On Monday, U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan ruled against providing emergency relief to a Guantanamo Bay detainee who has been participating in the ongoing hunger strikes at the detention center. Hogan claimed that he did not have jurisdiction over the case, citing the Military Commissions Act as a legal deterrent for any action; Hogan also added that the detainee had ”self-manufactured” his condition by participating in the hunger strike. The strikers have cited unavailability of drinking water and frigid temperatures as the reasons for the strike. Fittingly, Hogan’s ruling came during the same week former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher passed away; exactly 22 years ago, it was Thatcher who was making a political point and consolidating her reputation by letting 10 hungers strikers waste away in her prisons. The hunger strikers were protesting to regain their political prisoner status that had been stripped from them by the preceding British government, and Thatcher used the protests to promote her “Iron Lady” persona. While failing to provide relief for the strikers while they were alive, Thatcher did everything short of dancing on their graves after their deaths, to the approval of her electorate.

Forward 22 years, and the same plot seems to be unfolding, although with less fanfare on either side. As of Friday morning, 63 of the 166 captives at the detention center were on a hunger strike that has failed to garner widespread media attention, with the exceptions being few and far between. Russia Today did a telling piece on the media blackout, which included great insight by outspoken British MP George Galloway.

While looking through different news sites to find more information on the issue, an article on Business Insider managed to repulse me more than the lack of media attention itself. The title of the article is telling of the sort of rubbish that the article was going to put out: “The Other Side of the Gitmo Strike: Detainees Are Treated Surprisingly Well”. The article was published at the end of last month, by Robert Johnson, who spent a week at Gitmo before he wrote about how well the prisoners were kept; at one point, Mr. Johnson compared the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay to a vacation at a resort. The columnist was also astounded at the many amenities available to the prisoners, at one point commending the prison for its wide variety of entertainment options:

“Compliant detainees enjoy a selection of six balanced meals, 25 cable TV channels, classes, and an array of electronic gadgetry and entertainment, Nintendo DS consoles and Playstation 3 access with a library full of games.”

The full article can be read here.

In other words, a journalist spent a week at a camp that is in clear violation of international law, and he decided to write about their PS3. While the article mentioned the fact that it was not a commentary on the ethics of indefinite detention, that does not absolve the journalist or the news medium of providing fodder for the majority of our population that has decided to turn a blind eye to the injustice these prisoners are suffering from.

In stark contrast, everyone should read a piece in The Observer by Mark Townsend; Mr. Townsend documents the journey of one of the leading figures in the Gitmo strike, Shaker Aamer, who is in the third month of his hunger strike. Aamer, a British national, was cleared to be released in June 2007.