OT - The Tapes Are Missing

CIA destroys torture tapes
by Joe Kay
8 December 2007

The revelation that the Central Intelligence Agency destroyed at least
two video tapes depicting the torture of prisoners held by the United
States underscores the brazen criminality of the Bush administration.
Aside from the torture itself, the elimination of evidence of brutal
interrogation exposes top CIA and government officials to obstruction
of justice charges.

In an article published on Friday, the New York Times cites several
unnamed current and former government officials in reporting that "at
least two videotapes" were destroyed. The tapes showed the 2002
interrogation of two prisoners, one of whom was Abu Zubaydah,
considered a top member of Al Qaeda. The other individual was not
named.

Although the government has never officially acknowledged it,
Zubaydah, captured by the CIA in March 2002, was subjected to water-
boarding, a form of torture involving the near drowning and
suffocation of the prisoner. One can only assume that the tapes depict
water-boarding or worse forms of torture.

The existence and destruction of the tapes was first revealed on
Thursday by CIA Director Michael Hayden in a letter to CIA employees.
Hayden issued the letter only after the government was informed by the
New York Times Wednesday that the newspaper planned to publish an
article on the topic.

Hayden's letter attempts to create a rationale for what was clearly a
move to hide the government's actions from American and world public
opinion and destroy evidence of criminal activity by CIA operatives
and government officials, up to and including President Bush.

As the CIA well knew, if the tapes had become public--especially in the
aftermath of the Abu Ghraib revelations--they would have evoked a wave
of shock and revulsion in the United States and around the world, and
confirmed that Abu Ghraib, far from an aberration, was the outcome of
US government policy.

Hayden made the improbable claim that the tapes were destroyed to
protect CIA interrogators from retaliation by Al Qaeda. He wrote in
his letter that the CIA halted the practice of taping interrogations
in 2002, after only a few recordings had been made.

The Times reported that the tapes were destroyed "in part because
officers were concerned that video showing harsh interrogation methods
could expose agency officials to legal risks, several officials said."

If this statement is true, it is clear evidence of obstruction of
justice. The officials also "said that CIA officers had judged that
the release of photos or videos depicting his interrogation would
provoke a strong reaction." That is, the destruction involved a
conspiracy to prevent the population from learning of the actions of
the American government.

The tapes were destroyed in late 2005, as the extent of the CIA
program of abusive interrogations was first coming to public light. On
November 2, 2005, the Washington Post published the first report on
the CIA interrogation program overseas. Subsequent reports detailed
the techniques used, and on November 18, ABC News reported that one of
these techniques was water-boarding. ABC reported on December 5, 2005
that one of the prisoners involved in the program was Zubaydah, and
that he had been held in a CIA prison in Thailand.

The destruction of the tapes also took place in the context of the
trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, accused of conspiring in the September 11
attacks. Moussaoui's lawyers wanted to review any videotapes of
interrogations of Al Qaeda members in order to demonstrate that
Moussaoui was not involved in plans for the attacks.

In 2003 and again in 2005, US District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema
ordered the prosecutors to disclose whether any interrogations had
been recorded, but the government refused to comply. On November 3,
2005, Brinkema asked about videotapes of specific interrogations. On
November 14, the government reported that it did not have any tapes of
these interrogations.

It is not clear exactly when the tapes were destroyed. According to
the Washington Post, however, the destruction came after the November
14 response to Brinkema. According a CIA spokesman, the videotapes
destroyed were not among those specifically requested by Brinkema.

Last month, the government acknowledged that it had in its possession
two videotapes and one audiotape that it had failed to report in 2005,
but again did not mention the video tapes that it had destroyed. The
revelation of the destroyed tapes is only the latest in a pattern of
government misconduct in the prosecution of Moussaoui.

There were several other investigations and lawsuits ongoing at the
time the tapes were destroyed. Among these was a Freedom of
Information request brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. In
August 2004, a judge ordered the government to turn over all records
relating to interrogation or explain why the records could not be
released.

Before being destroyed, the tapes were also withheld from the
commission established by Bush administration and Congress to
investigate the attacks of September 11. The 9/11 Commission issued
its final report in 2004, one year before the tapes were destroyed,
but it was never informed of their existence.

The Times quotes Philip Zelikow, who served as executive director of
the commission, as saying, "The commission did formally request
material of this kind from all relevant agencies, and the commission
was assured that we had received all the material responsive to our
request. No tapes were acknowledged or turned over, nor was the
commission provided with any transcript prepared for recordings."

The Times goes on to report, "Daniel Marcus, a law professor at
American University who served as general counsel for the Sept. 11
commission and was involved in the discussion about interviews with
Qaeda leaders, said he had heard nothing about any tapes being
destroyed. If the tapes were destroyed, he said, 'it's a big deal,
it's a very big deal,' because it could amount to obstruction of
justice to withhold evidence being sought in a criminal or fact-
finding investigation."

The 9/11 Commission was from the beginning intended as a whitewash of
government inaction and likely foreknowledge of the terrorist attacks.
The fact that the commission was denied access to interviews of an
individual who was purportedly a close associate of Osama bin Laden
only underscores the fraudulence of its findings.

In addition to depicting torture, it is possible that the
interrogation of Zubaydah included information contradicting the
official story of September 11. This would explain why no transcript
of the interrogation was provided to the commission.

In his letter to CIA employees, Hayden wrote: "Beyond their lack of
intelligence value--as interrogation sessions had already been
exhaustively detailed in written channels--and the absence of any legal
or internal reasons to kept them, the tapes posed a serious security
risk. Were they ever to leak, they would permit identification of your
CIA colleagues who had served in the program, exposing them and their
families to retaliation from Al Qaeda and its sympathizers."

These are flat-out lies. The suggestion that there was no reason to
keep the tapes is absurd, as Zubaydah was at the time under US custody
and potentially faced some form of trial or military judicial
proceeding. He has since been transferred to Guantánamo Bay and may be
brought before a military commission. Videotapes of his interrogation
would obviously be one of the most critical pieces of evidence in such
proceedings.

As for the question of security, it would be a simple matter to
obscure the identity of the interrogators in any videotape, if this
were really the government's concern. According to Hayden's logic, the
CIA would have to destroy any document in its possession identifying
CIA interrogators, to prevent them from being leaked.

The threadbare character of Hayden's attempt to justify the tapes'
destruction only serves to highlight the criminal intentions of the
government.

Complicity of the Democratic Party

A central question emerges from these revelations: Who knew about the
tapes and their destruction, and when did they know it? The answer to
this question points to the complicity of the entire political
establishment in the cover-up of torture.

In his letter, Hayden declared, "The decision to destroy the tapes was
made within CIA itself." Hayden's claim that the decision to eliminate
the evidence was entirely internal to the CIA is almost certainly a
lie. It is highly unlikely that the tapes were destroyed without the
knowledge and approval of top administration officials.

According to the New York Times, the decision was made by Jose
Rodriguez--a long-time CIA operative who at the time occupied the high-
ranking position of head of the Directorate of Operations, in charge
of clandestine and covert actions. Until shortly before his retirement
in September, Rodriguez's identity was classified.

The Times report quotes "two former intelligence officials" as saying
that then-CIA director Porter Goss--Rodriguez's direct superior--was not
told of the decision and was angered when he learned of the tapes'
destruction.

For his part, Bush was quick to issue a carefully hedged denial of
knowledge. White House spokesman Dana Perino said on Friday that Bush
"has no recollection of being made aware of the tapes or their
destruction before yesterday."

The CIA has said that it received direct authorization to use the
methods employed in the videos, though the form of this authorization
has never been released to the public. This position was reiterated by
Hayden on Wednesday, when he wrote in his letter, "Before [the
interrogation procedures] were used, they were reviewed and approved
by the Department of Justice and by other elements of the Executive
Branch."

This means that ultimate responsibility for any actions depicted in
the videos lies with Bush, Cheney, former Attorney General John
Ashcroft and others in the administration. In this sense, the videos
are more damaging even than the photographs of torture at Abu Ghraib,
which the government could claim was the unauthorized behavior of a
few individuals.

Bush has repeatedly declared that the US does not "torture," but the
tapes would provide incontrovertible proof that it does.

Hayden also insisted, "The leaders of our oversight committees in
Congress were informed of the videos years ago and of the Agency's
intention to dispose of the material." This would include the ranking
members of the Senate and House intelligence committees at the time,
Democratic Representative Jane Harman and Senator Jay Rockefeller, and
the Republican chairmen, Representative Pete Hokestra and Senator Pat
Roberts.

A spokesman Hoekstra denied any knowledge of the tapes, but remarks
from Harman and Rockefeller confirm Hayden's account.

The Associated Press reported that Harman was "one of only four
members of Congress informed of the tapes' existence," and cited her
as saying she "objected to the destruction when informed of it in
2003."

"I told the CIA that destroying videotapes of interrogations was a bad
idea and urged them in writing not to do it," Harman said.

This is a dodge. Harman, and therefore the Democratic Party, knew of
the tapes in 2003, but decided not to inform the American people or do
anything to expose the government's policy of torture. This knowledge
was withheld from the American people throughout the Abu Ghraib
scandal, which began in 2004. The tapes' existence was known by
leading Democrats two years before the American people were first made
aware that the US government had used water-boarding.

The AP goes on to report, "While key lawmakers were briefed on the
CIA's intention to destroy the tapes, they were not notified two years
later when the spy agency went through with the plan." It reports that
Rockefeller "only learned of the tapes' destruction in November 2006."

Even if one were to accept this account as true, it means that the
Democrats have known for over a year that these tapes were destroyed
but decided to say nothing about it.

In September 2006, Rockefeller voted, along with 11 other Democrats in
the Senate, for the Military Commissions Act. Both that act and the
Detainee Treatment Act, passed in December 2005, included provisions
shielding CIA operatives and Bush administration officials from
prosecution for torture and other war crimes.

From the beginning of the Bush administration, the Democratic Party
has played a critical role in facilitating the massive attack on
democratic rights and legal constraints. It has helped confirm the
nomination of all the administration officials who have spearheaded a
policy of torture--including Hayden and, most recently, Attorney
General Michael Mukasey, who was approved by a Democratic-controlled
Senate despite his refusal to denounce water-boarding as torture.

The complicity of the Democrats in covering up the existence and
destruction of the videotapes means that any investigation will be a
whitewash. On Friday, Rockefeller said the Senate Intelligence
Committee would "review the full history and chronology of the tapes,
how they were used and the reasons for destroying them, and any
communication about them that was provided to the courts and
Congress." Senator Edward Kennedy called on the Justice Department--
headed by Mukasey--to open an investigation.

The Democrats are now pushing for a bill that would bar the CIA from
using "enhanced interrogation techniques," knowing full well that if
passed--which appears unlikely--it will simply be vetoed by Bush.

By itself, the destruction of the CIA torture tapes constitutes a
sufficient basis for impeachment of top government officials. It comes
on top of revelations of massive domestic spying and illegality. It
was done by a government that routinely violates and ignores laws,
launches illegal wars of aggression, and conspires against the
democratic rights of the American people.

But the Democratic leadership has resolutely, since winning control of
both houses of Congress over a year ago, ruled out any impeachment
investigation. No serious hearings or investigations have been carried
out into the Bush administration's torture program and other brazen
violations of American and international law under the Democratic
Congress.

There may be fall-out from the destruction of the videos. Some lower-
level individuals may be made fall guys for the White House and the
CIA. But the Bush administration is counting with good reason on the
Democrats to keep things under control.

This new revelation underscores the lawless character of the clique
around Bush and the immense dangers it represents to the democratic
rights of the people. It also highlights the Democratic Party's lack
of any serious commitment to the defense of democratic rights.
.

Relevant Pages

  • OT - Bush now officially a criminal
    ... CIA destroyed tapes despite court order By MATT APUZZO, ... videotapes that revealed some of its harshest interrogation tactics. ... aware of their obligation not to destroy evidence that may be relevant ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)
  • Re: OT - Bush now officially a criminal
    ... CIA destroyed tapes despite court order By MATT APUZZO, ... aware of their obligation not to destroy evidence that may be relevant ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)
  • CIA Destroyed Videos of Terrorist Milk & Cookie Questioning, Oops...
    ... The CIA videotaped its interrogations of two top terror suspects in 2002 and destroyed the tapes three years later out of fear they would leak to the public and compromise the identities of U.S. questioners, the director of the agency told employees Thursday. ... Hayden said House and Senate intelligence committee leaders were informed of the existence of the tapes and the CIA's intention to destroy them. ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: CIA destroys evidence...
    ... The justification (which somehow the CIA thinks is legally valid) is that destroying the tapes will protect CIA operatives from prosecution. ... Do you have any evidence whatsoever that any of this torture or destruction of tapes showing the torture have prevented any 9/11's? ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: CIA destroys evidence...
    ... video tapes of CIA operatives torturing prisoners? ... tapes will protect CIA operatives from prosecution. ... I could not care less about the CIA destroying tapes. ... Do you have any evidence whatsoever that any of this torture or destruction ...
    (soc.retirement)