A change of regime in the United States brings with it the promised closure of Guantamo Bay prison in Cuba. Australia is being asked to provide residence for some of the prisoners to be released.
We have a perfect right to ask precisely what crime they have been charged with before we consider that request !
It seems that sixty prisoners have been cleared for release, but can not be repatriated to their home countries because the regimes in power there would probably execute them as a matter of course.
The whole concept of justice at Guantamo Bay is murky at the least. There is no doubt that some captured terrorist leaders were consigned there, but it is equally clear that minor cogs in the Taliban movement were shipped to Cuba in the hope that useful information could be extracted.
Australian David Hicks seems to be a case in point. Hicks was captured serving with the Taliban. There is no evidence that he killed or wounded anyone and yet he served five years in "Gitmo" - and he claims he was tortured.
At the end of that term the United States seemed keen to get rid of him and plea bargaining ensured. He was offered a deal. Plead guilty to something that he maintains he didn't do and receive an almost " time served " sentence that involved repatriation to Australia and a few months in a prison here. He is now a free man.
The detainees that Australia is being asked to accept are not Australian citizens and if they come here they will be termed " migrants ". They may still have fundmentalist sympathies and if we accept them we will be engaging in blind trust that they will accept our laws and way of life - and not become some sort of fifth column tring to white ant our security.
One very clear question needs to be asked before this request receives any sort of consideration.
If these people are innocent of any major crime why are they held in Guantamo Bay ? - and why are they considered unsuitable for settlement in the United States ?
No comments:
Post a Comment