Earlier WikiLeaks releases seemed to expose atrocities and human rights abuses by the US military and government, which represents at least a partial justification. What end does this release serve?
I watched footage last week of British soldiers fighting to free large opium fields from Taliban control so that the real owners can get back to farming. All par for the course.
The war on drugs takes a back seat to the war on terrorism
What does it take to create fear? Certainly not successful terrorist attacks. Failed ones would work perfectly well too, as evidenced by the underwear bomber, shoe bomber, etc.
Things as minor as prank phone calls, etc., will still strike fear into the hearts of the target population.
So unless you can tell me that it's possible to stop failed attacks and prank phone calls, you must agree that terrorism cannot ever be stopped.
It's hard to imagine how exactly this ethos could reasonably manifest.
It's a little hard to tell from the wording, but that might be explicit evidence that the Obama administration is continuing the Bush administration's practice of extraordinary rendition. That or it's just banal, and the Obama administration is trying to find places to take our prisoners we can't release because of bureaucracy and fearmongering.
Though it wouldn't be surprising that the Clinton administration's practice of extraordinary rendition (which expanded under the Bush administration) has continued within the Obama administration.
They're talking about Gitmo detainees who they'd like to release; but can't due to problems in their home countries.
For example: there are (were?) a dozen Chinese Uighur muslims who were languishing in Gitmo, having been caught in the dragnet by mistake. They are Chinese citizens, so if they were to be released, they'd go back to China where the authorities would most likely execute them (or lock them away for life). So we'd like to release them to a third country; but everyone's afraid of China's clout and China was applying a lot of pressure to anyone who was even thinking of taking them. So we bribed countries into taking them: some went to Bermuda, some to Kiribati, etc.
The ones that are getting released probably don't want to come to the States anyway on account of lynch mobs.
On a side note, I was clearly mistaken and this includes the one we tried to get Slovenia to take. After the full-body scanners and COICA I'm getting a little on edge about my support of Obama.
I have no doubt that anyone released from Guantanamo into the United States would be subject to harassment, if not actual danger. The people in congress arguing vociferously against their release must have reasons, and as far as I can see that's either the belief that everyone in Guantanamo deserves to be there, or the belief that it will result in violence if they come to the US.
And simply put, in this case the expectation of violence is as good as violence itself. That's the goal of terrorism, and it's worked extremely well.
there is a reason Gitmo was established
besides prisoners of war have other rights (such as not being interrogated) under the Geneva Conventions - this all gets in the way of what we wanted from our prisoners at Gitmo
My understanding is that new prisoners are no longer being brought to Guantanamo, but instead to other sites outside of the United States.
For instance, I don't have "faith" in the IRS. But I don't think anyone should tar up and leak the tax records of every US taxpayer.
And I don't have "faith" in facebook. But I don't want a complete leak of every message anyone has ever sent via it.