Guantanamo Abuses
Four more Britons and one of the Australians captured in Afghanistan three years ago are being freed. None of them are going home to charges under laws existing at the time of their detention or having gone into effect since, although Philip Ruddock has stated that Mamdouh Habib will be subject to ongoing scrutiny by ASIO. John Howard has complained to the U.S. about having taken so long, but he did little enough up until now to secure the man’s release, so it’s a bit too little too late, although he’s not going to apologize for his inaction. Meanwhile, David Hicks is still awaiting trial.

I know George II said there’d be covert operations and anti-terror actions we’d never hear an outcome of, but has there been anything worthwhile out of the indefinite detention of anyone in Cuba? I mean except for the Supreme Court deciding the detainees can have access to the U.S. legal system. Has anyone actually been prosecuted, convicted, or has anyone provided substantive information that’s lead us to Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar? Yet Bush wants to build a permanent detention center there, with the sole purpose of holding prisoners for the rest of their lives; no charges to be brought, no trials, no burden of proof. Lock ‘em up and throw away the key. (A situation Mr. Habib now faces in another sense, as his repatriation becomes a kind of home detention, guilty for the rest of his life.) Except . . . one by one, they’re getting out and going home, often enough it seems as a result of formal allegations of abuse or torture. Is there any give-and-take on Habib’s release, as Amnesty International’s inquiry would suggest? I don’t expect to ever find out.