GUARDIAN– In the nine years since the opening of the Guantánamo Bay detention facility, the country has moved incrementally towards institutionalising the existence of the facility. On Monday, the Obama administration took the process of institutionalisation one step further, issuing both an executive order on detention – the first since the pathbreaking executive order that began his presidency, calling for the closure of Guantánamo and promising a rethink on the detention policy – and the revocation of the ban on military tribunals there.

In contrast to its predecessor, yesterday’s executive order was anything but pathbreaking. It tacitly acknowledged that the premises of detention in the “war on terror” begun by the Bush administration in the fall of 2001 still hold. More tellingly still, it demonstrated that the Obama administration now not only accepts the fact of Guantánamo’s existence as a given, but has also abandoned any debate over whether or not indefinite detention should be the policy of the land.

Under this new detainee review plan, the blueprint set out nearly a decade ago remains. At the outset, the underlying rationale for detention at Guantánamo Bay rests upon the September 2001 Authorisation to Use Military Force (AUMF). So, too, as decreed in the November 2001 Military Order, the department of defence remains the lead player in implementing the guidelines of the executive order, although “consultation with the attorney general” is prescribed. In terms of the procedures for review of the cases, those, too, are essentially new and updated versions of those that constituted the administrative review boards and the combatant status review tribunals, in which each detainee’s status was reviewed and chance for trial or release assessed. The justification for continued detention is familiar also – to wit, “to protect against a significant threat to the security of the United States“.

Read full article about Guantánamo: No Closure For Obama.

© Guardian News and Media Limited 2011

Photograph by Brennan Linsley/Pool/Reuters

MEDIA ROOTS- This is a Media Roots TV interview conducted by Abby Martin with Cindy Sheehan, mother who has made the ultimate sacrifice and fearless anti-war activist. She relays her powerfully lucid point of view in a candid interview at her home on February 6th, 2011.

For more information about Cindy go to http://www.cindysheehanssoapbox.com/

MEDIA ROOTS- Media Roots sits down for a short conversation with Chris Hedges, an American journalist, author, and war correspondent. Hedges gives a sobering take on American culture, relaying a grim yet powerful perspective on the current political and societal state of the US.

PRESS TV– American citizens are paying large amounts of money each year for U.S. defense spending, which can be used for domestic spending, Steve Breyman, assistant professor at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute said.

“Each and every citizen in the United States – man, woman and child – pays some $5,000 or so per year for U.S. defense spending much of which is associated now with the two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan”, he told Press TV’s U.S. Desk.

If the federal government had not spent some $1 trillion on the wars, that money would have been available for “domestic spending including the balance in the budget,” Breyman said. “You can have healthy public finances or you can have war but you can’t have both,” he added.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, some 200,000 people are employed by subcontractors.

By the end of 2008, the U.S. had spent approximately $900 billion in direct costs on Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Some experts estimate indirect costs such as interest on the additional debt will exceed the direct costs. Red Ice Creation

However, prominent economics professor Joseph E. Stiglitz says the true cost of the Iraq war is beyond $3 trillion. Washington Post

According to the Congressional Budget Office, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000-2009.

In Iraq, reconstruction efforts have been plagued by poor management, mishandling of reconstruction funds, inadequate coordination with Iraqis and widespread attacks on construction sites and contractors as documented by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR). NYT

A 2005 report stated that nearly $9 billion of reconstruction fund was lost by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). CNN

Photo by flickr user purpleslog

MEDIA ROOTS- MDMA, the active ingredient in the drug Ecstasy, has shown great potential for use in conjunction with therapy in the treatment of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD.

PTSD is caused by extremely violent or unpleasant experiences – either experienced firsthand or witnessed – in which the sufferer’s ability to cope is overwhelmed by stress.

One of the most popular therapies for PTSD is psychological exposure. The patient is instructed to relive the stressful experience repeatedly in his or her head, in a safe and controlled environment, and is assisted in processing the event in an emotionally healthy manner. This is where MDMA appears to have great potential for therapeutic use:

MDMA causes the release of the neurotransmitters Dopamine, Serotonin, and Oxytocin in the brain. Dopamine and Serotonin both regulate mood; Dopamine is the primary neurotransmitter associated with reward, and Serotonin with love and other causes of long-term feelings of well-being.

Oxytocin, however, is released when we feel trust, and when we bond interpersonally. It is released, among other scenarios, when mothers breast-feed their babies. By promoting trust between the patient and therapist, Oxytocin, along with Dopamine and Serotonin, allows the patient to relive the stressful experience while in a mental state of comfort and trust.

It is the overwhelming emotional response to the initial stressful event which causes PTSD. MDMA allows patients to relive their experiences and associate healthier emotions with the memories, rather than the extreme negative sensations they actually experienced. It can alleviate symptoms such as flashbacks, panic attacks, and other forms of anxiety rooted in the extremely unpleasant feelings which are tied to the memory of the event in the patients’ minds by replacing these feelings with less extreme ones.

While there are risks associated with the use of any psychoactive drugs, it appears that the benefits of controlled, therapeutic use of MDMA can outweigh the bad in patients suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Mitchell Singer is an SFSU undergraduate student with a great interest in all types of verbal expression. Aside from newswriting, blogging, and freelance copywriting, he spends his time sampling different media of visual art and reading books on a variety of subjects.

Photo by flickr user Alice Popkorn