Science Talk
Science Talk
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Forums
Science Forums
Biology
Math
Astronomy
Physics
Technology
Chemistry
Social Sciences
History
Psychology
Philosophy
Sociology
Linguistics
Religious Studies
Economics
Man Woman Ethno
Ask an Expert
World Records
Society Issues
Education
People
Alternative Science
The "Returned to the Battlefield" Myth

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Science Talk Forum Index -> Politics
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dan Clore
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:18 am    Post subject: The "Returned to the Battlefield" Myth Reply with quote

News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

[The claim that around thirty of the detainees released from Guantanamo
have "returned to the battlefield" has become a regressive-rightist
talking point, endlessly repeated. Justice Scalia, for instance,
repeated the claim in his recent dissenting opinion on habeas corpus:
"At least 30 detainees who have been released from the
Guantanamo Bay detention facility have since returned to waging war
against the United States and its allies." The evidence for the claim
provided by the Defense Department, however, reveals that most of these
thirty have never been on a battlefield, either before or after they
were imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay.--DC]

http://tinyurl.com/5nz6m2
The "Returned to the Battlefield" Myth
Category: Politics
June 23, 2008 9:23 AM
by Ed Brayton

Along with the myth that all the detainees held at Guantanamo Bay were
"captured on the battlefield" there is another myth being repeated over
and over again by Bush administration apologists: the myth that 30 men
released from Guantanamo Bay "returned to the battlefield" to fight
against the United States. It can most prominently be found in Justice
Scalia's dissent in Boumediene, where he claimed that "at least 30 of
those prisoners hitherto released from Guantanamo Bay have returned to
the battlefield."

A new study
[http://law.shu.edu/center_policyresearch/reports/urban_legend_final_61608.pdf

] out of Seton Hall Law School debunks this myth quite thoroughly by
tracing it to the source and showing how the Defense Department's own
reports show it to be false. For instance:

"The July 2007 press release issued by the Department of Defense raised
serious questions about the claims of recidivism made by the
Department's own Principal Deputy General Counsel and Minority Views.5
Although it did repeat the number 30, the Press Release made clear that
that number included not only those former detainees who could have in
any sense been said to have engaged in combat against the United States
or its allies but also those who returned 'to militant activities,
participat[ed] in anti-US propaganda or other activities through
intelligence gathering and media reports.'

"In short, while Principal Deputy General Counsel Dell'Orto and the
Minority Views publicly insisted that some 30 former Guantánamo
detainees have 'returned to waging war against the United States and its
allies,' the Department's July 2007 News Release flatly contradicted
this claim. Rather than thirty supposed recidivists waging war, the
Press Release described at most fifteen (15) possible recidivists. Even
more surprising, only seven (7) of these individuals are identified by
name and were alleged to have returned to any battlefield or any combat.
The other eight (Cool of the fifteen (15) individuals alleged by the
Government to have "returned to the fight" are accused of nothing more
than speaking critically of the Government's detention policies."

That last part is very important: they included in those figures people
who had criticized their own detention at Guantanamo Bay -- criticizing
their own unjustified detention was classified as "returning to the
battlefield against the US and its allies." Seriously:

"As we developed in detail in The Meaning of 'Battlefield,' these other
'recidivists' included the Tipton Three (who recounted their Guantánamo
experiences for Michael Winterbottom's commercial film, The Road to
Guantánamo) whose speech was apparently viewed as problematic and five
(5) Uighur's who remained detained in a refugee camp in Albania but who
had an editorial submitted on their behalf which was critical of the US
Guantánamo policy."

The study also points to testimony from the Defense Department in front
of a Congressional subcommittee on May 20, 2008 -- three weeks before
the court ruling came down -- which contradicted that July 2007 press
release and claimed only 12 had been caught fighting against the US
after their release. But even of those 12, there is reason to doubt the
accuracy of this claim:

"Of the twelve, five (5) are listed as 'killed' (one of whom is ISN 220,
a Kuwaiti national whose story is spelled out below), and one is listed
as 'at large.' There are five more listed as 'arrested' and only one
listed as 'captured.' It is not clear what the distinction is, but it
may indicate where the apprehension occurred -- 'on the battlefield' or
elsewhere. The 'arrested individuals' included two Moroccans, two
Russians, and one Turkish national, all of whom were arrested in their
home country. There is no information about the charges filed, nor any
information that these individuals attacked or plan to attack America.
Further, it is not clear that actions against Morocco, Russia, and
Turkey can be fairly characterized as 'return[ing] to the fight.'"

The study also points out that not a single one of the detainees they
claim returned to the battlefield were released as a result of a court
hearing, even the military tribunals at Gitmo, but were released by
order of political appointees at the Pentagon -- often over the
objections of the military:

"While Justice Scalia is clearly wrong about the number of detainee
recidivists, his larger point seems to be that the Government, not the
courts, should be trusted with separating the sheep from the goats.
However, one of the greatest ironies of the whole recidivism debate is
that not a single detainee has been released as a result of habeas
corpus. All recidivists have been released by the Department of Defense,
which has never explained why it released such individuals to 'return to
waging war' against us. Any assessment of the relative strengths of
judicial and political processes should be made with full awareness of
the story of ISN 220, who 'returned to the fight' not as the result of
any judicial ruling but rather because of a decision made by the
political appointees at the Department of Defense who released him
despite the objections of the military . . .

"While the documents which have been released strongly suggest that ISN
220 should still be detained, there are no available records indicating
why he was released or who is responsible for the release. The only
thing that can be said with assurance is that, Justice Scalia to the
contrary notwithstanding, no federal judge is responsible. Perhaps if
the process were more transparent, such a grave mistake would not have
been made."

Another myth bites the dust.

--
Dan Clore

My collected fiction, _The Unspeakable and Others_:
http://tinyurl.com/2gcoqt
Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://tinyurl.com/292yz9
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

Strange pleasures are known to him who flaunts the
immarcescible purple of poetry before the color-blind.
-- Clark Ashton Smith, "Epigrams and Apothegms"
Back to top
  Ads
Advertising
Sponsor


chatnoir
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:18 am    Post subject: Re: The "Returned to the Battlefield" Myth Reply with quote

Dan Clore wrote:
Quote:
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

[The claim that around thirty of the detainees released from Guantanamo
have "returned to the battlefield" has become a regressive-rightist
talking point, endlessly repeated. Justice Scalia, for instance,
repeated the claim in his recent dissenting opinion on habeas corpus:
"At least 30 detainees who have been released from the
Guantanamo Bay detention facility have since returned to waging war
against the United States and its allies." The evidence for the claim
provided by the Defense Department, however, reveals that most of these
thirty have never been on a battlefield, either before or after they
were imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay.--DC]

http://tinyurl.com/5nz6m2
The "Returned to the Battlefield" Myth
Category: Politics
June 23, 2008 9:23 AM
by Ed Brayton

Along with the myth that all the detainees held at Guantanamo Bay were
"captured on the battlefield" there is another myth being repeated over
and over again by Bush administration apologists: the myth that 30 men
released from Guantanamo Bay "returned to the battlefield" to fight
against the United States. It can most prominently be found in Justice
Scalia's dissent in Boumediene, where he claimed that "at least 30 of
those prisoners hitherto released from Guantanamo Bay have returned to
the battlefield."

A new study
[http://law.shu.edu/center_policyresearch/reports/urban_legend_final_61608.pdf

] out of Seton Hall Law School debunks this myth quite thoroughly by
tracing it to the source and showing how the Defense Department's own
reports show it to be false. For instance:

"The July 2007 press release issued by the Department of Defense raised
serious questions about the claims of recidivism made by the
Department's own Principal Deputy General Counsel and Minority Views.5
Although it did repeat the number 30, the Press Release made clear that
that number included not only those former detainees who could have in
any sense been said to have engaged in combat against the United States
or its allies but also those who returned 'to militant activities,
participat[ed] in anti-US propaganda or other activities through
intelligence gathering and media reports.'

"In short, while Principal Deputy General Counsel Dell'Orto and the
Minority Views publicly insisted that some 30 former Guant�namo
detainees have 'returned to waging war against the United States and its
allies,' the Department's July 2007 News Release flatly contradicted
this claim. Rather than thirty supposed recidivists waging war, the
Press Release described at most fifteen (15) possible recidivists. Even
more surprising, only seven (7) of these individuals are identified by
name and were alleged to have returned to any battlefield or any combat.
The other eight (Cool of the fifteen (15) individuals alleged by the
Government to have "returned to the fight" are accused of nothing more
than speaking critically of the Government's detention policies."

That last part is very important: they included in those figures people
who had criticized their own detention at Guantanamo Bay -- criticizing
their own unjustified detention was classified as "returning to the
battlefield against the US and its allies." Seriously:

"As we developed in detail in The Meaning of 'Battlefield,' these other
'recidivists' included the Tipton Three (who recounted their Guant�namo
experiences for Michael Winterbottom's commercial film, The Road to
Guant�namo) whose speech was apparently viewed as problematic and five
(5) Uighur's who remained detained in a refugee camp in Albania but who
had an editorial submitted on their behalf which was critical of the US
Guant�namo policy."

The study also points to testimony from the Defense Department in front
of a Congressional subcommittee on May 20, 2008 -- three weeks before
the court ruling came down -- which contradicted that July 2007 press
release and claimed only 12 had been caught fighting against the US
after their release. But even of those 12, there is reason to doubt the
accuracy of this claim:

"Of the twelve, five (5) are listed as 'killed' (one of whom is ISN 220,
a Kuwaiti national whose story is spelled out below), and one is listed
as 'at large.' There are five more listed as 'arrested' and only one
listed as 'captured.' It is not clear what the distinction is, but it
may indicate where the apprehension occurred -- 'on the battlefield' or
elsewhere. The 'arrested individuals' included two Moroccans, two
Russians, and one Turkish national, all of whom were arrested in their
home country. There is no information about the charges filed, nor any
information that these individuals attacked or plan to attack America.
Further, it is not clear that actions against Morocco, Russia, and
Turkey can be fairly characterized as 'return[ing] to the fight.'"

The study also points out that not a single one of the detainees they
claim returned to the battlefield were released as a result of a court
hearing, even the military tribunals at Gitmo, but were released by
order of political appointees at the Pentagon -- often over the
objections of the military:

"While Justice Scalia is clearly wrong about the number of detainee
recidivists, his larger point seems to be that the Government, not the
courts, should be trusted with separating the sheep from the goats.
However, one of the greatest ironies of the whole recidivism debate is
that not a single detainee has been released as a result of habeas
corpus. All recidivists have been released by the Department of Defense,
which has never explained why it released such individuals to 'return to
waging war' against us. Any assessment of the relative strengths of
judicial and political processes should be made with full awareness of
the story of ISN 220, who 'returned to the fight' not as the result of
any judicial ruling but rather because of a decision made by the
political appointees at the Department of Defense who released him
despite the objections of the military . . .

"While the documents which have been released strongly suggest that ISN
220 should still be detained, there are no available records indicating
why he was released or who is responsible for the release. The only
thing that can be said with assurance is that, Justice Scalia to the
contrary notwithstanding, no federal judge is responsible. Perhaps if
the process were more transparent, such a grave mistake would not have
been made."

Another myth bites the dust.

Well, I guess we will have to open up the can of worms of Pro-American
Iraqi Legislators attacking Americans is not a myth!:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/100/story/41895.html

headline:

U.S.-allied Iraqi politician kills 2 U.S. troops, wounds 4

Mohammed al Dulaimy / MCT



By Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam | McClatchy Newspapers
MADAIN, Iraq — A U.S.-allied Iraqi council member sprayed American
troops with gunfire Monday, killing two soldiers and wounding three
and an interpreter, Iraqi authorities and witnesses said. The attack
occurred minutes after they emerged from a weekly joint meeting on
reconstruction in this volatile town southeast of Baghdad.

Raed Mahmoud Ajil, a former high school principal in his mid-40s, was
known as a respected city council member and devoted educator who'd
recently returned to Iraq after completing his master's degree in
India, stunned colleagues said. U.S. troops shot and killed him at the
scene.

Ajil's colleagues said they could think of no motive for the deadly
rampage, which is thought to be the first incident of a U.S.-allied
Iraqi politician carrying out such an attack. Ajil comes from a
distinguished Sunni Muslim family. His brother is security chief for
the Iraqi Ministry of Justice and a cousin is a high-ranking judge,
relatives said.

Ajil's family said that he'd suffered from bouts of depression and
sporadic epileptic seizures, which he masked in his role as a public
servant. Relatives knew him to be friendly to U.S. troops and said he
had no qualms about working alongside them, even though many in this
mixed Sunni-Shiite Muslim town view American forces as occupiers.

"(The Americans) used to love him. They gave him a contract for a
project he was working on. He spoke English fluently with them and
they used to like him so much," said Sherif Abdullah Aziz, 47, a
cousin. "There is no explanation that we know of for what
happened." ... (c0nt)




Quote:

--
Dan Clore

My collected fiction, _The Unspeakable and Others_:
http://tinyurl.com/2gcoqt
Lord We�rdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://tinyurl.com/292yz9
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

Strange pleasures are known to him who flaunts the
immarcescible purple of poetry before the color-blind.
-- Clark Ashton Smith, "Epigrams and Apothegms"
Back to top
  Ads
Advertising
Sponsor


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Science Talk Forum Index -> Politics All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Australian Debt Consolidation Experts
medical insurance
Wedding Websites
Annunci di escort, accompagnatrici e massaggiatrici
Adult Films UK
Home Equity Loans
Car Insurance
Make Your Own Website
Free International Calls
Cleaning Service
toxic mold
UK Swingers Genuine Contacts Site
Sex Directory
business supplies
Wines Articles
Vacuum Cleaner Bags


Board Security

176 Attacks blocked

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group