preamble to the linked article where the actual arguments were made, and not be a stand-alone piece. This is a blog and not a journal. We do that linking thing to highlight articles that we believe reflect our thoughts or are repulsive, as it suits us. We may just link to something we think is interesting without taking a stand one way or the other. Though you'll find many reasoned and researched posts here (if I may humbly assert that), you'll also find (dignified) rants about things that just torque me off.

This post was a response to specific outrageous criticism of Guantanamo that was in our news at that time. Which is another feature of blogs--you need to be aware of the context of the time.

Which brings us to another feature of blogs as opposed to articles--they evolve. Those using the Intute PPT were referred to this post that has responded to the implied criticisms of the Intute product--and therefore changed--by pointing out that the PPT really misses the purpose of my post and seemingly judges it in terms applicable to articles.

And one question. Has the PPT become invalid because the focus of one Intute page is no longer the page originally highlighted?

Still, thanks to Intute for the link. I've been wondering about the stream of hits on this post without any apparent referring location.