CIA Says It Will Close Secret Prisons

Agency Says Guards Have Been Fired And Prisons Will Be Shuttered Permanently; But Prisoners Still Held

(CBS/AP)  CIA Director Leon Panetta has told Congress the spy agency has taken no new prisoners since he became director in February.

He also says the CIA has terminated contracts with private companies that provided security at secret overseas CIA prisons. That will save up to $4 million.

Panetta told agency employees in an e-mail Thursday that the secret prisons are no longer used and the CIA is making plans to permanently shutter them.

But the CIA can still hold prisoners temporarily. Panetta says if more prisoners are taken, they will be interrogated by agency employees and handed over quickly to their home country or a country with a legal claim.

The Washington Post reported in November, 2005 that the CIA has maintained secret prisons, also known as "black sites" in at least eight foreign countries since shortly after the 9/11 attacks.

The prisons were used, in part, to isolate prisoners, conduct so-called "enhanced interrogations" and to torture high-level al Qaeda suspects outside the jurisdiction of U.S. law.

[Salaam_Shalom]

We must demand full disclosure: the locations of the prisons, those who managed them, the employees, the prisonsers, and the activities. There must be full transparency and accounting. If laws were broken, the perpetrators must be prosecuted.

[ianlou]

CIA Says It Will Close Secret Prisons
Whether they do or not will be a secret.

[honestabe8]

When they say they`re "secret" prisons, they mean they`re strong enough for a man, but made for a woman.
Posted by davicar2

Thanks. That got not only a giggle, but a nice image of locked up women....hot, sweaty, shirts barely covering their voluptuous....well, never mind...

[promaclaura]

Put simply, he has stated, as has been widely reported and fought against by Amnesty International and the ACLU, that he now has the "right" to spy on any US citizen he wishes so long as the illegal information gathered isn't disclosed to the public

Posted by searingtruth


Good try neocon, but the truth (the searing truth) is you are lying. The administration has said simply, you are not allowed to sue the government for Bush's illegal acts unless the information was realeased and you were harmed by that release. This is meant to stop the tens of thousands of trivial lawsuits.


Has anyone ever told you that you're a whack-job? Never mind, I'm sure they have... probably your nurse.
Posted by iam4honesty at 6:12 AM : Apr 10, 2009


This is too rich to pass up. You're calling Searing Truth a neo-con? lol and it's on you, ST and I don't agree on some issues, but I'd never call him a neo-con. I appreciate ST because they have decided to "not be blinded" like so many Obamabot's. Any poster that comments (and questions) on the policies of both parties is the poster I want to read. Most Obama supporters are so far up Obama's rearend that they can't see straight, and they will continue to follow their pied-piper over the cliff. It must be terrible to be an Obamabot and have Bush Derangement Syndrome at the same time, blinded from both sides and brainwashed to boot. Searing Truth is a breath of fresh air and the loony libs that post here can't stand someone who supported Obama pointing out his questionable policies. Isn't that just like the loony-libs, screaming for "freedom of speech", but only for those that agree with them.

[promaclaura]

What Did Leon Panetta Know About Rendition And When Did He Know It?
Posted by Pejman Yousefzadeh on Sat Jan 10, 2009 at 03:17:10 AM EST

Thus far, defenders of Director-designate of Central Intelligence Leon Panetta make the following points in defense of the proposition that he would make a good DCI:

In response to arguments that Panetta is not experienced, Panettaphiles tell us that because of his experience as a consumer of intelligence--both as a member of the Iraq Study Group and as Chief of Staff to Bill Clinton--Panetta actually has lots of intelligence experience and would, in fact, be super-awesome as DCI. In addition, as Chief of Staff, we are told that Panetta played a key role in shaping intelligence policies.

Panetta is against torture, rendition and other bad stuff.

Okay. But here's the thing: If you believe Panettaphile Argument No. 1, then you really have to be concerned about the viability of Panettaphile Argument No. 2.
What do I mean? Well, in her book, The Dark Side, Jane Mayer pointed out that rendition policies began not during the Bush Administration, but rather, during the Clinton Administration. As Mayer writes, in 1995, the Clinton Administration proposed to the government of Hosni Mubarak that Egypt be a rendition destination, a proposal that the Egyptians accepted (pp. 112-113). Eventually, renditions became routine and a "Rendition Branch" was added to the CIA's Counterterrorism Center and President Clinton signed a directive that authorized "Apprehension, Extradition, Rendition and Prosecution" of terrorist suspects in 1998 (p. 114). Other countries, in addition to Egypt, were used as rendition destinations but Egypt remained the most popular destination.

Leon Panetta was Chief of Staff from 1994-1997, according to Wikipedia.

As I see it, only one of three scenarios is possible:


Leon Panetta, as Chief of Staff, was involved in the decision to craft the rendition program, and the program was crafted with his approval.

Leon Panetta, as Chief of Staff, was involved in the decision to craft the rendition program, and the program was crafted over his objections. However, there is no evidence whatsoever that Panetta left the position of Chief of Staff in protest over the rendition policy (Wikipedia states that his resignation took effect on January 20, 1997, which is the date Bill Clinton was sworn in for his second term, likely demonstrating that Panetta just picked the beginning of the second term to leave and did not leave over any policy difference).

Leon Panetta, as Chief of Staff, was entirely out of the loop when it came to crafting the rendition program, thus opening the door to questions over whether Panetta was really as involved in intelligence matters as Panettaphiles claim that he was. I mean, if one is the Chief of Staff to the President and one does not take an active role in helping shape the policies by which terrorists like the ones in al Qaeda are captured and interrogated, one is pretty darned ineffective and not a major player, nyet?

So I ask: What did Leon Panetta know about rendition and when did he know it? Will he come forward and give answers to those questions? And hey, what about all of those pundits who claim that the incoming Administration will forswear torture and other cruel and inhuman interrogation activities. Are they the least bit concerned over whether the DCI-designate meets up to their purported standards? And will they to and write about their concerns in public?
It would be dramatically hypocritical if they didn't, wouldn't it?

http://www.chequer-board.net/story/2009/1/10/31710/0033

[honestabe8]

if they are secret prisons, how will we know what has been closed?

[iam4honesty]

Put simply, he has stated, as has been widely reported and fought against by Amnesty International and the ACLU, that he now has the "right" to spy on any US citizen he wishes so long as the illegal information gathered isn't disclosed to the public

Posted by searingtruth


Good try neocon, but the truth (the searing truth) is you are lying. The administration has said simply, you are not allowed to sue the government for Bush's illegal acts unless the information was realeased and you were harmed by that release. This is meant to stop the tens of thousands of trivial lawsuits.


Has anyone ever told you that you're a whack-job? Never mind, I'm sure they have... probably your nurse.

[tyrany1]

How many of these prisons is Obama running?

[straightalk]

briannorwood, I only disagree with you on one word: " That man makes me want to puke! "

I would change the word "man" to "sub-human".

[pixelslinger]

"Has there been any more terrorist attacks on US soil since 2001? No. Oh, so who do we have to thank for that.... Santa Claus? Get real moron! " Posted by far_point200

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc - since I know you'll need a translation: After, Therefor, Because of. It is a logical fallacy of associating one thing due to another. A rather well-known one was that the launching of Apollo 7 caused the price of ice cream to rise in Miami.

When someone has to resort to ad hominem it is generally because 'he' is the moron. No attacks since 9/11. If you want to give all that credit to Bush and Cheney absent any evidence, I'm certain you'll have no problem ASSIGNING Bush and Cheney the blame for 9/11 as daily intel briefs for months said it would happen.

Moron.