CIA Holds Terror Suspects in Secret Prisons

Washington Post ^ | November 2, 2005 | Dana Priest

[GOPJ]

Porter Goss, please clean house. We are tired of Agency leakers using the press to air their grievances.

CIA ping...

[M Kehoe]

I thought I'd provide the link to The Geneva Conventions , because in my reading, mercenaries, certain civilians, and guerrillas (e.g. insignia, flag, command, etc.) are not covered. Matter of fact, the certain civilian category (spies), and certain other mercenaries and guerrillas categories can be SHOT without any "due process."

But hey, if we can get info out of them (in other countries) then I'm all for letting them live.

Hope this helps the discussion.

5.56mm

[GOPJ]

Don't you understand by now that a large majority of people on this site see nothing wrong with torturing and denying people basic human rights to people as long as they aren't American and it's is the best interest of the country...

No, don't believe in torture and denying basic human rights, but weren't born yesterday either. Somewhere in-between is a humane but not silly solution. And yeah, if it's us or them. It's them. Sorry, that might not be nice, but I want our people to survive. Finding an ethical but sane line matters, but it's not all that matters.

Knowing now the CIA is filled with liberals, it's scary thinking of them in charge of any person. Friend or enemy. Liberals are all sweet and light on the outside but often creepy and dark on the inside. Maybe some oversight is a good idea...

[conserv13]

Prisoners of war must be humanely treated at all times. Any unlawful act which causes death or seriously endangers the health of a prisoner of war is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions. In particular, prisoners must not be subject to physical mutilation>, biological experiments, violence, intimidation, insults, and public curiosity. (Convention III, Art. 13)

Collective punishment for individual acts, corporal punishment, imprisonment without daylight, and all forms of torture and cruelty are forbidden. (Convention III, Art. 87)

[M Kehoe]

Prisoners of war must be humanely treated at all times.

OK?

Three items:
The terrorists that are captured are not prisoners of war.
The captured terrorists are not signatories to the Geneva Convention.
Believe me, if our grandchildren are ever captured by the terrorists, they will not be treated according to the Conventions, just like our current captured soldiers are not treated according to the Geneva Conventions.

And in the fwiw department, I was a grunt many years ago, and had to learn the Geneva Conventions.

5.56mm

[balch3]

Why is Dana Priest not under arrest right now?

[conserv13]

I appreciate your service. I disagree with you, but I admit I'm not a lawyer and you have more experience than me.

[KoelschBloot72]

>>
The terrorists that are captured are not prisoners of war.
The captured terrorists are not signatories to the Geneva Convention.
Believe me, if our grandchildren are ever captured by the terrorists, they will not be treated according to the Conventions, just like our current captured soldiers are not treated according to the Geneva Conventions.
<<

They are terrorist SUSPECTS...not charged and not convicted yet.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Wow! I didn't know any FReepers didn't know that point. Boortz, a pretty sharp lawyer, IMHO, also analyzed the Geneva convention and made the same conclusion you made. And thank you for serving our country.

[I can't imagine the pain of being at the other end of your replies. Well done!]

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

God bless you for your service. =] And God bless those CIA agents. I hope they are gathering a lot of information, and I could care less how they are gathering it.

[George W. Bush]

I don't think this is the result of a leak.

The CIA has exhausted the usefulness of these captive terrorists for intelligence purposes and are preparing to release some or all of them. So they are breaking the ice on the fact that we have these other interrogation centers.

I'm not surprised. I always assumed there were other interrogation centers for their high-value prisoners.

[kabar]

The CIA has exhausted the usefulness of these captive terrorists for intelligence purposes and are preparing to release some or all of them. So they are breaking the ice on the fact that we have these other interrogation centers.

Surely you jest. Have you read the article?

"More than 100 suspected terrorists have been sent by the CIA into the covert system, according to current and former U.S. intelligence officials and foreign sources. This figure, a rough estimate based on information from sources who said their knowledge of the numbers was incomplete, does not include prisoners picked up in Iraq. The detainees break down roughly into two classes, the sources said."

"About 30 are considered major terrorism suspects and have been held under the highest level of secrecy at black sites financed by the CIA and managed by agency personnel, including those in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, according to current and former intelligence officers and two other U.S. government officials. Two locations in this category -- in Thailand and on the grounds of the military prison at Guantanamo Bay -- were closed in 2003 and 2004, respectively."

"A second tier -- which these sources believe includes more than 70 detainees -- is a group considered less important, with less direct involvement in terrorism and having limited intelligence value. These prisoners, some of whom were originally taken to black sites, are delivered to intelligence services in Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Afghanistan and other countries, a process sometimes known as "rendition." While the first-tier black sites are run by CIA officers, the jails in these countries are operated by the host nations, with CIA financial assistance and, sometimes, direction."

There is no way we are going to let the 1st tier go and the 2nd tier prisoners are returned to their native countries through rendition.

I don't think this is the result of a leak.

How else did this classified information become public? In the article, it is mentioned that, "The CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe, according to U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement. Also, "The Washington Post is not publishing the names of the Eastern European countries involved in the covert program, at the request of senior U.S. officials. They argued that the disclosure might disrupt counterterrorism efforts in those countries and elsewhere and could make them targets of possible terrorist retaliation."

[Zack Nguyen]

Its not good. Its illegal and immoral.

Leaving aside the debate over legality, why is it immoral? What would you do? (Forgive me if you've already given a thorough explanation on the thread here. Just point me to the right post.)

[conserv13]

I'm not saying don't interrogate them. Of course we should. We should use legal methods to do so. People have been beaten to death, had bones broken, etc... in US custody, and that isn't right.

[Zack Nguyen]

Let me hasten to add that I don't agree with torture. "Waterboarding" if that is what is described here, seems like torture to me. However, I find no problem with a wide range of coercive measures that might make the prisoner less able to resist our interrogations. Making them stand up, listen to loud music, lack of sleep, etc.

[Zack Nguyen]

I agree - beating someone to death is wrong, and if American officers have done this they should be held accountable. But holding them without trial is not a great sin in my book, as they are not American citizens.

[conserv13]

I think we can hold them without trial for a time until hostilities are over - but not indefinately. They should have access to the Red Cross. The problem is it is tough to say when hostilities in this war are over.

We could be fighting Al-Queda forever.