Guantánamo Reports: Research Of

(10 am. – promoted by ek hornbeck)

Those spreading or falling for the cheney/bush administration spin on the Released Guantanamo Prisoners going directly back into the Guerilla/Insurgent conflict and or Criminal Terrorism might want to educate themselves on the studies exposing that the government numbers just don’t Tell The Truth, not surprising!!

On the Rachel Maddow show last night, 1-16-09. she had a discussion with Professor Mark P. Denbeaux, Director of Seton Hall Law Center for Policy and Research, who supervises a group of talented Seton Hall students in preparing a series of Reports concerning the United States Navy Station at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Latest Press Release January 15, 2009

Seton Hall Law: Department of Defense Wrong Again on GTMO “Recidivism”

The Seton Hall Center for Policy and Research has issued a report which rebuts and debunks the most recent claim by the Department of Defense (DOD) that “61, in all, former Guantánamo detainees are confirmed or suspected of returning to the fight.”

Professor Denbeaux of the Center for Policy & Research has said that the Center has determined that “DOD has issued ‘recidivism’ numbers 43 times, and each time they have been wrong-this last time the most egregiously so.”

Denbeaux stated: “Once again, they’ve failed to identify names, numbers, dates, times, places, or acts upon which their report relies. Every time they have been required to identify the parties, the DOD has been forced to retract their false IDs and their numbers. They have included people who have never even set foot in Guantánamo-much less were they released from there. They have counted people as ‘returning to the fight’ for their having written an Op-ed piece in the New York Times and for their having appeared in a documentary exhibited at the Cannes Film Festival. The DOD has revised and retracted their internally conflicting definitions, criteria, and their numbers so often that they have ceased to have any meaning-except as an effort to sway public opinion by painting a false portrait of the supposed dangers of these men.

“Forty-three times they have given numbers-which conflict with each other-all of which are seriously undercut by the DOD statement that ‘they do not track’ former detainees. Rather than making up numbers “willy-nilly” about post release conduct, America might be better served if our government actually kept track of them.”

The MSNBC Rachel Maddow Video on Torture and than the discussion with Professor Denbeaux.

Following is a part of the 19 page PDF report from their studies of the administrations up and down confusing figures, with nothing to back them up, that was just released. I find it Very Interesting that the administration’s DoD has issued ‘recidivism’ reports 43 times, sounds much like rovian ‘revisionist history’ keeping that 43 number in their herded bases tiny minds, very poor propaganda tactic, very poor.

Latest Report (01/15/09)


Propaganda by the Numbers?


Time and time again, the Department of Defense, the Executive Branch, and other

government officials have claimed publicly that Guantánamo Bay detainees who have been

released have “returned to the battlefield” where they have then been re-captured or killed. On

January 13, 2009, during a press conference the Department of Defense provided its 43rd attempt

to report on the number of detainees released from Guantanamo who returned to the battlefield.

This latest report alleges that 61 detainees have returned to the battlefield. This report seeks to

examine the last numbers.


1. The 43rd attempt to enumerate the number of detainees who have returned to the

battlefield is false by the Department of Defense’s own data and prior reports.

2. In each of its forty-three attempts to provide the numbers of the recidivist detainees,

the Department of Defense has given different sets of numbers that are contradictory

and internally inconsistent with the Department’s own data.

3. The Department of Defense does not keep track of released detainees nor does it

follow their post release conduct.

4. The Department of Defense’s previous statements about the post release conduct of

former Guantanamo detainees were produced in writing in July 2007 and May 2008.

5. The January 13, 2009 press statement identifies no names, dates, places nor any

conduct by released detainees. The raw numbers that are cited are unsupported,

inconsistent with all other statements and appear to be presented to support the

internal Department of Defense purposes.

POINT I: The Department of Defense’s First 42 Reports of Released Guantanamo

Detainees: Recidivism

1. Among the previous numbers of recidivist detainees, the Department of Defense has

alleged variously: one, several, some, a couple, a few, 5, 7, 10, 12, 15, 12-24, 25, 29,

and 30. (See Appendix 1).

2. Eighty-two percent (82%) of the publicly made claims catalogued in Appendix 1 of

this report contain qualifying language, including terms such as: “at least”;1

“somewhere on the order of”;2 “approximately”;3 “around”;4 “just short of”;5 “we

believe”;6 “estimated”;7 “roughly”;8 “more than”;9 “a couple”;10 “a few”;11 “some”;12

“several”;13 and “about.”14

3. One would suppose that the number of “recidivists” would increase over time.

However, while the timeline does reveal a trend in a general upward direction over

time, there are notable deviations. For instance, in the months leading up to the midterm

election-from May 2006 until September 2006-the numbers proffered range

from “a couple”15 to “twenty-five (25)”16 During this same period, however, the

Department of Defense number remains constant at twelve (12). (See Appendix 1).

As is the case there are other links to previous reports and statements at the site. These are but a few:

# Profile of Released Guantánamo Detaines: The Government’s Story Then and Now

Cover Statement by Professor Mark Denbeaux (08/04/08)

# Justice Scalia, the Department of Defense, and The Perpetuation of an Urban Legend: The Truth about Recidivism of Released Guantánamo Detainees (06/16/08)

# Captured on Tape: Interrogation and Videotaping of Detainees in Guantánamo (02/07/08)

# The Meaning of “Battlefield”: An Analysis of the Government’s Representations of ‘Battlefield Capture’ and ‘Recidivism’ of the Guantánamo Detainees (12/10/07)

Professor Denbeaux’s Testimony before the Judiciary Committee on C-SPAN

# The Empty Battlefield and the Thirteenth Criterion (11/08/07)

# The 14 Myths of Guantánamo: Senate Armed Services Committee Statement of Mark P. Denbeaux.

Professor Mark P. Denbeaux testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on 4/26/07

More can be found at the Center for Policy & Research – Guantánamo Reports at Seton Hall University School of Law

As to those held captive in Guantanamo, and any other country under the cheney/bush administrations request and demands, I certainly wouldn’t blame them if they reverted to a combative retaliatory existence.

After being scooped up, taken to different countries or gitmo, held and tortured for now years, unable to contact family thousands of miles away, given no trials or even the government evidence of why they are being held or the charges, than after years released. I know what I would do, especially if I wasn’t a Guerilla Fighter to begin with, I’d Instantly Become One, my first reaction.

But hopefully I’d contain my Rage and Channel it into letting the World Know how I was Treated and help any others still held, as well as helping the innocent survivors of the occupied countries!!

1 comment

    • jimstaro on January 17, 2009 at 17:22

    Over at AfterDowningStreet you will find a post of Dwight D. Eisenhower with his Farewell Address to the Nation, 17 January 1961.

    Many have read or heard this Address many times, especially these past eight years, but with this post comes another many have not read or heard.

    Eight years earlier Eisenhower had said much the same in his “Chance for Peace Speech” to the American Society of Newspaper Editors on April 16,1953. Who has heard of that speech?

    You should listen to it.

    This is a part of what Ike says in the post and more as the his Farewell Address and what he warned about only 8 years prior to!

Comments have been disabled.