Thread: $800,000 per year per prisoner

On 26/09/2012 10:27 PM, Somebody wrote:
> Yikes, it appear to be true: imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly -
> $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...oc.semityn.www
>
> What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that is cost
> so much?
>
>
I don't think they are eating anything special. It's probably a lot more
to do with the staff/inmate ratio than the food they'll be getting.
Regardless, I won't be vacationing there anythime soon even with the 5
star cost of running the place.

--

Krypsis

Somebody wrote:
>
> Yikes, it appear to be true: imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly -
> $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...oc.semityn.www
>
> What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that is cost
> so much?

They are factoring in the cost of the US military maintaining the base there
for not so many prisoners. The actual 'per prisoner' cost wouldn't be so
much.

Personally, I think this anti-Cuba thing should end. yawn!

G.

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:24:31 -0400, Gary wrote:

> Somebody wrote:
>>
>> Yikes, it appear to be true: imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly -
>> $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...oc.semityn.www
>>
>> What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that is cost
>> so much?
>
> They are factoring in the cost of the US military maintaining the base there
> for not so many prisoners. The actual 'per prisoner' cost wouldn't be so
> much.
>
> Personally, I think this anti-Cuba thing should end. yawn!

Responding to trolls is very bad netiquette.

-sw

In article <1ngfv5eh0ql1f$.[email protected]>, Sqwertz <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:24:31 -0400, Gary wrote:
>
> > Somebody wrote:
> >>
> >> Yikes, it appear to be true: imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly -
> >> $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...web-of-federal
> >> -prisons.html?pagewanted=all&_moc.semityn.www
> >>
> >> What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that is
> >> cost
> >> so much?
> >
> > They are factoring in the cost of the US military maintaining the base
> > there
> > for not so many prisoners. The actual 'per prisoner' cost wouldn't be so
> > much.
> >
> > Personally, I think this anti-Cuba thing should end. yawn!
>
> Responding to trolls is very bad netiquette.
>
> -sw

then why do you respond so frequently to julie bove?

Sqwertz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:24:31 -0400, Gary wrote:
>
>> Somebody wrote:
>>>
>>> Yikes, it appear to be true: imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely
>>> costly - $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in
>>> federal prison.
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...oc.semityn.www
>>>
>>> What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that
>>> is cost so much?
>>
>> They are factoring in the cost of the US military maintaining the
>> base there for not so many prisoners. The actual 'per prisoner'
>> cost wouldn't be so much.
>>
>> Personally, I think this anti-Cuba thing should end. yawn!
>
> Responding to trolls is very bad netiquette.
>

As if.

On Sep 26, 8:45*am, Krypsis <kryp...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> On 26/09/2012 10:27 PM, Somebody wrote:> Yikes, it appear to be true: imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly -
> > $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...bay-a-web-of-f...
>
> > What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that is cost
> > so much?
>
> I don't think they are eating anything special. It's probably a lot more
> to do with the staff/inmate ratio than the food they'll be getting.
> Regardless, I won't be vacationing there anythime soon even with the 5
> star cost of running the place.

I remember a few years back there was a big stink about the inmates at
Gitmo getting Duck L'Orange and special meals per their religious
beliefs; they certainly aren't getting the typical prison gruel. I
read something over the last week or so about the inmates at Gitmo
getting a new Soccer Field, and I seem to think they also have
internet access, but their emails and browsing history are monitored
and they are blocked from many sites. They are probably getting
treated better than those at rich people prisons in the US. Our tax
dollars at work, no doubt.

"Michael OConnor" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Sep 26, 8:45 am, Krypsis <kryp...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> On 26/09/2012 10:27 PM, Somebody wrote:> Yikes, it appear to be true:
> imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly -
> > $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...bay-a-web-of-f...
>
> > What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that is
> > cost
> > so much?
>
> I don't think they are eating anything special. It's probably a lot more
> to do with the staff/inmate ratio than the food they'll be getting.
> Regardless, I won't be vacationing there anythime soon even with the 5
> star cost of running the place.

I remember a few years back there was a big stink about the inmates at
Gitmo getting Duck L'Orange and special meals per their religious
beliefs; they certainly aren't getting the typical prison gruel. I
read something over the last week or so about the inmates at Gitmo
getting a new Soccer Field, and I seem to think they also have
internet access, but their emails and browsing history are monitored
and they are blocked from many sites. They are probably getting
treated better than those at rich people prisons in the US. Our tax
dollars at work, no doubt.

---

why would they do that? Maybe it is part of plan.

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 19:05:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael OConnor
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sep 26, 8:45*am, Krypsis <kryp...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> On 26/09/2012 10:27 PM, Somebody wrote:> Yikes, it appear to be true: imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly -
>> > $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
>> >http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...bay-a-web-of-f...
>>
>> > What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that is cost
>> > so much?
>>
>> I don't think they are eating anything special. It's probably a lot more
>> to do with the staff/inmate ratio than the food they'll be getting.
>> Regardless, I won't be vacationing there anythime soon even with the 5
>> star cost of running the place.
>
>I remember a few years back there was a big stink about the inmates at
>Gitmo getting Duck L'Orange and special meals per their religious
>beliefs; they certainly aren't getting the typical prison gruel.

I'd love a cite on that one-- a Google search for 'duck l'orange at
Guantanamo yields nothing.

a special diet for their religion seems like a compliance with the
Geneva convention, if not just 'the right thing to do'. Especially
since few, if any, of these guys have been found guilty of anything.
[FTR- I'm not in favor of closing Gitmo- but I'd feel better about it
if we were spending more time *publicly* proving the guilt of the
inmates.]


> I
>read something over the last week or so about the inmates at Gitmo
>getting a new Soccer Field, and I seem to think they also have
>internet access, but their emails and browsing history are monitored
>and they are blocked from many sites. They are probably getting
>treated better than those at rich people prisons in the US. Our tax
>dollars at work, no doubt.

Adnan Latif seemed to think his 11 years there were no picnic-
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...mmoral/262317/

Maybe you were being ironic? Read an onion article?

Jim

On Sep 26, 11:24*am, Gary <g.maj...@att.net> wrote:

>
> Personally, I think this anti-Cuba thing should end. *yawn!

I agree.
>
> G.

--Bryan http://www.intrade.com/v4/misc/scoreboard/

In article <k3usc8$plo$[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> Yikes, it appear to be true: imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly -
> $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us...oc.semityn.www
>
> What are we feeding-- and how are we sheltering-- those people that is cost
> so much?

They don't say how that is calculated. Are they including just the
costs associated with the prison or are they including the entire
operating cost of the US Naval Station on which the prison is located?

Michael OConnor wrote:
>
> I remember a few years back there was a big stink about the inmates at
> Gitmo getting Duck L'Orange and special meals per their religious
> beliefs; they certainly aren't getting the typical prison gruel. I
> read something over the last week or so about the inmates at Gitmo
> getting a new Soccer Field, and I seem to think they also have
> internet access, but their emails and browsing history are monitored
> and they are blocked from many sites. They are probably getting
> treated better than those at rich people prisons in the US. Our tax
> dollars at work, no doubt.

These guys fell through the legal cracks. They were captured in an
undeclared war against a non-governmental organization. They are
not soliders in the sense of the Geneva Convention. Had they been shot
in the field they might have fared better. As it is there's no way to
release them so they will be there for life. Crazy but that's what
happens when a country is attacked in such a new way.

"Doug Freyburger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:k42kaq$d5u$[email protected]..
> Michael OConnor wrote:
>>
>> I remember a few years back there was a big stink about the inmates at
>> Gitmo getting Duck L'Orange and special meals per their religious
>> beliefs; they certainly aren't getting the typical prison gruel. I
>> read something over the last week or so about the inmates at Gitmo
>> getting a new Soccer Field, and I seem to think they also have
>> internet access, but their emails and browsing history are monitored
>> and they are blocked from many sites. They are probably getting
>> treated better than those at rich people prisons in the US. Our tax
>> dollars at work, no doubt.
>
> These guys fell through the legal cracks. They were captured in an
> undeclared war against a non-governmental organization. They are
> not soliders in the sense of the Geneva Convention. Had they been shot
> in the field they might have fared better. As it is there's no way to
> release them so they will be there for life. Crazy but that's what
> happens when a country is attacked in such a new way.


They will be released when the the War on Terror is over. Or at least
declared over.

On 28/09/2012 10:54 AM, Somebody wrote:
> "Doug Freyburger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:k42kaq$d5u$[email protected]..
>> Michael OConnor wrote:
>>>
>>> I remember a few years back there was a big stink about the inmates at
>>> Gitmo getting Duck L'Orange and special meals per their religious
>>> beliefs; they certainly aren't getting the typical prison gruel. I
>>> read something over the last week or so about the inmates at Gitmo
>>> getting a new Soccer Field, and I seem to think they also have
>>> internet access, but their emails and browsing history are monitored
>>> and they are blocked from many sites. They are probably getting
>>> treated better than those at rich people prisons in the US. Our tax
>>> dollars at work, no doubt.
>>
>> These guys fell through the legal cracks. They were captured in an
>> undeclared war against a non-governmental organization. They are
>> not soliders in the sense of the Geneva Convention. Had they been shot
>> in the field they might have fared better. As it is there's no way to
>> release them so they will be there for life. Crazy but that's what
>> happens when a country is attacked in such a new way.
>
>
> They will be released when the the War on Terror is over. Or at least
> declared over.
>
>
Live in hope! The war on terror will never be over, not as long as your
backside points down. It provides governments with the perfect platform
to "rein in the freedoms" that the populace now enjoys so there is
effectively no impetus to return to the situation that preceded it. Keep
the population in fear and you effectively have their tacit compliance.

--

Krypsis

"Krypsis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:k431of$jkr$[email protected]..
> Live in hope! The war on terror will never be over, not as long as your
> backside points down. It provides governments with the perfect platform to
> "rein in the freedoms" that the populace now enjoys so there is
> effectively no impetus to return to the situation that preceded it. Keep
> the population in fear and you effectively have their tacit compliance.
>
> --
>
> Krypsis


We can win the war on terror! Like we won the war on drugs, and the war on
poverty. And will soon defeat the war on women... Someday, the US will
defeat all nouns and pronouns-- both demonstrative and personal. I hope to
live to see that day.