[Ppnews] Secret Prisons, Top Secret Interrogations
Political Prisoner News
ppnews at freedomarchives.org
Fri Dec 22 14:21:15 EST 2006
http://www.counterpunch.org/brauchli12222006.html
December 22, 2006
When the Secret is the Question
Secret Prisons, Top Secret Interrogations
By CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI
It's a tremendous responsibility that has been
thrust on those who are imprisoned by George
Bush. They have, albeit it unwittingly, become
our allies in the war on terror. They remain
incarcerated indefinitely thus protecting the
rest of us (who have not yet been incarcerated)
from the likes of them (even if they are not
terrorists) and while incarcerated, pose no
threat to those of us who remain free They have
now been told that while incarcerated Mr. Bush
was willing to entrust to them information that
has been designated TOP SECRET. We would not have
learned this important piece of information but for Majid Khan.
Mr. Khan is a Pakistani who recently moved from
what was a non-existent secret prison run by the
C.I.A. in a far-off country to the Guantánamo
Detention camp in Cuba. Mr. Khan now has a
lawyer. The government doesn't want Mr. Khan to
tell his lawyer, what kinds of interrogation
methods were being used on him (and therefore,
shared with him) while he was in the secret
prison. That is because conditions at Guantánamo
are only adequate for handling information
classified as secret. Kathleen Blomquist, a
Justice Department Spokeswoman explains:
"information regarding the former C.I.A.
detainees [like Mr. Khan] was classified as top
secret. She said the information he shares with
his counsel should "be appropriately tailored to
accommodate a higher security level."
Why that should be is something of a mystery.
Readers will recall that in the statement
accompanying legislation George Bush sent
Congress that authorized military tribunals for
terror suspects and set rules to protect U.S.
military personnel from facing prosecution for
war crimes, he said, although not in these words,
that the United States uses "alternative"
interrogation methods that help the people being
questioned remember things they might otherwise
forget. Those procedures "were tough, and they
were safe and lawful and necessary."
Ms. Blomquist's comments tell us that although
the prisoners thought they were being tortured
(Mr. Bush's assurances to the contrary
notwithstanding) they were at the same time being
given TOP SECRET INFORMATION. (Anyone wanting to
get an idea of the kind of top-secret information
Mr. Khan has can Google Mamdouh Habib and find
the torture affidavit that was released by the
Federal District Court in Washington on January
5, 2005. It describes the top-secret information
(such as standing on tiptoes in water up to his
chin for hours) that was entrusted to Mr. Habib
while in prison. Mr. Khan's experience may well
have been no different from that. An uninformed
reader of the affidavit might consider the
techniques torture but for the fact that Mr. Bush doesn't do torture.)
In November the Central Intelligence Agency told
a federal district court in Washington D.C. that
al Qaeda suspects should not be permitted to
describe publicly the "alternative interrogation
methods" the CIA used on them while holding them
in the secret prisons. The D.I.A. told the court
that if Mr. Khan told just any person what the
procedures were, it would cause "extremely grave
damage to the national security." Marilyn A.
Dorn, an official at the National Clandestine
Service that is part of the C.I.A. told the court
that "If specific alternative techniques were
disclosed, it would permit terrorist
organizations to adapt their training to counter
the tactics that C.I.A. can employ in interrogations."
It seems safe to say that if the prisoners knew
when being interrogated that they were being
entrusted with "top secret" information they
would feel quite differently about the process.
They would take pride in having been permitted to
participate in this very important process. They
would not be any the less proud knowing that the
only reason the C.I.A. shares this top secret
information with them is that it hopes that in
the process of sharing the information those
being questioned will feel compelled to furnish
additional information to their interrogators.
So long as Mr. Khan remains in prison the
government can count on him to keep the secret he
and the C.I.A. enjoy sharing. The obvious
question is if Mr. Khan gets out of prison can
the government count on him to keep his secret?
Thanks to Mr. Bush's foresight in having Congress
give him broad new powers, if it looks like Mr.
Khan might get out of prison either before or
after a trial, Mr. Bush can designate him an
enemy combatant and keep him in prison forever.
That may seem harsh, but if it is the only way
the secret can be kept, then it is in everyone's
best interest that Mr. Khan remain in jail the
rest of his life. That way the secret will be
preserved and we will all be safer-even Mr. Khan.
He, however, will have to enjoy his safety in a jail cell.
Christopher Brauchli is a lawyer in Boulder,
Colorado. He can be reached at:
<mailto:Brauchli.56 at post.harvard.edu>Brauchli.56 at post.harvard.edu.
Visit his website: <http://hraos.com/>http://hraos.com/
The Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
(415) 863-9977
www.freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/ppnews_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20061222/1bd63a3e/attachment.htm>
More information about the PPnews
mailing list