I read a disturbing article today and wavered on whether I should pass it around, post it on Facebook, or do neither. I posted it on Facebook with a short comment, but almost immediately deleted it. I have a blog, after all, which allows me to post a thoughtful response without the risk of starting a flame war. In my view, civil rights and human rights should not be highly divisive political issues, but sadly they are.
The article is from The Chronicle of Higher Education and can be found here. It's the story of a young man who is a U.S. citizen and a Muslim and the treatment he receives in detention before being tried on charges of terrorism. As the author (one of the young man's college professors) writes, the treatment he receives is objectionable whether he is guilty or innocent, because it's a violation of the civil rights of any American citizen accused of a crime. I don't know if I can be very eloquent on the subject because I find it sick and disgusting that all of these ways around the Constitution even exist, to be applied in secret as the government sees fit. Also, the fact that the U.S. government had been watching the suspect's movements and political activities well before he was ever implicated in the charge makes it seem like they are looking for trouble.
And finally, not all agree, but I consider solitary confinement to be torture. There is evidence that it takes a serious psychological toll (duh!) on a person, and is considered torture by many in the international community. The article even quotes John McCain, who was tortured as a POW in Vietnam, as saying that such treatment "crushes the spirit." I know some people will say that terrorists deserve to have their spirits crushed, but they seem to forget certain things about living in the United States. Any American citizen suspected of a crime must be considered innocent until proven guilty in the court of law. Shouldn't we at least wait until after the trial and verdict to commence said crushing of spirit?
