Debunking myths about Guantanamo Bay
September 7, 2006 | By Nathaniel Ward
In a speech yesterday, President Bush strongly defended the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
It's important for Americans and others across the world to understand the kind of people held at Guantanamo. These aren't common criminals, or bystanders accidentally swept up on the battlefield -- we have in place a rigorous process to ensure those held at Guantanamo Bay belong at Guantanamo. Those held at Guantanamo include suspected bomb makers, terrorist trainers, recruiters and facilitators, and potential suicide bombers. They are in our custody so they cannot murder our people.
In a new video, Heritage national security expert James Carafano describes his visit last week to Guantanamo Bay, and he debunks five liberal myths about the operation there.
Myth 1. Detainees are abused and tortured
Myth 2. Detainees are forgotten and abandoned
Myth 3. Detainees have no rights
Myth 4. Detainees are not dangerous
Myth 5. Detainees have no intelligence value
Click here to watch the video and the debunking of all these myths—and be sure to send it to your friends and colleagues!
The erosion of free speech
The Founding Fathers believed firmly in free speech, since it allows citizens to criticize and thus improve upon the government. As the First Continental Congress explained in its 1774 Appeal to the Inhabitants of Quebec, freedom of speech plays a vital role in curbing government excess:
The last right we shall mention, regards the freedom of the press. The importance of this consists, besides the advancement of truth, science, morality, and arts in general, in its diffusion of liberal sentiments on the administration of Government, its ready communication of thoughts between subjects, and its consequential promotion of union among them, whereby oppressive officers are shamed or intimidated, into more honourable and just modes of conducting affairs.
The Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791, enshrined this principle in American law. “Congress shall make no law,” reads the First Amendment, “abridging the freedom of speech.”
Yesterday, though, the Founders’ understanding of free speech was chucked out the window. The D.C. Examiner explains in a hard-hitting editorial:
Something almost without precedent in America will happen Thursday. That’s the day when McCain-Feingold — aka the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 — will officially silence broadcast advertising that contains criticism of members of Congress seeking re-election in November. Before 2006, American election campaigns traditionally began in earnest after Labor Day. Unless McCain-Feingold is repealed, Labor Day will henceforth mark the point in the campaign when congressional incumbents can sit back and cruise, free of those pesky negative TV and radio spots. It is the most effective incumbent protection act possible, short of abolishing the elections themselves.
How can this possibly be, you ask? McCain-Feingold — named after the law’s main advocates, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and [Sen.] Russ Feingold, D-Wis. — bans all broadcast political advocacy advertising that mentions candidates by name, beginning 60 days before the election.
Heritage’s Mark Tapscott warned in 2003, after the Supreme Court upheld the blatantly unconstitutional campaign finance law, that this “reform” could only presage further restrictions on free speech. If the government can legally restrict free expression on television and radio 60 days before an election, he reasoned, no principle would prevent the government from arbitrarily extending the limits on free speech to cover more days and more types of speech.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas summed up the danger in his dissent against the ruling that upheld the “reform”: “The chilling endpoint of the Court's reasoning is not difficult to see: outright regulation of the press.”
Family matters
Many liberals like to pretend that divorce and family breakup are somehow good for families and children. Once again, though, scientific data backs up common sense and underscores the importance of traditional values.
Heritage’s FamilyFacts.org gives this quick summary: “Compared with their peers from intact families, students who experienced parental marital disruptions scored lower on academic tests and had lower educational aspirations both before and after the disruptions.” In short, despite what liberals might argue, family breakup does terrible damage to children.
Heritage makes inroads at the UN
Conservative ideas are “making inroads” at the United Nations, a State Department official told Heritage foreign policy expert Jan Smith yesterday. The official explained that Smith’s recent paper on the United Nations, co-written with James Carafano, is being circulated internally at Turtle Bay. The paper discusses the UN’s efforts to undermine traditional ideas of individual security and national sovereignty with bogus notions of entitlements to government protection from societal ills.
In other news
- Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) said Tuesday that he would refuse a State Department request to provide a police escort for former Iranian dictator Mohammed Khatami. He argued that “taking even a dollar of [taxpayer] money to support a terrorist is unacceptable.” Khatami is scheduled to speak at Harvard University this weekend.
- Iran’s current despot, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said yesterday he plans to visit the United States later this month to attend a meeting of the United Nations. Will New York’s leaders follow Gov. Romney’s lead?
- Coalition forces today handed over formal command of Iraq’s armed forces to Iraq’s elected government. American Gen. George Casey said that “from today forward, the Iraqi military responsibilities will be increasingly conceived and led by Iraqis.”
- Following weeks of rumors, British Prime Minister Tony Blair announced today that he will resign from office within the next year. This is sure to provoke a scramble to succeed him as more radical elements of his own Labour party compete with resurgent Conservatives.
Coming up at Heritage
To attend these or any other Heritage Foundation events, RSVP at Heritage’s events website. Or you can watch these events live online at Heritage.org. All times are Eastern.
- On Friday, September 8 at noon, presidential scholars Elizabeth Spalding and Steven F. Hayward will discuss the role of faith in the presidency, and especially its impact on the Bush administration.
- On Friday, September 15 from 1:00 to 3:00 pm, Heritage hosts a discussion with experts from government and the private sector about ways to improve airline security in the face of evolving threats.
- On Thursday, September 21 at noon, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) will discuss the need to restore public confidence in our immigration laws by controlling the border and enforcing the law internally.
Nathaniel Ward is the Editor of MyHeritage.org—a website for members and supporters of The Heritage Foundation.
