You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
US study portrays Guantanamo inmates as threat
2007-07-27
See? It's just the "study", "portraying" all those poor shepherds and students as a "threat". Agence France Presse has nearly exhausted its annual supply of sneer quotes:
Nah - Chirac designated them a critical national industry. There are scads of damp limestone caves incubating them by the thousands ... whole piles of white, eyeless squirming grubs eating decaying French pride, moldy cheese rinds and the dregs of wine grapes. When they change over to their black flying form the skies are darkened for hours and the only thing the cow milk is good for is bad cheese, for days thereafter.
A new report commissioned by the US Defense Department argues inmates held at the Guantanamo detention camp in 2004 and 2005 posed a clear threat to US forces.

The report, by a center at the US Military Academy at West Point, runs counter to the picture painted by human rights groups and other critics who have charged that most detainees held at the US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba are harmless and not linked to Al-Qaeda, the New York Times said on Thursday. Based on an analysis of information presented at military hearings for the detainees, the report found that 73 percent of inmates represented a "demonstrated threat" to US and allied forces, the Times wrote. And 95 percent were at minimum a "potential threat," including detainees who had played supporting roles in terrorist groups or had expressed a commitment to extremist goals, the report said, according to the Times.

The detainees included men who had been fighters with Al-Qaeda, attended terrorist training camps and had experience with explosives, sniper rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, the report said.
Nope, none of them a threat, nope, send 'em home to Wazoo ...
The study was written by the evil warmongers at the Combating Terrorism Center at the West Point military academy, which according to its website is "actively involved in supporting the global war on terror through education, research and policy analysis."

A previous analysis of the same evidence presented at military hearings by the right sort of people at Seton Hall University School of Law came to a much different conclusion. The Seton Hall report found that only eight percent of detainees had been described by the US military as Al-Qaeda fighters and that 55 percent had not committed any hostile acts against the United States.
Though 100 percent of those had been planning to do so.
The reports are based on hearings called combatant status review tribunals that decide whether detainees should be held as "enemy combatants."

The Pentagon-sponsored report includes specific criticism of the Seton Hall study, saying it ignored the context of the some information on detainees and engaged in speculation, the newspaper said. While the report comes as the Pentagon seeks to shape domestic and international attitudes toward the camp, Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Felter, director of the Combating Terrorism Center, told the Times it was an independent evaluation and carried out without Pentagon supervision. But Felter added: "They had been getting a lot of inquiries related to this previous study... They had a lot of concerns with the conclusions, but they did not have another study."

The United States still holds about 375 detainees at the camp after opening the prison in January 2001 as part of its "war on terror."
Posted by:Seafarious

#6  Note that these 2 studies looked at 2 completely different sets of data (at least, as reported here). So, being somewhat into science myself, several questions quickly popped in my head:

* How long ago was this Seton Hall "study" and how many of these goons had NOT gone through hearings, where some of this info would've been hashed out?
* Note that the Seton Hall study (again, as reported here) only cited those who actually fought against us via AQ. Almost as if the Taliban never picked up a rock against us, eh?
* Note that (probably) some of these goons have been handed off between these 2 studies, which in itself skews the % numbers. Also, what exactly does a "demonstrated threat" mean vs. "actually" committing hostile acts against us.

And, I came up with these in just 2-3 minutes.
Posted by: BA   2007-07-27 12:14  

#5  They wouldn't be a threat if they were just shot for being illegal combatants...
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2007-07-27 11:46  

#4  Should've leaked it to them. The Times would've believed it more.
Posted by: tu3031   2007-07-27 10:26  

#3  Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Felter, director of the Combating Terrorism Center, told the Times it was an independent evaluation and carried out without Pentagon supervision.

Should a be valid enough endorsement for most.
Posted by: Besoeker   2007-07-27 08:59  

#2  A study?!
It took a goddamned study to determine that the inmates in Gitmo are a threat?

I'm going to apply for some grant money to study the possibility that water is wet.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2007-07-27 08:06  

#1  Sneer quote grubs??? lotp, we're going to have to let you take vacations more often -- that is five star restaurant grade snark!
Posted by: trailing wife   2007-07-27 07:24  

00:00