No Secret US Prison Here, Thai Officials Repeat

[george]

No secret US prison here, officials repeat

BANGKOK: -- Representatives of the Foreign Ministry and US Embassy Thursday rejected any suggestion that Thailand had hosted one of the secret prisons that US President George W Bush acknowledged this week.

In a speech on Wednesday, the US president admitted for the first time that the Central Intelligence Agency had operated secret prisons outside of the United States to detain and interrogate terrorist suspects.

Foreign Ministry deputy spokes-man Kittikhun Chartprasert said Thursday that, despite strong speculation, Thailand never had one of these so-called black sites.

Bush did not mention any specific locations in his speech. He only said that the US had transferred 14 terrorist suspects to the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay.

"A small number of suspected terrorist leaders and operatives captured during the war [on terrorism] have been held and questioned outside the United States, in a separate programme operated by the CIA," he said.

--The Nation 2006-09-07

[Tyfon]

If they knew about it...

IT WOULDN'T BE SECRET

... would it?

Edited September 7, 2006 by Tyfon

[h90]

If they knew about it...

IT WOULDN'T BE SECRET

... would it?

yes but now Bush told already (source Austrian newspaper der standard) that USA has several secrect prisions.

So now it is just the where and how many.....

Only half secret....

By the way noone care about the fact that the US president is telling that the USA is braking international law, the human rights and the genf convention (not sure how called in english...)

[Mr Jones]

Geneva Convention.

Bush, Stalin, What’s the difference?

[britmaveric]

Geneva Convention doesnt apply to those that have no uniform.

[DragonLad]

Geneva Convention doesnt apply to those that have no uniform.

Brit is correct!!! Geneva Conventions only apply to people in uniforms.

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

( That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

© That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:

1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment.

2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties

[britmaveric]

Geneva Convention doesnt apply to those that have no uniform.

Brit is correct!!! Geneva Conventions only apply to people in uniforms.

Now if you want to go the human rights angle faire enough, but Geneva Convention certainly doesnt apply. Course then there would be debate if they are actually human???

Edited September 7, 2006 by britmaveric

[chuchok]

can you keep a secret?

[DragonLad]

Geneva Convention doesnt apply to those that have no uniform.

Brit is correct!!! Geneva Conventions only apply to people in uniforms.

Now if you want to go the human rights angle faire enough, but Geneva Convention certainly doesnt apply. Course then there would be debate if they are actually human???

I think Human Rights do not apply to them, but that's just my opinion. Even if there were secret prisons. What is the big deal anyway?? The Terrorist's if they capture you do the same thing. Bring you to some SECRET PLACE. The thing is I wouldn't want to go through their process of finding out information.

[Mr Jones]

You know what? If we don’t adhere to the Geneva Convention or the human rights act, or any other act that our governments signs then.

Then we are no better than the scum that opt out of them.

And that includes YOU.

[mark lamai]

of course there aren't any in thailand.

but if there were,

what's your guess?

i reckon Udon Thani is a lay down mazarre.

[Boon Mee]

can you keep a secret?

Obviously not too many folks as it was common knowledge that Hammdi was held in one of those 'back buildings' at U-Tapao for a while...

[John K]

No secret US prison here.

or

No secret, US prison here.

[astral]

Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.....................

[NovaBlue05]

You know what? If we don’t adhere to the Geneva Convention or the human rights act, or any other act that our governments signs then.

Then we are no better than the scum that opt out of them.

And that includes YOU.

The only way to fight a war against Guerrillas/Insurgents/Terrorists/Islamofascists (take your pick) and others who recognize no "rules of engagement" or international standards is to get more viscious and brutal than they are. Anything less is apparently seen as weakness by them. So far, I'd say the Coalition forces have been way too PC and media conscious.

[joe beets]

(read the ALL before you jump on me calling me a liberal or an arab lover)

Yeah. What could be worse?

jb

[OldAsiaHand]

can you keep a secret?

Obviously not too many folks as it was common knowledge that Hammdi was held in one of those 'back buildings' at U-Tapao for a while...

The rumor was even mentioned a couple of times in the Bangkok Post and they're generally the last to know anything......

[h90]

Geneva Convention doesnt apply to those that have no uniform.

than they are civilians, who are inocent till a civil court finds them guilty

[h90]

I think Human Rights do not apply to them, but that's just my opinion. Even if there were secret prisons. What is the big deal anyway?? The Terrorist's if they capture you do the same thing. Bring you to some SECRET PLACE. The thing is I wouldn't want to go through their process of finding out information.

there is one big problem in your argument....

They call themself not terrorist, they call themself freedom fighters.

When you compare the actions:

they kill inocent people...the US army is bombing inocent civilians (napalm iraq, supporting Israel where the premier or a general tiold in TV for ever Israeli solder they make 10 buildings (for living) flat). Thats not much different than Terrorist methodes.

they catch inocent people and put them somewhere. the secret prisions are the same, for sure there are also some inocent people by mistake in it.

these terrorists mostly fight in their own land, us army mostly in other countries.

The problem is if you use the same methodes, even with good intentions, than the evil, it will make you at the end very simillar to your enemy......

It is a loose/loose situation.....

[Scott]

When was the last time anyone was able to keep a secret here?

[ilyushin]

Ban Chang has a secret US prison? Who said that?

Wash Post

ABC News

Edited September 8, 2006 by ilyushin

[h90]

Ban Chang has a secret US prison? Who said that?

Wash Post

ABC News

where did you read "Ban Chang"??

Could not find it

[Losangels]

Does anyone remember a story in the local paper a few months ago about an American radio station here in Thailand that sits on several rais of land. The authorities showed the property to some journalist that wondered whether it was used as a prison for terrorists.?

[h90]

Does anyone remember a story in the local paper a few months ago about an American radio station here in Thailand that sits on several rais of land. The authorities showed the property to some journalist that wondered whether it was used as a prison for terrorists.?

I remember it, my wife told me, she was very upset that time.

I guess it was also at ASTV or Sondi told it or that anti-taksin radio, because that are her main sources of news

[ilyushin]

Ban Chang has a secret US prison? Who said that?

Wash Post

ABC News

where did you read "Ban Chang"??

Could not find it

You have to read between the lines. Only two places in Thailand would have the proper facilities to cover a blck op. U-tapao or Udon.

From another article:

Then the CIA captured its first big detainee, in March 28, 2002. Pakistani forces took Abu Zubaida, al Qaeda's operations chief, into custody and the CIA whisked him to the new black site in Thailand, which included underground interrogation cells, said several former and current intelligence officials. Six months later, Sept. 11 planner Ramzi Binalshibh was also captured in Pakistan and flown to Thailand.

According to sources directly involved in setting up the CIA secret prison system, it began with the capture of Abu Zabayda in Pakistan. After treatment there for gunshot wounds, he was whisked by the CIA to Thailand where he was housed in a small, disused warehouse on an active airbase. There, his cell was kept under 24-hour closed circuit TV surveillance and his life-threatening wounds were tended to by a CIA doctor specially sent from Langley headquarters to assure Abu Zubaydah was given proper care, sources said. Once healthy, he was slapped, grabbed, made to stand long hours in a cold cell, and finally handcuffed and strapped feet up to a water board until after 0.31 seconds he begged for mercy and began to cooperate.

Thailand rejects news report of secret CIA prisons

14:27 2005-12-07

Thailand on Wednesday denied a news report that it had allowed the United States to set up a secret prison where a top al-Qaida suspect was allegedly mistreated during interrogation. ABC News reported Tuesday that Thailand was the first country to allow the CIA to set up a prison to interrogate terror suspects. It was established in 2002 following the capture in Pakistan of Abu Zabayda, who was whisked to a disused warehouse on an air base in Thailand, ABC said.

"I guarantee there isn't one," Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Minister Chitchai Wannasathit told reporters Wednesday, while also denying that any prisoner was brought to Thailand from Pakistan in 2002. "We don't have anything more to point out on this matter either domestically or abroad. I ask that Thai people be confident that this information can be trusted," he said.

Capt. Monton Sucharkorn, spokesman for Royal Thai Air Force, said there was no such warehouse on any air base in the country. "These days Americans can no longer freely walk in and out of Thai airfields," he said, referring to the Vietnam War era when the U.S. maintained a string of air bases in the country.

U-tapao is a Naval base and Udon has a VOA airport.

A synopsis:

No presence of secret CIA prison in Thailand, PM confirms (http://etna.mcot.net/query.php?nid=4216) - TNA, November 5, 2005

Disbelief at Thai terror centre denial (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=70593) - AAP, November 5, 2005

US Gov't: No hidden jail in Thailand for al-Qaeda suspects (http://etna.mcot.net/query.php?nid=4201) - TNA, November 4, 2005

CIA Holds Terror Suspects in Secret Prisons - Debate Is Growing Within Agency About Legality and Morality of Overseas System Set Up After 9/11 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/01/AR2005110101644_pf.html) - Washington Post, November 2, 2005

NEWSPAPER REPORT: Secret jail report 'untrue' (http://nationmultimedia.com/2005/11/03/national/index.php?news=national_19052119.html) - The Nation, November 3, 2005

Anyone else noticed the following?

What I find funny - the official responses always used present tense, stating that "there is no secret prison on Thai soil".

Well, I'd say I believe that, but then, no one ever claimed that. The sources said the facility was shut down in 2003, after all.

I have the strong impression it's a rhetoric trick used to avoid having to lie. (Or a case of taking the piss, once again.) This way, they completely evade the issue whether there ever was a "black site" in Thailand (and there probably was). Also hard to believe the media did not ask further questions following these insatisfactory statements. Or are these simply translation errors? Someone please elucidate me.

As for the Voice of America transmitter: that Google spot (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=udon%2Bthani&ll=17.668558,103.203678&spn=0.070079,0.111219&t=h&hl=en) found by Admin must be it. 3000 rai equals 5 sq.km, and that's quite exactly the extent of the site pictured.

To conclude this, to me it seems likely there was a secret prison in Thailand, and that it was indeed inside that VOA complex at Ban Dung. Of course I could be wrong. But tell me, isn't that site somewhat fishy - why would a radio transmitter maintained by 12 staff need that much space and be fenced off and guarded like a military installation? I am by no means a supporter of conspiracy theories, but who knows what else has been going on within that suspiciously large compound?

As usual, the beloved PM takes the cake with his remarks:

"The prime minister said the report by the Washington Post, which claimed that the Voice of America (VOA) relay transmitting station in Ban Dung district of the country's northeastern province of Udon Thani was used as holding center for top al-Qaeda suspects, was groundless because the radio station relayed short-wave frequency broadcasts; and therefore, must have several tall antennas, he said."

Edited September 8, 2006 by ilyushin

[h90]

Ban Chang has a secret US prison? Who said that?

Wash Post

ABC News

where did you read "Ban Chang"??

Could not find it

You have to read between the lines. Only two places in Thailand would have the proper facilities to cover a blck op. U-tapao or Udon.

From another article:

Then the CIA captured its first big detainee, in March 28, 2002. Pakistani forces took Abu Zubaida, al Qaeda's operations chief, into custody and the CIA whisked him to the new black site in Thailand, which included underground interrogation cells, said several former and current intelligence officials. Six months later, Sept. 11 planner Ramzi Binalshibh was also captured in Pakistan and flown to Thailand.

According to sources directly involved in setting up the CIA secret prison system, it began with the capture of Abu Zabayda in Pakistan. After treatment there for gunshot wounds, he was whisked by the CIA to Thailand where he was housed in a small, disused warehouse on an active airbase. There, his cell was kept under 24-hour closed circuit TV surveillance and his life-threatening wounds were tended to by a CIA doctor specially sent from Langley headquarters to assure Abu Zubaydah was given proper care, sources said. Once healthy, he was slapped, grabbed, made to stand long hours in a cold cell, and finally handcuffed and strapped feet up to a water board until after 0.31 seconds he begged for mercy and began to cooperate.

from this article, do you have the link? Would like to print it out, give it for my wife+pin it in the office (all in my office are southeners, they are very gradefull for infos like that.....)

[Losangels]

Wow very disturbing information Ilyushin, our very own Guantanamo Bay right here.

Does this have any thing to do with the vilolence in the deep south?

[OldAsiaHand]

Wow very disturbing information Ilyushin, our very own Guantanamo Bay right here.

Does this have any thing to do with the vilolence in the deep south?

You're not suggesting that the reason for the violence in the south is that the US has imprisoned terrorists on Thai soil, are you? Surely not. Nobody could be that dumb.

[ilyushin]

Ban Chang has a secret US prison? Who said that?

Wash Post

ABC News

where did you read "Ban Chang"??

Could not find it

You have to read between the lines. Only two places in Thailand would have the proper facilities to cover a blck op. U-tapao or Udon.

From another article:

Then the CIA captured its first big detainee, in March 28, 2002. Pakistani forces took Abu Zubaida, al Qaeda's operations chief, into custody and the CIA whisked him to the new black site in Thailand, which included underground interrogation cells, said several former and current intelligence officials. Six months later, Sept. 11 planner Ramzi Binalshibh was also captured in Pakistan and flown to Thailand.

According to sources directly involved in setting up the CIA secret prison system, it began with the capture of Abu Zabayda in Pakistan. After treatment there for gunshot wounds, he was whisked by the CIA to Thailand where he was housed in a small, disused warehouse on an active airbase. There, his cell was kept under 24-hour closed circuit TV surveillance and his life-threatening wounds were tended to by a CIA doctor specially sent from Langley headquarters to assure Abu Zubaydah was given proper care, sources said. Once healthy, he was slapped, grabbed, made to stand long hours in a cold cell, and finally handcuffed and strapped feet up to a water board until after 0.31 seconds he begged for mercy and began to cooperate.

from this article, do you have the link? Would like to print it out, give it for my wife+pin it in the office (all in my office are southeners, they are very gradefull for infos like that.....)

FYI

http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2005/12/07/69392.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0101644_pf.html

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1375123

[mark lamai]

couldn't agree more.

with a little acceptable collateral damage

we should drop a few nukes on Pattani. Narathiwat etc.

simple, problem gone!

and while we're on a roll,

lets nuke Baghdad, Tehran, south Lebanon, all mountains in Afghanistan,

all of southern Philippines..

take a day's rest

oh, I forgot North Korea,

we'll do that tomorrow.