Contact Me

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Pentagon report says terrorism is speaking out against Gitmo torture tactics

6/6/09 New York Times finally apologizes for false Guantánamo recidivism story


I think this is the story (with recent Editor's note) that is referred to in the above link- "1 in 7 freed detainees rejoins fight, reports says":
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21gitmo.html?_r=1


The first link describes the situation pretty well, though I don't know anything else about the blog.

I found out about this latest apology from NYT by listening to a podcast of
Al Jazeera Listening Post 6/17/09 and they made some good points:

-Some detainees weren't picked up on the battlefield, so the "return" is in question.

-The so-called acts of terrorism they "returned to" included writing an op-ed for NYT against detainee treatment at the prison, talking about their abuse in Guantanamo to the media, appearing in film about Guantanamo, like the "
Tipton 3." (I don't know if their names were included in the infamous list, it wasn't clear, but this is a film about Guantanamo)

-Also rather sketchy is that this Pentagon report was dated April 7, 2009, but no one knew about it until the NYT printed the May 21 story, which happened to be the same day Obama gave that major speech on closing Guantanamo, followed immediately by Cheney's speech blaming him for future terrorist attacks, essentially.

-This is not the first time. In 2002 the Bush Admin leaked false info about Iraq's nuclear program and Cheney quoted it the same morning in the circular validation of "facts" to gain public support for war in Iraq. Two years later, the NYT said their article on Iraq lacked rigor and should have been more aggressive. Hoyt issued another similar mea culpa for this debacle.

And here is a blog post from someone (again, I don't know anything about the author or blog other than this article) about a year ago noting problems with a similar claim as the April 7, 2009 Pentagon report:

http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001115.htm


No comments:

Post a Comment