Guantanamo captives cleared for release years ago
At least four of the captives being force-fed at Guantanamo were cleared for release years ago.
As of Wednesday, the U.S. prison in Cuba classified 100 of its 166 captives as hunger strikers, according to Army Lt. Col. Samuel House, a prison spokesman. Navy medical workers were administering tube feedings to 23 of the hunger strikers, four of them in the prison hospital.
Prison officials have refused to name any of the hunger strikers. But the Justice Department has been notifying the attorneys of prisoners who have become so malnourished that they require the tube feedings.
Attorneys for nine of the men told The Miami Herald of their identities.
One is Mohammed al-Hamiri, a Yemeni man in his 30s whose lawyer, Omar Farah, says he was told by the Justice Department that his client is “on hunger strike and is being force-fed.” Hamiri is also one of 55 men that the Justice Department has named, separately, in federal court filings as eligible for release.
In 2009, the Obama administration assembled a task force of representatives from federal agencies, including the CIA, FBI and Pentagon, to examine the files of the detainees brought to Guantánamo during the Bush years.
The task force concluded that 46 of the 166 men now there should be held indefinitely, without trial or charge.
But it found that 56 were eligible for transfer and another 30 might be eligible for transfer if certain conditions were met.
The majority are Yemeni men, like Hamiri, whose transfer has been put on hold by a combination of congressional restrictions on releases and a White House freeze on transfers in particular to Yemen, which has a fervent al-Qaida franchise called al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula.
Hunger strike figures rose steadily after April 13, when soldiers stormed into Guantanamo's showcase communal prison and put nearly every captive in the complex under lockdown.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.