Guantanamo logic flawed

Andy PostâÄôs argument that Guantanamo must remain open is critically flawed. His argument is that the security risks of closing the prison, or moving it onto U.S. soil and U.S. jurisdiction, would be a threat to our nationâÄôs security. The truth is that it makes no sense for the U.S. government to take actions to circumvent its own laws by setting up offshore prisons where it can avoid accountability. The lack of representation, speedy trials, and other basic amenities of the great U.S. legal system has been thrown to the wayside at Guantanamo in the name of national security. Would the next logical step be for the government to capture part of another island and use it to set up a methamphetamine factory to help pay for our debt, because it isnâÄôt American soil anyway? Or perhaps for use the island for a base of animal cruelty through dogfights? No harm, itâÄôs offshore, right? It all boils down to the point that the government should follow its own laws and operate under them at all times, whether on native soil or not. If a company were doing these things, the public would be outraged. Post also stated that security âÄúwill be his [ObamaâÄôs] absolute priority upon taking office.âÄù To this, I would like to quote Benjamin Franklin: âÄúAny society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.âÄù Protecting basic human liberties has always and should always be the absolute priority for this country. Guantanamo moves us in the opposite direction. Ross Hedlund University student