Nicholas Kristof on Guantanamo

Much has been written about the travesty of Guantanamo Bay, but Nicholas Kristof's latest take on the issue in the New York Times is one of the most effective and efficient that I've read yet. The case of Sami al-Hajj gets at the utter emptiness and cynicism of the official rationales for this horrific facility. Kristof correctly argues that opposing torture should not be considered being "squeamish" on terrorists. I would go farther. It's easy and cowardly to keep this charade going; it provides artificial comfort to anxious Americans while our leaders hide from the intelligence, cultural, and political work needed to truly cripple and eliminate violent extremists.

One quibble about the piece: Why did Kristof choose Katie Couric for his analogy? The comparison holds up just as well (actually, better, since al-Hajj is male) with Brian Williams, or Dan Rather, who probably daydreams about such foreign peril anyway. Putting Couric in the clutches of Iran seems to be injecting a needless strain of paternalism into the analysis. Happy Valentines Day, Katie.....