Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WikiLeaks: Guantanamo Bay Secrets Revealed (1,000s of Pages From Ten Years)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 07:34 PM
Original message
WikiLeaks: Guantanamo Bay Secrets Revealed (1,000s of Pages From Ten Years)
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 08:31 PM by Hissyspit
Source: Telegraph / Washington Post

WikiLeaks: Guantanamo Bay terrorist secrets revealed

The files detail the background to the capture of each of the 780 people who have passed through the Guantanamo facility in Cuba

By Christopher Hope, Robert Winnett, Holly Watt and Heidi Blake
Last Updated: 1:06AM BST 25/04/2011
Guantanamo Bay has been used to incarcerate dozens of terrorists who have admitted plotting terrifying attacks against the West while imprisoning more than 150 totally innocent people, top-secret files disclose.

- snip -

However, the shocking human cost of obtaining this intelligence is also exposed with dozens of innocent people sent to Guantanamo and hundreds of low-level foot-soldiers being held for years and probably tortured before being assessed as of little significance.

The Daily Telegraph, along with other newspapers including The Washington Post, today exposes Americas own analysis of almost ten years of controversial interrogations on the worlds most dangerous terrorists. This newspaper has been shown thousands of pages of top-secret files obtained by the WikiLeaks website.

The disclosures are set to spark intense debate around the world about the establishment of Guantanamo Bay in the months after 9/11 which has enabled the US to collect vital intelligence from senior Al Qaeda commanders but sparked fury in the middle east and Europe over the treatment of detainees.

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/847...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Why isn't it closed now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. O is controversy-averse. The GOP may call him names. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #3
23. I am of the belief he has not
closed it (gitmo) not because he is afraid of being called names but rather he is thinking in the long term and in the long term he probably doesnt want to give them (the republicans) any real ammo to use against him than he already has with healthcare and the fact we are deeply in debt (which is really more the fault of the senate and congress) during the upcoming 2012 elections.
Assuming he wins re-election we might very well see a closing of it finally where as if a republican wins it you can be sure they wont close it and might well decide to expand it for other prisoners including some of our own citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marasinghe Donating Member (754 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #23
42. then - i guess, "doing the right thing" has fallen below "political expediency",
in the scale of things. and jailing & torturing a few innocents is something he can live with, if it'll get him re-elected & allow him to solve all the problems of the US - he couldn't solve his 1st term. kind of like the death penalty advocates mantra, that killing a few wrongly-convicted innocents is worth it - if the vast number of monstrous murderers can be executed.

granted - all political leaders have played this game, even FDR & Jimmy Carter. but, i figured - wrongly, of course - that we'd outgrow this kind of reptile-think, by the dawn of the 21st century.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #42
94. That's been happening since day one,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cherchez la Femme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #42
124. Has it been any other way this current century?
Heck, regarding those we've elected to power I'm more convinced that the first thing you mention has had priority over the latter for decades...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Don't lose "hope" okay?
"I've said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo and I will follow through on that. I've said repeatedly that America doesn't torture. And I'm going to make sure we don't torture. Those are part and parcel of an effort to regain America's moral stature in the world." - Barack Obama, 60 Minutes (2008) link


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BetsysGhost Donating Member (176 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #7
96. interesting quote there
America does not Torture

This from what year? 2008?

Obama was doing Bushs bidding before he was even elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
15. Ban on U.S. trials for Guantanamo prisoners passes House again-Politico 12/17/10
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 10:14 PM by MilesColtrane
http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/1210/Ban_on_...

Durbin: Senate will back Guantanamo transfer ban

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/1210/Durbin_...

__________________________

I guess Obama could just let them all go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caraher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. There's a thought
Either allow US trials or they must go free... Blame the Republicans for fearing to prosecute terrorists if he lets them go.

Politically, the best way to do this is probably to release them gradually starting with the ones least likely to be convicted. Surely there are plenty of those. We can hang onto the "big fish" until those against trials come to their senses...

Hmmm... what did I just write? Maybe we do just let them all go...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. one thing to keep in mind
"150 former Guantanamo detainees are either confirmed or suspected of reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities, according to a new intelligence assessment released by the Director of National Intelligences office on Tuesday. In total, 598 detainees have been transferred out of U.S. custody at Guantanamo. 1 out of every 4, or 25 percent, of these former detainees is now considered a confirmed or suspected recidivist by the U.S. government."

Not all of these guys are innocents...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. How many of those WERE innocent, but became terrorists
because we imprisoned them illegally for years?

If I was just some schmuck who got hauled in on the say-so of someone who was pissed at me, and I was tortured, held without charges, for years, fuck yeah I'd be pissed when I got out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. I don't know, you don't know
and I don't think the establishment of Gitmo was a good idea.

That having been said, not all the guys there are good guys, and just letting them all go isn't the answer.

Taking POWs that aren't 'lawful combatants' opens a can worms. I really don't know the best way to resolve this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #34
44. On what basis do you continue to imprison an innocent person?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #44
79. POWs can be held for the duration of the conflict
So if they're avowed AQ and Bin Laden hasn't called off the war he launched against us in the 90's, they can still be held.

Because these generally aren't 'lawful combatants' (and thereby normal POWs), I'm not sure how they should be handled.

What do you try them for in the court of law when you captured them shooting at you in a war zone?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #79
85. These people weren't even combatants.
They were tourists and grandfathers and teenagers and migrant workers who were kidnapped and sold to the Pentagon.

More than 85% of these people never pointed a weapon at an coalition troop. Less than a third of all the poor souls that Rumsfeld locked up to rot were involved in this conflict in any way at all.

They are not al Qaida. They are victims of abduction and torture.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #85
97. What do you do about the ones who are AQ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #97
99. You try them and take the consequences
for allowing the government to engage in illegal prisoner torture and abuse.

If Congress blocks a criminal trial, you do it in the military courts.

What you don't do is hold innocent people indefinitely. Can you imagine how the friends and families of the hundreds of innocent people rotting in Gitmo felt for all those years? We're creating infinitely more problems than we're solving by holding even the very few of these people that ever had any contact with the Taliban or AQ.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #99
101. try them for what?
"What you don't do is hold innocent people indefinitely."

POWs can be held for the duration of the conflict. They aren't provided trials, military or otherwise.

"What you don't do is hold innocent people indefinitely. Can you imagine how the friends and families of the hundreds of innocent people rotting in Gitmo felt for all those years? We're creating infinitely more problems than we're solving by holding even the very few of these people that ever had any contact with the Taliban or AQ."

I agree Gitmo was a mistake (said as much above, if you care to gander).
The flip side is in this war we've taken prisoner 'illegal combatants', at least some of whom are AQ. I am not a lawyer, but I don't know what you charge them with in a criminal trial or a military tribunal. Is it 'illegal' to fight U.S. imperialism?

I suppose we could have just left them in prisons in Afghanistan so that the Taliban could break them out...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #101
102. If they can't be charged with a crime, they have to be released.
Unless we're imprisoning people for thought crimes now. Which, of course. we are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #101
118. Do you realize that you're using the same excuse that the MIC
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 04:25 PM by truth2power
has already used, over and over? "I agree Gitmo was a mistake." What horse puckey!

Before we invaded Iraq tens of thousands of people worldwide protested against the invasion. Hundreds of credible, informed individuals said it was a bad idea; that there were no WMD's etc.

But Bush had a hardon, you see. so, in we went. When, finally, there was incontrovertible proof that Operation Iraqi Freedom was a gigantic fuck-up, the US govt. admitted it was a mistake, but said if we left even worse things would happen.

Now the line is that, assuredly, Gitmo was a mistake. But there's no real remedy, so, conveniently, we should just continue on as before, incarcerating these people forever. Because The War Against Terror (TWAT) will never end. I call bullshit!!

Just once. JUST ONCE, I would like to see the American people have to be accountable for their screw-ups. Maybe then they would think twice about electing malignant trolls to govern (sic) them.



edit for typo

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #118
119. Hey, I was against that stupid war too!
"But Bush had a hardon, you see. so, in we went."

Unfortunately the Congress agreed with Bush, and in we went. In that respect alone it was better than our latest war we're afraid to call a war, where the President bombs a country without the consent of Congress, or even the fig leaf of imminent threat to the vital interests of the United States.

But you're not answering the question. What do we do with the AQ we've put in Gitmo? They're not all goat-herding grandpas swept up by accident.
Do you think just letting them go is the answer? What do you charge them with if you want to charge them with a crime?

"Just once. JUST ONCE, I would like to see the American people have to be accountable for their screw-ups."

'Accountable' how exactly? I'm not clear what you're suggesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #119
122. Oh yes, "I was against XXX before I was for XXX" argument.
my favorite!

Hey, I assume that someone in the US may do something bad at some point, since not all Americans are nice. Why don't we just put all the population in a prison. Voila, problem solved.

Sigh...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #122
123. I'm not John Kerry
Who called for Saddam's head after 9/11, btw.

Hell, I've never even said I was 'for' Gitmo (I would close our base in Cuba entirely, and all the other overseas bases).

I said it was a mistake. But that doesn't alter the facts. We have captured some AQ. We have detained some of them at Gitmo. What do you do with the avowed AQ we have detained at Gitmo?

Can you answer that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #123
125. Thanks for proving my point.
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 05:30 PM by liberation
Your so-called question is based on a faulty premise and as such is nothing but an attempt at tangential fallacy. Because, you need a trial first, or at the very least a case, before you can have "facts." All you have is an opinion and an assumption that "we have some AQ."


Cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #125
126. why are you ducking the question?
You think none of the people detained at Gitmo are AQ?

If some of them are, what do you we do with them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #126
129. Ask a question and you will get an answer
thus far all you have produced is a massive fallacy thinly veiled as a question. If those people are AQ as you claimed, the US government would have had no problem bringing up cases against them. Alas...

The thing is that this is not about what "I would do" but what the US Government CAN'T DO. By law our government can't detain people without charges while subjecting them to unusual and cruel punishment. This is apparently something that you claimed to be "against" before now when you seem to be "for" it. Thus, as I said, proving my point. Once more thanks for doing that.

Cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #129
135. here's my question
"If those people are AQ as you claimed, the US government would have had no problem bringing up cases against them."

What is the case they bring? What do they charge them with?

"This is apparently something that you claimed to be "against" before now when you seem to be "for" it."

Wrong, I simply ask what you think should be done given that Gitmo as a prison exists. You say 'charge them', and my question is, with what exactly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #119
128. First of all...
I don't care if congress agreed with Bush. I don't care if GOD agreed with him (actually, god did agree, to hear him tell it).

The US invaded a country when just about anybody who mattered said, for a number of reasons, it was a very bad idea. When that turned out to be the case, we simply admitted it was a mistake and continued on exactly as before. And so on, until the next "mistake' and the next, and the next. I'm sick of it.

As far as Gitmo: Let then ALL go. Yes. What a goddamn clusterfuck we've created. We have no idea who's AQ and who isn't, for sure. Practically everybody was ratting-out everyone else, probably as a consequence of being waterboarded or tortured in other ways. One guy was so garrulous that they had to put an asterisk by his name, because virtually nothing he said could be relied on.

furthermore, you can be assured that if I were one of those innocent goatherders that were detained, I would JOIN AQ at the first opportunity if I were released. In what alternate universe do you think that WOULDN'T be true.

Everybody there is eligible for release, IMO, either because they really are innocent or by virtue of having been tortured.

And if anyone wants to get their panties in a twist about releasing so-called "terrorists" from Gitmo, that number would be insignificant compared to the hundreds we're creating every day by our actions in the ME.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #101
130. That's bullshit because they HAVEN'T RECEIVED POW STATUS or PROTECTION UNDER THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS.
If the U.S. was even remotely close to following the laws of war, they would have P.O.W. status and protection under the Geneva Conventions.

What you and the NeoNaziCons want to do is fabricate something new -- something not under criminal law and its protections, and not under the law of war and its protections -- called the Enemy Combatant.

You may as well do what the Khmer Rouge did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #34
133. Then you hold public trials so the people know
what is going on. You severely punish anyone who engages in any kind of torture, and you prosecute those who have done so in the past.

And you do NOT delay those trials for years and years so that children who were kidnapped by this government are adults before they ever see any justice.

And yes, we should let them all go. Nothing ANY of them has done compares to what this country has done, both before and after 9/11.

Once we invaded their countries, they were perfectly within their rights to fight those invaders, just as we would.

This whole mess is such a stain on this country that it will probably take decades, if not longer, before we can overcome the harm it has done.

No decent person can in any way defend this, and they don't. This country has lost so much moral authority as a result of these crimes against humanity that it may be impossible for it to regain any respect again in our lifetimes.

Otoh, if this administration had begun investigations of the war criminals, the world could have concluded that the Bush gang were an aberration, not the norm for this country. But now, with this administration continuing the same criminal behavior, ignoring war crimes etc. the world has to conclude that this really is who we are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plumbob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #26
36. So TRY them. If guilty, imprison them, legally.
What's the matter with that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:52 AM
Response to Reply #26
62. Well, what a surprise.
Not. The whole thing has been a huge fuck up.

Just like many said it would be from early on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #62
111. Yes it has, hasn't it? From the time Rummy was comparing
his standing at a lectern all day to do his paperwork, to the stress positions (torture) the prisoners were forced to endure.

I would say that those who've been tortured (virtually all of them, I assume) should be released forthwith because there can be no credible trials for those actually guilty of anything, and the rest should have been released long ago.

Even stupid acts have consequences. This is the result when stupid people allow a gang of malignant thugs to sieze power. Suck it up!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #26
63. Dupe
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 07:00 AM by Hissyspit
Deleted
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #26
64. BBC: Of 779 detainees at Guantanamo, all but 220 were innocent or low-level guerrillas |
Try wording it that way.

At the LEAST, 150 innocents - kidnapped, shoved into shipping containers inhoods and chains and kept from freedom and loved ones for years.

A ridiculous fucking mess and lie put to our "noble" character. More terrorists created.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #64
132. I didn't have the numbers handy in my post above, Hissy, ..
but let's just say that 220 are likely dangerous. I'll speculate that virtually all of those were tortured in some way, at some point, so we can't rely on anything they say. How could they possibly get a fair trial.

Let them go. Their numbers are insignificant compared to the what?...at least 500+ additional "terrorists" we've created as a result of our atrocities committed just since this story broke this morning.

I am sick of this. Imprison the real terrorists: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #26
80. HELLO! "according to a new intelligence assessment released by the Director of National Intelligence
"according to a new intelligence assessment released by the Director of National Intelligences office"

means about as much as "Saddam has WMDs" given the true history of the USA!

Not to mention the contradiction of innocent and recidivist.

It is NOT recidivist if you become an enemy of the USA because they illegally imprisoned you and tortured you for many years!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oak2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #26
95. Is that real terrorism, or speaking out against US policies?
In the past, when a former Guantanamo torture victim spoke out, this was classified as "terrorism."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
120. Jesus, the naivete in this post defies description and is maddening
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 04:40 PM by coalition_unwilling
because at first blush it seems to propound a worldy toughness.

"Not all of these guys are innocents" -- Um, yes they are, until they are found guilty in a court of law. Put another way, we are all of us guilty of something but that does not mean we should all be held without charge and tortured.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. He had plenty of time to act before that.
He said he'd have it done in a year. That year passed before Congress did anything to stop him.

And if he doesn't have a case against them, he SHOULD let them go. Continuing to hold people this way is a crime, one that both Bush and now Obama would be in jail for today if we had a functional justice system. We've held people there for years, and tortured them to, who we know are innocent.

Yes, if they're innocent, letting them go is a GREAT idea. Those who might not be innocent, you know we have a system of courts whose job it is to determine that, and they don't even waterboard to do it. Maybe we should put them to work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. The problem is
imo that the far right was able to largely regroup in a short period of time, thats whats been holding Obama back or atleast thats my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. I'm sure it's Obama's opinion.
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 10:59 PM by Capitalocracy
If he had closed Gitmo on day one, there would've been two years of NO TERRORIST ATTACKS before the next election, and it would've proven him right, proven our position and worldview right, and maybe, just maybe, could've helped a little bit with the dismal turnout in 2010 and the continued disappointment going into 2012.

But if he perceived himself as giving in to right-wing pressure and making a good move politically, all it became in the eyes of the American people is yet another broken promise and another big fuck you to the base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
31. I voted for Obama to see it closed
and it still stands as a testimony to torture and the ilegal war in Iraq
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
49. Because the rulers do not know how to govern without using torture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #49
89. W/Cheney/Rumsfeld needed the farce of all this to keep myth of 9/11 going ...
"confessions" to support the myth --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlbertCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #1
70. Why isn't it closed now?
Obviously... because someone is making money. This IS the USA after all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. So....
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 08:43 PM by underpants
the place was set up in 86 hours

we imprisoned people for no reason

we tortured them making anyone held at that facility unable to convict

of the people we held there and released about 60% have become terrorists in some way

we can't close it because we tortured people there making anyone held there and any information we got there inadmissable


we created a problem for ourselves (actually WE didn't - just the aholes who were never acutally elected and exhibited gross negligence to create the situation) and now we have evidence that we screwed everything up too.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PSPS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. I don't know about this
Just the portion in the OP makes me question the whole piece.

Guantanamo Bay has been used to incarcerate dozens of terrorists

Names, please.

who have admitted plotting

Did they "admit" this after being tortured?

terrifying attacks against the West

Why would reportage use the inflammatory adjective "terrifying?"

while imprisoning more than 150 totally innocent people

"More than?" How many "more?"

almost ten years of controversial interrogations

Instead of saying torture, this must be the UK's version of "enhanced interrogation."

on the worlds most dangerous terrorists.

Oh? According to whom?

At first, I was going to alert this as a misplaced opinion piece, but it is being carried on the website as "news." I expect this from the US Pravda media, but not necessarily the UK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
81. There is just no way to paint a happy face on this story, but they sure did their best
to spin and spin and spin, every little snippet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
5. WaPo Link:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
6. wikileaks: The Guantanamo Files
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 09:12 PM by cal04
http://wikileaks.ch/gitmo /

On Sunday April 24, 2011 WikiLeaks began publishing 779 secret files from the notorious Guantanamo Bay prison camp. The details for every detainee will be released daily over the coming month.

WikiLeaks Reveals Secret Files on All Guantnamo Prisoners

In its latest release of classified US documents, WikiLeaks is shining the light of truth on a notorious icon of the Bush administration's "War on Terror" -- the prison at Guantnamo Bay, Cuba, which opened on January 11, 2002, and remains open under President Obama, despite his promise to close the much-criticized facility within a year of taking office.

In thousands of pages of documents dating from 2002 to 2008 and never seen before by members of the public or the media, the cases of the majority of the prisoners held at Guantnamo -- 758 out of 779 in total -- are described in detail in memoranda from JTF-GTMO, the Joint Task Force at Guantnamo Bay, to US Southern Command in Miami, Florida.


Sharqawi Abdu Ali Al Hajj
http://wikileaks.ch/gitmo/prisoner/1457.html


Jason Leopold
http://twitter.com/#!/JasonLeopold
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:13 PM
Response to Original message
8. New York Times Link "Timeline of Gitmo Detainees," More
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
9. wikileaks: If you read Wikileaks' 'Gitmo Files' please do so with extra caution. 'Confessions' made
wikileaks: If you read Wikileaks' 'Gitmo Files' please do so with extra caution. 'Confessions' made under torture are suspect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TacticalPeek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
10. These things

These are the things that downfalls are made of.

An unjust law is no law at all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
11. McClatchy gets headline right: "WikiLeaks: Secret Guantanamo files show U.S. disarray"
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 09:51 PM by Hissyspit
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/04/24/112729/wikileaks-...

WikiLeaks: Secret Guantanamo files show U.S. disarray

By Carol Rosenberg and Tom Lasseter | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON Faced with the worst-ever single attack by foreigners on American soil, the U.S. military set up a human intelligence laboratory at Guantanamo that used interrogation and detention practices that they largely made up as they went along.

The world may have thought the U.S. was detaining a band of international terrorists whose questioning would help the hunt for Osama Bin Laden or foil the next 9/11.

But a collection of secret Bush-era intelligence documents not meant to surface for another 20 years shows that the military's efforts at Guantanamo often were much less effective than the government has acknowledged.

Viewed as a whole, the secret intelligence summaries help explain why in May 2009 President Barack Obama, after ordering his own review of wartime intelligence, called America's experiment at Guantanamo "quite simply a mess."

MORE AT LINK

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
12. Delete - Duplicate
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 09:47 PM by Hissyspit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
13. Guardian: What are the Guantnamo Bay files? Understanding the prisoner dossiers
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 10:00 PM by Hissyspit
http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/25/what-are-guan...

What are the Guantnamo Bay files? Understanding the prisoner dossiers

David Leigh, the Guardian's investigations editor, explains the files and how in key cases they expose official lies

The Guantnamo Bay files spell out the Americans' suspicions about individual detainees' involvement with terrorism, their intelligence value and the threat they are considered to pose if released.
David Leigh
guardian.co.uk, Mon 25 Apr 2011 03.45 BST
The Guantnamo files consists of 759 "detainee assessment" dossiers written between 2002 and 2009 and sent up through the military hierarchy to the US Southern Command headquarters in Miami. They appear to cover all but 20 of the prisoners.

- snip -

All the detainee assessments are classified "secret" but sometimes they mention separate, more sensitive "secret compartmented intelligence" (SCI) dossiers held elsewhere.

- snip -

The files spell out the extent of involvement US authorities believe each detainee has had with al-Qaida, the Taliban or other terror groups, an assessment of their intelligence value and the threat they are considered to pose if released. In each case they also make a recommendation for the future detention, release or transfer of the detainee.

Material presented as "evidence" in the assessments must be treated with scepticism as a number of files contain information known to have been extracted under torture, which has in several cases subsequently been found unreliable.

MORE

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnie624 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #13
104. "al-Qaida, the Taliban or other terror groups"
Of course, anyone capable of an objective, rational assessment can clearly see that the U.S. government is the most dangerous "terror group" of all, BY FAR.

It's helpful to keep in mind, that EVERY report found in the Western media establishment is framed by a false reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
14. Guardian gets headline right: "Guantnamo Bay files: Caught in the wrong place at the wrong time"
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 10:19 PM by Hissyspit
http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/25/guantanamo-fi...

Guantnamo Bay files: Caught in the wrong place at the wrong time
Almost half of 212 Afghan prisoners either innocent or forced to fight for Taliban, while foreigners were simply rounded up


David Leigh and James Ball
guardian.co.uk, Mon 25 Apr 2011 03.46 BST

Among the most dismaying stories to emerge is that of three hapless Tajiks caught up in a roundup of foreigners in Karachi in 2002.

The trio appear to have spent almost two years being interrogated and maltreated, first at the notorious Bagram airbase, and then at Guantnamo, before being released.

The prison files reveal that they were listed as "enemy combatants" on arrival , but turned out to be entirely innocent.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. WikLeaks: "This detainee was tortured in 3 different countries, held in CIA site but US gov file...
Edited on Sun Apr-24-11 10:25 PM by Hissyspit
wikileaks: This detainee was tortured in 3 different countries, held in CIA site but US gov file hardly mentions http://bit.ly/eI3Ymw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. WikiLeaks: "Australia: Guantanamo file for David Hicks released"
@wikileaks

Australia: Guantanamo file for David Hicks released http://wikileaks.ch/gitmo/prisoner/2.html

1 min ago from web

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #16
41. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #16
51. Failure to prosecute is also illegal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
19. Does anyone remember when Rumsfeld called them "the worst of the worst"?..
He knew then. He had to have known. Lying MFer.

He should be behind bars for the rest of his worthless life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Do you remember the minute by minute media coverage
of their transport to Gitmo?

Imo, it was supposed to scare the sh!t out of us so we wouldn't question anything.

These people were bakers and grandfathers and tourists and journalists and goat herders.

It was a big lie, all of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Not just him. Rumsfeld: Hides War Crimes - Free. WikiLeaker: Reveals War Crimes -
Life In Prison! (possibly)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
25. "imprisoning more than 150 totally innocent people" = WAR CRIMES!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
28. This is a fascinating release.
You can review, at NYT/NPR, every detainee's administrative review. You can see exactly how tenuous much the intell was.

http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
29. Raw Story: 7 Shocking Gitmo Revelations
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/04/24/wikileaks-7-shock... /

Officials arent sure what theyre doing. In 704 leaked documents assessing detainees, the word possibly appears 387 times, unknown 188 times and deceptive 85 times. Two conflicting committees from the Department of Defense worked at the facility and clashed frequently over how to classify prisoners threat levels and the quality of information they shared.

- snip -

Officials took note of every possible piece of evidence, in hopes of building mosaics of information even evidence as trivial as origami art. McClatchy reports:

Guards plucked off ships at sea to walk the cellblocks note who has hoarded food as contraband, who makes noise during the Star Spangled Banner, who sings creepy songs like La, La, La, La Taliban and who is re-enacting the 9/11 attacks with origami art.

Officials noted that information from some unstable prisoners may be faulty or untrue, but used it anyway. Yasim Mohammed Basardah, a detainee who gave information about 60 other prisoners, was noted as being unreliable, and his file stressed that information he shared should be independently verified. However, he was also given a high intelligence value, and his threat level was lowered from high to medium in exchange for his cooperation. He was resettled in Europe in 2010. According to the documents, eight prisoners have revealed information about 235 others.

Suspects were nabbed and shipped to Gitmo because they wore cheap watches. A specific model of watch a Casio style released in the 1980s was suspected to be used as a timer by al-Qaeda operatives. People in Afghanistan were seized and sent to the detention facility because they were wearing the watches, but most have been quietly released because of a lack of evidence.

MORE

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. All this money all the lies the torture was just a total farce
and now the world is going to know it was a brutal farce!!!!

its this that is going to bring America down...not the dollar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polly7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #32
91. I think most people believed it was a total farce from the beginning.
At least, everyone I've talked to about it has ... for years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #29
43. Reenacting 9/11 with origami art?
I wonder if they just mean folding paper airplanes and throwing them at eachother.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #29
47. Obviously, we TORTURED these people because we had no evidende against them ...
and needed "confessions" to make 9/11 believable --

anyone still believe 9/11?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 11:51 PM
Response to Original message
33. And just yesterday I wondered what our leaders had done to shut
them up. Apparently I need to have more patience. This is powerful evidence to have. About time we recognize what we have been doing by ditching habeas corpus and our own constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
35. BBC: "Wikileaks: Many at Guantanamo 'not dangerous'"
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 12:03 AM by Hissyspit
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13184845?utm_...

WikiLeaks: Many at Guantanamo 'not dangerous'

President Obama pledged in January 2009 to close the prison within a year


Files released by the whistleblowing website Wikileaks have revealed that the US believed many of those held at Guantanamo Bay were innocent or only low-level operatives.

The files, published in US and European newspapers, reveal analysis of all 780 people ever held at the facility.

- snip -

Mistaken identity
These were then detained for years due to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say.

In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".

MORE

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #35
38. Seton Hall has been on this for years.
This is a rundown of their reports:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seton_Hall_study#Studies

The really frightening thing is that they kept publishing these reports and NOTHING happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
37. You have to ask yourself: What is it the pugs and neocons are so very, very afraid of,
if the trials take place outside a carefully controlled proceeding they know their people can control? Could it be as many suspect, secrets that might blow the lid off more criminal involvement, thus far, so carefully hidden with such clumsy and criminal over reaches like "looking forward"?

If these "terrorists" are prosecuted in an open court proceeding, the media outside the beltway puppetry, would be closely scrutinizing the proceedings and who knows what might then come out.

Secrets many suspect are so damning the war profiteers cannot even contemplate taking the risk of open court proceedings in this country where anything could happen.

There are only so many folks their junk yard dogs can control.

Guantanamo? now that is easy, it belongs to the MI Complex lock stock and barrel and so can be controlled down to every word and action coming out of such a closely guarded gulag.

But then there comes a wild card...Wiki leaks.

No wonder they are so desperate to nail Assange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. It's long past time when we can blame Republicans.
Our government started abusing prisoners on 9/12/2001.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:17 AM
Response to Reply #37
58. Exactly what I've been thinking for some time. All that their secrecy does
is convince some of us that there must be something terrible that they wish to hide. I even posted yesterday, before this thread, asking what Bradley Manning knows to make it so essential that they keep him secluded.

I think what the administration and the Pentagon are afraid might come out has them running to the bathroom on a regular basis, if you know what I mean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #58
103. +1
"All that their secrecy does is convince some of us that there must be something terrible that they wish to hide."

Yep
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #37
100. their own crimes being exposed
if they can discredit Assange and Wikileaks, then maybe when the revelations about them come out, people won't believe and the lies can continue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:41 AM
Response to Original message
40. don't worry! Obama will close it ANY DAY now.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
45. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:46 AM
Response to Original message
46. Evidently, we pulled in something like 140,000 + people ... many were basically "bought" --
people were running around rounding up "quesitonable" people and selling

them to the US government!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:52 AM
Response to Reply #46
57. And many were saying this would happen even before the war start, and certainly while it was
happening. And all the while the MSM and D.C. insiders told us to shut up or ignored the warnings and discussions.

I mean, it's not like history was not a guide or something. Clearly, some people just didn't care. I remember thinking in 2001 this is going to be nightmarish. Are we really going to do this? And we did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnyxCollie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:36 AM
Response to Original message
48. K&R. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:45 AM
Response to Original message
50. Wikileaks is essential to real national security, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NuclearDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:47 AM
Response to Original message
52. A bunch of low-level foot soldiers?
Yeah, Rummy..."the worst of the worst"...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #52
72. It's worse than that. Most of these people had nothing to do
with any fighting force whatsoever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #72
86. Exactly, in the class of herding goats in the wrong place at the wrong time, then maybe
they are the worst of the worst innocent goat herders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snoutport Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:26 AM
Response to Original message
53. Wikileaks: Many at Guantanamo 'not dangerous'
Source: BBC

Files released by the whistleblowing website Wikileaks have revealed that the US believed many of those held at Guantanamo Bay were innocent or only low-level operatives.

Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13184845



We are not doing the right thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:26 AM
Response to Reply #53
54. k/r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:27 AM
Response to Original message
55. WikiLeaks discloses new details on whereabouts of al-Qaeda leaders on 9/11
Source: The Washington Post

A cache of classified military documents obtained by the anti-secrecy organization WikiLeaks presents new details of their whereabouts on Sept. 11, 2001, and their movements afterward. The documents also offer some tantalizing glimpses into the whereabouts and operations of Osama bin Laden and his Egyptian deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

The documents, provided to European and U.S. news outlets, including The Washington Post, are intelligence assessments of nearly every one of the 779 individuals who have been held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, since 2002. In them, analysts have created detailed portraits of detainees based on raw intelligence, including material gleaned from interrogations.

Detainees are assessed high, medium or low in terms of their intelligence value, the threat they pose while in detention and the continued threat they might pose to the United States if released.

The documents tend to take a bleak view of the detainees, even those who have been ordered released by the federal courts because of a lack of evidence to justify their continued detention. And the assessments are often based, in part, on reporting by informants at the military detention center, sources that some judges have found wanting.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/wikileaks_discloses...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scottybeamer70 Donating Member (844 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:27 AM
Response to Reply #55
56. ah......"informants"
what a convenient way to get around saying, "We really don't know"........
oh, and "analysts".......wow......really classy information!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:35 AM
Response to Original message
59. 'US knew Guantanamo detainees were innocent'
'US knew Guantanamo detainees were innocent'
Agence France-Presse
Washington, April 25, 2011

The United States held hundreds of inmates who were either totally innocent or low-risk for years and released dozens of "high-risk" Guantanamo inmates, according to leaked classified files. The new leaks reveal that inmates were held without trial on the basis of often seriously flawed information, such as from mentally ill or otherwise unreliable co-detainees or statements from suspects who had been abused or tortured, The New York Times reported.

The Times was among a group of US and European media outlets that also included The Daily Telegraph, NPR, El Pais, Le Monde, Der Spiegel and La Repubblica to receive 779 documents from the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks.

At least 150 were innocent Afghans or Pakistanis, including drivers, farmers and chefs, who had been rounded up as part of frantic intelligence-gathering in war zones and were then detained for years due to mistaken identity or simply for being at the wrong place at the wrong time, according to The Daily Telegraph.

The British daily said that overall, US military analysts considered only 220 of the people ever detained at Guantanamo to be dangerous extremists.

More:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/americas/US-kne...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:45 AM
Response to Original message
60. Glenn Geenwald: If Bradley Manning did what's accused, he imposed more transparency on the world's
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 06:47 AM by Hissyspit
@ggreenwald
If Bradley Manning did what's accused, he imposed more transparency on the world's powerful factions than any person in our lifetime: by far
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:49 AM
Response to Original message
61. Glenn Greenwald: WikiLeaks has generated more newsworthy scoops over the last year than all media ou
@ggreenwald WikiLeaks has generated more newsworthy scoops over the last year than all media outlets combined
4 mins ago from web
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:13 AM
Response to Original message
65. I wish I could recommend this thread over and over again.
Lots of information.

Thanks, Hissy!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:20 AM
Response to Original message
66. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
67. K & R
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
68. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
69. We have always been at war with Eastasia.
All wars are "over there". There are no home grown terrorists. You are either with us or against us. They wouldn't be in prison if they didn't do something. If they aren't guilty, we will find something on them. The world is a safer place with them in prison. We can't house them on US mainland soil because they are dangerous.

Sentenced to life based on hyperbole.

we are a sad and pathetic nation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
71. Another kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
73. Does anyone have any idea why the US did this?
I'm at a loss for an explanation...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #73
74. Maybe the MIC was running out of enemies and was afraid of being defunded?
The never-ending war needed a state of emergency and a reliable source of boogie men to continue.

What gets me was what Saudi Arabia did to its Gitmo detainees when returned home: gave them cars and houses and wives and jobs to try to de-radicalize the situation. Try that in America, sorry John Walker...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #73
75. They did it to provide visible evidence to the sheep that there was a real reason to feel fear.
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 09:45 AM by GliderGuider
Fear is the eternal enforcer of compliance. The government of a citizenry that lives in fear (of both The Other and the government itself) can do what it likes in the interests of the power elite. Guantanamo was the perfect totem to fear, terrifying in its implications and visible to all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polly7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #75
93. del.
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 11:17 AM by polly7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #73
76. BushCo cronies made brazillions off of the War on Terra.
Both here and over there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #73
77. All of the above. Plus, they did it because they could.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #77
82. And got away with it scot-free.
But, Look Forward(TM).

They Hate Us For Our Freedoms(TM).

Now where are all those Bloated Tax-free Bank Accounts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #77
87. Rumsfeld and Cheney are sadists.
I hope I live long enough to read that in their biographies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #87
105. I'm sure they also viewed it as "opportunity" to experiment
with all kinds of interrogation and torture methods in a real world setting -- just like real war represents "opportunity" to test new weapons under real conditions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #73
84. Marketing. Doing it made it clear to the enemy and the sheeple that the U.S.
wasn't going to follow the rules in the conflict.

Thus making the enemy feel fearful, and the sheeple feel secure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #73
98. Locked people in Gitmo?
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 12:00 PM by Recursion
Because they didn't have a better idea. Geneva rules didn't have this kind of conflict in mind (they foresaw interning POWs until the end of the conflict, but when the other side has no single leader/government with which to negotiate a peace, that essentially means forever), and nobody thought about what to do with partisans that were captured until we had a few hundred on our hands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #98
108. "Geneva rules didn't have this kind of conflict in mind"
That is a very disingenuous interpretation, yet very creative spin.

Bravo! I guess?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #108
110. OK, what do you do with captured combatants...
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 03:33 PM by Recursion
...who aren't soldiers in an army that has a political leadership you can negotiate with?

"Detain them indefinitely" is a horrible idea. Got a better one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #110
112. Maybe you should ask that question to the framers of the US constitution
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 04:04 PM by liberation
I am sure if only they had had the foresight of assuming that in the future our country would be engaged on endless un-winnable conflicts against abstract concepts, they would most certainly have not bothered with that whole thing about the US government being bound to conduct speedy far trials and not inflict cruel and unusual punishment.

Alas, many criminals often feel it is not they who have broken the laws but that the legal system has not yet managed to catch up with their visionary techniques. So I am sure there must be a perfectly valid reasoning as to why the US government has operated in such unconstitutional manner while neglecting the Geneva convention to boot. Win-win I assume.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #112
113. If you're going to excoriate people, I think you need to come up with a better idea
What would you do with them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #113
114. It is not about "what I would do with them" but what the US government can't do
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 04:13 PM by liberation
It can't hold people indefinitely without trial, and it can't torture people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #114
116. You can hold POWs until the hostilities cease
There's nothing unconstitutional about that. And people captured as far as I know have never had any recourse to challenge their status.

So, I suppose there's an option: simply declare them POWs and hold them until "the war is over".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #116
117. You need to declare a war first before you can detain people as POWs
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 04:48 PM by liberation
which is why in this case, besides the obvious lack of compliance with the Geneva convention, yes there is a hole lot of unconstitutionality going on: these are people snatched by the US government who have spent almost a decade held without charges waiting for a trial in conditions that could be considered cruel and unusual. The US Government CAN'T DO THAT.

You can't rewrite things or people's status, after the fact, to fit a narrative when the law of the land does specifically not sanction it. This is supposed to be a nation of laws not men, you seem to be making a case for the contrary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orangeapple Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #117
127. How does Geneva Convention
address handling of 'illegal combatants' (non-uniformed, non-state militants)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #127
131. Gee wiz... everything must be so fuzzy with such lack of reading and comprehension.
... how does the US constitution address the role of the US government in regards to providing fast and fair trials without being unable to subject people to cruel and unusual punishment. You know that being the main point of my post and stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #131
134. The detainees aren't accused of "crimes"
I don't see why you keep acting like they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #73
107. Trial balloon.
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 02:53 PM by liberation
Governments like to see how far they can push things.

In this case, the US government has managed to behave in a completely unconstitutional manner for almost a decade. This probably has nothing to do with "terrorism" as the people in Guantanamo are most probably two bit fools who were at the wrong place at the wrong time. But I am sure it has served as a training and testing ground for procedures which eventually may make it stateside.

That is why I think most fools who are trying to somehow justify Guantanamo do not grasp that in the end, they are advocating for their own doom. The minute we decided we had to subdue the constitution for any reason (in this case I guess it was "terrorism") we took a turn as a nation which is putting our last vestiges of democracy into a collision course with a very very very nasty place.

Righties love to croon about how the "price of freedom is eternal vigilance," usually to justify their penile extensions. However, people here tend to neglect that the vigilance involves both: from outside AND inside forces who are threatened by freedom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JEB Donating Member (134 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
78. Sounds like the perfect place
for the likes of Cheney, Bush, Rummy, Condi, etc. And we could dispense with trials and all that troublesome press stuff. Lock them up. Declare them guilty. Easy peasey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
83. CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION NOW!!
If this doesn't lead to criminal prosecutions of the Bush Administration, JUSTICE is dead in the USA and the entire world will know it.
To prevent future terrorism against the USA, a Nation of laws is in need, not an imperialist empire with dictators who are above the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #83
90. Pelosi did squat about Sami al Haj or anything else related to Gitmo.
Obama's plan is indefinite detention for the innocent prisoners AND for the whistleblower.

I was reading over an essay I wrote three years ago and felt so sad for my mistaken assumption that a Democratic administration would set this right.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I think we know and the entire world knows that "American justice" is officially an oxymoron.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
88. K/R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
92. On the one hand, it's about time this had light shed on it,
on the other hand, we now have two administrations to pursue for war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lebkuchen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
106. I remember when the first prisoners were released after several months
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 01:29 PM by lebkuchen
starting with the septuagenarians and octogenarians. Donny Rumsfeld, keeping the US "safe" after losing the Twin Towers and having his own work venue shoved up the rear-end with a passenger jet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Corruption Winz Donating Member (581 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
109. This is such a tough thing ot handle....
Theoretically, anyone there who hasn't been tried is "innocent." If they're being held on charges, then they should remain there. However, if you let the others go and something were to happen with them, Obama would be crucified. Yet, that's still not a good reason to keep people there that shouldn't be there.

The only way out of this that comes close to touching all the bases is to try those that have admitted guilt and to start seeing if the others need to be there or not. The sooner, the better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #109
115. Yep. Too bad Congress prevented them from being tried in civilian courts
Now, again, if this were world war 2 and these were Germans, they would be held without trial until the war ended. When exactly does this war end? And if it doesn't, do we hold them forever? And if not, what do we do, and what do you say to the family of the soldier one of them ends up killing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raouldukelives Donating Member (945 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
121. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Oct 19th 2014, 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC