No problem! My statement was not properly constrained in scope:
~~~~~~~~~~~
The images posted in #284 are deceptive on several levels:
- They apparently purport to show an increase of built-out building floorspace area over a (undefined) span of time.
- When dates are included, it's clear that the entire structural buildout in the depicted area occurred almost a decade ago.
- The area depicted in the photo in #284 does not encompass the entire detention site; in fact there is a larger detention area immediately to the west of the area depicted. However, the above observations apply to the entire detention area.
- Also taken into consideration must be the fact that the published Google database ends with 1/5/2017. Activities during the seven quarters since then are not publicly available for observation.
- I expanded my observation to include the "Naval" area near the docks, the personnel housing and recreation areas, and the active airfield. The same general observations apply:
- Most of the structures, etc. appear to be at least a decade old.
- There is little or no visible evidence of recent construction activity.
- Most of the structures, etc. appear to be at least a decade old.
- OHI observations, of course, cannot speak to interior redecorations or re-purposing of standing structures, uniform colors, etc., etc.
Therefore, I must qualify my conclusion to state,
"There is little evidence of new or expanded building area in evidence in the detention facility. Rumors of recent major detention camp capacity expansion are, as yet, unfounded."
TXnMA
