Fox News ignores that vaccinating Gitmo detainees benefits military personnel
The November 2 editions of Fox News' Special Report and Hannity both reported solely on criticism of reported plans to allow Guantánamo Bay detainees access to H1N1 vaccines, ignoring the benefit to military personnel. Neither report noted that military personnel will be vaccinated before detainees, that vaccinating detainees can help protect military personnel and their families, or that conservatives have repeatedly in the past touted the health care benefits given to detainees in order to defend the controversial detention center.
Special Report, Hannity reports focus on detainees access to vaccine, ignore military personnel
Special Report: "Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are very unhappy that detainees at the Guantánamo Bay detention facility will get the H1N1 vaccine before many Americans." From the November 2 edition of Fox News'Special Report:
BRET BAIER (host): And now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are very unhappy that detainees at the Guantánamo Bay detention facility will get the H1N1 vaccine before many Americans. Missouri Republican Congressman Roy Blunt says, quote, "It's outrageous that in Missouri, expectant mothers, children, and others vulnerable to the H1N1 flu virus do not have access to the vaccine, and our tax dollars are funding vaccines for accused terrorists detained at Gitmo."
Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak wrote to Army Secretary John McHugh, quote, "As long as Americans must wait to receive the vaccine, the detainees in Guantánamo Bay should not be given preferential treatment."
The military says the detainees are included in the priority group because prison populations are at higher risk of getting the flu.
Hannity: "[G]et in line" behind "Gitmo detainees" to get H1N1 vaccine. From the November 2 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
SEAN HANNITY (host): If you're hoping to get the H1N1 vaccine, well, you're gonna have to get in line, and you won't believe who gets it before you.
[...]
HANNITY: All right, so you were hoping to get the H1N1 vaccine. Well, if the vaccine hasn't reached a doctor's office near you, that might be because it's on its way to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. That's right: A military spokesman announced Gitmo detainees will receive the vaccine sometime this month. That's well before it's expected to be available to the public at large. Seems the Obama administration has its priorities straight, doesn't it?
Military officials to be vaccinated before detainees
JTF Guantánamo Bay spokesperson: "[D]oses will be administered to active-duty personnel before being offered to detainees and others on the base." An October 30 CNN.com report quoted Maj. Diana R. Haynie, a spokeswoman for Joint Task Force Guantánamo Bay: "Detainees at JTF Guantanamo are considered to be at higher risk and therefore they will be offered the H1N1 vaccination. ... JTF Guantanamo conducts safe, humane, legal and transparent care and custody of detainees. As such, we must provide detainees the medical care necessary to maintain their health." Haynie also said that while it was unknown when the vaccines would arrive at Guantánamo Bay, "Once the vaccinations are received, doses will be administered to active-duty personnel before being offered to detainees and others on the base."
CNN: Pentagon and Guantánamo officials "say the base commander will make sure military personnel get the vaccine first." CNN's Brian Todd reported on November 2: "Officials at Guantanamo and the Pentagon tell us there are no cases of H1N1 at Guantanamo yet. The vaccine has not arrived and don't know when they'll get it. They say the base commander will make sure military personnel get the vaccine first and that it will be voluntary for detainees." [CNN's The Situation Room, 11/2/09]
Vaccinating detainees helps protect military personnel
Pentagon official reportedly argued that "to protect the military personnel at Guantanamo ... the detainees may have to have access to the shot." According to CNN's Todd, "One senior Pentagon official calls this a forced protection issue. He says they have to protect the military personnel at Guantanamo so the detainees may have to have access to the shot." [The Situation Room, 11/2/09]
Bioethics expert: "Prisons like Guantanamo" are "incubators for infection." Todd reported: "Professor Art Caplan at the University of Pennsylvania has a long-running project on the ethics of vaccines. He says prisons like Guantanamo are what he calls incubators for infection. Prisoners get it, then they give it to the guards, the guards could then come home and spread it to their families. So they say -- he says at least those are populations that are at risk for these viruses." [The Situation Room, 11/2/09]
CDC: "Correctional institutions pose special risks and considerations due to the nature of their unique environment." In its "Interim Guidance for Correctional and Detention Facilities on Novel Influenza A (H1N1) Virus," the Centers for Disease Control emphasizes the "special risks" correctional institutions pose. From CDC:
Correctional institutions pose special risks and considerations due to the nature of their unique environment. Inmates are in mandatory custody and options are limited for isolation and removal of ill persons from the environment. The workforce must be maintained and options are limited for work alternatives (e.g., work from home, reduced or alternate schedules, etc.). In addition, many inmates and workforce may have medical conditions that increase their risk of influenza-related complications.
Some detainees cleared for release still reside in Guantánamo prisons. According to an August 20 Washington Post report, "[A]pproximately 80 detainees [had been] cleared for release so far." At the time, the Post reported that there were "229 detainees" being held at Guantánamo Bay. On September 28, McClatchy reported that there were "223 detainees at Guantanamo, 75 now cleared to go." After six Uighur detainees were released to Palau, a November 3 Associated Press article noted that "seven others are still at Guantanamo. One of them did not receive an invitation to resettle in Palau over concerns about his mental health." The AP noted that the 22 Uighurs who were detained by the United States "were approved for release after a federal court ruled they were not enemy combatants." An earlier version of this AP article reported that "[b]efore this transfer of the Uighurs, about 221 prisoners remained at Guantanamo."
Republicans previously touted health care given to detainees
Cheney in 2005: Detainees "are well-treated. Their medical needs are attended to." On the June 13, 2005, broadcast of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, former Vice President Dick Cheney argued that Guantánamo detainees "are well-treated. Their medical needs are attended to. They're well-fed. They've got -- their religious requirements are catered to." From the June 13, 2005, edition of Hannity & Colmes (accessed via Nexis):
CHENEY: The important thing here to understand is that the people that are at Guantanamo are bad people. I mean, these are terrorists for the most part. These are people that were captured in the battlefield of Afghanistan or rounded up as part of the al Qaeda network. We've already screened the detainees there and released a number of them, sent them back to their home countries. But what's left is hard core.
HANNITY: About 550 people.
CHENEY: That's right. And they are well-treated. Their medical needs are attended to. They're well-fed. They've got -- their religious requirements are catered to. If they want the Koran, they've got the Koran. These people are very well treated for terrorists. If you put them out on the street now and if you were to take action to release them, then you'd find yourself in a situation where the -- you may well find them back trying to kill more Americans.
So we need a facility. If it's not Guantanamo, it's got to be something else. The function has to be performed.
Gingrich cited detainees' access to "medical care" to argue against closing Guantánamo Bay: From Newt Gingrich's May 29 Washington Examiner column, "Mr. President: Keep Gitmo open":
The case for keeping Guantanamo Bay open begins with the almost universal acknowledgement today that the facility itself is an orderly and humane place; a place where detainees receive better food, medical care and respect for their personal dignity than they would in prisons in the various countries they hail from.
Col. Robert Maginnis argued against closing Gitmo: "They get better medical care than most Americans." In a January 28 Human Events column, Maginnis, a former Fox News military analyst and participant in the Pentagon's controversial media military analyst program, argued that "President Obama insults our service members by suggesting that closing the center is partly to end torture there." He added:
They are treated better than any prisoners in the world. They get better medical care than most Americans and they are treated with kid gloves. Many detainees have access to recreation 12 hours a day; they all have intellectual opportunities, including DVDs, books, and magazines. Some of them even take classes in art, English, Arabic and gardening. To suggest that we need a review of our treatment policies at GITMO is a slap in the face to our troops who serve there and are not allowed to even look menacingly at a detainee.
Wall Street Journal's Pollock cited "state of the art" medical care while defending detention center. In a January 17, 2007, column, Robert L. Pollock defended the detention center at Guantánamo Bay after visiting the facility. Pollock specifically cited the "state of the art" medical care offered to detainees to argue that their treatment is humane. From Pollock's January 17, 2007, WSJ column:
When it comes to medical care, almost no expense is spared -- as I discovered after spotting an overweight man lounging in the rec yard of Camp Five. "Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?" I inquired (he was some distance away). "No, that's Paracha," came the somewhat exasperated reply.
Saifullah Paracha is a Pakistani businessman and media owner who claims two meetings with Osama bin Laden were purely for journalistic interest. He is believed to be an important figure in the case against Majid Khan, one of the 14 "high value" detainees recently transferred to Gitmo from CIA custody. Last year Mr. Paracha's son Uzair was sentenced to 30 years in a U.S. prison for aiding an al Qaeda operative in a plot to bomb U.S. targets.
Maybe terrorism is stressful work. But whatever the reason, the elder Paracha also suffers from heart disease. So late last year -- at an expense of some $400,000 -- the U.S. government flew down doctors and equipment to perform cardiac catheterization. Mr. Paracha's response was to refuse treatment and file a petition in U.S. federal court for transfer to a hospital in the U.S. or Pakistan. At least his lawyers were frank about their cynical motives: "His death in U.S. captivity would be a blow to American prestige."
The medical care at Guantanamo seems state of the art. All detainees over 50 are offered colonoscopies; at least 16 have been performed. Gitmo's psychiatrist told me that fewer that 1% of detainees suffer from mood disorders, a rate lower than that of the general population. That would appear to undercut claims that indefinite detention is itself a form of "mental torture."
Sen. Bill Frist: "[I]f you look at the care that they get, the healthcare that they get, it's better than the healthcare that the typical American gets in the states." On the September 11, 2006, edition of Special Report (accessed via Nexis), correspondent Major Garrett reported that after a visit by three Republican senators to the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, the senators "appeared satisfied." Garrett aired a clip of Frist saying: "The detainees, if you look at the care that they get, the healthcare that they get, it's better than the healthcare that the typical American gets in the states."
Rep. Duncan Hunter cited detainees' "access to top-notch medical facilities" as a reason to keep detention center open. In a June 29, 2005, report on Special Report (accessed via Nexis), correspondent Molly Henneberg reported that "Duncan Hunter, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, told a hearing today that Guantanamo Bay is not a gulag and will stay open. He and 15 other lawmakers visited Gitmo on Saturday." Henneberg then aired a clip of Hunter saying: "We saw a world-class detention facility where detainees representing a threat to our national security are well-fed, given access to top-notch medical facilities, and provided an opportunity to obtain legal representation."
Sen. Jeff Sessions argued that detainees "are well taken care of medically" as a defense of "what is going on in Guantanamo." In an interview on the June 15, 2005, edition of Fox News' The Big Story (accessed via Nexis), Sessions stated: "We are not abusing prisoners at Guantanamo. They have an annual review to determine whether they should be released or not. Over 200 have been released. They have had full reviews by tribunals; 200 of the 500 that are there now have habeas corpus petitions pending in federal court. They are well taken care of medically. They're not being abused. Really, we can defend what is going on in Guantanamo and we should do so."
There are three reasons to get the vaccine.
One is to keep yourself from getting the flu. For most people, the flu illness is not a bad illness, but if you're one of the people who get really sick or die from it, of course it's a horrible thing. And while it's true that you might never get the flu - if you could predict the future and know that you weren't going to be exposed, or were going to have a mild case, then it'd be reasonable to not get the vaccine. Since no one can predict the future, that's not a good reason to not be immunized.
Another reason to get the vaccine is to prevent yourself from spreading the flu to others. If you get the flu, and you get pretty sick, while you're sick, you're unlikely to be out spreading it around. But if you get the flu, and you only get a mild case, you're less likely to know you have the flu, and you're less likely to stay home, thus spreading the flu unwittingly. And people who get the flu are contagious for a day or two before they even show any symptoms. If you get the flu vaccine shot, you're never contagious like you are if you get eventual immunity from the actual virus. You might only have a mild case of the flu, but do you want to be the person who spreads it to someone who dies as a result?
Lastly, the reason to get a lot of people vaccinated is that it helps curb the spread of the epidemic. Not only do all the vaccinated people not get sick, but they don't infect someone else. There is a huge benefit to the community at large if you get yourself vaccinated. This is why we have mandatory vaccinations for childhood diseases - it's not because most kids infected with measles would get sick and die from that disease. It's because if you vaccinate almost everyone, then almost no one has to worry about that happening.
That's funny, I don't think I've ever heard that inmates should have cable TV and internet to keep the prison workers from getting sick.
C'mon people, really. We're talking about 200 doses out of tens of millions produced so far.
In addition, it's worth considering that the majority of those being held haven't been charged with a specific offense, much less convicted. This is a case where common human decency intersects with practical disease control.
Finally, don't think that anyone isn't aware that you're just trying to distract the discussion from the fact that you never supported your original statement about cable TV and internet.
There are 3 reasons to get the vaccine, and two of them are because of the benefits to the community from someone getting vaccinated.
But there is an argument that treating prisoners in a humane way with a few 'treats' makes their behavior much more manageable and that does protect the guards and the facility. Rewards for good behavior also encourage good behavior.
I hope you don't have kids with your attitude. Positive attention gets one much better results than negative attention, which seems to be your solution.
Most of the people held in Gitmo have not been convicted of anything, and there's clear evidence that most of those are not guilty of anything. So why should we resign our place as the shining light on top of the hill in order to make you happy that innocent people are neglected?
If one of your loved ones was arrested illegally, what rights would you want them to have to give up to make someone who believed them guilty happy?
People like you are traitorous and unpatriotic. Our laws don't let us behave that way. Our national history doesn't let us behave that way. Bush violated US laws to do what he did, and you support him. That's traitorous.
With this flu, touching contaminated surfaces isn't the way it's transmitted - it's breathing contaminated air.
And let's be real here. These prisoners aren't travelling around to any places where they could be infected. It will be the surrounding community that infects any detainee!
And then an infected detainee can give it back to a soldier, who can then transmit it further.
Like I said, and the argument you can't debate, is there are 3 reasons to get the vaccine, and two of them are because of the benefits to the community from someone getting vaccinated.
They are getting theirs as part of the allotment by the government who is aiming to get those most at risk vaccinated first.
You have no argument that holds up under even the gentlest of scrutiny, you know that, right?
What a dunce you are. The reason to immunize the detainees is so they don't infect our military! Can you not read? Or are you just slow like so many others of your ilk?
I'll post the same thing for the 3rd time.
Like I said, and the argument you can't debate, is there are 3 reasons to get the vaccine, and two of them are because of the benefits to the community from someone getting vaccinated.
You continue to avoid the point that there will be a benefit to the guards if they also vaccinate the detainees.
If you stop acting like a dummy, I'll stop calling you one. If you stop showing us that can't apparently read and digest factual information, I'll stop saying that you have problems with reading comprehension. When you understand something the first time it's in a post, I'll stop saying that you're slow.
Just giving it to the guards is not a good idea. It isn't the best way to protect the guards. The best way to protect the guards is to immunize them and the detainees. And they'll do that when they get the allocation of the vaccine that's going out to the millions of servicemen we have. And that allocation will go out once it's determined that those most at risk have had ample opportunity to get immunized.
(That is a very low probability event, almost as low as any one person being killed in a terrorist attack)
Not just Fox News, but Obama must have missed your "3 reasons to get the vaccine" health warning, even though you've repeated in umpteen posts here for days - Who's the dummy now
And what part of 'doing something that looks good for political purposes to forestall complaints from critics' do you not understand?
And within the allocation to the military, there are tiers of distribution too! I already knew this.
And so do medical officials in charge of the flu vaccine. If there as not a shortage of vaccine, they'd do everyone as soon as they could, but still have some priority lists. Since they can't, they have priority lists and they aren't allowing people who aren't on that priority list to get vaccinated yet.
But that doesn't change the 3 reasons to vaccinate people in any way!
You lose again, and show your inability to address an issue fairly, but rather make unfair and baseless personal attacks!
Can you really not decipher the differences between Dave's argument and mine? really?
But I already addressed this.
So again you show how slow you are, and how you don't absorb info the first time it's presented to you - or you're too dumb to try to read other people's posts that have info in them - are you allergic to facts?
I'll post it again. Just for you.
Another reason to get the vaccine is to prevent yourself from spreading the flu to others. If you get the flu, and you get pretty sick, while you're sick, you're unlikely to be out spreading it around. But if you get the flu, and you only get a mild case, you're less likely to know you have the flu, and you're less likely to stay home, thus spreading the flu unwittingly. And people who get the flu are contagious for a day or two before they even show any symptoms. If you get the flu vaccine shot, you're never contagious like you are if you get eventual immunity from the actual virus. You might only have a mild case of the flu, but do you want to be the person who spreads it to someone who dies as a result?
Now they're acting like the Vaccine is an important part of their Hygiene?
Fox News, Where Mis-information is Expected not just Accepted.
"It Pays To Be A Winner" Hmmm, i think Fox Entertainment is something even the Navy Seals would have Rejected.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
It won't work. I forsee even more liberal Democrats in the 2010 midterms.
You bet.
Look at this history.
Conservative pundits:
-raise alarm over safety of H1N1 vaccine.
-blame Obama for slow distribution of vaccine
-defend health care for Gitmo detainees
-raise alarm over proposed vaccination of detainees
-stir hysteria over authorities using priorities for healthcare ...calling them "death panels" who ration healthcare
-ignore military and civilian "death panels" using prioritized
vaccination schedules to ration the short supply.
-complain that military "death panels" target Gitmo terrorists for eventual
vaccination with "unsafe" vaccine.
If you can figure out what they want, you are smarter than I am.
But, you ask, how could immunizing kids help keep elderly people from getting sick and dying?
Because kids spread the flu a lot more than adults do. If you can use the theory of herd immunity, you prevent a lot of kids from having the opportunity to infect other people (other kids, who infect other kids, etc, as well as parents, younger siblings in day care and older siblings in high school and college, parent's co-workers, grandparents, grocery store cashiers, day care providers, etc).
If you can stop that ponzi scheme where one person infects four others, and 3 of those 4 infect 4 others, and on and on, when you break that cycle because you immunized many of the potential early spreaders of the flu, you have done a great service to those most vulnerable in our society!!
1) All prisoners are required by law to provide good health care to prisoners.
2) Many of the people on the right and at FOX have argued that the vaccine is dangerous and you shouldn't get it. They are consistent -- in their ability to use either side of any issue as an argument.
3) The prisoners still have not been proven guilty in a court of law, and many of them may be innocent. It angers me when the right calls them "the worst of the worst" without more evidence. Their positions and statements are at odds with their claims about how much they love America and that America is the best country on Earth. It argues against their respect for rule of law. I, for one, don't know anything about any of the prisoners, except that they were captured on a battlefield or were ransomed for cash. To them, we are probably "the worst of the worst". All that aside, it is in our interest to treat them humanely. Not to do so will leave a legacy for us like the ones left by the Japanese and others for how they mistreated prisoners. Our brief moment of satisfaction when we mistreat them will live forever as a stain on the American character.