Robert Baer: CIA sources say the interrogation tapes' images were "horrific"

[sabra]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1983613,00.html?hpt=T2

Why Were CIA Interrogation Tapes Destroyed?
By Robert Baer


<snip>

What we know to be fact is that in 2005, the then-head of the CIA's clandestine service, Jose Rodriguez, ordered the destruction of 92 videotapes of the interrogation in Thailand of two al-Qaeda suspects. The tapes were then destroyed, but that's where the trail ends. We can only guess whether Rodriguez acted on his own authority or on the orders of a higher-up. And then there's the question of why the tapes were destroyed. Did the CIA want to destroy graphic evidence of sleep-deprivation or waterboarding? They were interrogation methods approved by the Department of Justice in memos sent to the CIA, and therefore shouldn't have been deemed a legal problem. The closest thing we come to answer is an internal CIA e-mail released last Thursday, in which an unidentified CIA officer writes that Rodriguez decided to destroy the tapes because they made the CIA "look horrible; it would be devastating to us."

But was Rodriguez acting on his own, or following orders? Rodriguez's lawyer said his client had cleared the decision up and down the CIA's chain of command, even notifying Congress. The CIA director at the time, Porter Goss, denies it, saying he never approved the decision to destroy the tapes. But in one e-mail an unidentified CIA official writes that Goss had approved the tapes' destruction — but only after the fact. The CIA's acting General Counsel at the time, John Rizzo, also denies he knew of the decision, and says he was informed only after the tapes' destruction.

...

I haven't been able to clear up the mystery either, beyond the fact that a former CIA officer aware of the details of the 2002 interrogation of the two al-Qaeda suspects told me that the tapes' images were "horrific." He believes that although the interrogations fell within the guidelines provided by the Department of Justice, if the public ever saw them, it would conclude that "enhanced interrogation" is just another name for torture.

[FiveGoodMen]

1. K&R

[secondwind]

2. kicked

[HereSince1628]

3. the public...would conclude..."enhanced interrogation" is...torture

NO SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[glitch]

22. The public has always concluded it, it's the corporate media and the people they stooge for

who won't admit it. Even the immoral pro-torture public admit what it is. Claims otherwise fool no one, they just provide the monsters a thin human mask.

[gratuitous]

4. Destruction of evidence is by far a far lesser offense

Than crimes against humanity. I'm so old, I remember when the United States at least paid lip service to honoring the rule of law and in opposition to torture. But 9/11 changed so much, why not our nation's commitment to humanity? Better to torture a bunch of people than feel scared, isn't it?

[chill_wind]

14. Crimes against humanity.

Yes. We used those words a lot during the Bush admin.

And now our government chooses to continue to protect and harbor those that committed them.
How did this happen?

[noise]

17. A sense of bipartisanship

was considered more important than the integrity of the government.

Warped priorities explain how this happened.

[FiveGoodMen]

28. Which is another way of saying that 'our' guys were never on our side.

[Rex]

5. Oh we already know it is torture, the only people who argue against

it are the Tea Baggers.

[pinboy3niner]

6. K&R

[Vinnie From Indy]

7. Funny how there is almost zero discussion of the detainees that had their

interrogations "enhanced" to the point of death. Yet another giant elephant in the room in regard to the carnage of the GW Bush regime. The Obama Admin. bears heavy responsibility as well for their current positions and efforts in regard to detainees as well as the notion that the President can engage in extrajudicial killings of American citizens with no review.

Millions of Americans are not fooled by the 24/7 diet of lies, distraction and irrelevance fed to us by the propaganda pimps in the mainstream media.

[malaise]

8. Sadly more millions do not give a flying fugg

They do not care.

[ljm2002]

10. THANK YOU for pointing that out!!!!!

Regardless of what one thinks of the "enhanced interrogation techniques" and whether they were torture (which of course, they were) -- well when someone dies due to their treatment, then they have been tortured by definition with no ambiguity whatsoever. And yet we never, ever hear those cases discussed.

Because the public might, you know, suddenly get a clue about what is really being discussed here.

[defendandprotect]

33. Many do care -- and many don't know how nation is betrayed by CIA ...

misplaced "trust" -- !!

[Soylent Brice]

9. K&R

[chill_wind]

11. There will be no "retribution"..

as we learned a whole year ago. And even earlier, with Panetta's confirmation.

I asked Emanuel: "The president has ruled out prosecution for CIA officials who believed they were following the law. Does he believe that the officials who devised the policies should be immune from prosecution?"

"He believes that, look, as you saw in that statement he wrote, let's just take a step back. He came up with this and worked on this for about four weeks. Wrote that statement Wednesday night after he had made his decision and dictated what he wanted to see. And Thursday morning I saw him in the office, he was still editing it. He believes that people in good faith were operating with the guidance they were provided," Emanuel said.

What about those who devised the policy, I asked?

"Yeah, but those who devised the policy, he believes that they were, should not be prosecuted either," Emanuel said.

"And it's not the place that we go, and as he said in that letter, and I would really recommend people look at the full statement, not the letter, the statement, and that second paragraph: "This is not a time for retribution. It's a time for reflection. It's not a time to use our energy and our time in looking back and in a sense of anger and retribution.' We have a lot to do to protect America. But what people need to know? This practice and technique, we don't use anymore. We banned it."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/04/obama-adminis-1.html

[Drops_not_Dope]

21. You Lie

..and I'm not talking about you chill_wind.

[RandomThoughts]

37. I think there was retribution.

Just a guess, but erasing the tapes probably has a broader meaning then just digital information.

[wiggs]

12. Why can't we give him immunity and ask him what was in the tapes? nt

[noise]

15. We have a pretty good idea

from the OLC memos what the tapes would depict--torture.

The question that remains unanswered is WTF was the point of the whole thing. One notes how we have been lectured for years that the people involved in all this BS are highly patriotic and thus it would be unjust to pursue investigations. And we were told that delving into the torture program would be very dangerous as it would distract the intelligence community from their work of protecting the country. With all that patriotism and dedication is it not strange that nobody can tell the truth about what happened? Instead they destroyed the videotapes. Hid behind national security classification laws. Intimidated anyone who called for investigations.

I am reminded of Obama's statement that reopening the anthrax investigation would undermine public trust in the FBI. I guess he feels the same way about the CIA and torture. Like many citizens I was hopeful that shallow, fake photo op politics would finally end when Bush left office. Sadly it seems that Obama also believes that false perception trumps reality.

[lonestarnot]

13. K & R

[EFerrari]

16. It's NOT over:. "Afghan Prisoners Detail Torture, Abuse at Bagram Prison"

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8161580

[Solly Mack]

18. K/R

Shakes head

[whathehell]

19. Would this have anything to do with the truly nauseating reports

of the rape of children?

[defendandprotect]

34. When America rapes . . .!!!

[EnlightenedOne]

20. This is what you get under a "christian" Republican President

Why don't the "christian" teabaggers care about that?

[rasputin1952]

24. I don't think religion has anything to do with this...

Every government has entities like this that act with unbridled cruelty. Whether the leaders of a government claim to be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Jain, agnostic atheist or any thing else...there are clandestine services to that government that act above both the law and moral standards.

The notion this is somehow a "christian" thing is absurd. Where was the "christian" in Hitler, Stalin Pol Pot? And that's just the 20th Century, where was the "christianity" under numerous Muslim controlled nations that found torture and abuse the "norm", or the Romans, the Greeks, the Picts, the Visgoths, the Babylonians, or any other society?

The {individuals{/i} who perpetrate and carry out these horrors are top be taken to task, not their alleged religion. As much as I despise bush/cheney, I can't recall any point where either of them said such situations were being carried out because they were some kind of "Christian value".

[EnlightenedOne]

27. I was being facetious

Remember all the right wingers who always claimed that God put Bush in the White House? This was for them.

[rasputin1952]

30. ...

;)

[rasputin1952]

23. I found this line interesting...

"...because they made the CIA "look horrible; it would be devastating to us."

I can think of very few times, if any, where the CIA didn't "look horrible". I can't be sure of any successes I've heard of publicly, in virtually every case, the CIA has come out looking like knuckle-dragging oafs; a sort of, "Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight" under Federal License.

Every other Federal Aspect has at least some successes, the legacy of the CIA, at least publicly, is one of incredible failure and remarkable stupidity.

[defendandprotect]

26. JFK was right . . . CIA should have been torn into pieces and blown away with the wind ....

[rasputin1952]

31. I have always wondered why, as with J Edgar Hoover, they were allowed

to get away with so much.

And there will always be the thought that one of the reasons JFK was torn to pieces and blown away with the wind...well, I don't wan to sound like a CT nut...but...:(

[defendandprotect]

32. Secrecy and betrayal of presidents --

Hoover evidently had black mail info on everyone in Congress -- Eleanor Roosevelt

comment on that calling them a "Gestapo" --

Sen. Hale Boggs -- if you search that you should get an interesting read.

But evidently James Jesus Angleton/CIA had blackmail info on Hoover -- think he got it from Mafia --

or they described it to him. Having to do with Hoover/Clyde Tolson homosexual relationship.

It seems at some point that JFK -- after being betrayed by Allen Dulles/CIA at Bay of Pigs --

began looking into things and probably discovered "Operation Paperclip" which under Dulles

brought in tens of thousands of Nazis into America after WWII -- including families -- and Dulles

used them to FOUND the CIA -- and funneled others into FBI -- and NASA/Werner Von Braun -- and

other agencies of government. I remember that JFK evidently had a huge disagreement with

Von Braun re Braun's desire to use nuclear fuel for the space program.

Fletcher Prouty who's written quite a few interesting books talks about the betrayal of Ike by

CIA -- that Ike would be talking PEACE to the military/CIA and Ike would be ignored.

Evidently, that's how the U2 incident happened -- Ike gave instructions for all U2 flights to

be grounded months before the Paris Peace Summit --

It was sent up anyway -- including Gary Powers relates with many documents which weren't supposed

to be on the plane!

On and on --

And, with violence -- the only way the right can rise is with violence -- assassination --


Sad time in '63 -- and much more right wing political violence after that, as well.


:)

[rasputin1952]

35. The existence of clandestine operations depends upon...

how much information can be gained to ensure it's survival. While information about external threats can be taken many ways, the first line of business to maintain "life" for the entity. In the case of the CIA, anyone outside of the "Company" is considered a "threat" to it's existence. Like Hoover, the CIA built dossiers on many American citizens, particularly those who could possibly dissolve it.

The CIA, FBI, NSA,and now Homeland Security all depend on how they can manipulate damaging information., It would take a remarkably brave individual to expose them for what they are and demand dissolution. An inept bunch to be sure, at least as far as the public is allowed to know, they have messed up so many times, it boggles the mind that they still exist. Of course, they may keep any "wins" under cover, using failure as a ploy to avoid exposing what works. But IMO, they have done little good for the country as a whole, and a lot of damage. Keeping up their attempts at "purveying democracy" and shoring up RW killing machines has done nothing but ensure scorn on us because of their "beyond the law" ways. Oliver North is another prime example of their stupidity on parade.

[defendandprotect]

25. 92 tapes . . . I'd like to see the record of who in government has actually seen them . . .

[Supersedeas]

29. K and attempted R

[Blue_Tires]

36. bookmarked