Hilary Anderson at BBC has been following the Bagram prison story closely. Today, she reports that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has confirmed the existence of a second prison site at Bagram. The presence of a second site has long been suspected, a prison the Afghans call Tor Prison, or the "Black" Prison.
The US military says the main prison, now called the Detention Facility in Parwan, is the only detention facility on the base.
However, it has said it will look into the abuse allegations made to the BBC.
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said that since August 2009 US authorities have been notifying it of names of detained people in a separate structure at Bagram.
Obama Tortures, Too
Last month, BBC reported on conditions at the main Parwan facility. The scenes as described were right out of the iconography of Guantanamo. Prisoners in handcuffs and leg shackles, "moved around in wheelchairs" with blackout goggles and headphones "to block out all sound." This was the treatment for a prison population that even the U.S. military admits is far and away not made up of serious terrorists. Meanwhile, the number held at Bagram has swelled to approximately 800 prisoners.
But we don’t know how many are in the other, "the Black Hole." We don’t know because the U.S. still insists that no second prison exists. Prisoners held at Tor, according to investigations by BBC, are tossed into cold concrete cells, where the light is kept on 24 hours. Noise machines fill their cells with constant sound, and prisoners are sleep deprived as a matter of policy, with each cell monitored by a camera, so the authorities will know when someone is falling asleep and come to wake them.
Prisoners are beaten and abused. According to BBC’s article last month, one prisoner was "made to dance to music by American soldiers every time he wanted to use the toilet."
Both the Washington Post and the New York Times reported late last year on conditions at the black-site prison, believed to be run by U.S. Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). Each of these reports noted that prisoners were subjected to abuse. One prisoner, a 42-year-old farmer named Hamidullah told the New York Times about his stay in the Tor prison, June through October 2009:
I can’t remember the number of days I spent there because it’s hard to tell days from nights in the black jail, but I think every day they came twice to ask questions.
They took me to their own room to ask the questions. They beat up other people in the black jail, but not me. But the problem was that they didn’t let me sleep. There was shouting noise so you couldn’t sleep….
The black jail was the most dangerous and fearful place. It is a place where everybody is afraid. In the black jail, they can do anything to detainees.
Together with the BBC investigation and the ICRC confirmation, we can see that the military is lying through their teeth when they claim there is no second Bagram facility, or that no abuse takes place at Bagram. (For more on Bagram and the issue of indefinite detention, see this recent diary by Jim White.)
The presence of sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, brutality, isolation and the like at the U.S. prison complex has not been a matter of protest among U.S. progressives, many of whom still support the administration of President Barack Obama. Many liberals have been in denial over the poor record of President Obama on the issue of torture and detention policies. The President began his administration with a big series of presidential orders that supposedly ended the Bush administration’s policy of torturing prisoners, and shut down the CIA’s black site prisons.
But as we know now, not all the black site prisons were shut down. Nor was the torture ended. Whether it’s beatings and forced-feedings at Guantanamo, or the kinds of torture described at Bagram, it’s obvious that torture has not been rooted out of U.S. military-intelligence operations. In fact, by way of the Obama administration’s recent approval of the Bush-era Army Field Manual on interrogations, with its infamous Appendix M, which allows for much of the kind of torture practiced at Bagram, the White House has institutionalized a level of torture that was introduced by the previous administration, but which has been studied and devised over the last fifty or sixty years.
Furthermore, in a June 2009 Air Force document reported on last July, it was noted that the personnel responsible for some of the torture program deriving from the SERE schools were still allowed "psychological oversight of battlefield interrogation and detention." Are SERE psychologists involved in the Special Operations at torture at Tor and Parwan? Given the close relationship between SERE’s parent group, the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency, and JSOC, I think there’s a high possibility of just such involvement.
A question hangs heavily over the U.S. political scene: how long will denial exist among liberals and progressives over the persistence of an aggressive military policy and the concomitant crimes against humanity that come with it? How long will the supporters of Barack Obama maintain their studied indifference to the crimes against humanity done in their name? The shine is off this new president, and underneath it all we can discern the same old game of lies covering for crimes. Enough is enough.



44 Comments

Here’s my proposal: a blue-ribbon panel made up of a Congressional delegation, the press, and representatives of human rights NGOs, like ACLU, CCR, PHR, Amnesty, HRW, etc., be allowed full access (not the one hour BBC obtained) to tour Bagram and Guantanamo, at all sites therein, and document the treatment there. The ICRC is forbidden from reporting on conditions in the facilities it visits. Anything less than full transparency has proven to allow for the worst kinds of abuses, whether under Bush/Cheney, or Obama/Biden.
Of course, my proposal will be dismissed as pie-in-the-sky impossible. But consider the alternative. The system is broken, whether its environmental controls (the BP disaster), the economy (do I need to point it out), etc. Society must begin to take matters in their own hands. This doesn’t mean anarchy or mob rule, but an insistent policy of initiating change, and that means no business as usual.
Reading the BBC story reminds me of a Doonesbury cartoon about the “secret bombing” of Cambodia, where the locals pointed out to a US soldier that they were hardly a secret to them.
But I was struck by the fact that the ICRC confirmed the existence of this prison. Usually they are very reticent to say anything publicly about their work, as a part of a deal that insures them access to the prisoners. Speaking up like this — even to confirm what someone else is reporting — is highly unusual.
Yes, and it is ominous. They didn’t report on conditions, and all the stories from the prisoners come from big press investigations. But if the ICRC finds it necessary to confirm such a thing, then you can guess that something very bad is going down.
When will we see Obama’s ass in the Hague?
McChrystalMeth, Rahmobamma, GWB and Vice President Dracula should all be thrown into prison with the other butchers and genocidal war mongers.
Spencer Ackerman asks a very good question, and one I aspect of the story I neglected to emphasize, at his article on the ICRC confirmation at The Washington Independent.
Noting that Vice Adm. Harward says, “All detainees under my command have access to the International [Committee of the] Red Cross,” Spencer asks:
Sounds very similar to conditions and methods at the Shah’s secret prison during the 60′s and 70′s. Someone took careful notes. The only question remaining being who were the teachers and who were the students.
And that episode turned out so well. I can only imagine when the 800, 1600 or whatever number are released back into the general population, we’ll see similar success.
Meet the new boss same as the old bush.
I refer to our government as the new American Nazis.
I have not specifically said “Obama tortures” until now. The preponderance of the evidence now points in that direction. What gives him the imprimatur of a reformer are some smart moves of a PR sort, and the lassitude of the majority of the reporting crowd. (Of course, if it were not for the reporters, like BBC, NYT, etc., and analyst-bloggers-reporters like Marcy, we wouldn’t know what we do now, so I don’t want to put everyone down.)
A question hangs heavily over the U.S. political scene: how long will denial exist among liberals and progressives over the persistence of an aggressive military policy and the concomitant crimes against humanity that come with it?
It’s been clear to me for awhile that Obama was stylistically different while what he did substance-wise was the same. Closing Gitmo and whatnot has just been a show while the same things go on with Obama – if not worse. I hope the Nobel Peace Prize Committee is proud of themselves for giving it to Obama before he had done anything and then went and used his acceptance speech to basically say WAR=PEACE right out of 1984.
The problem is the people doing the criticism.
The truth of him being as big of a war criminal as bush is drowned out by “HE’S A RADICAL MUSLIM!!!! A MUSLIM!!!!!”
The media “balances out” crazed birthbagger conspiracy theories and actual valid criticisms from the left as equally crazy. Because one comes from the right the other from the left, both have to be equal regardless of whether or not the criticism is accurate.
To Spanish: Pax Americana.
“A question hangs heavily over the U.S. political scene: how long will denial exist among liberals and progressives over the persistence of an aggressive military policy and the concomitant crimes against humanity that come with it? How long will the supporters of Barack Obama maintain their studied indifference to the crimes against humanity done in their name? The shine is off this new president, and underneath it all we can discern the same old game of lies covering for crimes. Enough is enough”
Thanks for this Jeff and to the BBC
Thanks for this piece Jeff. It’s hard to have to get most of our insight from BBC when there are how many 24 hour news services here in the US?
One thing Obama has done very successfully is to lift the old Bush meme of blaming everything on Clinton and using it now to blame everything on Bush. He’s even got a facebook group for it – with everyone repeating, no matter what the topic, that we shouldn’t blame Obama for the mess Bush left him.
Re this: “A question hangs heavily over the U.S. political scene: how long will denial exist among liberals and progressives over the persistence of an aggressive military policy and the concomitant crimes against humanity that come with it?” I have one small reservation. I get very depressed when the issue of torture comes up and it is framed as a liberal v. conservative issue. I know a lot of people who are conservative who -if they had the facts on what really has been going on with torture thrown at them in the same way they have had the disinformation talking points thrown at them, would not be supporters at all. I don’t think torture is liberal v. conservative.
I think it is eagle v. ostrich.
“How long will the supporters of Barack Obama maintain their studied indifference to the crimes against humanity done in their name?”; as long as the media keeps the U.s. public in a state of fear over ‘terrorism’.
I wrote this diary back at the beginning of the year; I’m not a Ron Paul devotee but there are simply too many associations/coincidences/actions taken by the Obama Admin to think that Paul’s perspective on this doesn’t have more than a grain of salt to the perspective.
What I do wonder is how many FDL’ers are participating in the State Dept.’s ‘outreach’ about foreign affairs?
BBC is one of the links on huffpost; as is al-jazerra and other worthwhile reads.
And if you have satellite tv, you can tune in LINKTV (also available online as is democracynow); these “24 hour news services here in the US” are a waste of time and mostly propaganda.
Yeah, we can get the upright Lee Hamilton, Richard Ben-Veniste, and James Baker III to give the kabuki the gravitas they’ve brought to their previous comedy roles.
Well, that brings up a question for me. Is Tor under Vice Amiral Harward’s command? Or does JSOC or whomever is running it have a different chain of command?
Well, what do you propose? My whole point is that we put extra- or non-governmental watchdogs on an investigatory panel, drawn from the human rights movement. If things go off the rails, we might know sooner. But until and unless we have a significant change in the power structure of this country (and I don’t mean something as simple as a change in parties), then a wide-spectrum full-bore investigation, with subpoena powers, is our best chance, as these crimes wither some under the light of exposure.
Another good point. I don’t know. Also, it has occurred to me that CIA can house prisoners at a JSOC facility, much as they had “ghost” prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
To get rid of the CIA black site prisons, all they had to do was place a new sign out front: Under New Management.
I looked at your diary. Hah hah hah. The state department wants my opinion and wants to keep me informed.
Mary, your point is well-taken, and I certainly didn’t want to rule out any decent human being, from whatever political viewpoint, from being anti-torture. I was only speaking to the facts in liberal or progressive circles, where criticism of Obama from the left is muted, even when that criticism is about something that should be non-partisan, torture.
OT– “Judge Baltasar Garzón seeks leave of absence from Spanish court“:
Thought I’d note that Physicians for Human Rights has put out a press release on the Bagram/ICRC story.
Also, Max Fisher at The Atlantic Wire, has kindly picked up the story above and included it with other coverage (including an article by Spencer).
All of the liberals in the veal pen are squealing “I am shocked, shocked that torture is occurring here!”.
Here at the Lake, not so much. This diary confirms what most of us already strongly suspected.
Wonder if the Kos crowd will care much?
Thanks for the report, Jeff. Damn. I feel so powerless. There is so much that is wrong and the only people with any power seem to be the people who worship the status quo. Some days I just want to scream and just tune everything out. I want to but I just can’t do it. I have to keep pushing the boulder up the hill and watch as it comes right back down. I wish I could figure out how to REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE instead of just going through the motions.
Sorry for the negativity…I’ll shake it off tomorrow because I refuse to let the creeps of the world win without a fight. As much as it depresses me I just can’t walk away. I can’t let them win by default. There have got to be millions of people like us. How can we all connect and start pressuring these bastards?
This is how I feel sometimes, too.
To coin a favorite expression from my youth (courtesy of Mr. Micawber): “Something will certainly turn up.”
God bless American torture, the freest, the fairest, the most democratic, the most red, white and blue torture in the world! You’re either with our torture or your with the terrorists’ torture. Oh beautiful, for spacious skies, for amber waves of waterboards…
[/crestfallen snark]
“Meet the new boss, same as the old Bush.”
Good ‘un.
Hey Jeff Kaye hope you are ready for the onslaughts to come from the Obama
sycophants like Randi Rhodes.
In their eyes Obama never does anything wrong,the fault is always those of us who questions his policies & motives.
Obama is simply even more terrible than Bush cuz he has some reasonably composed people thinking he is sincere.
Bush flat out was upfront with his policies this schmuck is covert and that’s dangerous to us all.
If I use “tweets” as a sampling, this story was not as popular as others. But given the content, I don’t think I’ll be pilloried. Instead, it will be ignored. In psychology, such kinds of stories create cognitive dissonance, and one typical response is to fuzz it out.
In other words, I don’t think the Obama loyalists really want to defend him on this. Their main response will be silence.
Hear, hear!
How exactly is this helpful to the AfPAk COIN strategy that Gen McChrystal says will allow us to “win ” in Afghanistan ? Where exactly is Gen Petrauses oversight of this subordinate? And are we to believe that the Petrauses” open letter to the troops saying there will be zero tolerance for torture ” is now no longer being enforced ( if it ever was to begin with ?
Finally regarding our current Commander in Chief – how can he not know that we are still torturing innocent detainees ? And how -as a law school professor -can our current Commander in Chief not know that this means he is now aiding and abetting the commitment of War Crimes ?
I weep for my Country -
What can we possibly do? Torture is now thoroughly a part of American culture. It is accepted as a cultural norm. Even The Daily Show cracks jokes about it. Everything is a joke, nowadays. Nothing is taken seriously. Oy vey. What has this country got itself into.
Not a whisper about this on MSNBC last night. Not on Dylan Ratigans, Chris Matthews, Ed’s, Keith’s, Rachel’s. Not a whisper.
When I subject myself to four or five hours of MSNBC’s news coverage the echo chamber from one program to the next is deafening. Last night it was all oil spill, audit the fed legislation. While each program is truly an echo chamber with a twist…Chris hammered on Cheney, Rachel (Chris filling in for her) had Sanders on,..they all add a bit of a twist. They basically cover the same issues for four hours in a row.
Got to give it to Dylan Ratigan last night he actually covered a bit of what is going on in Iraq. But most nights they are all complicit with keeping Americans in the dark about the death and destruction in Iraq. The innocents in Afghanistan, Pakistan killed by our drones and raids by U.S. special forces. Forget reporting about how some of the family members of those killed by our forces are paid a few goats and a few thousand bucks by our government for the loss of their loved ones. So perverted…shameful.
Forget any mention of this “black site” other prison in Bagram. Silence
IOKIYAAR has been replaced by IOKIYAAD.
Obummer, “I’d kill for a peace prize”, not mine, but I should have noted it so as to give the right person is due.
Amen. Every time I hear that song, I want to puke.
It gets better:
“Independent UK / By Stephen Foley
Very Bad News: Afghanistan’s Bagram Air Base Will Be Obama’s Guantanamo
The Afghan air base is to undergo a $60 million expansion, allowing it to hold five times as many prisoners as remain at Gitmo.
February 22, 2009 |
Less than a month after signing an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, President Barack Obama has quietly agreed to keep denying the right to trial to hundreds more terror suspects held at a makeshift camp in Afghanistan that human rights lawyers have dubbed “Obama’s Guantanamo.” …
One of the detainees who passed through the Afghan prison was Binyam Mohamed, the British resident who is expected to return to the UK this week after his release from Guantanamo Bay. Mr. Mohamed’s lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith, head of a legal charity called Reprieve, called President Obama’s strategy “the Bagram bait and switch,” where the administration was trumpeting the closure of a camp housing 242 prisoners, while scaling up the Bagram base to house 1,100 more.”
Full story:
http://www.alternet.org/rights/128273/
No one wants to be the first to stick their necks out on this one. KO has more than anyone else tried to tweak the establishment narrative. When I watched him with Scott Horton on the Camp No story, he looked remarkably nervous for him, and unprepared. Even Horton looked surprised at one of his more inane questions. Still stars to him for putting him on. Maddow has done stories on torture as well. But to accuse Obama of torture, that’s a whole other kettle of fish.
To alinaustex @31, the U.S. military doesn’t believe its own propaganda. Cognitive dissonance is an everyday fact of life there. Some claim to believe, but their eyes and ears are shut. When they do sometimes finally see what is happening, they are punished, demoted, shunned. Look at the fate of many of the Gitmo military attorneys. I’ve spoken to one of the former JAGs involved in the 1999 Daniel King case. For documenting and speaking the truth about the tortured confession by NCIS of a Navy petty officer, he was heavily pressured by his superiors, and was aware he was destroying his military career by taking the defense of his client seriously. “Go along to get along” is a truism in the military.
As for what they say and what they do… In Vietnam, the U.S. made much of the fact that it would follow the Geneva Conventions, and that the North Vietnamese said they would not. And up to a point, the U.S. did, with Article 5 hearings to determine battlefield prisoner status, releasing many who were not enemy combatants. But the U.S., via the CIA, also ran in conjunction with the South Vietnamese partners, the Phoenix Project, a massive counterintelligence operation meant to break the backbone of the opposition leadership, but quickly became a murder-torture program that tortured and killed tens of thousands (a figure, by the way, admitted by then CIA director William Colby). Both Article 5 hearings and Phoenix existed side-by-side.
Jeff, This is what the “ICRC spokesman” said (I removed the comments interspersed and the bracketed inserts just to show what it was the spokesman said):
I’m sorry, but I’m having a real problem with that being construed as confirming all of Hilary Andersson’s story. I’m not saying that even one word of her story isn’t absolutely accurate (I’m not saying it is, either), but I’m having a problem with the idea that the ICRC confirmed a story about prison conditions. I’m also having a problem with no announcement at the ICRC website, and I’m having a problem with the spokesman not having a name. There is no way the spokesperson’s name is being withheld at ICRC request, there is no way that the ICRC could have just found out about the prisoners in August 2009 (since one prisoner was supposedly held over this period and received no visit — if it was a newly acquired access to the site they’d have visited it between June and October). If they really divulged new information about U.S. prisons to the public, it would have also had a press release or news item on their site, and a spokesperson would have had a name.
Clearly, the above quote just confirms that the ICRC has visited prisoners held at Bagram (wherever) since February 2008, and that they believe they’ve had access to all U.S. facilities in Afghanistan since August 2009.
As for your comment @1, they are not forbidden from reporting, they don’t report as a matter of practice. They are not carrying on investigations, they are obtaining access to prisoners and trying to get adherence to international humanitarian law.
The ICRC is well-aware that its access to prisoners is at the sufferance of the United States government. The question and answer to/from BBC has the appearance of a wink and a nod kind of affirmation. It was enough to give BBC its confirmation that the prison (which we already knew existed) did in so exist.
Did the article say the identity of the ICRC spokeperson was withheld upon request. I don’t remember that.
Just because the ICRC says it started to get info about these prisoners in August 2009 doesn’t mean they actually got much or all of this information, or that they still do. In fact, everything we know tells us the U.S. routinely hides prisoners, restricts access, sets up Potemkin village types of situations.
What are you trying to imply? That the report is bogus, unsubstantiated? That it was bad reporting?
Re what ICRC can say… I once got reamed by human rights officials by suggesting in a story that ICRC releases any information publicly about their visits, without at least the approval of authorities. While ICRC formally doesn’t conduct investigations, I don’t see how what they do and the information they collect doesn’t amount to a kind of investigation. In facxt, this dual nature of the organization has a long history of conflict within it. See the excellent history: The Red Cross and the Holocaust by Jean-Claude Favez, who had extraordinary access to the ICRC’s archives.
I guess we can continue this on the piece written by emptywheel, which cites yours and says the ICRC confirmed a black site.
I’m not trying to imply that the report by the BBC, not the ICRC, is bogus.
I’m saying that the “confirmation” amounts to answering the question with publicly available information only, and the rest appears to be inference. I’m also saying that the ICRC doesn’t do anonymous sources stuff. The ICRC doesn’t divulge some information, your response indicates that you know that.
As for what you’re saying in that response, what I’m saying is that the ICRC doesn’t disclose as a matter of practice. There is nothing “forbidding” them from disclosing, and they do disclose some information, usually in the form of warnings or reminders, when situations are dire and immediate and they feel it will have the proper effect.
They don’t do investigations. They don’t catch bad guys. That isn’t their mission. Their mission is to prevent loss of human dignity by a vulnerable population in the case of prisoner visits. And to prevent enforced disappearance, although that term is newer than the language that their mission is written in.
(from the ICRC website)
You are correct in that “forbidden” was a poor choice of words. I don’t know why the ICRC spokesman was not named, but it doesn’t say that they chose not to be named. Also, if the ICRC has no problem discussing secret prisons, then why were they not more straight-forward in their answer. My point is that there reticence is due to the fact that they know they obtain their access to prisoners at the sufferance of the U.S. government, and not because the latter feels bound by any international treaty.
I just got a hold of a used copy of Amnesty’s 1977 report, “Torture in Greece,” on the first ESA torturer’s trial, 1975. See description of that document here. These trials were one of the few times torturers of security services were ever held accountable for their crimes, post-Nuremberg. It is notable that the United States, even then, under both Johnson and Nixon administrations, did their best to legitimate the junta that was torturing. It is also of some importance in understanding the current events in Greece, it’s relations with other states, and the attitudes of its people.
But it’s always that way, from what I understand. They cajole and remind the detaining authority of its obligations, and the detaining authority tries to argue back. Is that what you mean by suffrance? It’s the detaining authority’s responsibility to uphold the law not the ICRC’s to enforce it. What’s despicable is that the detaining authority in this case has an obligation to us not to be running away from its responsibilities to act in good faith.
Yes. We are not in disagreement. The detaining authority, in this case the United States, is in violation of international law, and has been for some time, in trying to hide prisoners from the ICRC. The evidence has been published even by the SASC, in the form of minutes where such hiding was discussed in the presence of legal officers of DoD, DIA, and CIA. This latest is only another admission.
(Dear reader, if you’re reading this, you really should have clicked over to the EW post on the subject.)