A guard tower is visible behind a razor-wire fence at the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base in Cuba, July 23, 2008. (AP Photo/Randall Mikkelsen)
Guantanamo Bay. The images are indelible. The constitutional and political stakes — epic.
The Supreme Court decided in June to give detainees their day in federal court. The trial of Osama bin Laden’s driver ended in a split verdict and short sentence. The alleged 9/11 mastermind is next.
We read all this in the papers, but our guest today knows Guantanamo up close. A young lawyer, she has worked as an interpreter for Afghan detainees. What she has found are human stories and travesties of justice like she’d never imagined. Instead of terrorists, goat herders, politicians, and reputable physicians with no way out.
This hour, we hear the stories from her new book, “My Guantanamo Diary.”
You can join the conversation. What lessons do you take from the stories coming out of Guantanamo? From the trials and the reports of torture?
-Jane Clayson, guest host
* * *
Guests:
Joining us from San Diego is Mahvish Khan, an interpreter for defense lawyers at Guantanamo Bay and author of the new book “My Guantanamo Diary: The Detainees and the Stories They Told Me.”
And from Washington, we’re joined by John Walcott, Washington bureau chief for McClatchy Newspapers and editor of the five-part investigative series “Guantanamo: Beyond the Law,” which was published in June.
* * *
More links:
McClatchy’s series “Guantanamo: Beyond the Law”
The McClatchy series website offers a large archive of documents from the eight-month investigation and video interviews with detainees.
Mahvish Khan’s Official Website
Has more on the stories, including photos of the detainees and their families.
Read an excerpt from “My Guantanamo Diary: The Detainees and the Stories They Told Me.”
Tags: detainees, Guantanamo
I’d be curious to hear the guests’ opinion as to the use of the word “detainee”. Was it promulgated as part of a US strategy to disassociate the people they hold from the word “prisoner”, which suggests some basic rights? Or is its use more traditional?
Posted by Gordon, on August 14th, 2008 at 10:38 am EDTSome of the comments from listeners are just shocking. Shocking stupid. They sound like Rush Limbaugh devotees. If this isn’t a wake up call for better education than I don’t know what is.
Posted by Louise, on August 14th, 2008 at 10:49 am EDTFor me, this is all “deja vu.” During the period of political violence in Peru in the 1980s and 1990s, the Peruvian armed forces detained thousands of people on accusations of terrorism. Some were terrorist but there were also many who were turned in by local peasants and others who had grudges against them or expected favors from the military.
Posted by Joanna Drzewieniecki, on August 14th, 2008 at 10:52 am EDTFinally, Peru created an official commission to review all the cases of people who claimed to be innocent, the “Comision Ad Hoc de Indultos.” It reviewed 3000 cases, and proved that 481 were innocent. These 481 people were released and “pardoned” by the government (in order to get the Peruvian government to agree to this commission, the Peruvian human rights community agreed to “pardons” instead of a formal declaration of innocence). Currently, there is a process underway to get reparations for these and other innocent victims of political violence.
Now, I ask you: why can’t the United States do as well as Peru?
Incidentally, just like many of your callers, most Peruvians were suspicious of anyone who was detained and were sure they must be guilty even if there was no evidence. But those who fought for human rights prevailed.
Guantanamo is a solution to a military problem, that that has been converted into a legal problem under pressure from the US Congress. The capture of battlefield combatants is a fundamental part of warfare. The United States is the only country on earth that has ever converted the status of captured combatants into a legal issue.
The creation of Camp X-Ray, and the detention of combatants there, is testament to the humanity of the United States. How many detainees did the Soviet Union keep during their excursion into Afghanistan? Do you remember the controversy over their status and legal fights of Afghan detainees in the 1980’s? No, of course not… That is because the Soviet Union did not detain any battlefield combatants… they executed every last one…
Posted by Super64, on August 14th, 2008 at 8:40 pm EDTI would’ve been curious to hear about any children (a large percentage of Guantanamo detainees were under 18 at time of arrest) she had interviewed.
Posted by Jamey, on August 14th, 2008 at 9:00 pm EDTI am saddened that so many Americans and listeners assume all Guantanamo detainees were guilty simply because America imprisoned them. We did it – so it MUST be right and they MUST be guilty. However, the facts show that a large majority were imprisoned, tortured, and then released with no charges being made. After years!
Posted by Suzie, on August 14th, 2008 at 9:44 pm EDTMany military supporters claim the detainees had weapons. That is not true. Many detainees were picked up for other reasons. If they were carrying a weapon, why are they not prisoners of war?
Ms. Khan’s book can be an important resource for the many who seek to balance some of the corrosive and spiritually deadening language of the war on terror. Please consult http://www.perplexityproject.blogspot.com for some ideas about how “My Guantanamo Diary” might be used to counteract some of the toxic propaganda that is the fare of the Gitmo experience.
Posted by Mark Engle, on August 15th, 2008 at 9:40 am EDTWhen you invite a guest you need to show respect.
Posted by Respect, on August 18th, 2008 at 1:31 am EDT