The Gitmo Three Update
Readers who followed the debate about the Gitmo three should be aware that Slate’s estimable media critic Jack Shafer addressed the subject here. Mr. Shafer agrees with Joe Carter that the theory advanced by Scott Horton in Harper’s Magazine is seriously flawed. I am on the road reading and blogging by iPhone, so I cannot weigh in at length until I’ve gone back over everything, including a couple posts by Mr. Carter that I’d missed (they’re linked in the Slate piece). I do want to say that nothing I’ve read critiquing Mr. Horton’s piece mounts a persuasive argument that the official narrative of the Gitmo three is plausible. Perhaps all the speculation about what really happened is wrongheaded — if so Mr. Carter and Mr. Shafer are absolutely right to say so — but the strangeness of the official narrative nevertheless calls for further inquiry. In any case, do look at the additional work done by Mr. Shafer and Mr. Carter between now and whenever I can revisit this.
I am going to eat some Alabama barbecue now.
“Additional inquiry.”
Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, there was this guy at the Atlantic who kept talking about needing more evidence about Sarah Palin’s kids. Wait, what…the same guy is leading this charge? Hmmm….he seems to require a lot of evidence. I’m not sure I’d ride shotgun with him on this (or anything else). Conspiracy theorists make entertaining clowns, but politics is enough like the circus already.
— jlr · Feb 1, 11:28 PM · #
In other words, you’ve entered the phase where no amount of contrary evidence will disprove your conspiracy theory.
— Phil · Feb 1, 11:37 PM · #
where are you in Alabama? Are you giving a talk somewhere? We don’t get much of a chance for intelligent conservative conversation down here — could you let me know?
— mk · Feb 1, 11:49 PM · #
Yes, Phil, like all inflexible conspiracy theorists I am linking to arguments that cut against my own and promising to investigate further when I get time.
— Conor friedersdorf · Feb 1, 11:55 PM · #
Mk,
I am in Birmingham but I am not speaking or anything. I am Conor64 on Twitter if you want to follow my trip.
— Conor friedersdorf · Feb 2, 12:18 AM · #
It’s customary before making that charge to, you know, provide some contrary evidence. Joe Carter and Jack Schafer certainly don’t; their entire argument is “anyone who doesn’t believe every detail of the official story is a conspiracy theorist, and only idiots are one of those!”
Never mind that a secret Al Qaeda suicide pact, with every detainee in Alpha block playing along, is every bit as much a “conspiracy theory” as the other one.
Well, just the one of them she was never pregnant with. It’s funny, every time he asks what why he should believe a known liar’s absurd pregnancy story, all anybody can tell him is “shut up, is why.” Gosh, can’t imagine why he’s not convinced yet. Must be AIDS dementia!
— Chet · Feb 2, 03:06 AM · #
I guess the question is, what sort of further inquiry would be enough to resolve the questions satisfactorily? Presumably the full details will continue to be heavily censored from the public, so it’s not like we’ll have a chance to sift through all the evidence and decide for ourselves — who could be selected as an independent investigator whom you would find trustworthy even if his/her conclusions simply re-affirm the results of the official investigation?
— kenB · Feb 2, 03:06 AM · #
I should say, I’m mostly kidding. Doubtless there’s an abundant weight of evidence that has you all convinced that the issue of Trig’s birth is completely settled. Nobody’s told Sullivan or I about it, though, and I think we’d both appreciate being let in on whatever loop jlr is on. It’s weird, though, Sullivan’s basically the man on the dunk tank about this – you could really make him look ridiculous by showing him all the evidence about Trig. But nobody ever throws the softball.
In the last thread I spoke about the way we determine some things to be fruitless “conspiracy theories” with absolutely no consideration of their underlying facts. The Trig thing seems to be a perfect example of that.
— Chet · Feb 2, 03:16 AM · #
I do want to say that nothing I’ve read critiquing Mr. Horton’s piece mounts a persuasive argument that the official narrative of the Gitmo three is plausible.
What have you read that persuades you the official narrative is implausible?
There were over a hundred people that had firsthand knowledge either of the events of that night or of the subsequent investigation. Not a one of them has ever come forward and suggested that the official narrative is not true. None of the detainees every suggested to the their lawyers that the official narrative wasn’t true. The Red Cross never suggested that the official narrative wasn’t true.
Doesn’t it seem odd that no one who has first-hand knowledge of the event finds it questionable?
Also, the Pentagon has responded to a number of the speculations raised by the politically-motivated Seton Hall report. For example, to the nonsense suggesting that the prisoners died by having rags forced down their throats, the Pentagon says:
The NCIS has also released a statement which includes:
The NCIS also says that the case file will be posted in its entirety on the DOD FOIA web site in the near future.
Why would they do such a thing if their is a massive cover-up under way?
— Joe Carter · Feb 2, 07:41 AM · #
“What have you read that persuades you the official narrative is implausible?”
Three guys, at least two who had no ties to terrorism and one who was going to be released— separated in different cells, tied their own hands and feet together, stuffed rags in their mouths and swallowed them and then hung themselves, all in the same moment. The commander of the base then told everyone that while they were going to hear that the victims had rags stuffed down thier throats, that the official story was that they were hanged. Then the bodies were returned to their families minus their throats, the one part of the body that could prove they were hanged as claimed.
It’s an improbable story that in all your thousands of words you haven’t addressed in the least. ANd it is the improbability of the Government’s story that is the cause of all the fuss.
— cw · Feb 2, 03:58 PM · #
Let me guess, CW, you only read the Horton story and none of theprimary document or rebuttals, right?
Three guys, at least two who had no ties to terrorism and one who was going to be released—
Where did you get that they had no ties to terrorism? Also, the one that was going to be released was not aware of that fact.
tied their own hands and feet together,
Loosely bound their hands and feet with cloth.
stuffed rags in their mouths and swallowed them and then hung themselves
No, they didn’t. Only one swallowed the rag after asphyxiating himself by hanging.
all in the same moment.
As part of a coordinated plan.
The commander of the base then told everyone that while they were going to hear that the victims had rags stuffed down thier throats, that the official story was that they were hanged.
Says who? The Guardsmen who have already been shown not to know what they are talking about? The FBI investigated their story and (assuming they stuck to their story when they could be charged with perjury) found there was nothing to it.
Then the bodies were returned to their families minus their throats, the one part of the body that could prove they were hanged as claimed.
The throat organs were kept as evidence of an an ongoing investigation. Also, the Pentagon says that no request for the organs was ever made (i.e., the detainee’s family made that part up).
It’s an improbable story that in all your thousands of words you haven’t addressed in the least. ANd it is the improbability of the Government’s story that is the cause of all the fuss.
I’ll say again: No serious person can read all of the primary documents and explanations and conclude that it was anything other than suicide. Those who wish to believe that it was a massive conspiracy involving over 100 people throughout various levels of the government are simply not living in reality.
— Joe Carter · Feb 2, 04:24 PM · #
If you’re asking why they would say they’re about to release the full document, that strikes me as a great way to defuse accusations of there being a cover-up. It’s all the advantages of disclosure (at least to the credulous like Joe) with none of the problems of actually disclosing things.
If you’re asking why they would release the document, well, they haven’t done it yet, so it makes no sense to give them credit for something they only say they’re about to do.
What ongoing investigation? You’ve said repeatedly that the case is closed.
No person at all can read all of the primary documents, because they’ve only been released in redacted form. It’s on the basis of what you imagine to be under the redacting markouts that you believe the official story, not anything that can actually be read in the document. (I see that your claim of “52 eyewitnesses” has now inflated to “hundreds.” What an amazingly dishonest hack you’ve turned out to be.)
— Chet · Feb 2, 05:44 PM · #
Conor, I know this post is a few days old, but I was wondering where you had BBQ in Alabama. I checked your twitter feed but I only saw the post about Fatt Matt’s, which Google tells me is in Atlanta.
— Xelgaex · Feb 5, 03:04 AM · #