Pretty, pretty pleeeease with sugar on it!!!

Please send this to your Congressperson now:

Also, thanks to everyone at FireDogLake for all the help driving activism today.This is sick, and needs treatment. I prescribe impeachment immediately.I find it pathetic that this country is so biased against Muslims that stating a fact is a smear.Why isn't our news media covering the news? Congress needs to investigate the FCC.

CIA photos 'show UK Guantanamo detainee was tortured'
By Robert Verkaik, Law Editor
Published: 10 December 2007

Lawyers for a British resident who the US government refuses to release from Guantanamo Bay have identified the existence of photographs taken by CIA agents that they say show their client suffered horrific injuries under torture.

The photographic evidence will be vital to clear Binyam Mohammed, 27, who the Americans want to bring before a Military Commission on charges of terrorism, say his lawyers.

Last week it emerged that Britain had negotiated the release of four detainees who have British residence status but Mr Mohammed, who speaks with a London accent, and at least three others are being held back.

In a letter sent to the Foreign Secretary David Miliband, Britain is urged to ask the US to stop the CIA destroying the pictures.

Clive Stafford-Smith, the legal director of Reprieve representing Mr Mohammed, said that he also knows the identity of the agents who were present when his client was allegedly beaten and tortured.

Writing to Mr Miliband, he said: "Given the opportunity, we can prove that the evidence was the fruit of torture. Indeed, we can prove that a photographic record was made of this by the CIA. Through diligent investigation we know when the CIA took pictures of Mr Mohammed's brutalised genitalia, we know the identity of the CIA agents who were present including the person who took the pictures (we
know both their false identities and their true names), and we know what those pictures show."

The wounds to Mr. Mohammed allegedly include a "slashed" penis, among other things.Now, one would think that the mere accusation of such brutal treatment -- especially in the midst of the Democrats in Congress probing the CIA's destruction of videotapes documenting torture -- would have immediately made it to the front pages of America's newspapers, as well as the lead-news slot on our evening TV news programs.

But one would be wrong. Google News turned up bupkis on this for the past week:

What does that tell you about our wonderful media, friends?
http://firedoglakecom/2007/12/17/the-things-we-know/

Once again, I am rendered speechless, but not for long. All I can think of is that there is a gestapo-like mentality permeating these torturers and those that order the torture.

More Neofascist behavior. Somehow, I have a sneaky feeling this has something to do with the destruction of the CIA tapes…timing and all. I get the feeling that a whole lot more really horrendous revelations are going to come out soon about what fkery this Administration has really been up to.

The repetitive reports exhibiting and apparent obsession with the demasculation of torture subjects is particularly telling of some seriously deranged thinking.

War Crimes.

How much more evidence does the world need????

The cruelty……just sickening.

REMOVE MR. BUSH AND MR. CHENEY FROM OFFICE NOW!

I love the symbolism of the date. Winter Solstice - the day the sunshine begins to return.

Moth Collector,

Bush doesn't need to ignore the judge. He can just appeal. The DC appeals court is notoriously conservative, then there are the Supremes. It will take years.

"Back in 2005, Kennedy, a Clinton appointee,"

'Nuff said. There's the only talking point that matters, according to the media.

Go to "evidence from Torture"-link, and scroll down: Go to that HTML link on the page: You will see the FAX showing Murray documented his concerns with evidence gleaned from US-CIA-torture.

What light can Murray shed on the CIA water boarding transcript; or other video evidence he may have had access in re his concerns on this FAX?

This note for TPM readers hopes to apply some of the lessons from the DOJ Staff e-mails and RNC email retention problems to the e-mails in re CIA tape destruction.

A. Example: Subsequent Discussions in re UK-US Evidence

The link at "Speech E-mail" goes to UK govt correspondence related to an upcoming speech. The speech was not disclosed, but what interesting are the govt e-mail discussions related to that speech. The issue, for purposes of TPM readers, is to explore not just the original act -- the CIA tape destruction -- but the subsequent e-mails related to that original alleged illegal act.

- What types of similar memos about disclosures of CIA water boarding were sent?

B. Analogy: Access to US DoJ Staff e-mails _sent after_ US Atty Firing Disclosures

The original information may have been related to illegal activity. Recall the Congress had access to the US DOJ e-mails _after_ the US Atty firing issue first surfaced: Even though the original conversations were denied, subsequent e-mails "about the US Atty firings"-controversy were disclosed.

The issue, as with the US Atty firing e-mails sent in DoJ: We have
- the original CIA tape;
- the subsequent discussion of that illegal torture;
- the subsequent discussion of the court requests; and
- the later "discussion of the public disclosures" related to that tape.

A line in the sand has been drawn: It's been disclosed that the CIA tape was destroyed. It makes no sense to narrowly focus the e-mail review to only e-mail between the original CIA tape recording, and the CIA tape destruction. Rather, all evidence going forward -- including all e-mails going forward from Dec 2007 -- need to be reviewed, as was done with the US Atty firing e-mails in re DOJ Staff e-mails.

- How much e-mail sent between the US and UK relates to "concerns about the expanding US inquiry" into the CIA tape destruction?

- What e-mail -- sent after the the media reported the CIA tape destruction -- was sent with the intent to silence discussion or continue not providing the court with evidence, as required, related to the CIA tape destruction?

C. Data Retention: Action by Congress, Media, Courts, FOIAs to ensure subsuqunet e-mails retained

- Is Congress (as was done with the US Atty firing e-mail within DoJ) asking for all _ongoing_ e-mail discussion between the US, DoJ, WH Counsel, CIA and others that may occur _after_ December 2007?

- When will copies of these redacted e-mails be provided to the public, as was done with the DOJ Staff e-mails in re the US Atty firings?

D. WH Staff E-mails Sent After Dec 2007 in re CIA Tape Destruction

WH Counsel Fielding has said there will be no "public" statements about the CIA tape destruction. However, this makes no mention of all e-mails _going forward from Dec 2007_.

- What is the plan of the court and Congress to review all e-mails the WH-DoJ-CIA-Congress create _after December 2007_ in re CIA tape destruction?

Legal principle: It is not lawful to hide evidence of war crimes; any e-mail "about the CIA tape destruction" after December 2007 is known to be linked with an ongoing criminal investigation and Judicial branch inquiry in re contempt. This would be known to legal counsel; and forseeably linked with any request for data.

E. Oversight of Abysmal WH Data Retention

As with the RNC e-mail destruction, what is the plan of the Congress to ensure that the WH "e-mail retention problem" is resolved; and there is a back-up system in place to record all e-mails made after December 2007 related to the WH-DoJ-CIA discussion of CIA tape destruction?

F. OVP and 32 CFR 2800 in re CIA Tape Destruction E-mails sent after Dec 2007

OVP has expressed disdain for document retention requirements.

- What is the plan of the court and Congress to review the OVP legal compliance program in re 32 CFR 2800, and ensure all OVP-staff counsel discussion in re CIA tape destruction after December 2007 are properly retained, as required under 32 CFR 2800?

G. Non-Official Communication Systems To Discuss Alleged Illegal Activity

Recall, when OVP-WH counsel learned that the WH e-mail could not be protected by privilege, that there were alleged efforts to find a backup communication system. These are sometimes called the "RNC backup emails" or the "backup e-mail systems". These were not expected to be disclosed; but the WH-related communication sent through these non-official backup systems were not adequately retained. Yet, despite not complying with the data retention legal requirements, and sent through nonofficial system which were not protected as classified information, the President absurdly claimed these communications were "privileged".

- What backup communication systems, as was done with the RNC e-mails, are US government officials using to bypass the records retention requirements, but continue discussing after Dec 2007 CIA tape destruction issues

- When will the court and Congress identify all backup IMs, emails, and non-official communication systems which DoJ Staff counsel, WH staff, and CIA are using to continue discussing CIA tape destruction issues after 2007; and also bypass the official communication channels as was done with the RNC e-mails?

- What is the plan of Congress, the Courts, and media-FOIAs to (a) glean the lessons of "OVP non-compliance with 32 CFR 2800 in re document retention"; and (b) apply those lessons to OVP as they related to retention of all e-mails sent after Dec 2007 in re CIA tape destruction?

Anonymous, are you as big a moron as you appear to be in your last post? You are obviously not knowledgeable in the law. Whether we like it or not, the members of congress would not be under a legal obligation to report a violation of law disclosed to them during a classified briefing. But then I am sure that you are just a drooling idiot and would not understand the difference of having an affirmative legal obligation under a valid statute to maintain records and taking affirmative action to avoid complying with that law. Now I want to hear your response. I want to know the law school that you attended and the bars to which you are admitted. I went to Indiana University and was admitted to the Ohio and Indiana Bars. But I have notice that Republican, conservative pigs like yourself pride themselves on acting in ignorance. NOW GO TO HELL.

Too Justice Kennedy for Fridays hearing on the CIA tape destruction:

I'm sorry your honor "all revelant information pertaining to the destruction of the CIA interrogation tapes were destroyed by natural causes... we had them stored at the Eisenhower Exec. office..... err it was a construction fire.....