It is acceptable for the Polish government to house its current criminals in Auschwitz-Birkenau

In response to your clairification, I do not want to use Hel as the island. The point of the island is to give an ambigous option to the problem, and with the unknown risk of danger I believe if the Island is not clairified it will add to the philisophical meat of this debate. Ill post my one contentions and keep this round short, though reminding my opponent I am withholding certain materiel, because I have absolutely no idea where this debate will go. I hope this debate will be approached like the notion of using Auschwitz-Birkenau was just announced in the Polish Government, because I will be arguing that any option is better, it is not a viable option and should not even be seriously considered Auschwitz-Birkenau is a monstrously innapropriate place to house prisoners because of practical and moral issues. Subpoint A) The History of the place demands its sanctity is not disturbedI think we all know the history, so keeping prisoners in what is now a state museum for the largest hate crime in history would be like housing criminals in Dome of the Rock Mosque. This place should be seen by not just Poland but the global community as absolutely untouchable-the only appropriate use is commemorating the victims that died there. The gravity of the situation-having 1000 prisoners and no idea what to do with them, in no way outweighs the absolute sanctity of this place of remembrance. This place should be as respected by all humans as a church is to all Christians-it is an international symbol or remembrance and tolerance, despite its evil use in WWII, thats what it has evolved to be. To defile it by filling it with prisoners would be unacceptable to every human being on the planet-no matter what the alternatives are. Subpoint B) Using it as a prison is the worlds penultimate hate crimeRe-opening Auschwitz-Birkenau as a prison is re-opening the wounds of the Holocaust. It is extremely intolerant to use this place as a jail once again no matter what the reason is. It does not matter that these men are guilty while the original inhabitants were innocent because it has become of symbol of persevering over hatred and intolerance-so to have people once again locked inside and residing on its bunks would undo all that and be a slap in the face to humanity in general. Mainly, the international Jewish Community will be in an uproar and I bet Poland could bet to be on the recieving end of a few of Isreals 200 nuclear weapons-while Poland has none to defend itself with. Subpoint C) This is a breach of the actual prisoners rightsPro is likely to talk a lot about the rights of the prisoners. But remember Auschwitz-Birkenau was designed to be as cruel as possible to its inmates, and to be able to cram as many people as possible into small places. Polish people respect this place almost as much as Jewish people, and I am sure many of them will violentely oppose to being put in there. It is degrading and disgracing to jam people like cattle into bunks that were meant for horses. Subpoint D) It could be said that Auschwitz-Birkenau is in fact the "ideal" prison-it is not. This was meant to house large amounts of harmless civilians, a violent criminal could find it quite easy to break out of the place, it relies heavily on flimsy electric fences that rubber handled clippers could destroy. In fact since most of its technology was made before 1940, it is seriously outdated, at the expense of the prisoners health and the prisons security. So although the other two options are indeed quite unnaceptable as well, there are not as quite unnaceptable-they do not break so many human rights and indeed are better options than re-opening Auschwitz-Birkenau as a prison.