The 'Judicial Black Hole' of El Salvador's Prisons Is a Warning for Americans
126 comments
·April 4, 2025netsharc
curtis3389
Reminds me more of the Amazon Delivery Partner model where the way you want to do something implies harming innocent people, so you have a third-party do it to shift blame for the deaths.
labster
Suffering as a Service
rkagerer
Not to minimize what's going on down there, but that also sounds like an apt backronym for other SaaS products I've tried.
trentlott
It's more efficient because you introduce a middleman and ignore pesky regulations. Thank god we've discovered this important thing that's never existed in history and created so much wealth exploiting this very new technological dynamic.
User23
On the other hand if you ask the El Salvadorans they seem to quite like having a murder rate that’s barely above 1 per 100,000.
Perhaps it was violent gangsters who were the ones providing suffering as a service?
trentlott
I remember a time when decreased murder rates was just a lie by the government. But we all know nobody's more trustworthy than the El Salvadorian regime, especially when it results in an influx of cash.
BriggyDwiggs42
Wow really violent gangsters hurt people and are bad? Thanks for your insight!
rafram
That’s not relevant to this discussion at all.
rayiner
[flagged]
null
hayst4ck
I don't think many people have actually contemplated what absence of law, defined as rules that apply to rich and powerful people too, is like.
In a world with law, there are restriction on what society's most powerful can and can't do, because there are police officers, detectives, lawyers, and judges, who all work together to make sure there are consequences for crimes.
In a world without law, the only restriction on what someone with a lot of money or power can do is what they can get away with. We flirted with this territory by subjecting the rich to a very different justice system than the poor, but we are now solidly in the territory of no limits to rich people's power so long as they don't threaten other rich people.
We are now in the realm of having to consider not what is allowed to be done, but what can be done. We can no longer ask what is legal to do, only what is possible to do. It is possible for several men to ambush a person, put them in a car, put them in chains, and send them to a black site without due process. That is a thing that can physically happen in reality. That is a thing that has happened in other countries. Locking political opponents in mental institutions is a thing that can happen. While it seems unlikely that it will happen here, "intellectuals," those with the capability of challenging those in power, have been rounded up and forced to dig their own graves. Babies have been smashed against trees. That is a thing that has happened in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge at the killing fields. That is a thing that is possible to happen. Forced labor camps are a thing that can and has happened. Mass famine as a result of disastrous government policy is a thing that can and has happened. Extermination of humans based on genetic traits is a thing that can happen.
There is no magical power that prevents these things from happening. These things happen because people make decisions to act or not act. Individuals choose to passively let bad things happen rather than put themselves at risk to say no.
Who would stop that abduction from happening with force? What if the men doing that are police officers? What if they go after your family the day after?
The constitution is just a piece of paper. Law is just an idea. For it to have any effect on physical reality, it requires someone to take actions on its behalf. Nothing on a piece of paper forces a president to follow a law. Human beings who believe in something enforce, or don't enforce, the law.
What kind of person will you be if the unthinkable starts happening?
SpicyUme
I think there is a decent argument that some of the nihilism we see in the population comes from seeing a general unwillingness to jail or proportionately punish wealthy criminals. As we have heard for a long time, if the bill for breaking the law is too small it is just a fee and if you steal from enough people it becomes a statistic.
I'm not optimistic about this. I think removing due process to allow for exporting people without any rights is a terrible idea. The writers of the declaration of independence specifically named these.
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
Teever
I would go so far as to say that white collar crime is the root of all evil in our society. Every violent criminal, every death of despair, it all can be tied directly to white collar crime.
White collar crime and the lax punishment of it allows individuals to accrue resources that allow them to lobby the government to change laws or bribe law enforcement to not enforce laws against them which allows to accrue even more resources and a feedback loop forms.
This sucks resources away from the system that could be used to enforce other laws against violent crime or even better prevent violent crime nearly entirely through properly funded social programs that stop people from growing up in the terrible conditions that lead to most violent crime in the first place.
If we took white collar crime as seriously as street crime, we’d see a ripple effect. Funds recovered from fraud and tax evasion could go to schools, healthcare, addiction treatment, and housing. Instead, we live under a system where accountability is only for the poor.
A simple and effective way to begin to mitigate white collar crime would be to scale all fines as a proportion of an individuals net worth. This, combined with a rapid scaling of the fine for re-offenders within a period of time (say 3-5 years) would at least begin to chip away at the ill-gotten gains of some criminals.
But I too am not optimistic about where this is all going. I have a terrible in the pit of my stomach that a lot of people are about to die because of the snow ball effect of unchecked corruption in America, and at this point I don't think there's anything that can stop it.
I just hope that there's enough left over to rebuild a more resilient system and that the world can oppose the authoritarians like China that will attempt to fill the power vacuum.
derektank
I think we might also find that who is rich and powerful can easily get flipped upside down over night. Being rich is not actually all that hard when law enforcement exists to uphold private property rights. But without rule of law, everything is quite literally up for grabs and might will make right. I hope our business leaders are mulling this fact over and considering whether they have either the force of personality or the physical strength to keep what they currently have in a new regime.
vineyardmike
> considering whether they have either the force of personality or the physical strength to keep what they currently have in a new regime.
They know the answer and that’s why they lined up like show ponies at the inauguration.
cjbgkagh
The crushing of margins crushes the middle class before it crushes the rich, there is no point where the rich cannot afford private security. While they may end up less wealthy in absolute terms they’ll likely end up more wealthy in relative terms.
curt15
>I don't think many people have actually contemplated what absence of law, defined as rules that apply to rich and powerful people too, is like.
Maybe not many people in the US have, but people in CCP China are plenty familiar. That is an example of "rule of the people" instead of "rule of law". Remember the melanmine milk scandal? Barely a slap on the wrist for Sanlu (the vendor). Or, did anything happen after the child molestation incident at a Beijing kindergarten?
_tik_
Where do you get your news from? I cross-checked your comment with Wikipedia. In the Sanlu case, the executives were sent to jail, and they were ordered to destroy their stock because Sanlu was on the brink of bankruptcy. Life imprisonment and the death penalty don’t exactly sound like a slap on the wrist to me.
The school molestation cases began as rumors from two parents, but real abuse was found and the teachers were jailed. The CCP launched a nationwide kindergarten audit—seems like a fair response, especially with so much fake news online.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RYB_Education
ixtli
The problem with Americans is that they believe themselves to be temporarily embarrassed millionaires. In its original context we find this a funny if depressing cliche but when applied to our current context I think it explains in a very dark way why no one does anything and collective defense never forms.
hayst4ck
That's too simple and unsympathetic which only serves to divide. They don't literally see themselves that way. That's a liberal pejorative of their belief system.
There is (or was) a strong culture of self reliance, which is born out of a concept of freedom being focused around "freedom from" rather than "freedom to."
They see a billionaire's freedom being taken away and worry that if it can happen to someone that powerful, then it can happen to them to. A billionaire being muzzled is a clear statement that there is a power strong enough that everyone must bend to it. Which is a cogent and rational assessment.
What they don't see so easily is that if they don't have money or have to work 2 jobs to support their life, they aren't free. They can't afford to do things, that's not freedom. If they are confined to a bed because they are too poor to afford healthcare, they are not free. Those same billionaires are hoarding wealth and materially damaging people's "freedom to" by paying them the absolute minimum possible. Those same billionaires would enslave them if they could. "Freedom to" is born out of restricting the most rich and powerful.
Unfortunately, the rich and powerful can pay for entire industries that exist to manufacture consent. So they are able to pay for scary content that gets people to focus on other people being dis-empowered, rather than getting them thinking about how to empower themselves.
null
morkalork
Americans, not content with learning from others' mistakes, will now be learning them first hand. The horrors are just beginning.
hayst4ck
Historians, particularly ones who study fascism and Russia/Eastern Europe are already fleeing the country.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/the-fascism-expert-at-...
Baeocystin
Fuck. That is a bleak assessment.
dawatchusay
Europe is also seeing far-right ideology spreading and taking over mainstream politics so this really isn’t an American problem only right now.
hayst4ck
It is the unholy union of a new unregulated form of communication, social media, and unregulated privatized intelligence companies, such as Palantir and Cambrdige Analytica.
Ironically China implemented the GFW because they correctly predicted this exact scenario being used to destabilize themselves.
gotoeleven
I am personally conflicted about this because on the one hand it'd be great if everyone could have a whole bunch of legal process and we could be super sure that we're only getting rid of people that shouldn't be here, but on the other hand biden imported millions of third worlders with no vetting through a combination of lack of border enforcement and wide ranging refugee and amnesty efforts. Now that we're enforcing immigration laws again, how can we give every illegal immigrant a trial? Perhaps the blame lies with the people who created this situation in the first place. This seems a lot like hamas putting their bomb factories under schools and then crying when the IDF bombs them. If you believe immigration laws should be enforced, what else can you do?
hayst4ck
Citizenship is not some indelible mark on your person. It is likely at best some ink on a piece of paper or line in a database that can be lost, stolen, "forgotten", or denied.
Imagine that I were a police officer, I asked for your papers, and then immediately burnt them. How are you going to prove you are a citizen? What if I accused you of faking those documents? What is your recourse? How are you going to prove your citizenship? Are you going to go to the judge that was appointed by the person in power to plead your case? I already think you faked your documents, why should I let you have due process, I already know you are guilty.
Once you take away the structure of law these ideas that you think give you power, like citizenship, are just power on paper. The only real power you have is your friends and family getting upset and going to a journalist to plead your case to the court of public opinion, but maybe those journalists are employed by a billionaire, too, or they are scared they will fall out a window if they question the governments actions.
You are trusting someone who says if you give them power, they will solve your problems. But what if they don't, what if they start causing you problems? Who takes that power away once they already have it or have consolidated it with loyalists?
BriggyDwiggs42
I think that you should consider trying to widen your media diet. Everyone can benefit from listening to opposing perspectives.
milesrout
[flagged]
8note
> so they could use it as an eternal campaign issue
clarification - its the republicans that used it as a campaign issue. the dems just assumed it was settled law
transcriptase
“Assumed it was settled law”, despite RBG herself at the time saying what amounted to “this is a flimsy interpretation that will likely be overturned, but we’re going to make it anyway and the government should codify it into law rather than relying on us legislating from the bench”.
Spoiler: No democratic president/congress ever bothered to, and it was rightfully (in a legal, not moral sense) overturned just as she predicted.
fzeroracer
> What makes you think anyone is operating other than according to law?
The fact that they are not complying with the law.
hayst4ck
The fact a Secretary of Defense (second in command of the US military) and a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (highest ranking officer and principle military advisor) have both said he is unfit and doesn't care about the law.
Jim Mattis, a Secretary of Defense, in a letter titled "I cannot remain silent":
“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us... We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership... We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.” [1]
Mark Milley, a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spent his final days in his position making sure that the military understood that they took an oath to the constitution before president. Mark Milley in his retirement speech said:
We don't take an oath to a wannabe dictator. [2]
[1] https://archive.is/UmFxO -- https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/american-c... [2] https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/29/milley-farewell-spe...
yieldcrv
No party has had 60 or more votes in the Senate for many many years. Which means nothing can pass under the goals of one party. The game is that one party says the measure being presented is unnecessary and redundant and doesnt vote in favor of that law. Rinse, repeat.
But yes, the culpability is ultimately on Congress.
Its also easy to see why it is gridlocked
clipsy
The filibuster rule is determined by the senate itself, and could have been neutered at any point. The gridlock is a conscious choice of the senate majority.
ixtli
This is just the outsourcing of something the US has been doing for a long time.
lenerdenator
It's like the UK Rwandan exile program, but somehow worse.
gpm
Far... far... worse. The Rwanda exile program at least had some concept of due process in both the UK and Rwanda. The Rwanada exile program was at least stopped when the courts told it to instead of trying to remain secret long enough to avoid the courts having a chance to forbid it, and then outright ignoring the court orders forbidding it when that failed.
Here the program is "ICE picks you up off the street, without telling anybody. Writes in some internal document that you're a foreign national member of a gang, without telling anybody or giving you a chance to challenge that. Ships you off to El Salvador's concentration camp, without telling anybody". To this date even the lawyers challenging the program don't actually know the name of everyone who was shipped to El Salvador.
Maybe somebody finds out, by looking at ICE publicity photos that you happen to be in the background of, maybe not. Maybe you are a member of the gang, maybe you're a US citizen whose never even heard of the gang. Doesn't matter, there was no chance to challenge ICEs decision. You weren't even informed of the decision, you were just put on a plane without being told why. And once you're there, even if somebody figures out that's where you are and challenges the decision on your behalf, the US has no authority to bring you back.
rayiner
The homicide rate in El Salvador has dropped from 100 per 100,000 to 2.5 per 100,000 in just a decade: https://www.statista.com/statistics/696152/homicide-rate-in-.... The El Salvadoran government has literally brought the country to an entirely different level of development, vastly improving the lives of most of the country’s 6 million people. Disorder and dysfunction doesn’t just hurt those who are killed. It’s a tax on the whole country, on the economy, and on kids’ futures. It’s system that beats down builders and cultivators and makes them subservient to the sociopaths.
As someone from a dysfunctional third-world country, the revolution in El Salvador gives me hope that change is actually possible in some of these places. It’s such a slap in the face to see that the only news coverage of this is from privileged Americans who can’t possibly understand what this means for the standard of living in that country. Your ancestors did the hard things (England punished all felonies by death for centuries) so you have forgotten how your lives became so comfortable in the first place.
takeda
If you can put any person 12 years and up in jail without a trial, and you don't care about accidentally hurting innocent ones I'm surprised it is 2.5 per 100,000 and not 0 per 100,000.
El Salvador currently has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and its president now is serving second term which is not allowed by their constitution.
maxerickson
Sending people there and then saying you don't have jurisdiction over them anymore is dysfunctional by any reasonable measure.
grandiego
Writing from a country with dysfunctional judiciary, I think this is a logical way to overcome crime, at least temporarily. There isn't a "hygienic" alternative when judges are continuously bribed or blackmailed by gang members.
beej71
Not in the US, it's not.
voidspark
[flagged]
rayiner
Note that this often happens because countries won’t repatriate their own criminal citizens: https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/23/politics/trump-visa-sanctions...
tastyface
"Neri Alvarado Borges was told by ICE officers that he was arrested in February for his tattoos — one of which is a rainbow-colored autism awareness ribbon with the name of his brother, who is autistic."
"The Trump administration admitted in court documents that 'many' of those sent to El Salvador did not have criminal records. As more information about those deported was unearthed, it became clear that some of the 'evidence' against them was as absurd as a tattoo of a Real Madrid CF logo, or an autism awareness tattoo."
"These men—human beings with names, histories, dreams—were marched through a gauntlet of armed guards, beaten, stripped naked, shaved, and thrown into overcrowded cells. A photojournalist on the scene described watching men age a decade in two hours. He watched as one young man sobbed, 'I’m not a gang member. I’m gay. I’m a barber.'"
No, they are not violent criminals. The authorities don't even bother to check.
"There is zero probability that a normal innocent US citizen will be sent there."
I'm 99% sure that we'll start seeing US citizens sent there in the coming months for crimes as basic as vandalism of Trump or Tesla properties.
tastyface
So they "solved" gangs and installed a ruthless and illegal dictatorship in their place — which may in fact be secretly conspiring with those same gangs behind the scenes.
I feel sorry for El Salvador. It may now have to experience several generations of Soviet-style repression and suffering before a new regime is able to overthrow the current one. Meanwhile, thousands of families will never get to find out what happened to their loved ones in those horrifying concentration camps.
FYI, many of our (Americans') ancestors fled their home countries precisely to escape this sort of state-enacted brutality.
cavisne
Nearly 25% of El Salvador is in America, although they fled gang violence not Bukele.
tepalmnagon
>It’s such a slap in the face to see that the only news coverage of this is from privileged Americans who can’t possibly understand what this means for the standard of living in that country.
Or, you could just acknowledge that it is inherently inhumane, despite the improvements it's making for your country. Of course authoritarian measures bring results and of course in a country like El Salvador, in it's previous state, they might even be warranted - but it is still inhumane. Inhumanity sometimes has to be fought with inhumanity, Americans of all people should acknowledge that. If you want to argue that it is not inhumane, however, then you are wrong. Imprisonment without due process is inherently inhumane.
rayiner
What you’re talking about isn’t “humane,” it’s pathological individualism. It’s a moral viewpoint so warped by individualism that you can’t rationally weight the benefit of allowing 6 million people to walk safely in the streets and live their lives against the costs to less than 2% of the population—the overwhelming majority of whom are bad people who prey on others.
A humane society is one where the majority, collectively, suppresses the antisocial minority to enable the society to flourish. A society where ordinary people must cower because the state cannot protect them is inhumane.
tastyface
How do you know that the "overwhelming majority" are "bad people who prey on others" without a functional judicial system to prove it?
As the number of incarcerated grows from 2% to 5% to consolidate Bukele's power, what recourse will anyone have outside the party elite?
The pattern of strongman politicians, indefinite emergency measures, and erosion of liberties to manifest full bore dictatorship has repeated over and over and over again in the 20th and 21st centuries — and you still can't see it happening? You may enjoy it now, but consider this the honeymoon phase: it only gets worse from here on out.
anonzzzies
So if they lock up, torture (you are a gang member as you looked weird at your neighbour of 20 years who happens to be a friend of a the local police chief) and kill you and your family without any due process that's fine for the greater good? Don't think many people have that idea, probably nor do you; you just think so as it didn't happen to you yet. The overwhelming majority as you say does a lot here; where is the proof and process that it is the overwhelming majority? And that these people are not just people like you and your kids but who do not agree with the regime? According to the process/system, all people in Cambodia were guilty as well. You cannot have read any history and talk like this so I guess you never have.
It will get worse anyway; that 2% will rise and that gov will never go away, killing everyone who opposes them. History shows this every time.
rbetts
So easily you gloss over millions of Americans who fought to end slavery, who fought for women's right to vote, who fought for desegregation, who fought for labor rights,... The "comfortable life" in America isn't a 300 year old gift of extra judicial killings - it's a continued culture across 10 generations of individuals and communities fighting for ever fairer freedoms under a shared rule of law.
rayiner
You’re retconning history from a mid-20th century civil rights lens. That lens focuses on increasing access to a civilizational order that has already been built. Its about expanding access to what white males already had. But it’s an inadequate lens for understanding how that order was built in the first place.
The hard part is getting “from 0 to 1.” You need a state, the state needs to impose order and gain control over warlords, you need law and civil institutions, you need a government that is controlled by more than a handful of people, etc.
England or New England in 1800 was already a more developed society than Bangladesh or Somalia or Iraq in 2024, even though slavery still existed and suffrage wasn’t universal. Just getting to that point would be transformational for much of asia, the middle east, and africa.
This is why nation building in the 20th and early 21st century has failed so spectacularly. You can go into Iraq and create a nice constitution with rights and universal suffrage and religious freedom, but you’re just redistributing 0. The “rights lens” doesn’t actually tell you how to get Iraq in 2024 to the point where England was in 1800.
defrost
> England punished all felonies by death for centuries
No.
For less than a century, during peak "Bloody Code" almost all felonies specified a death sentence .. that doesn't in any way mean that all felonies were punished by death.
A large number of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century statutes specified death as the penalty for property offences (even minor ones), meaning that the vast majority of the people tried at the Old Bailey could be sentenced to hang.
This body of statutes, which later came to be criticised as a “Bloody Code”, meant that one could be executed for stealing as little as a handkerchief or a sheep. Nevertheless, judicial procedures prevented a blood bath by ensuring that sentences could be mitigated, or the charge redefined as a less serious offence.
[..]
As a result, as documented on the Digital Panopticon website, between 1780 and 1868 less than a fifth of convicts sentenced to death were actually executed.
rayiner
Interesting, thank you for that clarification. It looks like execution rates were as high as 30 per 100,000 in 1600, dropping to under 5 per 100,000 by 1700: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5955207/
The US in 1700 was about 1 per 100,000: https://www.cato.org/blog/despite-federal-return-capital-pun...
The number of executions in the US annually today is only 0.008 per 100,000.
khazhoux
It’s worth a debate, even though in American culture we hold this idea as beyond any consideration.
Benjamin Franklin is quoted as saying "it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer". That's a noble thought, but those 100 criminals can cause suffering of 100s of others. So his assessment isn't necessarily accurate. Every innocent father jailed in El Salvador might save 10 children from losing their own father.
anonzzzies
You can use a proper system to do that though to minimise the risk of jailing innocent people. It's all easy talking until you get locked up in an animal case without recourse until you die. Ask those innocent ones how they like taking one for the team.
rayiner
Note that Franklin was the product of a society that had been executing felons for hundreds of years. The homicide rate in both England and New England in the early 1700s was around 2 per 100,000, lower than any western hemisphere country today.
dleary
Where did you get that figure from?
There are many sources online that agree, so I won’t bother to link them, that the population of New England was ~100k in 1700 and ~300k in 1750.
The claim that that actual rate of murder in all of New England was 2-6 per year is not believable.
squigz
Canada's is less than 2 per 100k
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=351000...
I also have to doubt the accuracy of such data collected in the 1700s.
giraffe_lady
Hey is it still too early to call it fascism you guys.
lazyasciiart
It’s always too early, until you’ll be disappeared for saying it.
pyronik19
Like in the UK for spicy social media posts?
Volundr
Refresh my memory, who was sent to an extrajudicial prison in a foreign country without so much as a trail for a spicy social media post in the UK?
SauciestGNU
There you get arrested for being a Nazi. In America you get disappeared for not being one. There was a bit of excitement in the 1940s that gives us moral guidance on what to do when Nazis rear their heads.
null
hackable_sand
No, but people will be waking up at different times.
arkis22
the problem is that when you get to call it for sure its too late to do something about it
blatantly
A concentration camp for people of a certain race. Blocked by judiciary but proceeded anyway. Nope need more evidence.
It is not prison if there is no due process.
barbazoo
At least stocks are up /s
null
at_a_remove
This is pretty sad as a headline. It's not a warning, it is business as usual.
Civil asset forfeiture started expanding in the 1970s and in the next decade, we got Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. Gitmo? 2002. Room 641A is the next year. Black ops sites, aka "we can torture you as long as we're not in the United States" is somewhere around there. Extrajudicial killings, I read 2,400 in just Pakistan, that's Obama-era, right? Stingrays, about 2007 or so. Qualified immunity out the yin-yang; hell, you can just shoot up someone's house for nearly a day trying to capture a shoplifter and the courts will shrug. That's 2015. Even the ACLU has become notably more partisan.
Decades ago, back when I thought people were capable of learning from anything other than a hot stovetop, I used to say that we ought to be careful when making manacles to restrict various liberties and cautious when providing more tools for law enforcement, because you just do not know for a certainty that the manacles you made will not be around your own wrists and that the latest tools of the law will not be aimed at you. "Pretend you will eventually be on the losing side," I said.
We've been going along with this business because it was convenient to believe that these little inches taken will not add up to miles. This will only be used on drug peddlers, pedophiles, terrorists, and money launderers, WINK WINK. We have been building this machine for a long time, and we've been smug as a bug on a landline with a FISA rubberstamp warrant.
Why this headline, now? And also, why this headline, now? Now and this because the people who were very comfortable are finally cottoning on to the fact that the various abilities tacked on to the Executive Branch over the decades might actually be used against them (us? ME? but I am one of the good guys, I only helped construct the machine!) and, while fearful, are still unwilling to engage with their own multi-decade culpability, so they must focus on the latest outrage and nothing before it. To do otherwise would suggest that they have some kind of involvement in this particular outcome and just making noises like "Trump," "Musk," and "fascism" keeps their metaphorical hands clean.
At this point, when I mention this kind of thing online, it's less from a desire to sway opinion (almost no chance of that occurring) and more of an opportunity for me, years down the line, to point and say, "Yup. Called it."
black_13
[dead]
oalgo
[dead]
Heh, even the extrajudicial imprisonment camps can be outsourced now. Why look bad having your military run Guantanamo when you can do the Uber model it for a cheap price.
Heh, or is a pun on AirBnB the more apt name for it.. "Concrete Floor & Indefinite Detention"?