DNI report shows recidivism of released Gitmo detainees increasing

posted at 10:55 am on December 8, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Maybe this explains why the push to close Guantanamo Bay has slowed to a mere memory.  The Obama administration waited until the last minute to publish a report from the Director of National Intelligence on recidivism among Gitmo alumni, and one can see why they wanted to keep it confidential as long as possible.  While Barack Obama played Let’s Make a Deal with Europe to get the terrorists behind Door Number Three, more and more of those released previously have returned to terrorism — with dozens no longer able to be located:

A de-classified summary of a report about detainees formerly held at Guantanamo Bay, written by the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, reported that of the 66 former Guantanamo detainees transferred since President Obama took office, “2 are confirmed and 3 are suspected of reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities.”

The Bush administration freed many more so-called recidivists, the report stated, having transferred 79 confirmed and 66 suspected of subsequently “reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities after transfer.”

As of October 1, 2010, the report stated, 598 detainees have been transferred by the Pentagon from Gitmo into the custody of other countries. “The Intelligence Community assesses that 81 (13.5 percent) are confirmed and 69 (11.5 percent) are suspected of reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities after transfer. Of the 150 former GTMO detainees assessed as confirmed or suspected of reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities, the Intelligence Community assesses that 13 are dead, 54 are in custody, and 83 remain at large.”

Thomas Joscelyn at the Weekly Standard wrote that the rate has “soared” in his first piece yesterday:

The DNI’s latest assessment is a significant increase over previous estimates. In June 2008, the Department of Defense reported that 37 former detainees were “confirmed or suspected” of returning to terrorism. On January 13, 2009 — seven months later — Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said that number had climbed to 61. As of April 2009, the DoD found that same metric had risen further to 74 — exactly double the Pentagon’s estimate just 11 months before.

In February 2010, President Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, confirmed that the estimated number of recidivists had increased to 20 percent. At that recidivism rate, and based on the total number of detainee transfers at that time, between 110 and 120 former Guantanamo detainees were on the U.S. government’s recidivist list in early 2010.

Thus, the DNI’s latest assessment of the Gitmo recidivism rate is higher than all previous estimates by an appreciable margin.

The White House apparently complained to Sam Stein of the Huffington Post, noting that their parolees have a lower recidivism rate, slightly above 10%.  Joscelyn responds:

It is odd that anyone in the Obama administration thought it was necessary to reply in the first place because I hardly flogged the administration for the increasing recidivism rate.

I made it clear that the “overwhelming majority” of confirmed and suspected recidivists on the DNI’s list – 145 of the 150 – were transferred during the Bush years. The news that 5 of the former detainees on the DNI’s recidivist list were transferred by the Obama administration is actually somewhat downplayed in my piece.

Moreover, how can anyone dispute that the number of estimated recidivists has “soared”? It is a straightforward matter. The previous assessments concluded that there were 37 confirmed and suspected recidivists as of June 2008, 61 as of January 2009, 74 as of April 2009, and between 110 and 120 as of February 2010. There are now 150 confirmed and suspected recidivists.

There are a couple of problems with comparing the rates.  First, Bush started with a wide number of people captured, with a significant number of those detentions resting on less-complete evidence of terrorism.  They were the first detainees released by the tribunals and the Bush administration, basically because they didn’t have enough evidence to keep them.  Those that were left were considered the worst of the worst, with the most evidence supporting their continued detention.  Those released now will be known to be more dangerous and more likely to return to terrorism.

Next, there is also the matter of time.  The recidivism rate is higher for those released earlier in part because they have had more time to reconnect to the networks.  Those released under Obama’s watch have had less time to do so.  The actual rate for these parolees won’t be known for a few more years — and to an extent that’s also true of most of the Bush parolees as well.  That’s one reason why the rate of recidivism increases even while the number of releases declines.

The Obama administration’s argument that “only” five released terrorists have returned to their terrorism is hardly comforting, nor is their pledge to eventually “bring them to justice.”  We already did that, and then we let them go.  That hardly bodes well for “justice” down the road.  Instead of bargaining with allies to give safe havens to known terrorists, we should be adjudicating their cases in the military commissions Congress has repeatedly ordered and setting their detentions in concrete terms at Gitmo.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I don’t understand why we let a single terrorist out of Gitmo.

Vera on December 8, 2010 at 10:58 AM

Then there are guys that we had like Abdullah Mehsud, the more charismatic of the Mehsud brothers… we let him go and in a few weeks he was working to build up the Lashkars that he and his brother had. Then when we took him out, his smarter, if less charismatic brother, took over and he was working to get AQ Khan released…. such a nice fellow!

I’m glad we took Baitullah out… but if Abdullah had stayed in Gitmo we would have had fewer problems from the less charismatic brother who then got to avenge his ‘martyred’ brother.

This ‘problem’ required the 230 grain solution, not stay at the Gitmo resort. But then we would have to prosecute these people as Spies and Saboteurs under the GC for their activities. We are too civilized to follow the rules of war we agreed to.

ajacksonian on December 8, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Who’s the hostage takers in this story?
What was the compromise?

Electrongod on December 8, 2010 at 11:05 AM

*shocking developments*

That’s what I call smart power!

search4truth on December 8, 2010 at 11:05 AM

They just need more rehabilitation. It’s obvious if we just spent more money…….

Tim Zank on December 8, 2010 at 11:06 AM

It’s pretty hard for the real world to compete with the allure of 72 virgins.

Lily on December 8, 2010 at 11:09 AM

But Catch-And-Release is so humane compared to what that awful Sarah Palin does to Caribou, as Maureen Dowd concocts truly horrendous Palin-assassinating-Obama imagery in her column.

Drained Brain on December 8, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Obama whines that only 5 have returned to terrorism under his watch? This is a bragging point? Seems to me, like Obama is using this narrative, and holding it “hostage”. Silly ol hostage taker Obama. ;)

What the he!! does it matter how many and under whose watch? They would return to AQ or whatever, even if Howdy Doody were the president. It does not matter Obutthead. What matters is….what in he!! are you going to do about it?

capejasmine on December 8, 2010 at 11:12 AM

Apply rule 303.

Rebar on December 8, 2010 at 11:13 AM

That is just the Gitmo detainees, how many more terrorists has the Karzai government and the Pakistani’s released?

fourdeucer on December 8, 2010 at 11:13 AM

How . . . unexpected.

AZCoyote on December 8, 2010 at 11:13 AM

I don’t understand why we let a single terrorist out of Gitmo.

Vera on December 8, 2010 at 10:58 AM

According to Mr. Obama, some of them need to participate in the tax debate.

Rovin on December 8, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Having a Gitmo stay on your resume can only be a career enhancement for a terrorist. Star power!

GnuBreed on December 8, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Terrorism is an Islamic defect.

tarpon on December 8, 2010 at 11:20 AM

Implant them with a chip that makes them want to do nothing but knit sweaters like in “Demolition Man”.

Tony737 on December 8, 2010 at 11:20 AM

OK, so we can’t keep Club Gitmo open. We can’t close it. We can’t keep the “undocumented combatants” locked up, and we can’t release them.

Strange, I don’t see any of the suggestions for Julian Assange type answers. What, no trial for trumped up charges? No calls for Rendition? No suggestions of CIA assassins to take care of the matter?

Snake307 on December 8, 2010 at 11:22 AM

This makes no sense. Gitmo has been closed since January 20, 2010 and all the inmates moved to that job-producing prison in Illinois.

/

mankai on December 8, 2010 at 11:27 AM

allow them ways to escape or release them after implanting them with tracking devices.

portlandon on December 8, 2010 at 11:35 AM

Anyone housed in Gitmo needs to only leave in a pine box (hopefully with pigs and bacon with a little bit of lead).

Tim Burton on December 8, 2010 at 11:36 AM

Not in the released rreport but well known that 1 out of 2 saudis captured and released go back to the battle field. some friends!

ConservativePartyNow on December 8, 2010 at 11:41 AM

The prisoners continue bowing to Mecca on their prayer rugs all day long and we expect them to reform?

scrubjay on December 8, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Oh, for crying out loud, what ever made anyone really think religious zealots could be “rehabilitated?”

These guys are motivated by dreams (albeit a nightmare to us) of achieving a worldwide Caliphate. They certainly will not be deterred by anything but being physically incarcerated for the rest of their miserable violent lives.

Gitmo and Obama’s continuance of his very own rendition program is all we have going for us these days. Well, that and Obama’s ever-increasing drone killings.

marybel on December 8, 2010 at 11:42 AM

We should grant the Gitmo detainees US citizenship, offer them jobs Americans don’t want, and give them unemployment benefits. Everyone will be happy and vote Democrat for life! What could go wrong?

jerseyman on December 8, 2010 at 12:30 PM

So why is it we treat tax cheats more harshly then terrorists? Well, ok, non-Democrat tax cheats.

18-1 on December 8, 2010 at 12:45 PM

Well when your Muslim allies present a list of terrorists they feel are innocent, how can you turn them down? They might stop giving you tips on how to show respect for Islam.

BL@KBIRD on December 8, 2010 at 12:47 PM

Anyone who contributes toward letting any madman (who subsequently reverts to murder and mayhem) out of Gitmo should share his punishment. Example: ex Gitmo religious nut kills 7 in bomb blast. Judge (or congressman) who released religious nut faces seven counts of first degree murder. “Book him, Dano.”

MaiDee on December 8, 2010 at 12:52 PM

The recidivism rate among those hit by drones is somewhat less.

cthulhu on December 8, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Release them through a trapdoor and the recidivism rate drops to zero.

profitsbeard on December 8, 2010 at 1:34 PM

Terrorism is an Islamic defect.

tarpon on December 8, 2010 at 11:20 AM

FIFY

profitsbeard on December 8, 2010 at 1:36 PM

Liberals = Al-Qaeda’s useful idiots.

scotash on December 8, 2010 at 4:29 PM

Boy, you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to make this into a good thing for Bush. Never mind that his recidivism rate was higher at this stage (and I’ll ignore that “recidivism” can include talking to the media about their treatment). Or that Obama’s releasing of the “worst of the worst” was supposed to produce an instant explosion of terrorism. Well played.

Hal_10000 on December 8, 2010 at 4:33 PM

Ahh yes, the one area where Obama has stimulated job growth. Or, is this considered one of Obama’s “saved” jobs?

RandallinHerndon on December 9, 2010 at 7:11 AM