SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
senate intelligence committee
Jeffrey Sterling Completes One Year Of Unjust Prison Sentence
Jun 17, 2016
Yesterday, June 16th, marked one year since Jeffrey Sterling began his 3.5-year prison sentence for divulging classified information to a New York Times journalist, a crime he did not commit. One year, he was deprived of the freedom that so many of us take for granted every day; one year separated from his loving wife, his friends, and his family, and one year of wasted talent as a licensed attorney, a former CIA case officer fluent in Farsi, and a successful investigator who uncovered over 32 million dollars in healthcare fraud.
Today, we want to remind the American people that Jeffrey's conviction and sentence were unjust and renew our appeal to President Barack Obama to pardon him.
Why has he had to suffer such an injustice? Because the United States government wanted to punish Jeffrey for blowing the whistle and for fighting for his civil rights against the CIA?
Jeffrey is a beloved husband, a brother, a friend, and an honorable man who has consistently worked to keep our country safe. He was one of the few African Americans to work as a CIA case officer, and he was incredibly proud of this accomplishment. But he soon became disillusioned by a work environment characterized by racial disparity and was dismayed to learn that the government he worked for was shrouded in mistruths and secrecy.
The CIA planned to use a former Russian nuclear engineer to pass flawed designs to Iranian scientists, a program that was revealed in New York Times Journalist James Risen's book "State of War." Jeffrey had grave concerns about the mismanagement of this program and the potential harm to the citizens of our country, and so he used proper legal channels to inform the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
During Jeffrey's trial, the Department of Justice was unable to present any direct evidence proving that he divulged classified information to James Risen. To convict him, the DOJ relied solely on circumstantial evidence -- emails and telephone conversations -- to try to prove that Jeffrey was Risen's source. In the end, Jeffrey was severely punished for merely communicating with a journalist, which caused a public outcry from press freedom organizations like Reporters Without Borders.
How did the government justify that Jeffrey was their only suspect when over 90 additional individuals had access to the same classified information and could have easily leaked it to James Risen?
As Jeffrey repeatedly made clear throughout his trial, his relationship with Risen was related to his interest in Jeffrey's discrimination lawsuit against the CIA.
When Jeffrey was preparing for his first overseas post for the agency in Germany, his supervisor told him "we are concerned you would stick out as a big black guy speaking Farsi" and informed him that another person would be taking the assignment. When he filed an Equal Opportunity Employment complaint, the CIA fired him. Shortly afterward, he became the first African American to file a racial discrimination lawsuit against the CIA. Still, his suit was never allowed to go forward because the government claimed it would reveal "state secrets."
According to the United States government, Jeffrey then "retaliated" against the CIA by leaking classified information to James Risen. The moment that the administration felt there was an opportunity to incriminate him for fighting for his civil rights, every finger pointed to Jeffrey, and no amount of evidence or lack thereof could defy the verdict that followed.
Jeffrey's case drastically differs from that of former CIA Director General David Petraeus, who pleaded guilty to divulging huge amounts of classified information to his biographer and lying to an FBI agent, far more egregious acts than Jeffrey was accused of. Yet Petraeus was able to walk away with two years probation and a fine. Suppose one strips away the race, financial status, and political clout of each of these men and solely compares their alleged crimes. In that case, it is glaringly obvious that this was selective prosecution and sentencing.
Petraeus' treatment solidified the belief in this country that the white man is presumed to be innocent and can do no wrong, and at worst, receives a slap on the wrist, while the black man is guilty until proven innocent and belongs behind bars. Never in the history of this nation has there been a black person who had the courage to fight racial discrimination in the CIA, and a black man in the White House that would allow him to go to jail unjustly.
Justice must be served for this mockery of the truth. Jeffrey is innocent and always has been. Our appeal to the President to pardon Jeffrey is a request for the acknowledgment of this undeniable injustice done to Jeffrey and amends to the wrongful conviction that changed our lives forever. Please don't forget him; he serves time for a crime he didn't commit.
To learn more about Jeffrey's case, click here. To sign the petition asking President Obama to pardon him, click here.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Victims File Suit Against CIA Torture Architects for 'Systemic Brutality'
Psychologists James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, who thus far escaped accountability, face charges of 'cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment; non-consensual human experimentation; and war crimes.'
Oct 13, 2015
The two psychologists credited with creating the brutal, post-9/11 Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) torture regime are being sued by three victims of their program on charges that include "human experimentation" and "war crimes."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on Tuesday filed the suit against CIA contractors James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen on behalf of torture survivors Suleiman Abdullah Salim and Mohamed Ahmed Ben Soud, as well as the family of Gul Rahman, who died of hypothermia in his cell as a result of the torture he endured.
The suit, which is the first to rely on the findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee report on CIA torture, charges Mitchell and Jessen under the Alien Tort Statute for "their commission of torture, cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment; non-consensual human experimentation; and war crimes," all of which violate international law.
The pair, both former U.S. military psychologists, earned more than $80 million for "designing, implementing, and personally administering" the program, which employed "a pseudo-scientific theory of countering resistance that justified the use of torture" that was based on studies in which researchers "taught dogs 'helplessness' by subjecting them to uncontrollable pain," according to the suit.
"These psychologists devised and supervised an experiment to degrade human beings and break their bodies and minds," said Dror Ladin, a staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. "It was cruel and unethical, and it violated a prohibition against human experimentation that has been in place since World War II."
In a lengthy report, the ACLU describes each plaintiff's journey.
After being abducted by CIA and Kenyan agents in Somalia, Suleiman Abdullah, a newlywed fisherman from Tanzania, was subjected to "an incessant barrage of torture techniques," including being forced to listen to pounding music, doused with ice-cold water, beaten, hung from a metal rod, chained into stress positions "for days at a time," starved, and sleep deprived. This went on for over a month and was continually interspersed with "terrifying interrogation sessions in which he was grilled about what he was doing in Somalia and the names of people, all but one of whom he'd never heard of."
Held for over five years without charge and moved numerous times, Abdullah was eventually sent home to Zanzibar "with a document confirming he posed no threat to the United States." He continues to suffer from flashbacks and physical pain and has "become a shell of himself."
Mohamed Ben Soud was captured in April 2003 during a joint U.S.-Pakistani raid on his home in Pakistan, where he and his wife moved after fleeing the Gaddafi regime in Libya. Ben Soud said that Mitchell even "supervised the proceedings" at one of his water torture sessions.
Describing Ben Soud's ordeal, the ACLU writes:
The course of Mohamed's torture adhered closely to the "procedures" the CIA laid out in a 2004 memo to the Justice Department. Even before arriving at COBALT, [a CIA prison in Afghanistan] Mohamed was subjected to "conditioning" procedures designed to cause terror and vulnerability. He was rendered to COBALT hooded, handcuffed, and shackled. When he arrived, an American woman told him he was a prisoner of the CIA, that human rights ended on September 11, and that no laws applied in the prison.
Quickly, his torture escalated. For much of the next year, CIA personnel kept Mohamed naked and chained to the wall in one of three painful stress positions designed to keep him awake. He was held in complete isolation in a dungeon-like cell, starved, with no bed, blanket, or light. A bucket served as his toilet. Ear-splitting music pounded constantly. The stench was unbearable. He was kept naked for weeks. He wasn't permitted to wash for five months.
According to the report, the torture regime designed and implemented by Mitchell and Jessen "ensnared at least 119 men, and killed at least one--a man named Gul Rahman who died in November 2002 of hypothermia after being tortured and left half naked, chained to the wall of a freezing-cold cell."
Gul's family has never been formally notified of his death, nor has his body been returned to them for a dignified burial, the ACLU states. Further, no one has been held accountable for his murder. But the report notes, "An unnamed CIA officer who was trained by Jessen and who tortured Rahman up until the day before he was found dead, however, later received a $2,500 bonus for 'consistently superior work.'"
The ACLU charges that the theories devised by Mitchell and Jessen and employed by the CIA "had never been scientifically tested because such trials would violate human experimentation bans established after Nazi experiments and atrocities during World War II." Yet, they were the basis of "some of the worst systematic brutality ever inflicted on detainees in modern American history."
Despite last year's release of the Senate Torture Report, the government has prosecuted only a handful of low-level soldiers and one CIA contractor for prisoner abuse. Meanwhile, the architects of the CIA's torture program, which include Mitchell and Jessen, have escaped any form of accountability.
Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) issued a statement saying they welcomed the federal lawsuit as "a landmark step toward accountability" and urged the U.S. Department to follow suit and criminally "investigate and prosecute all those responsible for torture, including health professionals."
In the wake of the Senate report, the group strongly criticized Mitchell and Jessen for betraying "the most fundamental duty of the healing professions."
In Tuesday's statement, Donna McKay, PHR's executive director, said: "Psychologists have an ethical responsibility to 'do no harm,' but Mitchell and Jessen's actions rank among the worst medical crimes in U.S. history."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Would Jeffrey Sterling Be in Prison If He Were White?
Jun 25, 2015
Last week CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling went to prison. If he were white, he probably wouldn't be there.
Sterling was one of the CIA's few African-American case officers, and he became the first to file a racial discrimination lawsuit against the agency. That happened shortly before the CIA fired him in late 2001. The official in Langley who did the firing face-to-face was John Brennan, now the CIA's director and a close adviser to President Obama.
Five months ago, in court, prosecutors kept claiming that Sterling's pursuit of the racial bias lawsuit showed a key "motive" for providing classified information to journalist James Risen. The government's case at the highly problematic trial was built entirely on circumstantial evidence. Lacking anything more, the prosecution hammered on ostensible motives, telling the jury that Sterling's "anger," "bitterness" and "selfishness" had caused him to reveal CIA secrets.
But the history of Sterling's conflicts with the CIA has involved a pattern of top-down retaliation. Sterling became a problem for high-ranking officials, who surely did not like the bad publicity that his unprecedented lawsuit generated. And Sterling caused further hostility in high places when, in the spring of 2003, he went through channels to tell Senate Intelligence Committee staffers of his concerns about the CIA's reckless Operation Merlin, which had given Iran some flawed design information for a nuclear weapons component.
Among the U.S. government's advantages at the trial last winter was the fact that the jury did not include a single African American. And it was drawn from a jury pool imbued with the CIA-friendly company town atmosphere of Northern Virginia.
Sterling's long struggle against institutionalized racism is far from over. It continues as he pursues a legal appeal. He's in prison near Denver, nearly 900 miles from his home in the St. Louis area, making it very difficult for his wife, Holly, to visit.
Last week, as Sterling headed to Colorado, journalist Kevin Gosztola wrote an illuminating piece that indicated the federal Bureau of Prisons has engaged in retaliation by placing Sterling in a prison so far from home. Gosztola concluded: "There really is no accountability for BOP officials who inappropriately designate inmates for prisons far away from their families."
With the government eager to isolate Jeffrey Sterling, it's important for him to hear from people who wish him well. Before going to prison, Sterling could see many warmly supportive comments online, posted by contributors to the Sterling Family Fund and signers of the petition that urged the Justice Department to drop all charges against him. Now he can get postal mail at: Jeffrey Sterling, 38338-044, FCI Englewood, Federal Correctional Institution, 9595 West Quincy Ave., Littleton, CO 80123.
(Sterling can receive only letters and cards. "All incoming correspondence is reviewed," the Sterling Family Fund notes. "It is important that all content is of an uplifting nature as any disparaging comments about the government, the trial or any peoples involved will have negative consequences for Jeffrey.")
While it's vital that Sterling hear from well-wishers, it's also crucial that the public hear from him. "The Invisible Man: CIA Whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling," released the day after he was sentenced in mid-May, made it possible for the public to hear his voice. The short documentary (which I produced for ExposeFacts) was directed by Oscar nominee Judith Ehrlich.
More recently, journalist Peter Maass did a fine job with an extensive article, "How Jeffrey Sterling Took on the CIA -- and Lost Everything."
It should be unacceptable that racism helped the government to put Jeffrey Sterling in prison.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular