<html>
<body>
<h1><b>The "Black Jail"<br><br>
</b></h1><h2><b>Obama's Afghan Torture Center and the American
Psychological Association</b></h2><font size=3>By
<a href="http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/stephensoldz">Stephen
Soldz</a><br><br>
Friday, May 21, 2010<br><br>
Change Text Size
<a href="http://www.zcommunications.org/the-black-jail-by-stephen-soldz#">
a-</a> |
<a href="http://www.zcommunications.org/the-black-jail-by-stephen-soldz#">
A+</a> <br>
<a href="http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/stephensoldz">Stephen
Soldz's ZSpace Page</a><br>
<a href="http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/signup">Join
ZSpace</a><br><br>
<br>
A recent pair of articles by Marc Ambinder of the
<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/10/05/inside-the-secret-interrogation-facility-at-bagram/56678/">
<i>Atlantic</a></i> has shed new light upon activities in the secret
so-called "black jail" on the Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.
Among other aspects, these new revelations suggest that psychologists may
be playing a major role inside the facility, raising questions about the
reasons for American Psychological Association (APA) lobbying activities
in support of the agency that Ambinder reports is running the detention
center. <br><br>
In recent months the
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/27/AR2009112703438_pf.html">
<i>Washington Post</a></i>,
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/world/asia/29bagram.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print">
<i>New York Times</a></i>, and
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8674179.stm"><i>BBC</a> </i>reported
on a secret prison on the fringes of the Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.
Referred to by former prisoners as the "black jail," this
institution is reportedly a site where prisoner abuse is regular and
systematic. The
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8674179.stm"><i>BBC</a></i> reported
that all nine former prisoners they interviewed <br><br>
"told consistent stories of being held in isolation in cold cells
where a light is on all day and night. <br><br>
"The men said they had been deprived of sleep by US military
personnel there." <br><br>
Thus, we can assume that
<a href="http://physiciansforhumanrights.org/library/report-2005-may.html">
psychological torture techniques</a> of isolation, sleep deprivation, and
hypothermia are routine aspects of treatment inside the
facility.<br><br>
The
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/27/AR2009112703438_pf.html">
<i>Washington Post</a></i> provided additional details through interviews
with two youths imprisoned in the black jail. As one young man, Rashid,
who is "younger than 16" described:<br><br>
<br><br>
"At the beginning of his detention, he was forced to strip naked and
undergo a medical checkup in front of about a half-dozen American
soldiers. He said that his Muslim upbringing made such a display
humiliating and that the soldiers made it worse. <br><br>
"'They touched me all over my body. They took pictures, and they
were laughing and laughing,' he said. 'They were doing everything.'
<br><br>
"He said he lived in a small concrete cell that was slightly longer
than the length of his body. Food was tossed in a plastic bag through a
slot in the metal door. Both teenagers said that when they tried to
sleep, on the floor, their captors shouted at them and hammered on their
cells. <br><br>
"When summoned for daily interrogations, Rashid said, he was made to
wear a hood, handcuffs and ear coverings and was marched into the meeting
room. He said he was punched by his interrogators while being prodded to
admit ties to the Taliban; he denied such ties. During some sessions, he
said, his interrogator forced him to look at pornographic movies and
magazines while also showing him a photograph of his mother. <br><br>
"'I was just crying and crying. I was too young,' Rashid said. 'I
didn't know what a prison looks like or what a prison is.'"
<br><br>
Ambinder received confirmation from the Defense Department of the
existence of this secret detention center at Bagram that the Department
had previously
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8674179.stm">consistently denied</a>
existed. [Ambinder has a picture of the facility
<a href="http://assets.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/assets_c/2010/05/FacilityDSCN0175-26493.php">
here</a>.] He reports that the center is run, not by the Joint Special
Operations Command (JSOC), as was
<a href="http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/12/hbc-90006166">previously
reported</a>, but by the Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA) Defense
Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center (DCHC) in the course of
its providing intelligence services for Task Force 714. For those with
long memories, DCHC is essentially where the Defense Department stuffed
the old Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) after the latter was
"disbanded" due to several major scandals involving
<a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0318-02.htm">spying on
Americans</a>
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-16-tkc-CIFA_x.htm">
and</a> <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14898">fraud</a>
connected with former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham.<br><br>
It isn't clear if it really makes a difference if the "black
jail" is run by JSOC or DCHC. After all, Task Force 714, which DCHC
is serving, is itself a
<a href="http://washingtonindependent.com/67136/special-operations-chiefs-quietly-sway-afghanistan-policy">
JSOC special ops</a> force:<br><br>
<br><br>
"McRaven runs a secretive detachment of Special Forces known as Task
Force 714 -- once commanded by McChrystal himself -- that the NSC staffer
described as 'direct-action' units conducting 'high-intensity hits.' In
an email, Sholtis said that because Task Force 714 was a 'special ops
organization' he 'can't go into much detail on authorities, etc.' But the
NSC staffer -- who called McRaven 'McChrystal Squared' -- said Task Force
714 was organized into 'small groups of Rangers going wherever the hell
they want to go' in Afghanistan and operating under legal authority
granted at the end of the Bush administration that President Obama has
not revoked." <br><br>
[Scott Horton has made a similar point
<a href="http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/05/hbc-90007044">here</a>
.]<br><br>
As Ambinder reports, the Defense Department now admits that this secret
Afghan prison uses interrogation techniques from the
<a href="http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm2-22-3.pdf">Army Field
Manual's</a>
<a href="http://www.alternet.org/rights/117807/how_the_u.s._army%27s_field_manual_codified_torture_--_and_still_does/">
infamous</a> Appendix M. This appendix
<a href="http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/blog/2010/01/24/alexander-close-tortures-loopholes-amend-army-field-manual/">
authorizes abusive techniques</a>,
<a href="http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/05/14/dods-latest-black-site/">
including</a> sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, and
"environmental manipulation" [think freezing someone or
blinding light] that often amount to torture.<br><br>
Consistent with the multitudinous reports of severe abuse in the
"black jail," Ambinder reports that there is a top secret
Special Action Program authorizing DCHC interrogations. As Jeff Kaye
pointed out in an
<a href="http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/05/14/dods-latest-black-site/#comment-235268">
<i>emptywheel </a></i>comment, if only Appendix M-based techniques --
which are covered by the Army Field Manual -- are used, why the need for
a Special Action Program? Thus, we must wonder what, exactly, DCHC is
doing at Bagram and other sites. Whatever it is, it apparently isn't
something they want us, the public, to know about.<br><br>
For those who think that President Obama banned torture centers like
this, think again. Obama's Executive Order only banned <i>CIA </i>secret
prisons. This administration thus apparently intended from the beginning
to maintain its torture facility, only under a Defense Department rather
than CIA label. <br><br>
Further information about the black jail is provided in a
<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/05/bagram-what-appendix-m-says-about-interrogation/56772/">
follow-up post</a>, where Ambinder provides this description of the
"black prison":<br><br>
<br><br>
"From what information I've been able to gather, the interrogation
environment is much like a social science laboratory, <b>with
psychologists and experts in human behavior</b> looking for clues to see
who might know more than they do, alternating with interrogators trained
to ferret out actionable intelligence information." [emphasis added]
<br><br>
If the detention facility is being run as a "social science
laboratory," it raises concerns that the psychologists and others
may be conducting research on the detainees without these detainees'
consent. As a result of the abusive research of the Nazi doctors and
research on poor black men in this country denied by the US Public Health
Service well-known treatments for syphilis as they got sick and died in
the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, informed consent has been a requirement
in this country for all but the most benign research for decades. Thus,
Ambinder's report raises the prospect that detainees in the "black
jail" may be subjects of otherwise banned research procedures.
<br><br>
Wherever psychologists are involved in national security work, links to
the APA are seldom hard to find. In this case, the APA has regularly
lobbied for funding for DCHC while a former top APA research scientist
was until very recently at CIFA and its successor, DCHC, investigating
"deception detection," like that reportedly occurring
inside the "black jail."<br><br>
Over the years, the APA has devoted considerable lobbying resources to
maintaining Congressional funding for CIFA. Thus, in a
<a href="http://www.apa.org/about/gr/science/spin/2008/06/advocating.aspx">
report</a> on APA lobbying for fiscal year 2009, the APA ignored all the
issues regarding corruption and illegal spying at CIFA as they advocated
for protecting the agency's funding:<br><br>
<br><br>
"Dr. Boehm-Davis concluded her testimony by noting another APA
concern -- the potential loss of invaluable behavioral science programs
within DoD's Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) as it reorganizes
and loses personnel strength. APA's testimony urged Congress to provide
ongoing funding in the next fiscal year for CIFA's behavioral research
programs on cyber security, insider threat, and other counter-terrorism
and counter-intelligence operational challenges." <br><br>
After CIFA was folded into DCHC in the Defense Intelligence Agency, the
APA lobbied Congress for money for "behavioral science" to
support the DIA's activities, including the counterintelligence work now
located in DCHC. Here is a section from the written APA testimony to the
US Senate Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense regarding
appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2010 budget:<br><br>
<br>
"APA... is concerned with maintaining invaluable human-centered
research programs formerly within DoD's Counterintelligence Field
Activity (CIFA) now that staff and programming have been transferred to
the Defense Intelligence Agency. Within this DIA program, psychologists
lead intramural and extramural research programs on counterintelligence
issues ranging from models of 'insider threat' to cybersecurity and
detection of deception. These psychologists also consult with the
three military services to translate findings from behavioral research
directly into enhanced counterintelligence operations on the
ground.<br><br>
"APA urges the Subcommittee to provide ongoing funding in FY10 for
counterintelligence behavioral science research programs at DIA in light
of their direct support for military intelligence
operations."<br><br>
There have been strong personal contacts between APA and CIFA/DCHC
psychologists. The former Director of Behavioral Science for CIFA, Scott
Shumate, was selected for the
<a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/07/26/interrogation/">
APA's 2005 PENS</a> [Psychological Ethics and National Security]
taskforce, where he and the majority of other members from the
military-intelligence establishment proclaimed it ethical, even
essential, for psychologists to aid Bush-era interrogations at Guantánamo
and elsewhere. Shumate had previously served with the CIA's
Counterterrorism Center and was present for at least part of the 2002
torture of Abu Zubaydah; Shumate claims to have
<a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/07/torture200707?printable=true¤tPage=all">
left in disgust</a>, but the <i>New York Times</i>' Scott Shane reports
skepticism about this claim. He quotes "[o]ne witness [who] said he
believed that 'revisionism' in light of the torture controversy had
prompted some participants to exaggerate their objections."<br><br>
More recently, Susan Brandon -- a former APA Senior Scientist who brought
together psychologists and "operational personnel" from the
intelligence community and later served as
<a href="http://www.apa.org/about/gr/science/spin/2004/02/brandon.aspx">
Assistant Director for Social, Behavioral and Educational Sciences</a>
for the Bush White House --
<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/383/74a#name">landed at CIFA</a>
and after the reorganization
<a href="http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12854&page=95">at
DCHC</a>. Brandon was one of the silent observers at the PENS taskforce
<a href="http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/20/1628234">
described</a> by dissident taskforce member Jean Maria Arrigo as exerting
pressure on members to adopt a likely pre-approved policy in favor of
participation in Guantánamo, CIA, and other interrogations. Throughout
her career, including her time at CIFA/DCHC, Brandon worked on
"deception detection" and other matters relevant to
interrogations.<br><br>
Thus, personal ties as well as a general desire to curry favor with the
military-intelligence establishment likely influence APA support for CIFA
and counterintelligence efforts within DIA -- that is, for DCHC.
While these agencies employ a number of psychologists --
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/18/AR2005121801006_pf.html">
CIFA reportedly employed 20 psychologists</a> when Shumate was director
of behavioral sciences there -- the numbers of psychologists potentially
affected by budget cuts alone cannot explain APA support over the
years. <br><br>
In pursuit of influence and a seat at the table with the national
security apparatus, the APA has usually bought into unsubstantiated
claims that these and other military-connected intelligence psychologists
were opposed to torture and abuse, even as evidence mounted that many
intelligence psychologists were participants in torture and other abuses
that permeated much of US detention operations at Guantánamo, Bagram, and
Iraq in recent years. That is, claims that psychologists were preventing
abuses
<a href="http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/Soldz_ClosingEyesToAtrocities_HLS_Book.pdf">
were cover</a> for the fact that APA's leadership
<a href="http://blog.aclu.org/2009/06/24/can-the-american-psychological-association-break-with-torture-collusion/">
apparently never cared</a> what it was that these psychologists might be
doing. <br><br>
Given this history of APA's leadership turning a blind eye to reports of
psychologist involvement in abuses, we shouldn't hold our breath
expecting the APA to change its position on DIA/DCHC funding now that the
Defense Department admits that DCHC runs a detention facility using
techniques like sleep deprivation that the APA itself has
<a href="http://www.apa.org/governance/resolutions/councilres0807.html">
proclaimed unethical</a> and amounting to either
<a href="http://www.apa.org/governance/resolutions/amend022208.html">
torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment</a>. After all, for the
APA leadership in recent years, professional opportunities for psychology
have always trumped professional ethics, at least in the national
security sector.<br><br>
Psychology as a profession is at a crossroads. As the connections
discussed here illustrate, the profession has long-standing ties to the
military-intelligence establishment that, outside of the awareness of
many members, permeate much of its public policy making. While it is,
perhaps, too much to expect that these relations will totally end, they
must become more transparent and subject to public discussion and debate.
A first step would be for APA leaders to express concerns and call for an
independent investigation of the possibility that psychologists are
studying or otherwise aiding abuses at the "black jail." That,
alas, is a simple step that is extremely unlikely from the profession's
current leadership.<br><br>
<br>
<a href="mailto:ssoldz@bgsp.edu">Stephen Soldz</a> is a psychoanalyst,
psychologist, public health researcher, and faculty member at the
<a href="http://www.bgsp.edu/">Boston Graduate School of
Psychoanalysis</a>. He edits the
<a href="http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/blog/">Psyche, Science, and
Society</a> blog. He is a founder of the Coalition for an Ethical
Psychology, one of the organizations working to change American
Psychological Association policy on participation in abusive
interrogations. He is President-Elect of
<a href="http://psysr.org/">Psychologists for Social Responsibility</a>
[PsySR].<br><br>
<br><br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>