Documents reveal new information about destruction of torture tapes (& Bush WH Role)

[kpete]

Source: The Hill

Documents reveal new information about destruction of torture tapes
By Alex Abdo, legal fellow, ACLU National Security Project - 12/01/09 04:47 PM ET

Records obtained late last month by the American Civil Liberties Union reveal new information about the CIA's destruction of videotapes depicting the brutal interrogation of prisoners at CIA black sites, including the precise date the tapes were destroyed and evidence that the White House was involved in early discussions about the proposed destruction.

..............................

The new index also lists the earliest known record of White House participation in discussions about destroying the tapes – an e-mail dated February 22, 2003 revealing that CIA officials met with Bush administration officials to discuss how the agency should respond to a letter from Representative Jane Harman (D-CA) advising the agency not to destroy the tapes. While it was known previously that the White House participated in discussions about the disposition of the tapes, this is the earliest record to date of any such discussions and provides a damning timeline that sheds even more light on the extent of the Bush administration's micromanagement of the CIA's torture program.

Serious questions remain about the extent to which the Bush White House and other government agencies were complicit in the CIA’s destruction of the tapes, and releasing these and other documents in full is essential to fully understanding the responsibility of high-level officials for torture.


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/70035-documents-reveal-new-information-about-destruction-of-torture-tapes

---

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/selected-chronology-cias-destruction-92-videotapes

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. "Serious questions remain...?"

Um, not really.

[L. Coyote]

4. about how much evidence was destroyed

not about who is a war criminal, what war crimes were committed, or, for that matter and sadly, whether there are any consequences for committing war crimes in America!

[Wizard777]

32. Does it even really matter? Lets talk this thing to death to distract us

from Destruction of Evidence being a crime.

[Steerpike]

2. I bet you 5 dollars...

that the president will discourage any legal recourse...unless of course democrats are involved...

[DavidDvorkin]

3. And nothing will happen as a result

It's so damned dispiriting.

[Javaman]

15. Of course, nothing will happen.

The one thing have come to understand about Obama is this: he will do the right thing until it interferes with what he wants to do.

If what he wants to do gets overshadowed by something else, he really doesn't like that. It distracts from his message.

So to recap, If Obama isn't in front of it, it won't happen.

I voted for the guy, preferred DK but life goes on.

[DavidDvorkin]

18. It's more than Obama, though

There'll be no Congressional investigations. No courageous prosecutors going out on their own. No media outrage.

[Javaman]

20. That's a given.

But honestly, if Obama said today, we are going to investigate, then things would certainly move forward

But another thing I have noticed about Obama and I believe this comes from his lawyering background, he will never make a statement about something that can be directly pinned on him or tracked back to him.

So if he said, "we will investigate", that would be political hay for the right to obstruct him at every turn.

Where as if Nancy Pelosi or (heaven forbid) Reid ever said anything like that, they deal with that kind of stuff every day and would just take it in stride. Back door deals would ensue.

Aside from his grand proclamations on the economy, health care and the war, not much of anything else can be directly tied back to him. Smart, yes, but not much in the way of throwing his supporters a bone.

I'm not asking for a "fearless" president, just one that stands for the rule of law and makes it plainly evident via his words.

In the arena of politics words are the bigger than the action sometimes.

[Soylent Brice]

5. K&R

[The Stranger]

6. Will we ever have justice?

[LynnTheDem]

8. We? How 'bout the people of Iraq, slaughtered maimed destroyed by bush's illegal invasion?

Will they ever have justice?

Nope.

[The Stranger]

34. I was counting them in with "us." (Or "we".)

(And secretly hoping that someone else was more optimistic than I am.)

[Nite Owl]

7. No matter how much info

comes to light nothing is going to happen to the last administration. These are the moves that make them seem 'all the same'. The political elite protect themselves at all costs.

[LynnTheDem]

9. And the precedent is set for future war crimes.

And sooner or later, the world will decide they can't sit back and ignore the evil that we are...



Learn from history??? Nahhhhh.

[Nite Owl]

13. Yes, that is the worst part of it.

No one sees the need for any sort of accountability, justice.

[diamidue]

17. They ARE all the same.

Don't forget that the war was supported by the Democrats in power, as well as the GOP. Democrats knew what was going on. They just chose to play along.

Everyone wants to blame the "last administration". But Democrats gave them everything they wanted. Of course, the Democrats won't want to investigate.

It is not a Democracy we live in. We need to get over that idea. Corporations/banks/military, etc. are in charge. Presidents and politicians are just employees who do as they are told..

[Nite Owl]

19. Bad cop, good cop

same goals.

[RedSock]

22. bingo

bad cop, good cop -- same police force

[elehhhhna]

35. more like bad cop/worse cop, imo

[FlyByNight]

10. Practically speaking, there is very little, if any, accountability...

...in DC. Sexual trysts are forbidden and impeachment-worthy but real crimes are ignored.

Good thing the administration is "looking forward".

:eyes:

[katandmoon]

11. Obama and Holder: YAWN

[Piewhacket]

12. Bush and Cheney & associates are war criminals... the question remains

is Obama also destined for such dishonor.

[dgibby]

14. Yes, unless he decides that the last Admin should be prosecuted.

Unless he takes action against war crimes, then he's complicit.

[peacetalksforall]

30. Yes, this is about going back and more about going forward. Notice that he (Obama),

still only refers to Guantanamo. He only says torture stops in Guantanamo. He never say a word about the other prisons and do we assume that torture is still going on? So is he and his administration going to get caught the way Cheney is getting caught. Does he confer with the CIA? Did he meet with them and tell them that the Cheney administration policies are what they should continue?

If the US will not do anything about torture, it will be up to the world to take us to trial.

If the US will not do anything about trial and so-ruled punishment, it will be up to the world to take us to trial.

Oil profits through torture - that's what it is - IN ADDITION to getting able bodied men off all streets and out of the way. Hand some of them by their fingers or light them up with electricity or make them thin from fright.

That ACLU report makes me more convinced that the original order came from the WH.

How much more do we have to take from this country?

[Jefferson23]

16. The international community is listening too., this is important, K&R

[JonQ]

21. So I'm confused, is destroying irreplacable original data a bad thing now?

Because I was getting the distinct impression that that was unimportant. ;-)

[Uncle Joe]

38. Yes you are confused, this is probably due to not reading the column in question,

although it's possible your confusion is deliberate.

<snip>

"The ACLU is seeking disclosure of these records as part of its pending motion to hold the CIA in contempt for destroying the tapes in violation of a court order requiring the agency to produce or identify records responsive to the ACLU's Freedom of Information (FOIA) request for records relating to the treatment of prisoners held in U.S. custody overseas. The tapes, which show CIA operatives subjecting suspects to extremely harsh interrogation methods, should have been identified and processed for the ACLU in response to its FOIA request. Instead of identifying and processing the videotapes, however, the CIA destroyed them. The tapes were also withheld from the 9/11 Commission, appointed by former President Bush and Congress, which had formally requested that the CIA hand over a variety of information pertaining to the interrogation of CIA prisoners, including Abu Zubaydah, the subject of many of the videotapes. Special Prosecutor John Durham has been criminally investigating the destruction of the tapes since January 2008."

<snip>

[Solly Mack]

23. k/r

[WhiteTara]

24. they so micromanaged the program

that they destroyed the evidence that proved they were involved in the torture itself. I have often thought that there was a direct feed in the vampire's office and that was the reason for the fire there.

[EFerrari]

29. Same here. n/t

[Neecy]

25. Interesting.

So, I guess our courts will no longer prosecute ANYONE who conspires to destroy evidence in a criminal matter. Or perhaps the laws don't apply to our overlords?

[90-percent]

26. you got it Neecy

It's really getting thrown in our faces that there is one set of rules for THE LITTLE PEOPLE and an entirely different set of rules for THE ELITES.

These days over and over and over again we have seen the Elites quite literally GET AWAY WITH MURDER.

We're all boiling frogs now!

-90% jimmy

[Rosa Luxemburg]

27. Isn't anyone prosecuting the people responsible?

Surely Congress should be asking these questions repeatedly?

[90-percent]

42. Bugliosi

Vinny's most recent book was

The prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder.

It's a blue print or recipe for any Attorney's General from any state in the USA to prosecute ole' George.

As I've stated here repeatedly, to let these crimes stand unpunished sets a HORRIBLE PRECEDENT so that when we elect a President that is not as noble and honorable as GWB and his team of trolls, America could be in REAL TROUBLE. You're either for us or imprisoned without any rights for the end of your life kind of trouble.

Live all your remaining days in CAMP REAGAN, with the name of your crime carved in your back.*

-90%

* from "The Chrome Plated Megaphone of Destiny" by Frank Zappa, from the album We're only in it for the Money

[Hubert Flottz]

28. Now Now...

Don't look back!

[Bluebear]

31. The laws don't apply to the Ruling Class anymore. nt

[tomm2thumbs]

33. 'this country needs to continue to look fast-forward, not rewind'

their new talking point I imagine

[grahamhgreen]

36. Don' let torture be our gift to our children

[Ezlivin]

37. Great news! Now I can safely shred ALL of my financial and tax documents

...since I know that the government doesn't treat this as a crime.

"Yes We Can" my ass.

[Uncle Joe]

39. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.

[bobthedrummer]

40. K&R#60

The Torture Archive (The National Security Archive)
http://WWW.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/torture_archive/index.htm

[valerief]

41. Torture? What torture? Did you hear about Tiger Woods?

:sarcasm:

[winyanstaz]

43. K & R....

These criminals that started this mess need to be brought to justice NOW.

[leveymg]

44. Note the date 1st recorded CIA memos re: tape destruction in the attached ACLU Chronology: 04/17/02

That was proximate to two events: the initial CIA interrogations of Abu Zubaydah, who was captured in late March, and the date of resignation for CIA/CTC Director Cofer Black, who was in charge of running the rendition and torture program. Black was also in charge of CTC in January, 2000, when two 9/11 hijackers were let into the US and a CTC warning cable to FBI was ordered withheld. From Wiki:

Following Abu Zubaydah’s capture he was interrogated by FBI agents Ali Soufan and Steve Gaudin.<2><43><44> The interrogation followed standard FBI protocol and involved cleaning and dressing Abu Zubaydah’s wounds.<43><44><45><46> Ali Soufan stated that "e kept him alive... It wasn't easy, he couldn't drink, he had a fever. I was holding ice to his lips."<44> The agents attempted to convince Abu Zubaydah that they knew of his activities in languages he understood; English and Arabic.<45><46> Both agents believed they were making good progress in gathering intelligence from Abu Zubaydah.<2><43><44><47>

Within a matter of days, however, a CIA interrogation team began participating in Abu Zubaydah’s interrogation.<2><6><44><45> The CIA team has headed by outside CIA contractor and former Air Force psychologist James Mitchell.<44><48> Mitchell ignored Soufan's previously successful strategy and ordered that Abu Zubaydah answer questions or face a gradual increase in aggressive techniques.<44> According to Soufan, Abu Zubaydah cooperated with the FBI interrogators on multiple occasions.<49> Soufan testified before Congress that his FBI team was removed from Abu Zubaydah's interrogation multiple times, only to be asked to return when the harsher interrogation tactics of the CIA proved unsuccessful.<49> Soufan asked Mitchell whether he had ever interrogated anyone, to which Mitchell replied that he hadn't, but "Science is science. This is a behavioral issue" and suggested Soufan was the inexperienced one at the facility.<44>

Ali Soufan was alarmed by the CIA’s interrogation tactics,<2><6><43><44><45> and was so enraged that he challenged a CIA agent's authority to go through with them, shouting "We're the United States of America, and we don't do that kind of thing."<44> The CIA agent told him in April 2002 that the tactics were approved by the "highest levels" in Washington, and even stated that the approvals "are coming from Gonzales."<44> Soufan reported to his FBI superiors that the CIA’s interrogation constituted “borderline torture.”<46> He was particularly concerned about a coffin-like box he discovered that had been built by the CIA interrogation team.<44> He was so angry he called then FBI Assistant Director for counterterrorism, Pasquale D'Amaro and shouted "I swear to God, I'm going to arrest these guys!"<2><44><50> After Soufan’s complaints to the FBI Counterterrorism Assistant Director Pasquale D’Amuro were communicated to the CIA, both FBI agents were ordered to leave the facility immediately by FBI Director Robert Mueller.<43><44><46><51> Ali Soufan left, but Steve Gaudin stayed an additional few weeks and continued to participate in the interrogation.<46>