Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Keep CounterPunch ad free. Support our annual fund drive today!

Secret Prisons, Top Secret Interrogations


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: Visit his website:



More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine


Weekend Edition
October 28, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
Inside the Invisible Government; War, Propaganda, Clinton & Trump
Andrew Levine
The Hillary Era is Coming: Worry!
Gary Leupp
Seven World-Historical Achievements of the Iraq Invasion of 2003
Paul Street
Standing Rock Water-Protectors Waterboarded While the Cleveland Indians Romped
Stanley L. Cohen
Israel: 1984 Everlasting
Michael Brenner
American Foreign Policy in the Post-Trump Era
Luciana Bohne
Crossing the Acheron: Back to Vietnam
Robert Hunziker
The Political Era of Climate Refugees
Stephen Cooper
Alabama’s Last Execution was an Atrocity
Pete Dolack
Work Harder So Speculators Can Get More
Joyce Nelson
Canadians Launch Constitutional Challenge Against CETA
John Laforge
US Uranium Weapons Have Been Used in Syria
Paul Edwards
The Vision Thing ’16
Arshad Khan
Hillary, Trump and Sartre: How Existentialism Disrobes the Major Presidential Candidates
Peter Lee
It’s ON! Between Duterte and America
Joseph Grosso
Starchitects in the City: Vanity Fair and Gentrification
Patrick Carr
Economic Racial Disparity in North Carolina
David Swanson
Public vs. Media on War
Chris Gilbert
Demo Derby in Venezuela: The Left’s New Freewheeling Politics
Binoy Kampmark
Nobel Confusion: Ramos-Horta, Trump and World Disorder
Stephen Cooper
Alabama’s Last Execution Was an Atrocity
Binoy Kampmark
Nobel Confusion: Ramos-Horta, Trump and World Disorder
Russell Mokhiber
Lucifer’s Banker: Bradley Birkenfeld on Corporate Crime in America
Ron Jacobs
Death to the Fascist Insect! The SLA and the Cops
Cesar Chelala
Embargo on Cuba is an Embarrassment for the United States
Jack Smith
And the Winner Is….
Ken Knabb
Beyond Voting: the Limits of Electoral Politics
Matt Peppe
An Alternate Narrative on Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump
James Rothenberg
Water Under the Bridge
Louis Yako
Remembering Rasul Gamzatov: The Poet of the People
Brian Cloughley
The US, NATO and the Pope
Louis Proyect
The Outsider-Insider: Isaac Babel’s Big Mistake
Martin Billheimer
Now and Then, Ancient Sorceries
October 27, 2016
Paul Street
An Identity-Politicized Election and World Series Lakefront Liberals Can Love
Matthew Stevenson
Sex and the Presidential City
Jim Kavanagh
Tom Hayden’s Haunting
CJ Hopkins
The Pathologization of Dissent
Mike Merryman-Lotze
The Inherent Violence of Israel’s Gaza Blockade
Robert Fisk
Is Yemen Too Much for the World to Take?
Shamus Cooke
Stopping Hillary’s Coming War on Syria
Jan Oberg
Security Politics and the Closing of the Open Society
Ramzy Baroud
The War on UNESCO: Al-Aqsa Mosque is Palestinian and East Jerusalem is Illegally Occupied
Colin Todhunter
Lower Yields and Agropoisons: What is the Point of GM Mustard in India?
Norman Pollack
The Election: Does It Matter Who Wins?
Nyla Ali Khan
The Political and Cultural Richness of Kashmiriyat