The Torture Tape Cover-up: How High Does It Go?
When the hideous photographs of torture and abuse emerged from Abu Ghraib in the spring of 2004, they created a public relations disaster for the Bush administration. The White House had painstakingly worked to capitalize on the 9/11 attacks by creating a “war on terror.” Never mind the absurdity of declaring war on a tactic. Central to Bush’s new “war” was the portrayal of us as the good guys and al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Saddam Hussein as the bad guys.
But the Abu Ghraib photos of naked Iraqis piled on top of one another, forced to masturbate, led around on leashes like dogs shined the light on U.S. hypocrisy.
After the Abu Ghraib revelations, the Bush administration could not tolerate more bad publicity. So in 2005, the CIA destroyed several hundred hours of videotapes depicting torturous interrogations of Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, probably including water boarding. The former U.S. official involved in discussions about the tapes reported widespread concern that “something as explosive as this would probably get out,” according to the Los Angeles Times. This destruction of evidence may violate several laws. And it remains to be seen how high up the chain of command the criminality goes.
Now that the videotape scandal has come to light, Bush and his men are back in damage control mode. CIA Director Michael Hayden minimized the significance of the destruction, claiming the tapes were destroyed “only after it was determined they were no longer of intelligence value and not relevant to any internal, legislative or judicial inquiries.” These claims are disingenuous.
The tapes likely portray U.S. officials engaged in torture, which violates three U.S.-ratified treaties as well as the U.S. Torture Statute and the War Crimes Act.
Bush justifies his administration’s “harsh interrogation techniques” by maintaining that Zubaydah, under interrogation, fingered Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. But according to investigative journalist Ron Suskind in his 2006 book One Percent Doctrine, it was a “walk-in” who led the CIA to Mohammed in return for a $25 million reward.
Zubaydah evidently wasn’t a top al Qaeda leader. Dan Coleman, one of the FBI’s leading experts on al Qaeda, said Zubaydah “knew very little about real operations, or strategy.” Moreover, Zubaydah was schizophrenic, according to Coleman. “This guy is insane, certifiable split personality.” Coleman’s views were echoed at the top levels of the CIA and were communicated to Bush and Cheney. But Bush scolded CIA director George Tenet, saying, “I said [Zubaydah] was important. You’re not going to let me lose face on this, are you?” Zubaydah’s minor role in al Qaeda and his apparent insanity were kept secret.
In response to the torture, Zubaydah told his interrogators about myriad terrorist targets al Qaeda had in its sights: the Brooklyn Bridge, the Statute of Liberty, shopping malls, banks, supermarkets, water systems, nuclear plants, and apartment buildings. Al Qaeda was close to building a crude nuclear bomb, Zubaydah reported. None of this was corroborated but the Bush gang reacted to each report zealously.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the government’s duty to provide criminal defendants with any evidence in the government’s possession that might tend to exonerate the defendant or impeach the prosecutor’s case. Zacarias Moussaoui tried to subpoena Zubaydah to testify at his trial. On May 9, 2003, Assistant U.S. Attorneys David Novak and David Raskin lied to U.S. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema, who presided over Moussaoui’s trial. When the judge asked “whether the interrogations are being recorded in any format”?, the U.S. Attorneys, evidently relying on information from the CIA, said “No.” This is obstruction of justice.
When Zubaydah and al-Nashiri go before the military commissions, they will undoubtedly raise their torture as a defense to whatever crimes they face. Yet the evidence of that torture has been destroyed by the government.
There was no way of knowing whether these tapes could have intelligence value in the future. Indeed, the government defied the 2003 and 2004 demands of the 9/11 Commission by failing to turn over the videotaped interrogations. Now the CIA is parsing words by claiming the commission never directly asked for videotapes. “We asked for every single thing they had,” commission co-chairman Thomas Kean said. “And then my vice chairman, Lee Hamilton, looked the director of the CIA in the face, and said, ‘Look, even if we haven’t asked for something, if it’s pertinent to our investigation, make it available to us.’” Hamilton said the CIA “clearly obstructed” the commission’s investigation.
At the same time the 9/11 Commission was denied the tapes, the ACLU filed Freedom of Information Act requests seeking records of the treatment of all detainees held in U.S. custody abroad since 9/11. When the government refused to comply with the FOIA requests, the ACLU sued in federal court in New York. On September 15, 2004, U.S. District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein ordered the CIA and other government agencies to “produce or identify” all requested documents within one month. They are still not forthcoming. The ACLU has filed a motion to hold the CIA in contempt of court for refusing to comply with Judge Hellerstein’s order.
When the destruction of the tapes became public, both the House and Senate intelligence committees opened investigations, and subpoenaed witnesses and documents to shed light on the matter. Attorney General Michael Mukasey refused to cooperate and tried to put the kabosh on the congressional probes, asking them to wait until he had finished his own internal investigation. But after criticism in the media, the CIA relented and agreed to produce documents and the testimony of acting CIA general counsel John Rizzo.
The decision to destroy the tapes was allegedly made by Jose A. Rodriguez Jr., who was chief of the Directorate of Operations, the CIA’s clandestine service. Although the House intelligence committee has subpoenaed Rodriguez, there is no indication his bosses will allow him to testify.
The Sunday Times (London) reported that Rodriguez may seek immunity from prosecution in exchange for testifying before the House intelligence committee. Rodriguez’s testimony could be explosive.
At least four top White House lawyers participated in discussions with the CIA between 2003 and 2005 about whether to destroy the videotapes. They included Alberto Gonzales, David Addington (Cheney’s former counsel, now his chief of staff), Harriet Miers, and John Bellinger (former senior attorney at the National Security Council). The New York Times quoted a former senior intelligence official as saying there was “vigorous sentiment” among some high White House officials to destroy the tapes.
Two former CIA officials, Vincent Cannistrano and Larry Johnson, think it highly unlikely Rodriguez made the decision to destroy the tapes on his own. George W. Bush “has no recollection” of hearing about the existence or destruction of the tapes before Hayden briefed him on December 13. Yet given Bush’s keen interest in Zubaydah’s interrogation, it seems more likely the President was involved with the decision to destroy the tapes.
During his Senate confirmation hearing, Michael Mukasey refused to opine about whether water boarding constitutes torture. Mukasey knew the Bush administration had admitted water boarding prisoners, and that torture is a war crime under the U.S. War Crimes Act. Mukasey was shielding his future bosses from criminal liability as war criminals. Now the Department of Justice, under Mukasey, is investigating the destruction of the tapes.
Justice Department regulations call for the appointment of an outside special counsel when (1) a criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted, (2) the investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department, and (3) under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter. When these three conditions are satisfied, the attorney general must select a special counsel from outside the government. (28 C.F.R. 600.1, 600.3 (2007).)
When he was a federal judge, Michael Mukasey issued the material witness warrant for Jose Padilla. The warrant was based partly on information from Abu Zubaydah. It is not clear whether Mukasey knew Zubaydah’s statements were obtained by torture. But since he issued the warrant, Mukasey has a real or apparent conflict of interest. He has said it is premature to appoint an outside special counsel. But like the Nixon administration, the Department of Justice cannot be trusted to investigate itself. Congress should be pressured to pass a new independent counsel statute.
Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and President of the National Lawyers Guild. Her newest book is Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law. You can visit her blog or see archived articles at www.marjoriecohn.com
It really does not matter what the evidence is or how high it goes. The democrats in congress do not have the courage to pressure the Bush/Cheney justice department (talk about an oxymoron) to prosecute. Nor do they have the courage to impeach Bush and Cheney.
My question to all you so-called progressives out there: Why the hell did you vote for the democrats in 2006?
They have sold you out, again. When will you learn?
Congress should issue a search warrant of the White House. I’ll bet Bush has a personal copy of those torture tapes for his own viewing pleasure.
How high does this go? HAAAAAAAAAAAAA Ha.
I was thinkng that this “scandal” might have been setup on purpose by the Bush Administration.
If the democrats don’t have the cajones (or the votes) to force the issue with the justice department, then this “scandal” creates a nice frame for the Bush administration. President Bush would love to have the national media focusing on terrorism related subjects.
Here again, people are still asking the wrong question. The question is not “HOW HIGH IT GOES” but “HOW BROAD IT IS”. Make no mistake, the Democratic Party Leadership, and the Congress leadership are equally complicit…. Bush, Clinton, Cheney, Pelosi, Rumsfeld, Reid, Wolfowitz……
Goes all the way to Israel
Slouching towards Bethlehem
W.B Yeats
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert.
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
It’s about time that we stop asking questions to which the answers are obvious and begin to develop tactics and strategies (and the courage to employ them) to take on a global dictatorship that formally began with the Congressional passing of the National Security Act in 1947 and the parallel signing of National Security Directive Number 1 by Harry S. Truman that same year.
To frame the issues as questions, as Cohn does, is to pretend that we don’t know what’s going on; or worse, we actually don’t know. There is nothing left to question if your eyes and hearts are open and you are awake and breathing.
Let’s get on with it.
“When the hideous photographs of torture and abuse emerged from Abu Ghraib…”
Now hold on - those photographs were all digital, via cell phone or d-camera. But we’re supposed to believe that the CIA used VIDEOTAPE? $40 BILLION/year and they’ve got the Betamax rolling? James friggin Bond with a camcorder from 1992?
And - okay, let’s assume the best the best intel agency in the world (cough) can do is VIDEOTAPE. What kind of CIA video director tapes HIS OWN SPIES as they TORTURE? What friggin spy film school did he go to? “Hey, spy dude, you just simulated death on a suspected evil doer - whatta you gonna do next?” “I’m goin to Disneyworld! Hi Mom!”
Hear that? That’s Karl Rove laughin his lyin ass off down Texas way…
Okay TJ, what do WE do, that we are not already doing? It’s up to Congress and they are having a Congressional hearing with Jose Rodriguez, the former head hog of the CIAs Special Ops group testifying in January. They had preliminary hearings last week and it looked bad for Bush and Cheney with the questions and comments from the Jusdicial Committee members.
We’ll see how far that goes, if Rodreguez spills the beans and he says he will. I sure do hope so, for if he does, I do believe the game will be over for the Bush Cartel. ___We’ll see.
We’re talking about a whole system that is failing us, not just the individuals. There are plenty of wannabes waiting in the political wings for their chance at replacing anyone stupid enough to get thrown out of the game. So replacing one or two individuals won’t change a thing. We need to change the entire kingdom, not just the king.
Hoa binh
frank1569,
Hilarious and astute post. I think there is one thing you are forgetting. The CIA does not have Steven Spielberg or Martin Scorsese to run the camera (maybe they do and we just do not know about it). Even though they get $40 billion/yr, these are not camera people. This is the CIA, and many of these people have difficulty operating a Polaroid camera, not to mention a Betamax. It does defy logic as you astutely point out for the CIA to tape a crime, its members are commiting! But I must say it does not surprise me that these people are using Betamax because it comes with the shortest instructions. Maybe they tried to hire a cameraperson but that person was to smart to see the SNAFU on the horizon. Nonetheless, Karl Rove most likely is laughing at the whole ordeal, as if he was attending a Keystone Cops performance.
I have asked this question before, but no one seems to want to address it, so I will ask, once again. Why would the CIA or whoever made the decision to destroy the tapes(which I believe there are still copies of) use protecting the identity of an agent as the criteria for their destruction? They did not get too excited over the exposure of Valerie Plame-Wilson,an acknowledged undercover agent…and her role was involved with WMD. Could there be a double standard?
peace,
st john
The CIA didn’t blow her cover, St. John. Cheney did. And you can bet your last dime that she and her husband have some very powerful friends in DC and she’s pissed. Never piss a woman off, ___ they know how to get even. Cheney and Rove may be Bush’s brains, but they may have gotten too smart. When people begin to cover lies, it usually turns to a lake of shit and Bush is now swimming in it.
keyinside blames “the Democrats” again. Well, you may notice that there are some people in Congress trying to do something with this, and they are all Democrats. But then, maybe you’d rather not notice that.
The reason this isn’t going anywhere fast is not “the Democrats.” It’s the media. The media sets the agenda, got behind the civil rights movement, turned against the war in Vietnam, made Watergate a national catharsis, turned against Carter after the Iranian revolution, told us Reagan was a jolly cowboy, sold us the “free market” and “free trade”, sold us the evil dictator Saddam and his defeat, our glorious high tech victory in 1991, said “Yessir Mr. President” after 9/11 and lined up where he told them to, ignored all available evidence until it decided the Iraq invasion was a mistake, but now tells us the “surge” is working.
After the Tet offensive, Walter Cronkite famously intoned that “the war in Vietnam cannot be won.” Lyndon Johnson famously said, “If I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost middle America.” Well, that wasn’t quite it. The thing was, if Johnson had lost Cronkite, the corporate bosses had lost control of their mass media hirelings, and that meant a brief flowering of free speech, at least for those with access, which lasted until sometime in the mid-1970s. We probably lost it because we were too stoned to notice they were taking it from us, but by the mid-1980s the lid was firmly on again, and they were welding it shut.
So, here’s all these stories about how the CIA tapes, the Attorneys scandal, torture itself, the NSA wiretaps, the Plame leak, WMD and al Qaeda lies, 9/11 coverups, etc. ad nauseam, demand investigation and make a solid case for impeachment.
Where is any of this in the mass media? Look at google or yahoo for an objective survey.
George W. Bush hasn’t lost “Cronkite” yet.
You nailed it NADER 2000, our “free press” has been purchased.
There’s another angle besides following up who knew about the tapes’ destruction. The quote from Thomas Kean indicates the 911 Commission made it clear to the CIA that those tapes were the sort of thing they were looking for, even if they didn’t know about them so as to be specific. Who decided to not disclose them? Who knew about that decision?
Nader2000
b-b-b-b-but the media!
Cry me a river. If the democratic leadership had any balls whatsoever, the media would be awash in these stories.
But they don’t.
“some democrats”
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Kucinich doesn’t count. He never did. He’s a minority within his own party.
But the guys who own the media own the Democrats too keyinside. They own it all, inluding us. However, there comes a time when the media cannot hide behind their owners. That time may be very near.
Hi KEM-I wanted to respond to your earlier response to me, and add an additional comment about the MSM. I did not say that the CIA blew Valerie’s cover. What I said was: “They did not get too excited over the exposure of Valerie Plame-Wilson, an acknowledged undercover agent…” Now, they are saying the tapes were destroyed to protect CIA operative identities. You can’t have it both ways, unless the media complies. What I think has to take place with the MSM and its owners is that we have to withdraw support from them by ignoring their publications and use alternative information sources. As long as the Internet remains relatively free and accessible, we can communicate and exchange information here. The Free Market does work to the extent that we work it. The supplementation of the corporations through tax incentives, etc can only last so long. As global trade advances and the barriers to that trade collapse of their own weight, the playing field is levelled. As someone said to me recently, we do not fight with our trading partners. We have to find a way to sit down and talk with them to work out issues of sustainability and human rights. We can only do this from a peaceful stance, not a war stance. The exposure of Truth here and elsewhere is a start. Keep opening doors and windows and allow the light and fresh air to circulate.
peace,
st john
KEM and Nader2000-
I guess the only choice is to vote for candidates who aren’t owned by corporations.
….hmmmmm……who could we turn to…..let’s see..
Oh yes- the Green Party! www.GP.org
First one to say “But they don’t have any chance of winning so I won’t vote for them” gets slapped with an organic trout.
Nader2000, why, when they are more or less the same, does the Democratic party take so very much more maligning than the republican scum in the CD threads? (Not so the articles.)
But in the threads it is to a point of wierdness: I pretty much see some republican loser w/ a dozen email accounts getting himself off.
I’ve read your posts. you have ralph’s #. the rnc is negotiating w/ him over the ‘08 run he is “considering”.
“burst your bubble?” wanna laugh, go to keyinside’s “homepage” where he shares his hopes and dreams w/ you. i mean he’s young (pictures too!) but scary….
these jackasses got it on w/ me over that pig nader until i shut them up w/ facts about his investmestments in Raytheon, General Dynamics, FMR & McDonalds.
I do believe John Edwards is the best choice by far KEYINSIDE. He has fought the big business boys and whipped their asses. They are scared of him and therfore that should tell us all something. If he wins the primary he may select Kucinich as a running mate, That of course is just a hoping guess. Check his record.
You may a well pick up one of those organic trout for my slaps. Sorry, not THIS year or NEXT, they just don’t have it together yet and that’s reality. Reality like history never lies, it’s the people who write flawed history and those who cannot accept reality who are incorrect.
Sometimes reality sux.
ST JOHN—once again you have said it best and clearest. Keep on keepin on. We have to change the paradigm from resisting, thus energizing, what we claim we DON’T want, to supporting and enegizing a vision of what we DO want.
Thus no more “anti-war movement,” but rather a Pro-Peace movement. Same with Justice, Truth, Compassion, We have to stop squandering our energy resisting, and put it into creating a reality we really want. ” What we resist persists.” That may be a big part of why Bush still appears so strong, in spite of the obviousness of his crimes. He is an energy trap that we keep feeding. Stop contributing the most valuable thing you have. Your attention and thus your valuable energy. Re-direct it to a positive vision of something you feel passionate about. IMAGINE!
Well, seeing as how I personally am not doing much to get Bush out of power, I think I’ll refrain from trying to figure out whether the media or the Democrats are more at fault and take another good, long, ugly look in the mirror.
barely human-from Cali, you bad mon. intellectuallizing w/o action is guilt provoking-
I read in CD how the poorest 56 million Americans survive on the same amount of resources the wealthiest 400 have effectively stolen. I’m sorry, earned by their hard work.
Could we get that poorest 50-60 million there to jog on up to DC for a weekend? How? Maybe we camp on that mall where MLK spoke and Dylan played. Can 60 million fit are there overnite campsite fees who does own that land woody guthrie?
I admit tho I don’t know how…..wanna chain ourselves to some gate and get arrested? I try not to get arrested. ideas welcome please…
There are photos and videos that the public is suppose to be able to see, but so far I have not seen them come out. They are terrible, but we must know what is being done in our name. These sick acts committed by our CIA and military must stop.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/14864
“‘The American public needs to understand we’re talking about rape and murder here. We’re not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience,’ Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina told reporters after Rumsfeld testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee. ‘We’re talking about rape and murder — and some very serious charges.’
“A report by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba on the abuse at the prison outside Baghdad says videotapes and photographs show naked detainees, and that groups of men were forced to masturbate while being photographed and videotaped. Taguba also found evidence of a ‘male MP guard having sex with a female detainee.’
“Rumsfeld told Congress the unrevealed photos and videos contain acts ‘that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman.’”
The military later screened some of the images for lawmakers, who said they showed, among other things, attack dogs snarling at cowed prisoners, Iraqi women forced to expose their breasts, and naked prisoners forced to have sex with each other.
In the same period, reporter Seymour Hersh, who helped uncover the scandal, said in a speech before an ACLU convention: “Some of the worse that happened that you don’t know about, ok? Videos, there are women there. Some of you may have read they were passing letters, communications out to their men … . The women were passing messages saying ‘Please come and kill me, because of what’s happened.’
“Basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys/children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. The worst about all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror it’s going to come out.”
I wish to know something of importance.
I understand that website, or E-mail petitions are absolutely worthless. __ Is that so? __ Not opinions ___ facts and if anyone can give references.
I can see where if one signs an E-mail or website petition, they must give their real name, maybe an address. Do I want to do that here?
If so, why does almost everyone here use a code name? Signing a petition would compromise the code name. How easy for someone to know who (Kathyodat for example) really is, and where he or she lives. I do hope that someone could and would answer those questions for me.
What are you afraid of?
MY real name:
-matti
P.S. Unless you use a Pseudonym and fake credit card or bank account with your ISP why would you think a “code name” would protect you from the big scary whatever it is?
polsci:
> “Nader2000, why, when they are more or less the same, does the Democratic party take so very much more maligning than the republican scum in the CD threads? (Not so the articles.)
> “But in the threads it is to a point of wierdness: I pretty much see some republican loser w/ a dozen email accounts getting himself off.”
I don’t think it’s the Rs. It’s members of the Green Party and various Red cults such as the ISO, WWP, RCP and so on. These people recruit from the pool of disaffected leftists, so their strategy is to attack the Democrats constantly for not being Left enough. That way they bring in just enough new people to balance out the ones who’ve finally burned out or grown up and seen the futility of whichever splinter group they’ve just given the last 10 years of their lives to.
Of course the Rs do support the Greens and Nader under the table, because these people are a big enough factor to do real damage on election day.
The commies are less important, except that their deliberate strategy of alienation is deeply poisonous to much of the idealism and energy that could otherwise be helping to move American politics in a positive direction.
“But Bush scolded CIA director George Tenet, saying, ‘I said [Zubaydah] was important. You’re not going to let me lose face on this, are you?’”
See in this administration, we don’t give a flying fork about truth, honesty, torture, obstruction of justice, false imprisonment, human rights or the constitution; the only thing that’s important to us is saving face.
If the Democrats don’t have the guts to impeach Bush/Cheney, they should at least summon the courage to impeach Jose Rodriguez. Would the administration refuse to allow him to testify in his own impeachment proceedings? Why not find out?
‘Morning Nader2000.
That makes sense. Thank you.
No, there is no “lesser evil,” for ex., Gore vs Bush, for so many CD posts; we’d have been no better off w/o bush than with?
Absolutes are dangerous and rarely if ever real.
Signed, A Relativist Marxist.
Zubaydah was valuable because he provided what Cheney calls “actionable intelligence.” The “intelligence” doesn’t need to be true, just “actionable” for Cheney’s nefarious purposes. The more outrageous and scary the lies Zubaydah made up, the better for Cheney and Bush.
9/11 attacks?
how Naive can you possibly be? just who attacked whom
why is it the only Live Camera were by non New York Television Station(s)? a city with 4 or 5 traffic helicopter(s)?
…Operation NorthWoods
…JFK
…U.S.S Liberty
…GULF OF TONKIN
wake up……
Save us, democrats, save us!!!!!!
Or, just cave to the neo-cons like you always do. So much easier just to be cowards…..
Really MATTI, is that your first or last name?
And your address?
The fact is, website and E-mail petitions are as worthless as used toilet paper and any who ask people to sign them have to be aware of that. So why do they want names that won’t ever be used on a petition? Now I do believe most of the bloggers here use a code name MATTI __ Why?
How high does the torure conspiracy go? It goes straight to Ralph Nader and the ISO!
ISO want to know what you’re talking about, but nonsense is O|< 2.
… where “O|< 2″ is the cryptic form of “OK too”
Keyinside,
What’s your suggestion - just stay with the repugs? No thanks, I’ve seen that before and choose to take my chances with the no Kahona group. Not great options either way but then again you get the government that you vote for 9Or in this case that was appointed by the Supremes!).