1187

By all criteria, this a concentration camp. Not “concentration camp” as rhetorical inflation, or emotionally manipulative shorthand, or edgy metaphor—but as in: literally.

As in: detention without trial, state control, inhumane living conditions, forced labor, dehumanization, brutal violence, isolation from accountability, psychological torture, and—by every available logical extension—murder.

That last one we can’t yet verify in the strict evidentiary sense, but the circumstances suggest it like smoke suggests fire, and they are already trying to hide their actions and deny what is occurring.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 10 months ago

Guantanamo Bay is/was its own fresh hell, but it was not a concentration camp.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago
[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Because it was used for a select few (relatively speaking). It wasn't a camp built to concentrate a sizeable portion of our population into one small area.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

I've already said that there are good arguments for why this shouldn't be considered a concentration camp, and this isn't one of them. This is like saying genocide isn't genocide because the unique tribe you wiped out was only a couple hundred people. So, if you took that same tribe of people and put them in a camp and resteicted their movement, would you not consider it a concentration camp because of it's size?

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Gitmo was never meant to store large amounts of people (and not civilians). It was a place that was conveniently located that allow them to detain and torture individuals. That's not a concentration camp dude.

Even when they started trying to send some migrants there, there were articles saying that they didn't have the facilities for it because it was never meant for that.

[-] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

It was an off the record black torture/interrogation site. They didn't send every taliban they accounted there. It was selective.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 months ago

Ah, sorry, I didn't realize that the Nazis sent all their prisoners to one camp. I guess those weren't concentration camps, either.

[-] tamman2000@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

I'm sure the Nazis had torture/interrogation sites too.

Nobody said that not being a concentration camp made Guantanamo ok.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

No, someone just said it's not a concentration camp because everyone of one demographic wasn't there.

Actually, on further thought, I'll give you that. But, unsurprisingly, limited rights abuses tend to lead to more extensive rights abuses, and the only really surprising thing is that it took more than 20 years to go from torture camps to concentration camps. Waiting for those ghettos, Poland style.

[-] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

You misinterpreted my response. The point is the intention (giving 1 example at the time of operation). That intention was interrogation not concentrating undesirables.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of criminals imprisoned in America have been interrogated without having to be removed to a different country and kept in a special prison. I imagine the exceptions are military personnel stationed outside America, criminals serving sentences in other countries, and the people at Guantanamo bay? So why are they being treated differently?

[-] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

I guess it's semantics. If you want to call black sites concentration camps that's fine by me, there's a lot of overlap, I acknowledge that.

this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
1187 points (98.4% liked)

News

36429 readers
639 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS