So the Obama administration is ready to look into invidvidual case files for the Guantanamo Bay detainees and start making case by case evaluations. This information is something they were not allowed access to until the inauguration. It seems there’s a snag – they’re AREN’T any decent case files:
It sounds like the Justice department never bothered to compile any decent case files because they never thought they’d actually have to try anything, and they were caught off guard by Supreme Court decisions:
So it looks like Obama is going to be set back in the process because of the incompetence, lack of organization, lack of professionalism and basic lack of giving a shit by the previous administration. Instead of being able to pull up a folder on Joe Detainee, they have to call a bunch of different agencies and find out what each one has, and where. They have to rifle through desks and lockers and car trunks to find out what kind of evidence and case – if any – they have against any given prisoner.
Not only does it show the utter disregard the Bushistas had for the human rights of the hostages at Gitmo (something we already knew), it shows that they didn’t even have any regard for their own cases against them. They never gave a shit about having to prove anything, and never even bothered to compile coherent cases.
I think we’re going to find out more stuff like this. I think we’re going to find out more stories about Bush basically leaving the place a shithole for Obama to clean up. Fuckers.
I hope the current administration makes it clear that anyone without a coherent case against them will be released. And that any person or agency that had the information to keep them locked up but didn’t produce it will be held responsible for any releases we may come to regret.
But really, in such a situation, the only thing a good executive and judicial branch can do is release anyone without a documented reason for their continued incarceration.
I can hardly believe that the previous administration didn’t even think it was worth jotting down a couple of made-up reasons for the lock-ups. They were usually good for a transparent lie or two whenever it served their purpose.
And of course the hard-core right now has nice little, “Stop blaming Bush,” / “Obama goes back on his word,” talking points to throw about like a phantom birth certificate.
I might be a good thing Bush has Gitmo built. For some reason I keep thinking we will need a large holding area for all the corrupt officials in the Bush/Cheney administration. As we send most of these detainees home in the upcoming year their cells might prove very useful. I would really like to start with Old Man Potter himself.
So basically, some of the detainees are being held because someone in some agency somewhere says so and there is no oversight or collection point…sounding like this was pretty much SOP for the Bush administration.
Some underlings that quit during the eight years had stories about abuse of various programs (detention, spying*, no-bid contracts or otherwise) because no one was watching what was going on. I was willing to dismiss some of the stories as just sour grapes but I think I’m going to go back and read as many as I can find so I can brace myself as the real stories come out in the next few years.
*Recording the soldier’s pillow talk with their SOs so the next shift can listen to them, still really chaps my ass even amongst the more egregious accusations and implications
Pish, you’ll fill up gitmo with the politicians from Illinois alone.
Yeah. Lost 'em, that’s what happened. Maybe Barney ate em, or they were accidentally put out with the recycling. Perhaps they were mixed up with the carry out menus in the white house junk drawer.
So are we about done with blaming Clinton? Cause I was getting tired of that one.
I guess the old “respect the office of the president even if you don’t agree with him” canard is out the window too.
When a significant portion of the public simply “knows” that everyone in Gitmo is a guilty terrorist, it really is a waste of time to collect or collate evidence.
I was listening to Fox News the other day and one of the fucktards said" “So what are we going to do about the detainees we don’t have evidence against, release them even though they are guilty?”
Well this is another fine kettle of turds. Are any of these guys guilty of anything? They must be, I keep assuring myself, it can’t be a complete and utter…oh, who am I kidding, of course it could.
No files? No chain of custody for evidence? Hell, no evidence? Even for that number who are guilty as all git-out, a ten year old boy who’s watched a full season of Boston Legal could make the prosecution’s case look like road kill surprise.
Could they possibly fuck this up more than they have?
It seems pretty clear that the previous adminstration’s plan (perhaps “plan” is too strong a word for it… perhaps “cock-up”) was to simply pass along the ginormous screw-up along to the next administration and let them try to fix it. The more it was screwed up, the harder it will be to fix. Ha ha!
I would not be surprised to have them try to blame Obama for Gitmo. 25% of the population would buy any lie they peddled, hook, line and sinker.
Is there anybody who can be charged for this? (In the government, I mean-basically, without case files, these people were never really formally arrested, just locked up) Like say, a certain Texan moron, and a grouchy old bastard with a bad aim?
Problem is, by not competently processing and keeping information, the Bush administration is making it far more difficult to determine which prisoners are and which prisoners are not terrorists. This harms both human rights and national security.
Oh good, I thought we wouldn’t have any more liberal douche circle jerk threads after Jan. 20. Thanks for keepin’ it real for us, Dio.
This is one of those stories that is inevitable given the pre-disposition of certain reporters to spin facts a certain way. The real crux of this is that the complaint is not supported by facts, so it’s impossible to refute with facts because the goalposts are too easy to move.
What’s the definition of a “case file”? Must it be a physical file folder containing paper bearing written or typed words that contain 100% of the facts about a particular detainee? If there is a single fact about a detainee that is on a different piece of paper contained in a different folder, does it mean that the first folder is no longer a “case file” because it does not contain 100% of the facts about that detainee? And what is a “comprehensive case file”? And how many detainees do not have “comprehensive case files”? (The article says “many.”) Do any of the detainees without “comprehensive case files” still have “case files”? If so, how far away from “comprehensive case files” are these “case files”?
I’m sure you are thinking “come on, we know what a case file is, geez.” But the article never defines it, so how can we know what it means to say that “many” detainees do not have “comprehensive case files”? I know the answer–bush is bad so of course whatever his administration did was wrong.
It is easy to read this story and get all upset, but once you realize that the story contains very few facts, you realize that it was possible to write it before any facts were available because this way of spinning the available facts is always possible. For instance, after 9/11 there were calls for more inter-agency cooperation (such as sharing iformation). Now this article comes along and complains that information about detainees is scattered across the executive branch. What if the information each agency has is duplicative of information other agencies have and was “scattered” to promote inter-agency cooperation? And you can always find a former official that didn’t like something to give you a nice complaining sound bite.
I could go on, but hopefully this will be enough to jumpstart some of the brains of those that are so eager to jump all over the outgoing administration over this.