iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Harry Shearer

Harry Shearer

Posted: January 8, 2010 11:29 AM

The Dark Prison Gets a Little Spotlight

What's Your Reaction:

While the president and the punditocracy alike have no compunctions in talking about Guantanamo Bay, Obama's promise to close it, the missing of the deadline, the problem with the Yemeni prisoners, et al., the word that continues to be unspoken is Bagram, the name of our oh-so-secret prison in Afghanistan, and the only one of our prisons where two of our detainees seem to have met their demise at the hands of enhanced interrogators. This week, for a moment, two shafts of light fall on Bagram.

First, a U.S. appeals court on Thursday heard oral arguments on the question of whether the U.S. Supreme Court's decision granting habeas corpus rights to Gitmo inmates may also apply to certain Bagram residents, specifically detainees who were rounded up outside Afghanistan and then shipped to Bagram. Afghan detainees need not apply, because it's a war zone.

Then, there comes an announcement that the U.S. military is investigating allegations that two Afghan teens were beaten while in custody at Bagram. What the adolescents allege in terms of treatment sounds so similar to what happened at Abu Ghraib, and what British troops have reportedly done at their Basra detention center in Iraq, that one imagines there must be a military orchard someplace where all the bad apples are being bred.

 

Follow Harry Shearer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/letwits

 
 
  • Comments
  • 46
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
06:28 PM on 01/12/2010
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iGRVVfWuxHAg0MeD9YC_xrWnqzuQ

Afghans to allow legal challenges at Bagram jail: official

(AFP) – 1 day ago

KABUL — Hundreds of inmates held without trial at a controversial prison on a US base will be allowed to challenge their detention through the courts when Afghanistan takes over the jail, officials said Monday.

The prison at Bagram Air Field north of Kabul has been compared to the Cuba-based Guantanamo Bay detention centre and Abu Ghraib in Iraq due to harsh treatment of prisoners detained there without charge.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:47 AM on 01/11/2010
Unfortunately, this is hidden in Media section......

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/11/bbc-airing-guantanamo-gua_n_418219.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zoooni
former C-Span junkie
07:07 PM on 01/10/2010
Stories have been told about Bagram for years. And only Mr. Shearer has the nerve to remind us.
I thank you sir.
photo
rabiddog6708
This Dog's bite is Worse Than his Bark
12:32 PM on 01/10/2010
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Friedrich Nietzsche


We are either a nation of laws and believe in justice and equal protection for all or we are little better than other countries we deplore for their lack of human rights.
photo
CigarGod
What is your process?
04:24 PM on 01/10/2010
But it's okay to hide behind technicalities...or rationalizations, like:

1. They're not citizen's, so they don't get the same legal rights or humane treatment.
2. They aren't really equal...look at how successful we are.
3. There is no such thing as the name they call themselves.
4. We were here first...3 thousand years ago...when we took it from someone else...because God commanded it.
5. Our abuses aren't as bad as their abuses....so we are the good guys.
6. We're better in this area, so it means we are superior in all areas.
7. Anyone who criticizes us does so for unfair or irrational reasons.
8. They don't have a recognized military...so they are t#rr@rists.
It's all their fault they couldn't build a thriving society..under constant seige and second class status.

Just some of the usual "arguments" to justify the status quo.
10:22 AM on 01/10/2010
I fail to understand the rationale behind these gulags. Is it that when rounding up guys there might be some actual terrorists among them? Or that they make the US somehow look tough on terrorism? The politicians starting and continuing these policies must have been told about the blowbacks: hard hits on US image, terrorist recruitment up because of anger of these places, the people going through the treatment are very likely to want retribution, standard policy being harsh treatment will result on at least some innocent people being maltreated etc. These prisons are de facto extremist factories, what kind of supposed positive effects can outweigh that?
09:53 AM on 01/10/2010
I appreciate the sentiment that these prisoners of war deserve habeas corpus rights. I'd be interested to hear viable solutions though. I don't see how we expect military personel from different countries that are in a theater of war to document what behavior led these prisoners to be incarcerated. With this information unavailable, how is it determined that these individuals are being held with cause?...take their word for it? Whether you agree with it or not the U.S. and others have men and women at war. In the current situation, how do we provide habeas corpus rights for prisoners without further endangering these troops?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:57 AM on 01/09/2010
It still astounds me that people think that we should grant no rights to terrorists.

We're frickin' America, we're better than that! And we should show the world what the American justice system can do.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
09:57 PM on 01/09/2010
There are two different types of prisoners, civilians and troops. While this conflict has no uniformed troops on the opposing side, they are still troops and we can't try them under the Geneva convention, but terrorists, civilians acting on civilian targets are criminals and should be treated as such.

J
09:56 AM on 01/11/2010
The Geneva Convention is not a court where a member of an opposing arm can be "tried". The Geneva Convention is a set of rules for treatment of prisoners of war, in other words a set of rights the prisoners had based on human dignity.

Our government at the time was of the opinion that some technicalities in the wording of these rules would allow them to bypass the inconvenience of having to respect these rights. Those in charge at the time were of the opinion that by bypassing these rights they could gain advantage over the enemy by terrorizing them with maltreatment of those who got caught and by extracting more useful intelligence.

This strategy hasn't had the intended effect, has had a roughly opposite effect of gathering poor intelligence and motivating the enemy, and has been a scar on the morals of our nation.
photo
CigarGod
What is your process?
04:26 PM on 01/10/2010
Yes, especially since......
The Brits considered us terrorists during the time we were fighting second class status...using some similar tactics.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:15 AM on 01/09/2010
Rudy Giuliani continued his march towards political oblivian, telling George Stephanopoulos that there were no domestic attacks on the US during the Bush Administration. Stephanopoulos continued the MSM's march towards irrelevance, by allowing Rudy to get away with saying it.
Obama is continuing his march towards a one term Presidency, by continuing to bog the US down in this Afghanistan debacle that includes the shameful Bagram detainee facility, apparently buying into the kind of mindset typified by the likes of the Giuliani crowd. And for his trouble, Obama still gets labeled soft on terrorism, because he doesn't utter the words "war on terroism" 30 times in a one minute statement.
The "terrorist expert" Guiliani could say 9/11 100 times in a one minute statement. At least until he forgot there was a 9/11.
I wouldn't mind watching all of these folks continue to march towards their respective cliffs, along with their lemming-like followers, if they weren't dragging the rest of us kicking and screaming along with them.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
waitforme
05:38 PM on 01/09/2010
If you want to see a list of all the horrors done by Obama and under his watch, see the transcript of DemocracyNow.org from either January 4th or 5th, Alan Nairn lists them. It is enlightening to see them all in one place.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
09:58 PM on 01/09/2010
not my list I pulled it from a post on HP Friday:

Terrorist activity during Bush Admin

2001 Sep 18 Anthrax attacks on the offices the United States Congress and New York State Government offices, and on employees of television networks and tabloids.
2001 Dec 22 shoe bomb plot was a failed bombing attempt that occurred on American Airlines Flight 63 flying from Charles De Gaulle International Airport in Paris, France, to Miami
2002 July 4: An Egyptian gunman opens fire at an El Al ticket counter in Los Angeles International Airport, killing two Israelis before being killed himself.
2005 March 3 Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, an Iranian-born graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, drives an SUV onto a crowded part of campus, injuring nine.
2006 July 28 USA:A woman was dead and five others were hospitalized this afternoon after a shooting at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle building in downtown Seattle by a man who declared he was "angry with Israel."[10]
2006 Aug 30 An Afghani Muslim hit 19 pedestrians, killing one, with his SUV in the San Francisco Bay area.
2006 Dec 22 Federal Agents disrupt Derrick Shareef’s attack on an Illinois shopping mall. His intent was to commit “violent jihad” just before Christmas
I am sure I've left something out, but then I am not as qualified as Stephanopoulos.”
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
waitforme
06:23 PM on 01/10/2010
This show is actualy on the 6th.
photo
Salfana
Concerned citizen
01:30 AM on 01/09/2010
Thank you so much Mr. Shearer to keep this issue alive. I have refrain from commenting anymore on this subject, the blindness and the never learning from the past, troubles me. I feel a lot of shame.

Mr. Worthington comments here at the HP, he has reported extensively and still does on the Guantanamo detainees and he is worried as well about Bagram.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
edgarcaycedoc
07:26 PM on 01/08/2010
When I was in the military, we tried to never go beyond our "aura of deniability." In other words--the worse the crime the less believeable. So to give us "deniability" we would operate beyond the normal parameters of battle. Gave them six years, have two honorable discharges.
12:56 AM on 01/10/2010
That is the truth many know by instinct and dread by conviction. Thanks for the honesty. I have no quarrel with the soldier following legal lawful moral orders. I understand the concept of vermin that cannot be redeemed and that needs to be dealt with. Yet evil tracked, hunted down, and replaced should not occupy the space of one claiming an elevated status of victor; that is, must I become a brute to beat the brutish? Now -- if they (the military) lose the hypocritical notion of plausible deniability, and just tell the naked brutal and bloody truth (“We tortured them and killed them and we loved it. It was magnificent and I almost wet my pants it was so good.”), at least the people know where they stand and can make an informed choice concerning whether their government is truly representative. If people were tortured and killed shouldn’t America be proud – for we did it and therefore it must be right. Say it loud, we are thuggish and we are proud (kind of catchy).

The rule of the gun only works if one controls all the guns. Also, seeds of pain anguish and wanton death today, may lead to tomorrow’s fanatical movement who function as vermin that the elevated are once again called to deal with through armed conflict…and thus the cycle of pain continues, as do questions such as – “Why do they hate us so?”
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DLSteinhardt
05:34 PM on 01/08/2010
And let's not forget about murders at Abu Ghraib!

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4977986
03:20 PM on 01/09/2010
Let's not forget that you never served in the military or done anything where you had to give up your personal comfort to benefit your country. Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
waitforme
05:33 PM on 01/09/2010
'Give up your personal comfort TO 'benefit' this country? You don't mention HOW you feel (for I suppose it is you you are referring to) you have 'benefitted' this country. Until we know what it is you are referring to, benefit-wise, we really can't respond.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zoooni
former C-Span junkie
07:21 PM on 01/10/2010
thanks for the link.
05:05 PM on 01/08/2010
Obama has taken all legal steps to keep this one off the table.
04:25 PM on 01/08/2010
I heard they were going to tear it down to destroy the evidence. Will all our presidents now be war criminals?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:40 PM on 01/08/2010
Just our present one & the last one.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zoooni
former C-Span junkie
07:18 PM on 01/10/2010
I read recently(can't remember where) that the base had been renovated.
02:58 PM on 01/08/2010
Lyle Denniston (an experienced, old-fashioned journalist) also attended yesterday's court hearing, and has a more comprehensive report and analysis posted (based on which, it's nice to see that the summation of the hearing by the WP's Del Quentin Wilber seems to have accurately captured the gist of things):

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/analysis-parsing-boumediene/

There's an interview with the author Kal Raustiala about his new book "Does the Constitution Follow the Flag?" that relates to the fundamental ideas underlying this case, that helps provide context to the issue:

http://harpers.org/archive/2009/12/hbc-90006287

[Kal is someone Congress SHOULD be learning from at oversight/legislative hearings.]

Basically, the POWER of the U.S. Executive Branch, as established within and by the original confines of the Constitution, seems to "follow (accompany-by-definition) the flag" (our military and diplomatic forces abroad) without quibble, but the attendant, supposedly-inseparable Constitutional LIMITS on that power, and thus the RIGHTS of those subject to the government's power, trail along, if they travel abroad at all, somwhere FAR behind.

It really seems to boil down to whether we want to be a nation of greedy Imperialists (like those who operate our modern national and multinational corporations and own our Congress), or a Republic of self-governed decent human beings who are willing to PAY for, or trade for - or else forego - the resources and assets of other (weaker) nations that we (or "our" corporations) may covet.
02:14 PM on 01/08/2010
The left is extremely silly, naive, hypocritical, wrong & often lies regarding every issue (sic Gore on Global Warming), and this radical left that has taken over the Democrats is even more so. Democratic party leadership is laughably silly on everything. Unlike the Democratic leadership you have an excuse. You are a comedian!
photo
notb observer
Technically it's a micro auto-bio...
02:44 PM on 01/08/2010
Oh my... You've managed to hit every Right Wing trademark tactic in one sentence, and accuse the left of exactly what your own draft dodging & deferment "fearless leaders" are experts at.

Silly: See below
Naive: Gunboat diplomacy, Bush Doctrine
Hypocritical: Family values, fiscal responsibility, C Street fundamentalists
Wrong: Mission Accomplished, Greeted as liberators, Death throes of the insurgency, Get them over there so they can't geet us over here, Trickle down ecomomics.
Lying: 9/11 didn't happen on Bush's watch, WMDs, I don't recall, We did not torture, FoxNews.

Of course it's impossible to tell when the Right Wing is lying or wrong, it's all the same propaganda, misinformation, distortion and fabrication. The only exception is "silly". The right Wing is far from being silly. They are very dangerous sociopaths who are intent on ruining this country at all costs. They came close with Bush but the majority of Americans have now caught on to the lies, so the Right Wing as a political force is finished.
03:30 PM on 01/08/2010
I would not bet the ranch on this. [ as GALLUP illistrated this week displaying increasing conservative fortunes and declining liberal ones ]. Besides, Mr. Accountability has held no one to account for the Detroit mess and others including Wall St. , AIG, Homeland ''Security'' ,unemployment, and a host of other failures, nor has Mr. Transparency after eight consecutive promises, allowed any transparency to shine even a flashlight beam with AAA batteries into what the Most Ethical Congress is up to with our healthcare futures. Confusion reigns and both the banks, and al Qaeda, are taking full advantage of this.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:42 PM on 01/08/2010
If the lips are moving, the truth is not forthcoming.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
waitforme
05:27 PM on 01/09/2010
You don't define your terms. What, for instance, do you mean by 'left'? If you think 'the radical left' has 'taken over' the Democrats, you have a very, very, very different idea of what left means than I do. It is the 'left' that is most realistically (as opposed to making things up) critical of Obama and most of the Democrats in Congress. It really is impossible to discuss with you because no one knows what you mean and where you are coming from -- because you don't say! You just throw things out and hope you have hit something -- in the dark; with blinders.