There is nothing that can, or needs to, be said about this.

This is a trailer for a documentary film about Guantanamo Bay. I include it because there’s a clip in it I want to point out. Anybody who saw The Late Edition on BBC4 the other day will have seen the same clip. It’s Donald Rumsfeld defending Guantanamo Bay. It’s pretty well right at the start of the video, and the really interesting bit comes right after the word “convention”.

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tTjG0aDlXvw&rel=1&border=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent"width="425" height="355">

I say “interesting”. Really “shocking” or “indefensible” or “moronic” would have been a better choice. In any case, there’s really not a lot else that can be added to that. And I can’t imagine any context in which that clip could be placed to make it seem okay, with the possible exception of immediately after an interviewer asking “how might a belligerent thug defend conditions in Guantanamo Bay?”. The conditions in Guantanamo are “consistent with the Geneva convention for the most part”. What an utter cunt.