Madam, - A UN report has called for the immediate closure of Guantánamo Bay, and a British High Court judge has stated that the rather narrow US definition of torture "is not the same as ours and doesn't appear to coincide with that of most civilised countries".
We have all seen the graphic images of "interrogation techniques" that have emerged from Abu Ghraib. Is anyone naïve enough to think the inmates of Guantánamo Bay are not suffering the same appalling fate? George Bush cited UN inactivity when he cast aside international law, declared himself some kind of global sheriff and illegally invaded Iraq. Is the UN about to prove him right? Are the global community going to continue to tut disapprovingly, shake its collective head, and continue to bleat about human rights abuses without actually doing anything concrete to eradicate these abuses?
If Tony Blair, Bertie Ahern and other European heads of state would tackle George Bush forcefully on this issue there would have to be some kind of action. Mr Blair seems to be changing too quickly into some ultra-right-wing Bush clone to care much about this issue. Bertie Ahern is seemingly worried that if he takes some kind of moral stance on this matter, hundreds of US companies will suddenly take umbrage, and Irish jobs will be at risk.
The men being held indefinitely in Cuba deserve a trial. However, in order for a trial to take place, they first need to know what they are being charged with. Bush seems to be loath to charge these inmates, as he can't seem to find the pesky evidence he would need to secure a guilty verdict. The very fact that there is no definite evidence could never be an indication of innocence, according to his inane logic.
Is the UN going to do anything more than produce endless costly reports, or was George Bush right all along? Everyone knows that the winners write history, and it's looking increasingly likely that the history books of the future are going to be rather unreliable. - Yours, etc,
COLETTE BROWNE, Lios Na Gréine,South Douglas Road, Cork.
Madam, - Those who oppose the US use of Guantánamo for holding non-combatants do themselves no favours when trying to make an equivalence between this camp and the torture chambers that were operated by the Ba'athist regime in Iraq. Firstly, the latter included the use of acid baths, industrial shredders, etc. Even those most opposed to the US accept no such horrors are inflicted on its captives. Secondly, the torture chambers were part and parcel of the state apparatus to maintain its grip on a terrified populace. Thirdly, the bulk of the inmates were ordinary Iraqis who may or may not have opposed the regime.
Guantánamo Bay, on the other hand, is used by the Americans to detain suspects in its war on terror who are released when they can show they are not a threat. Some of the practices may be questionable but they do not amount to torture. - Yours, etc,
BRENDAN McMAHON, Elmwood, Naas, Co Kildare.