It's true! I don't know for sure, though...

There must be something in the water, because these stories just keep on popping out. Not long after Amnesty International called Guantanamo Bay "the gulag of our times," the head of the group's US branch (William Schulz, below) now says, "We don't know for sure." Here's the relevant quote from the article in full:

'Schulz said, "We don't know for sure what all is happening at Guantanamo and our whole point is that the United States ought to allow independent human rights organizations to investigate."

He also said he had "absolutely no idea" whether the International Red Cross had been given access to all prisoners and said the group feared others were being held at secret facilities or locations.'

So, let me get this straight: you allege that "independent human rights organizations" should be able to have access, but you can't tell us whether one of the world's largest such organizations has an opinion? Has it occurred to you to pick up the phone and call??

Listen, I'm no fan of the Guantanamo situation, but what gets me going about this is the idea that a group like Amnesty International can make broad statements without having access to, apparently, a single fact; and furthermore, they get enough credit from the media that their allegations are presented without disclaimer. I mean, check this out:

[Executive Director William Schulz] recently dubbed Rumsfeld an "apparent high-level architect of torture" in asserting he approved interrogation methods that violated international law.

"It would be fascinating to find out. I have no idea," Schulz told "Fox News Sunday." [emphasis added]

I don't know what all this tells us. But I will say this: before the "mainstream media" can begin to rebuild its reputation in my eyes, it has to become a lot less credulous. They're willing to doubt whatever statements come out of the White House; think how well they'd do if they evinced a healthy skepticism about all their sources!