| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Release and Cover up |
| 2010-05-03 |
| The most transparent administration in history withholds national security information BY Stephen F. Hayes On May 1, 2009, Republican senator Christopher Bond wrote to President Obama with questions about the handling of detainees from Guantánamo Bay. Bond, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, was concerned about reports that an increasing number of transferred detainees were going “back to the battlefield to kill American soldiers.' He asked a series of specific questions about the detainees and the process for releasing or transferring them. Almost a full year later, on April 19, 2010, Bond received a response from the Justice Department, which Obama had designated as the lead agency on the detainee task force. Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legislative Affairs Ronald Weich wrote offering a vague description of detainee review process and promising that the detainee task force made its decisions only after a “careful examination of the available and relevant information pertaining to each detainee.' Blah, blah, blah. For more than a year, Obama officials, with the Justice Department in the lead, have hidden crucial information on detainees from the public. They have refused to discuss the decisions of the Guantánamo Bay task force or to identify the 60 individuals who serve on it. They have declined to provide information on the detainees that have been transferred or released. And they have ignored repeated requests for specifics on the growing number of former detainees who have returned to jihad—terrorists that the U.S. military is now fighting in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and beyond. The recidivist group is growing. The Weekly Standard has learned that the Pentagon has an updated version of its “Return to the Battlefield' report, which tracks Guantánamo Bay recidivism. The percentage of known or suspected recidivists is now “north of 20 percent,' according to a source familiar with the latest data. In June 2008, when the Pentagon released its first report, the estimated number of recidivists was just 37. In January 2009, that figure had climbed to 61. By April 2009, it was 74. In February 2010, following reports in this magazine and other media outlets that the number of recidivists had spiked, White House counterterrorism chief John Brennan acknowledged that the recidivism rate had reached 20 percent. A stunning 112 of the 560 detainees who had been transferred or released had returned to jihad. In just a year and a half, the estimated number of Gitmo recidivists tripled. |
| Posted by:ed |
| #2 "Transfer" the subject from one facility to another. Shift him from one location at Gitmo to another. Take him out of the general population to another "facility". Camp Delta has him. He is no longer at Camp Alpha. And make it appear he is in the fast track process for "release". Do all the paperwork, keep it complex and and involving. Bureaucratic and mucho ladida. Just like last time with the last guy who was "released". He is to be sent back to (name a country) and turned over to the native security personnel there for their security processing. Except he is never going to ever get there. You can pay somebody off to make a file of paperwork but that's all it is: paperwork.( everything appears to be in order). No one in Goombah goes to meet the delivery for good old Abu Butkis. We deliver a big bribe instead and a years subscription to Playboy magazine. Sign here. If any Journalists want to check on it after that they can talk to the sweaty guard in the Turban with the toothpick in his mouth and garlic goat on his breath down at the "facility. Sign the guestbook and we give you your shoes back. And it will be assumed by them that Abu Butkiss yes indeedy was sent ( it must have been the nightshift crew)that signed off on this... and simply disappeared very quickly back among his friends. Make a false trail.( hell make a couple of false trails) Leave the door open. If anybody checks...then muddy the water and show them the "papers"( signed here and here). Yup he was "released" it says so right here. Goombah has him. Go and see what you can find in Goombah. Make it happen. What really happened was he was put in the Gitmo Van and in transit to the next stop he was injected with an industrial strength animal tranquilizer. Then the first van passed his comatose body to a second van midway on highway Camino Reale...(or whatever is feasible and believable)..and the second van puts him in a large heavy locked canvas Mail Bag and he gets driven with the other mail to the airport. The Mail is delivered to West Africa but that one particular bag is thrown out at 35,000 feet (choose someone reliable and pay him well) somewhere a thousand miles south of the Azores in the mid Atlantic. A flight did land in Goombah and somebody did get a delivery of ( see the paperwork says so) and the native Security people did put something in a van and take it to their "facility". Its all in the file. ( If you are a Journalist and a staunch Democrat) You can go check on the paperwork in Goombah too, ask for Captain Hajimullah. Try the monkey stew and see the local color in the capitol. Be sure and get a souvenir. |
| Posted by: Critter Control 2010-05-03 07:52 |
| #1 The unspoken reality of "release" is clear. In spite of the Geneva Convention, signatories or non-signatories, the current administration no longer desires or intends to take prisoners. Prisoners are only taken in war...right? Any attempt at rehabilitation of these, for a moment let me call them captured people is clearly out of question and moreover harmful, as it simply leads one to the obvious conclusion and politically forbidden acceptance of 'hate and Islam' as core causes and central themes of a much, much larger, global struggle. As we have often been told, we can never be "at war with Islam." The trial of these prisoners, either civil or military, to include sentencing, possible execution by the current administration is now clearly unthinkable. Dead yes, but certainly not at the hands of someone throwing the switch from the White House possessing an Islamic name and childhood upbringing. So it's back into the fish pond for these buggers and a distant, far removed death via recidivism and martyrdom, all as the profit wills. Let the dirty work and risk be accepted by the soldiers, airmen, and Marines. With that gutless, politically motivated reality comes the apparent intended political dividend of not having to deal with interrogations, claims of "torture" or actionable (but possibly faulty or flawed) intelligence and other nastiness. The equation goes something like ....no prisoners, no "torture", no risk taking through potentially faulty intelligence. Soon we'll have emptied GITMO and voila..... no more bad news. Problem solved. And so it goes, multiculturalism and the 'friend making' of all things Islam continues and will continue by an administration who's leader bears the names of Islam. "Then again you could say that a horse with wings can't really be a horse." - Pegasus Yes indeed, not taking prisoner is a win for the administration, but unfortunately not for the ranker and the man and woman at the pointy end of the spear. Those who voted for him should acknowledge the fact young soldiers, airmen, and Marines are being put at risk and will die from his policy of release. As Americans, they should care about the consequences of this policy. The cowardly, empty suited emposter they voted for certainly does not. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-05-03 04:52 |