Welcome to PatsFans.com

No proof released detainees return to battle field

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PressCoverage, Jun 21, 2008.

  1. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    How many times do we experience this? Like I say, just turn over any con man rock and find the truth behind another Empire lie.

    Report: Scalia’s Claim That Released Gitmo Prisoners Have Killed Americans Is An ‘Urban Legend’

    (oh, this is a THINK PROGRESS link)

    A new report from the Seton Hall University School of Law explodes the myth that some 30 detainees released from Guantanamo Bay prison have “returned to the battlefield” against American forces.

    This conservative urban legend was recently parroted by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in his dissent from the Court’s Boumediene decision. Scalia wrote that granting habeas corpus rights to Gitmo detainees “will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed,” and supported this view by asserting that “at least 30 of those prisoners hitherto released from Guantanamo Bay have returned to the battlefield.” The new Seton Hall report (pdf) states that “Justice Scalia’s claim of 30 recidivist detainees is belied by all reliable data” :

    Despite being repeatedly debunked, this statement has been reflexively accepted as true by Members of Congress and much of the American public. Justice Scalia is only the most recent disseminator of an urban legend that refuses to die. […]

    [Scalia’s] source was a year-old Senate Minority Report, which in turn was based on misinformation provided by the Department of Defense.​

    Among the report’s conclusions:

    – According to the Department of Defense’s published and unpublished data and reports, not a single released Guantánamo detainee has ever attacked any Americans.

    – Despite national security concerns, the Department of Defense does not have a system for tracking the conduct or even the whereabouts of released detainees.​
     
  2. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,256
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    So the report states that there's no way to track detainees once released, yet they can positively say no released detainee has ever attacked an American?

    Surely, PC--a man of your intelligence sees the flaw in this argument.
     
  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    42,737
    Likes Received:
    282
    Ratings:
    +711 / 20 / -30

    Conversely, can you prove what Scalia said is true??
     
  4. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,543
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0


    The report, is pretty much lefty spin. The Seton Hall comes to two conclusions essentially (at least relevant to this discussion).

    – According to the Department of Defense’s published and unpublished data and reports, not a single released Guantánamo detainee has ever attacked any Americans.

    – Despite national security concerns, the Department of Defense does not have a system for tracking the conduct or even the whereabouts of released detainees.


    It's a smoke and mirrors report from StinkProgress and a pretty dissapointing study from a bunch of liberal Seton Hell profs in general. It seems to center around 2 premises, the fact that Scalia said 30, and by their count it's only been 13-15 past inmates confirmed killed or caught in fighting US troops after detention. They also trumpet the fact their carefully coached "not a single released Guantánamo detainee has ever attacked any Americans" specifically. Which, while technically that may true, avoids the central fact that Scalia never claimed that Americans HAD been attacked. He simply stated, in his DISSENTING OPINION that;

    He's stating that his opinion that this will occur in the future as a result of this the court's judgement. It's not like it's out of the question.

    First, there is this guy - Abdallah Salih al-Ajmi - Who was involved in coordinated suicide bombings that killed over 70 in Irag in April 2008. None happened to be Americans thankfully, but that doesn't make it less of a terrorist attack.

    Then there is Mohammed Nayim Farouq - Who is a taliban commander and DOES IN FACT leads troops against American troops and it's NOT out of the realm of posibility, that he, or troops under his command will kill US troops in the future..

    To say nothing of Rasul Kudayev, Abdullah Mehsud, and Mohamed Souleymani Laalami.

    Several of which were "out of theatre" terrorist connected activities that were not included in the study.

    Should I continue?

    StinkProgress goes on to conclude at the end of the peice..........

    They are just doing an end-around using the technicality od the "attacked Americans" (which is not what Scalia said, he said "he beleived the decision would END UP killing American). There is plenty of evidence that former detainees have returned to the battlespace and are conducting terrorist activities that ARE KILLING PEOPLE. Thankfully, no americans (proven) at this point, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility that it won't happen in the future (WHICH IS WHAT SCALIA WAS SAYING).

    StinkProgress also seems to hone into the fact that scalia referenced 30 have returned to battle, and that number (according to Seton Hall's report) cannot be verified beyond the 14-15 they independently found, so they use this as evidence that. "explodes the myth that some 30 detainees released from Guantanamo Bay prison have “returned to the battlefield” against American forces." as perpetuated by Scalia.

    It completly IGNORES the fact that Scalia's reference to 30 prisnors is citing SPECIFIC testimony by one of the litigents in the case (Department of Defense Principal Deputy General Counsel Daniel J. Dell’Orto), who testified as to that number. It is entirely appropriete for a dissenting judge to cite SWORN TESTIMONY of one of the litigents before him in a his dissent.

    Scalia NEVER makes a specific claim to that number, he simply is refering to Dell’Orto's testimony on April 30, 2007 when he entered sworn testimony that;

    The Seton Hall group, may not think he should, but it is neither inappropriete or irresponsible to do so.




    File this whole thing as LEFTY, smoke and Mirrors spin bullsh!t. Yeah, it happens on the right too........... It's just where we are at as a country. POLITICALLY.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2008
  5. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    The burden of proof is on Scalia and his fellow Bush rumpswabs to prove that they actually do kill Americans because they are the ones who made the claim.

    Surely, a.paul--a man of your intelligence sees the flaw in your argument.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2008
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,759
    Likes Received:
    271
    Ratings:
    +487 / 20 / -17

    PiNY, I find it hard to believe that our treatment of prisoners is not helping to reeducate and reenlighten them to a more favorable view of western culture. One of the tactics of the Chinese communists was to treat their captives well and then release them so as to soften the opposition, and to some degree it worked. I wonder what we actually do in terms of re-education. I hope, when we release prisoners, we first make some effort to show them the error of their ways and to introduce them to the fundamental decency of our values.
     
  7. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,944
    Likes Received:
    96
    Ratings:
    +213 / 1 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    That's true as far as their claim is, but that's not the tone of the article. With no process in place to track them, then PC's confidence that it's all a lie is weak. And anyway, hasn't the argument been all along from the left that we create terrorists out of these detainees? Which myth do you prefer? I think it's funny that both sides here have to switch back and forth on that. I think the reasonable answer is that both are possible. If by chance a "good combatant" was detained wrongly, I can see how he could vow revenge. By the same token I can see some realeased legitamate detainees picking up where they left off and some saying "F it. Not worth it any more."
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2008
  8. PatsFanInMaine

    PatsFanInMaine Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

  9. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,256
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Just for the record--I wasn't being sarcastic toward PC--I meant it sincerely.

    Wistah, how can you call Scalia a Bush rumpswab?


    As the facts appear, there's no proof in either direction. Is it a case of better safe than sorry? I don't know.

    It's extremely difficult for me to care about Gitmo at all. I'm sure I should, I just can't.
     
  10. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,256
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    God strike me dead, I agree with Patters and can't find anything not to agree with him about. How the hell often can he make a post I can't argue with at all?

    You're not playing fair anymore...:mad:

    ;)
     
  11. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Wazzup with the new VIP stuff?
     
  12. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,543
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0

    But that has nothing to do with my post. My post post was directed to the posting of StinkProgress's agenda driven article that was posted. It parse's everything down to the minute level and then attempts to produce this shiny nugget from nothing. It's partisan spin.

    In fact, if you want to get technical, the title of the StinkProgress link is dubious at best. It's say's - Report: Scalia’s Claim That Released Gitmo Prisoners Have Killed Americans Is An ‘Urban Legend’

    Scalia, in his dissent, never made ANY specific claim, he simply referenced SWORN TESTIMONY from a litigant that appeared before him in a case he was reviewing. That is not the same as "making a claim".

    Plus, his FUTURE assertion worry is being attributed to past incidental practice. All of which avoids the true context of the heart of the matter. At least 12-15 past detainees have been killed on the field of battle in actions against US troops, and criteria used specifically does not account the actions of other documented to have attempted to, or did in fact participate in terrorist activities after leaving GITMO.

    Split hairs as you will, and justify it any way you like, but the clear fact is that, a sizable (18-20 which have been documented in this thread, and possibly more), have be caught (captured or killed) participating in or engaging in armed conflict with US forces, or terrorist activities, after being at GITMO.

    I personally think GITMO should have been closed a long time ago, even if I don't agree with the concept that those people be let go, but I also see spin for what it is.

    .... and the StinkProgess link is a lefty spin product, generated from a dubious study that doesn't even include benchmarks and control to make the assertions that it does.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2008
  13. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,248
    Likes Received:
    255
    Ratings:
    +986 / 2 / -9

    No proof released detainees return to battle field.

    THE PLACE THE RELEASED DETAINEES WANT TO RETURN TO IS "GITMO" THEY MISS THE CHICKEN DINNERS AND THE SOCCER GAMES.

    :bricks:
     
  14. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,256
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0



    BE VERY CAREFUL POINTING THAT STUFF OUT BECAUSE YOU MIGHT BE SAYING SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE DOESN'T LIKE AND YOU WILL BE PUNISHED BY SPANKING OR MAYBE DUCKING IN A COLD POND
     
  15. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,759
    Likes Received:
    271
    Ratings:
    +487 / 20 / -17

    Well my point was that if we are releasing terrorists and they return to the battlefield, then we should look at what we can do better.

    Well, it's pretty similar, especially at that level. One would expect as SC justice to carefully vet any info they use to form their opinions.

    Then we are failing to educate them as to the superiority of our values or even moderate Muslim values. I don't know what we do, but I would hope we treat them for lack of remorse, expose them to alternative views of Islam, and do all we can to convince them not to return to the battlefield. If we make them miserable and then release them, that's a problem, but as long as we could hold them indefinitely, the thinking was there was probably no harm in fueling their anti-American attitudes.
     
  16. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,256
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Okay--and keep in mind that I agreed with you--but how do you reach certain people? By all accounts, the people who are at Gitmo are well treated, they've got clean clothes, meals prepared according to dietary restrictions, time to pray etc. Beyond that, keep in mind that any of them don't like us simply because of western slash American culture.
     
  17. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,759
    Likes Received:
    271
    Ratings:
    +487 / 20 / -17

    There are many ways to try to reach people. Let them talk with families who lost loved ones to terrorism; let them talk with American Muslims who love our country; have them receive lessons from Muslim religious leaders on tolerance; and so on. I'm not saying we haven't tried any of that, but it's pretty unclear exactly what we've done and how they've been treated. We know that they have been given some rights, but certainly not all rights. All I'm saying is that before you release someone (because of lack of evidence), spend some time trying to win them over or at least discouraging them from becoming terrorists, especially since some of them may not have been terrorists in the first place.
     
  18. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,543
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0

    That, or we just fukcing KILL them and move on.



    I don't think it unreasonable that a SC justice reference sworn testimony in setting a tone for his dissent. The though being that if a professional gives sworn testimony that it's equally reasonable that a justice discount or validate as they see fit. That is own system.

    Or we just fukcing kill them on the spot an not worry about this extemporaneous bullsh!t going forward. IT IS OKAY TO KILL ENEMIES OF THE STATE and not try to rehabilitate them, which is a waste of time.
     
  19. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,256
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0



    You really did read Rogue Warrior, didn't you? :D:D

    This was the attitude that got Marcinko in trouble during the planning for Desert One, the Iran hostage rescue: "what if we accidentally see some poor Iranians while we're actually in the middle of this raid?" And Dick's answer was "shoot the bleepers in the head."...The 2-3 stars in the Pentagon thought that was much too extreme, after all, it's much better if an American dies than an enemy of America.
     
  20. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,543
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0

    :D ....... I just was needling Patters. I agree with the first statement.

    IF you are going to release them, we probably should have had a better tracking system. Not much you can do though if they want to return to battle. It sucks, but what can you do. The other option is not releasing them. We are talking about combatants here to, not innocent civilians.

    But I disagree with his post #17. I don't think any of those things would have much effect against a committed jihadist
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2008

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>