Pentagon Pushes Debunked "Returning To Terror" Hype

Pentagon Pushes Debunked "Returning To Terror" Hype
By Cernig Wednesday Jan 14, 2009 3:15pm


The pro-Gitmo, pro-torture camp are getting all excited about a Pentagon
statement that 61 former detainees from the Guantanamo Bay facility "appear
to have returned to terrorism since their release from custody." But that
bald figure is very misleading.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said 18 former detainees are confirmed as
"returning to the fight" and 43 are suspected of having done in a report
issued late in December by the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Morrell declined to provide details such as the identity of the former
detainees, why and where they were released or what actions they have taken
since leaving U.S. custody.
"This is acts of terrorism. It could be Iraq, Afghanistan, it could be
acts of terrorism around the world," he told reporters.

Morrell said the latest figures, current through December 24, showed an 11
percent recidivism rate, up from 7 percent in a March 2008 report that
counted 37 former detainees as suspected or confirmed active militants.

Only "suspects"? That's pretty thin gruel when no details are given. That
March figure is itself up from a 2007 claim of 30 "returning to terror"
after their release from Gitmo - but that claim was firmly debunked by
reports from the hard-working Seton Hall School of Law.

Just as the Government's claims that the Guantanamo detainees "were picked
up on the battlefield, fighting American forces, trying to kill American
forces," do not comport with the Department of Defense's own data, neither
do its claims that former detainees have "returned to the fight." The
Department of Defense has publicly insisted that at least thirty (30) former
Guantanamo detainees have "returned" to the battlefield, where they have
been re-captured or killed. To date, however, the Department has described
at most fifteen (15) possible recidivists, and has identified only seven (7)
of these individuals by name. More strikingly, data provided by the
Department of Defense reveals that:

- at least eight (8) of the fifteen (15) individuals identified alleged by
the Government to have "returned to the fight" are accused of nothing more
than speaking critically of the Government's detention policies;

- ten (10) of the individuals have neither been re-captured nor killed by
anyone;

- and of the five (5) individuals who are alleged to have been re-captured
or killed, two (2) of the individuals' names do not appear on the list of
individuals who have at any time been detained at Guantanamo, and the
remaining three (3) include one (1) individual who was killed in an
apartment complex in Russia by local authorities and one (1) who is not
listed among former Guantanamo detainees but who, after his death, has been
alleged to have been detained under a different name.

It seems clear the people being referred to in this new statement aren't a
different set of Gitmo detainess and include that spurious 30 and doubtless
a bunch more too.

Moreover, not one of those named in that earlier claim had attacked
Americans after his release from Gitmo and all had been released "by
political appointees of the Department of Defense, sometimes over the
objection of the military" rather than through the tribunals process. Seton
Hall's studies also found that a bare 55% of Gitmo detainess had ever taken
up arms against the US and only 8% were suspected of being members of Al
Qaida. The vast bulk of Gitmo detainees had been turned in by local warlords
for bounty payments with no US witnesses to their alleged involvement in
terrorism at all. No wonder their recidivist rate is so low, at a Pentagon
figure of 11%. That compares with "an estimated 67.5%" in the general prison
population.

With Obama seemingly set on closing Gitmo down, and Susan J. Crawford,
convening authority of military commissions, coming forward to say that some
cases cannot be prosecuted because the evidence is indelibly stained by
torture, the timing of this Pentagon "just believe us" statement is a little
too pat. It is undoubtably true that some dangerous people will likely be
freed because of the Bush administration's arrogant belief in its own
ability to re-write law to suit itself, although the number is far lower
than the Pentagon is trying to suggest. Even so, any failure to keep the
public safe should be blamed on Bush and his coterie.




Login or Register to post comments.

32 comments
Easy to Spot Someone with an...
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:22 - An Average Joe
....orange jumpsuit. Just ask them to sign an agreement that they will keep
them on when they leave.

Geez....isn't it obvious?

a.. Login or register to reply
We Need to Keep 'em Locked Up
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:23 - That Mick Piobr
for no good reason so that the Government can set a precedent and

start locking up American citizens whenever they feel like it.

a.. Login or register to reply
Oh, Lord!
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:25 - Amitola
I cannot believe any of this.
1st: bin Laden is DEAD!
2nd: no one in our government has told the truth since 2000 (and probably a
long time before that).
3rd: Who cares? I've never been afraid of "terrorists."
I'm afraid of the international financial cabal, the NWO
guys who seem to be winning in this war to take control of
the USA for their own purposes.

[Deleted. Please don't go there. I don't want to clean up the flamewar.
thank you. Site Monitor]

a.. Login or register to reply
Re: Pentagon Pushes Debunked "Returning To Terror" Hype
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:27 - pissed off patricia
Be sure and catch Hardball tonight and listen to this one guy try to blame
Clinton for 9-11, because bush didn't change his national security plans
away from Clinton's that is why we were hit. Then after 9-11 bush put in the
Patriot Act and all that other *** and thats what has kept us safe. Even
Chris seemed to think it was BS.

a.. Login or register to reply
Well, they are partly right
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:52 - ConcernedCanuck
Clinton probably is party responsible. He continued the bombing campaigns
started by Bush Sr., and used almost identical reasons for doing it. People
watching their family get killed from bombing, don't ask if the guy doing it
is Republican or Democrat.

a.. Login or register to reply
Was Clinton bombing Saudi Arabia?
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:10 - Andy K
Because, iirc, most of those hijackers were Saudis and none were from Iraq.

And, ya know, the big AQ talking point was "Get the infidel troops out of
the Holy Land!"

a.. Login or register to reply
Military bases
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:14 - ConcernedCanuck
were in Saudi Arabia with jets leaving there, to bomb Iraq. That was the
point. And those AQ talking points were prob made up at the local CIA
meeting of the week. Wait till the true terrorist campaign actually does
start after military campaigns over there for 20 years. Some person with
revenge in mind, is going to do a real terrorist attack that isn't US gov't
sponsored. And then the tears will be crying, "why do they hate us?"

a.. Login or register to reply
And there were US Air Force bases in Turkey
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:20 - Andy K
Why didn't AQ hit the barracks at those bases?

a.. Login or register to reply
Maybe
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:35 - ConcernedCanuck
cuz there is no AQ?

a.. Login or register to reply
Re: Pentagon Pushes Debunked "Returning To Terror" Hype
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:30 - pissed off patricia
I think this administration is scared shitless that someone is going to pull
the right thread and a whole lot of *** is going to unravel. Not all the
crooks will be heading back to Texas next Tuesday.

a.. Login or register to reply
Interesting Deja Vu
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:33 - timtimes
You're running a story about authoritarianism vis-s-vis made up wars and
propaganda, and I'm running my second online poll, which tangentially raises
the question in a more gentle fashion about a different made-up war.

The first online poll I did was on Why God Abandoned Sarah Palin and was
extremely well received. I hope you enjoy this little trip back down memory
lane as well....

Flashback to the Sixties
{ Deleted, Blogwhoring. SiteMonitor}

Enjoy.

a.. Login or register to reply
It Was Okay
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:44 - That Mick Piobr
but I couldn't vote.

"I don't remember too much about it" wasn't one of the choices. ;)

a.. Login or register to reply
Re: Pentagon Pushes Debunked "Returning To Terror" Hype
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:40 - Tighelander
We should put most of them up at Disney World for six months, and then send
them home with a new wardrobe, a new Caddy, and a big note that says Sorry!

a.. Login or register to reply
Give Obama a break.
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:49 - They all suck
He's got to deal with a lot of ***.

Give the guy a break.

a.. Login or register to reply
If I Were a Healthy Young Man
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:58 - That Mick Piobr
and some country imprisoned me, tortured me and allowed me absolutely no due
process for years -

I'd be tempted to take some action. It wouldn't involve stern letters.

a.. Login or register to reply
I'd do it...
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:05 - Milquetoast
....if I was old.

....and I aint never even been to guantanimo.

a.. Login or register to reply
Strange (il)logic
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 15:59 - Scarabus
For the sake of argument let's stipulate that a number of former detainees
have committed acts of terror since leaving gitmo. Two questions.

First, why did they do so? How do we know that they didn't commit acts of
terror because of what was done to them and others at gitmo? that gitmo
isn't more of a terrorist manufactury than a terrorist protection?

Second, what are the alternatives to respecting the demands both of
international law and of common humanity? Trample on the principles that
have defined our nation? Become virtual slaveholders once again, kidnapping
people from their homeland, holding them and abusing them with any legal
recourse for them or accountability for us?

And let's not forget that, independent of justice, honor, and humanity, what
goes around comes around. We do it to citizens of other nations at gitmo,
simply because we're strong enough to get away with it? They we give tacit
encouragement for every other nation or organization to do it to our own
citizens.

a.. Login or register to reply
First, why did they do so?
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 17:02 - pinkobait
They hate us for our Free-dumb.

a.. Login or register to reply
Couldn't happen
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:02 - Sec_Humanist
The Pentagon making up numbers for whatever nefarious reason??? Impossible.
I refuse to believe that as their historical track record is as lily-white
as the driven snow. Every mind filled with pop culture distractions knows
that.

a.. Login or register to reply
Your post made me wonder...
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:12 - anney
Will there be a sudden cessation of government propaganda beginning on
January 21? I recall it's being the OTHER way when Reagan was elected.
Suddenly, America had enemies EVERYWHERE and our nation was threatened. The
difference in tone was absolutely startling.

Anway, that's what I'll be looking for, the kinds of comments that will
appear after Obama is sworn in.

a.. Login or register to reply
Clinton
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:16 - ConcernedCanuck
smiled as he bombed Iraq. Did that make it any better? Does anyone suppose
that relatives of the dead refer to US presidents by their political party?

a.. Login or register to reply
Re: Pentagon Pushes Debunked "Returning To Terror" Hype
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:18 - ron
How do you know he smiled? What a stupid remark.

a.. Login or register to reply
Well, a lot of us would understand
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:06 - anney
I've seen several comments from folks on this and other blogs saying they'd
become terrorists against the US if they'd been tortured for years. So it's
an easy rumor to spread even among those who approve of torture, who surely
feel the same way. Right now it's a claim made to try to keep the Guantanamo
prisoners from being released.

I think, too, in the interests of honesty and transparency we should be
asking for details, names, date of release, were they tortured, who they're
associated with now, what country they live in, etc. Otherwise, it's just
propaganda.

I keep wanting to tell these folks about their propaganda, "It ain't gonna'
work this time."

a.. Login or register to reply
Bye bye
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:10 - bobbquackenbush
Geoff Morrell is someone I will like to see shown the door.

a.. Login or register to reply
human rights
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:12 - constituent
in yersterday's NYT an article about Obama and Gitmo mentioned that the
pentagon is pressing ahead with plans to begin a trial on Jan. 26 of one of
it's high profile suspects a Canadian detainee named Omar Khadr. he is the
guy that susposively killed an american in 2002 in afghanistan. at the time
he was 15yoa

a.. Login or register to reply
Thank you USA
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:26 - Ummm
For making us all torturers. It is sad to see such injustice in the name of
security. Our country is attacked so rarely it is unreal. Lets see, Pearl
Harbor and New York, they were many years between each other so this
justifys having an illegal prison in Cuba. Bush did a good job of scaring
the *** out of everyone. Neat!

a.. Login or register to reply
yeah, they'll be heading to
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:30 - cswat
whoops

a.. Login or register to reply
If they weren't terrorists before...
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:30 - FilthyHarry
I don't know, I'm a fairly easy going fella, but snatch me off the street,
torture me and hold me without process for who knows how many years, then
release me in a way that makes me an outcast or an illegal in my home
country... I might harbor ill-will towards my oppressors and turn to
criminal activities partly due to rage and partly due to having no other
recourse open to me. But hey, thats just me.

a.. Login or register to reply
Keep Them Forever??
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:43 - Dalton
So, is that the premise the pro-Gitmo camp is arguing? That we basically
hold them...forever?

Where would we hold them?

Who would be paying the cost of holding them?

It's absolutely ludicrous to believe that all of those being held would
immediately "return to the fight."

a.. Login or register to reply
Re: Pentagon Pushes Debunked "Returning To Terror" Hype
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 16:46 - living-abomination
well, i'll tell you one thing for damn sure - if they weren't terrorists
before, they are now.

a.. Login or register to reply
Re: Pentagon Pushes Debunked "Returning To Terror" Hype
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 17:59 - raker
If the government doesn't have enough evidence to convict these people then
they have no business holding them.

a.. Login or register to reply
Maybe I'm naive, but now we can give recidivism rates here
Wed, 01/14/2009 - 19:59 - fastfeat
as if these were state parolees failing to check in with their POs?...

On the other hand, our government acts as if confining these few at Gitmo
will keep some sort of proverbial lid on Pandora's Box; no other pissed off
wannabe terrorist could ever figure out how to harm 'Murika...

Am I schizophrenic or what?

a.. Login or register to reply
32 comments
Login or Register to post comments.



--
oining the "Twinkie Defense", "Television Intoxication", "Wrestling Made Me
Do it", now add "Halo 3" to the list of rejected defenses for criminal
behavior

The replacement for NASA's Hubble telescope will be the Webb telescope,
named after NASA admin James Webb. Launching on a French rocket because NASA
rockets can't launch diddly for at least the next decade


.