The other day, in an envelope representing through its terms to be from OASD-Public Affairs, Directorate for Public Communication, 1400 Defense Pentagon, Washington DC 20301-1400, originally and only addressed to me at my within below given address, I received a letter appearing to be signed in original (not facsimile or stamp nature)in name David R. McWilliams, descriptio personnae thereof Director, Office of Public Communication.

It was in reference to an alleged letter to Robert Gates questioning conditions of release set for Mohammed Mohammed Hassan Odaini, with indication that the Director of Public Communication had been asked to reply to me thereon.

I know I've participated in some ACLU and Amnesty International efforts re GITMO, so I'm notifying both groups of the complete DOD reply after said opening references of sender, said body of reply verbatim and completely being, to-wit:

"The U.S. Government seeks humane treatment and security assurances from recipient governments before approving the transfer of release of a detainee as appropriate. Many of the detainees, who have been approved for transfer from Guantanamo, have objected to their transfer to certain countries. The negotiations to transfer a detainee can, and have, taken years to complete in some instances, but are a necessary step to ensure released detainees are not mistreated and/or do not re-engage in hostilities upon release. In cases where there are no litigation obstacles preventing transfer or where these obstacles have been resolved, the U.S. Government makes every effort to ensure a timely return or release. Despite these challenges, the Department has transferred over 500 detainees from Guantanamo to date.

For more information regarding detainee operations, please visit the Detainee Affairs website at http://www.defenselink.mil/home/features/Detainee_Affairs.

We hope that this information provides more clarity on our detainee policies. We understand your concerns and we thank you for taking the time to share them with us." [End Of Cited DOD Reply]

For the record, despite all pollyanna and military splendor of waging war on terror, I remain of an opinion bona fide terrorists are essentially self-motivated anarchists who use anything from bent coat hangers to guns to whatever deadly devices they can finger, all in grand-sounding but rather limited-capability strikes; I further find it obnoxious that some nations like Pakistan let terror groups base within their borders, but in absence of AUMF or war declaration against any such nation(s)...and Iraq doesn't count as only AUMF is to rid of Saddam Hussein not manifestly due to 911...the AUMF against Qaeda seems to not allow grafting on of anybody any nation wants to call terrorists without trial of evidence, and whether or not al-Qaeda involved; I am baffled as to why Qaeda then sits as if allowing Pakistan to be a cause célèbre (bête-noir?) enabling anyone on earth to be suspected of "joining anarchy in sympathy to Qaeda"; I would be satisfied if a Harry Callahan-like group went around asking terrorists and in fact ANY thugs if they felt lucky, taking into swift trial of ANY nature those who surrender, otherwise using force as required for those feeling lucky until subdued; lastly, I firmly believe that in re Islam or any faith on earth, when one acts for one's own egregious concern, especially when killing, at such point such people in fact cease being able to be called members of ANY faith...and indeed, most of the earth is NOT a vast cesspool of killer folks, or we wouldn't have such small numbers of bona fide terror group members...unless, of course, any government(s) were to transmogrify or expand terms of terrorism to include anything from questioning why an official thinks a policy is or isn't working, up to and through say Iceland riots, that last one being its own kind of felony in any event but not requiring tether to Qaeda-type demands for destruction of a nation's economy or trade.

I myself see the relevant DOD response as an insinuation the ACLU is anti-American for questioning the Terror Watch List, what with that implied "bigger than WWII field of battle these well-martialled mercenaries return to, causing more battle casualties as decaying economies help identify they are winning and only the guilty seek arraignments or trials".

As a William F. Buckley, Jr. Conservative, certainly not his wealth but philosophy, I understand the need for wealthy private people, in the context that they are a symbol that those under them are reaping benefits of investments into global economies.

Well, with a DOW recently under 7,000, how much domestic or foreign investment is going into USA, State, and local T-bonds, munis, jobs, education, and so forth, further how much is due to lack of private funds; likewise, with all the tax cuts constantly going on plus apparent coming dis-incentive for corporations and wealthy persons to make charitable contributions, how much money CAN be raised from this for anything; lastly, there is that eternally pernicious tight and never-growing money supply of bills in circulation, at a time credit cannot be had by those without any or sufficient income, those who do qualify face higher interest, costs keep rising, and so forth here, also...makes everyone describing or criticizing from Bush Term I through Obama I seem silly for even postulating budgets "splash red, we must undo this Liberal Commie Socialist Big Government nightmare!"...no matter how military bases and Federal funds to anything (besides banks and real estate and sovereign sub-Federal paychecks) become as scarce as hens' teeth.

Earlier on, pre-2006, Congress itself ordered banks to make mortgages available to those (e.g., new immigrants) who could not otherwise qualify...these would be the ones Obama refers to when he says "chiselers who knew what they were doing and get NO help"; yes, how abusive to avail of what the USA government insists upon, national or not. Then, last September, and no matter how often its terms will be revised, Congress and Bush/Obama/McCain embraced an outright arrest of all USA dollars in circulation, with protocol that they shall go only to banks and real estate and those which insure same...a few sops to propagandawood, er, Hollywood, and the auto industry with smaller nationalization and Federal control via mini-bailouts.

Now in this New Order, which literally every other government on earth either disdains, encouraged, or both, if you couldn't get a home or other loan before, obviously you won't now or in future; this applies to payroll loans and SBA types, as well, and likely will include students, based on the usual raising of how much you make despite costs so you "have too much income". Remember, don't worry...media's been nationalized, certainly if they'll report Utopian success under Obama (or fill-in-the-blank) it's credible without examination, and only some criminal/terrorist/human filth/chiseler would try to figure angles, as real Americans and real wannabe immigrants are satisfied with a housing market that never loses value....ever.

Think about that...one way or the other for years and still, banks and real estate nationalized, tons of bad loans covered as if they never happened, foreclosures go on, and values never drop...and banks can still take back property. In the alternative, those who can't get credit on their homes in the first place often can look ahead to seizure for local property tax non-payment and such...and where it happens, again, the local markets stay high.

Who needs to worry about income or trade as long as their house won't lose its value? Thus, on to the things REAL people WORTHY of God, voting, and newspolling care about: who's the next American Idol, who's Dr. Phil going to excoriate for even doing what government said, are Hannity et al right that by playing Social Conservative against Social Liberal economic problems will finally just evaporate on their own, will my team endorse my NASCAR driver and my beer and win the divisionals this year, is Blagojevich worth that six figure book deal, ooooh that Roland Burris, blah blah blah blah. Hey, we've had a nationalized economy now spreading into yet another Presidency, we've all chittered away on this and that alongside it, and come to believe that Iran and Hamas are an uber-power not even the combined allied forces of WWII could do more against than bend knees to in supplicated surrender...yea, and at the same time, we're in some Christian Right pseudo-Rapture wherein the sheep get mortgages/credit/social aid and the goats get the boot, and we please MyMood Alibabajihad and crowd because the Looorrrrr-ddddddaaahhhhh will bless everyone who keeps Israel from being hurt, especially by the new Red Menace known as Islamic terrorists (no matter how much that's like saying we must cower before a street gang as a nation, hemisphere, or globe, and no matter how much the world and its everyday peoples strive to point out how those who wantonly or egregiously kill aren't even adherents of their faiths...including of Islam...but appease the puffing extremist anyway while invitiating the whole).

Oh, and notice we've gone from 911 to Iraq to today and will march into tomorrow, yet without ANY IOTA of the rest of the globe's action or non-action deterring from tight money in circulation, nationalization of banks and real estate, and general non-inclusion of those who have sought incomes, the kind which pay for education, healthcare, and stuff of life themselves...like all generations before us. Nope, like all the Left, Right, and Center psychobabble of almost a decade, only the expansion of nationalized, jobless banks and real estate seems to endure, together as said with those public paychecks and regular increases thereto.

Most of the non-Islamic terrorism-reliant world seems currently displeased with a USA which neither offers its own people to become or remain consumers, nor accepts foreign investment; like us, that world also has existed despite its own problems and the occasional flusters from Alibabajihad inter alia. All I can respectfully suggest is that, absent different forthcoming Obama rules, banks and real estate are nationalized, whatever your current housing woes that's what they're to stay, neither terrorism/media hype nor lack of it impacts the scenario in the least, and if that were to be at the heart of IMF grief re the USA, then it becomes ponderous indeed what the vocational and income futures (including sitting back as some quasi-investor class, sans cash to invest here or abroad) are going to be in a nation which will not be isolated by the world, it will isolate itself...and find maybe Bush wasn't so wrong about the Constitution being just a piece of quaint paper, deficits being just numbers on paper.       

Voices, too many voices: "Schermerhorn concert hall will save us!" (Nashville TN); "Millennium Park will save us, and next Olympic re-building!" (Chicago IL); "Build homes into our hills non-stop to save us!" (Linn/Benton Counties OR); repeat with same re malls, theme parks, unused commercial constructions in every town.

Hey, look...I found that 1999 cartoon from the Chicago "Reader" titled "Do The Richie" (actually run in the July 30, 1999 issue as drawn by Citizens For A Cooler Chicago); you remember, back then Chicago had that public "Macarena"-type dance "Do The Millie" for Y2K? Anyway, the cartoon's got a silhouette of Daley, ala dancing school figures and dotted lines, in each frame; the first few frames exhort and show Daley demonstrating: "Plant, plant a pretty flower, toss a bum with all your power! Shrug to your left, shrug to your right, say eh, eh, who, me?".  Boy, Eddie Murphy's 'The PJs' sure hit right back then, as "those people" of various races were the only ones who had to go to gentrify everyone else into prosperity, and back then, they were all re-distributed...who else has since ever lost out, huh?

The cartoon, a few months now short of a decade old, was in "Reader" objections to Daley and Giuliani-type espousals that from billion-dollar public flowerboxes to almost complete razing of everything (with little or no restorations or restriction to "inner city" structures), followed by New Urban housing deals, conversions from commercial into loft spaces, and road projects, for this the housing market would always offer high and easy resale values; further, that  this would draw so much entrepreneurial and job opportunities, nationals and immigrants alike would dwell forever in capitalist Nirvana...anybody incidentally needing "management away" or "kept mobile" being a loser anyway, the kind DHS REALLY ought to be watching instead of Qaedans, Janjaweeds, blah blah blah, as losers were not inner city types but "slackers" unwilling to do what it took in "the new economy".

Dadgum is eternal re-re-repavings and constant housing starts haven't at least kept home prices high to date.

But get with most USA officials and understand: it only LOOKS like an eternally fixed money supply, fluffed by occasional issuances of consumer credit (usually resulting in bankruptcy) is a bad thing; sure, it takes real money from the money supply to build empty warehouses, homes, roads, but see, only LOSERS who had pay cuts or lost jobs due to lack of cash in the consumer stream get hurt; come on, really, you folks today don't actually think that sprawling sea of all already out and ahead of you can actually involve YOU, do you? See, it's better to bail out Wall Street, realtors, and a handful of construction firms in each area to keep them comfy as THEY lend to obvious problem payers, or those with tight if high budgets dependent on not one hour cut back, and at least get you to agree no one in difficulty should be helped out so no griping or boo-boo lips when YOUR time comes. Besides, even if all of you in diversity went bust, plenty of ferreners still abroad who know when in some "proxy Rapture" and God must mean for them to step up to houses they didn't build...and be the next "you" in re your current temptations.

Even if all this over-building reduces farms and God's green spaces and green energy resources, to boot, and without regard to which nationals or immigrants "avail" of such schemes.

In sum, the Obama  plan offers some no deflation (just lower monthly payments, not sticker prices), while saying "no" to those with no income(s) so their neighbors lose value due to surrounding foreclosures; Obama critics offer permanent "Do The Richie", where homes stay high through re-re-rebuilding and over-building/infrastructure, yet nobody gets help when they can't access equity, with only Wall Street being kept in a manner to which it's accustomed since cash doesn't flow through public fingers...which is why often homes are eminent domained and just handed to developers to "improve local economic bases".  

Thus, Obama, being a proponent of infrastructure money as way to economic salvation, seems of one mind with his critics, except Obama is merely willing to let some pay less until their own income fails...and unlike $300-$1200 lump-sum literally everybody got last year as IRS stimulus, for those still having jobs, a new $15 per paycheck ($180 this year if 12 pays, $390 if 26 pays)...until lost...will leave nothing else to do in order for personal economies to work efficiently, grow jobs, and generally save the world...who but a miscreant or addict or VAWAbuser or such could fail? Boy, if only FDR had seen the simplicity in dealing with the Great Depression of HIS times!

As for me, I just point things out for discussion, shrug to my left, shrug to my right, and say "eh, eh...who, ME?". I only assume job losers, the eminent domained, the hurricane stricken, the can-no-longer-meet-ends, and those deemed "irresponsible" by officials (including those who took impossibly-termed loans due to no income and to avoid homelessness from lenders who offered them) will need some warehousing to keep them off streets, perhaps jails, or renditions to CCA or otherwise, as real-wage or other incomes and jobs don't yet blip on even mid-range "radar"...student, mortgagee, dislocated, national, or immigrant, it appears the "'nuff said" stimulus (like its GOP analog) has been pronounced infallible, and if you can't find work or whatever it must be somebody other than the system.   

I am commenting today in re recent opinion by Obama Solicitor General Elena Kagan that she approves and urges continuation of Bush torture and detention of anybody at all, evidence or not, trial or not, actual combatant or not, all things Bush against USA citizens on say-so, and indefinite detention if all a detainer says is "national security"...maybe she goes to one of those Rapturist Churches, and is just one of the amorphous global mass of pro-Rapturist/Jihadists toward fewer people in God's holy name.

I'm sure no Democrats or many sane people actually just wanted the little people (non-crowned heads or soldiers/office workers/police thereof) to feel good about things November 2008 to date, then slam everyone with the same "screw the lot of you!" they thought would change; surely, Obama is more than a glib pacifier pending reinforcement to the old way once enough suckers find out. 

Numerous interrogators, generals, and admirals have stated that abuses committed during interrogations are not only illegal, but also counter-productive and hurt our government's ability to collect accurate and timely intelligence.

Senate hearings have found that abuse at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib was not the work of a few rogue actors but the direct result of policies and practices sanctioned by the highest levels of the US government.

One wonders where a porn starlet gets the neocon funding and public relations spin, as a proposed Democrat challenger to GOP Senator Vitter of Louisiana; of course, the pornographer would be just one name running, but isn't it handy how a Bush-driven neocon media atmosphere just whisks her up as if to have SOMETHING to make it plausible somehow Americans don't like Dems, so by extension, they gag on Democrat change?

Well, perhaps the GOP has gone senile; we ALL recall what the GOP majorities did for us on pain of plain dissolving filibusters and other traditions, we know they are the most enamored of neocons and likely find kinship with their neo-Louisiana icon getting big cash from SOMEBODY who has it, and no...people aren't going to believe Democrats want to end religion, have all turn to porn for jobs, practice same-sex bacchanalias and more with intent to flip birds at God, or otherwise give us what the GOP has already delivered.

No, folks I've spoken with don't seem to think the aforesaid rise above wedge issues re elections simple, if that at all. But we DO spot that the no-ideas GOP thus mean to indicate...hold on for this shocking revelation...staying the course Bush, Chenehy, Delay et al have set our ship of State (and States!) upon, not THEIR legislative intent to have any change there whatsoever...gays, pornos, and non-Calvinist religious stamped out or not.

President Obama is correct no single omnibus bill, or standalone bill, could possibly be hammered out for at least a decade if we went that route. Knowing the background of many issues and persons in public service, I respectfully observe the GOP is gainsaying for no other purpose than to go on record as being 'Nay' to any change whatesoever to the domestic issues, and penchant for blaming any other ethnics or nations for their relevant aacta, motivating voters to have supported Democrats and Obama last November.

President Bush used fuzzy slam-through bills so that as a unitary power, he could best set about doing what he understood the legislative intent of Congress to be, beyond the mere words of any bills; I repose special confidence in President Obama to interpret any Congressional bill for change from the aforesaid, especially where GOP restricts itself in nature of refusing to admit jobs are important let alone being lost while arguing Churches should discriminate against people in need money is taken from, and I believe President Obama is quite capable of using his unitary Presidential power to effectuate the obvious intent of the majority of both Houses that positive and people-inclusive change from what has been occur instanter or with minimum delays.

It certainly seems true that a number of executives in firms being the recipients of Federal bailouts have sought to abuse the cash flow; on the other hand, there seems a fungible salient re the public in our times.

Media here and I'm sure elsewhere are abuzz with skyrocketing unemployment, on top of the miasma causing bailouts and on top of inability for most people to get credit for commercial, educational, or personal endeavors. Concurrently, of the amorphous comparatively few who can get advertising on mass media, a lot of it here is constantly peppered with: law firms reiterating their general availability to file class or personal liability and punitive damages claims; and companies urgin that if one can get a structured Court settlement of any kind whatsoever, one may approach them for upfront buyout of such settlement.

Now, most of us know, for example, that the USA Roman Catholic Church is perceived as a monolithic edifice, further charged by many public bodies as if to completely handle public distributions of social service and immigration-related funds...i.e., in times where many people are in financial tailspins, to some they might make excellent targets for renewed lawsuits based on steamroller, high shock value allegations in hopes of producing a quick settlement. Indeed, local media here the past few weeks have reported Catholic Priests around Illinois suddenly slammed with allegations of being literal child-porn drug lords out of rectory offices, child molsters literally on their altars, and the like, often with attendant defacements to their Church (which can be caused from lawbreaking disgruntled persons upon hearing of bare charges, persons in league with complainers to "slip convincers", or anything else wrongly undertaken in reaction to such news).

It would seem necessary and fair, on such grounds as aforesaid, that the public not be able to "jackpot" in re Presidentially-guided faith initiatives nor against any company involved in provision of bailout intendments. Just as the public should not expect bailout cash to be scarfed up by a relatively few execs, neither should the government nor bailees have to expect mass chunks can be taken away via nuisance lawsuits.

I would respectfully suggest as or in the nature that: any faith organization receiving Federal or any public funds have such funding suspended if any criminal or civil complaint is lodged against its agents; that should faith initiative or corporate bailees' agents settle out of Court to avoid judgment against them, rather than see a suit through, such faith or corporate entity should be banned for ten years at least from participating with public funds, or minimally be investigated by the highest relevant law authorities for criminal probe; that the public should be capped in damage allegation recoveries against public bailees or funded initiatives, specifically being limited to actual costs of damage or restoration to full mental health simple (no housing, maintenance, or jackpot trappings), reasonable costs thereof and interest thereon, together with reasonable costs of Court action; and that such "gloves" stay on against a bailee or funded intiative only until such time as the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives is rescinded, or in the case of corporations such unit has repaid its bailout money and no longer subject to executive pay caps.

Re the certain Conservative Senate objections re faith bills, I think it is fair of a President expected to maintain the Bush Office of Faith Based Initiatives to require no faith unit discriminate in God's intention of sharing with love toward one another; also, it seems a more proper Constitutional respect to not use Federal or other public money to promote the teaching of divinity matters nor to confer degrees therein nor to pay for religious activities peculiar to a faith unit...one thing if my or someone else's folks can form activities on their own, another if the State must fund us INTO being, instead of help us help others; also, who really wants State accrediting boards establishing secular standards for what is and isn't a "true faith" or "true faith doctrine" in re peaceable religions? Sounds a lot like the very intrusion of government into religious control even Conservatives disdain in OTHER nations.

That is my opinion as a USA national and voter re issues present at a time President Obama is soliciting for people to have house meetings re the stimulus and what it should do.