Journalists from The New York Times, Washington Post, NPR and The Guardian were among those who published the first wave of stories Sunday night, poking more holes in the facility's detention and interrogation programs.

NPR reported: "The classified documents, consisting largely of official "detainee assessments" by the Pentagon's Guantanamo Joint Task Force, suggest that military intelligence officials and counterterrorism analysts sometimes found it difficult to determine whether detainees were truly dangerous.

The assignment of detainees to "high," "medium," or "low" risk categories seems to have been haphazard in some cases. Some intelligence about the detainees came from informants whose credibility was subsequently questioned or was secured under conditions tantamount to torture. Some U.S. federal judges have questioned the reliability of the evidence cited to support the detainee risk assessments."

The Guardian suggested: "The Guardian puts emphasis on the seemingly indefensible errors like the captive 89-year-old man and 14-year-old boy. The New York Times gives more prominent mention to the 200 or so cases in which high-risk detainees were nevertheless released.

There will be insufferable amounts of political posturing over all this in the coming days. The 200 were released between 2003 and 2009, according to NPR this morning, which, if you think about these things politically, means to you instantly: ah, both administrations. So who released more high-risk people, Bush or Obama?"

Further analysis of the nearly 800 documents, believed to be provided to WikiLeaks by Pfc. Bradley Manning, should reveal more about any differences between Bush and Obama's respective handlings of Guantanamo.

The Washington Post found intruiging information about al Qaeda within the cache: 

On Sept. 11, 2001, the core of al-Qaeda was concentrated in a single city: Karachi, Pakistan.

At a hospital, the accused mastermind of the bombing of the USS Cole was recovering from a tonsillectomy. Nearby, the alleged organizer of the 2002 bombing in Bali, Indonesia, was buying lab equipment for a biological weapons program. And in a safe house, the man who would later describe himself as the intellectual author of the Sept. 11 attacks was with other key al-Qaeda members watching the scenes from New York and Washington unfold on television.

Within a day, much of the al-Qaeda leadership was on the way back to Afghanistan, planning for a long war.

The Times got into the nitty gritty of American intelligence tactics:

Among the most revealing of the leaked documents is a 17-page guide for analysts, evidently prepared by military intelligence trainers, on how to gauge the danger posed by a detainee. It lists major clusters of detainees, including the so-called Dirty 30, who were the bodyguards of Mr. bin Laden, as well as the large group of accused Qaeda operatives captured with Abu Zubaydah, an important terrorist facilitator, at two guesthouses in Faisalabad, Pakistan, in 2002.

Among the more novel details of the guide is analysts' assertion that a Casio F91W digital watch might be an indication of a detainees' ties to Al Qaeda. Specifically, the documents contend that the watches were handed out at a Qaeda bomb-making course.

Obama, whose administration has already condemned the leak, had promised to close Guantanamo as a candidate and then as president.