« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
NYT: CIA Covered Up, Then Destroyed Interrogation Tapes
The New York Times has a big one this afternoon: in 2002, the CIA videotaped the interrogations of at least two Al Qaeda operatives -- interrogations that likely involved waterboarding and similar techniques. But no one who asked for videotapes of CIA interrogations -- including the 9/11 commission and a federal judge -- was told about it. The tapes were ultimately destroyed in 2005.
In a nutshell:
Daniel Marcus, a law professor at American University who served as general counsel for the Sept. 11 commission and was involved in the discussions about interviews with Al Qaeda leaders, said he had heard nothing about any tapes being destroyed.If 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 criminal or fact-finding investigations.
CIA chief Mike Hayden announced the destruction of the tapes today in order to get ahead of the Times story, which was due to break tomorrow morning. "The tapes posed a serious security risk," he explains. However, he doesn't attempt to justify the decision to lie to investigators about their existence before they were destroyed.
As for why the tapes were destroyed:
A former intelligence official who was briefed on the issue said the videotaping was ordered as a way of assuring “quality control” at remote sites following reports of unauthorized interrogation techniques. He said the tapes, along with still photographs of interrogations, were destroyed after photographs of abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib became public in May 2004 and C.I.A. officers became concerned about a possible leak of the videos and photos.
Comments (48)
Bob wrote on December 6, 2007 6:28 PM:OK these are the bad guys
I repeat these are the bad guys
What is happening to us that we don't want to protect ourselves.
You say they need a trial to prove guilt or innocence
YET YOU SAY OUR PRESIDENT IS GUILTY WITHOUT A TRIAL!!
Seems like a double standard.
johnnydoughey wrote on December 6, 2007 6:32 PM:If they beleived in Bushes god
this would not happen to them
So...
outing Valorie Plame (and thus her allies in the CIA and elsewhere) is okay, but tapes of these interrogators must be destroyed for their protection from "serious security risks" (or perhaps prosecution for torture later down the line).
Aren't we all just so happy to have once lived in a democracy where ther rule of law was important and everyone was treated equally?
Freewheelin' Freddie wrote on December 6, 2007 6:34 PM:Hey, I'm all in favor of putting Bush on trial. Good idea!
EH wrote on December 6, 2007 6:38 PM:Repeat after me, this administration uses the word "Security" to measure how controlled their message is. If it makes them look bad, it's bad for (national) security.
Long Memory wrote on December 6, 2007 6:44 PM:The thing that's important is for us to remember what the Republicans have done to our image at home and abroad. We were never torturers until post-9/11. So everything changed, and it apparently started with us.
So let's remember it.
When the next president, whatever Democrat it may be (God knows I don't care, so long as it's a Democrat), starts hearing the GOPers spout off about the rule of law, then I hope there will be a nationwide come-to-Jesus discussion over torturer.
I want to hear the GOP apologizing, saying they were scared because of 9/11, and that they were afraid Americans would blame them because it happened on their watch.
I want to see the GOP sweat blood when they find out that Hillary (or whomever) holds the power that they said was so important. So important that we torture.
Corrupt. Bastards.
Cuqui wrote on December 6, 2007 6:54 PM:Better fix your lead on the Talking Points Memo page. In 2002 George Tenet was the CIA director.
In late 2004 he was succeeded by Porter Goss. I don't know who this Peter Goss fellow is.
JW wrote on December 6, 2007 6:57 PM:"If 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 criminal or fact-finding investigations".
Bullshit. Impeachment is off the table, and whatever gutless democrat ends up on the throne will refuse to pursue or prosecute the criminals in the name of "bringing us all together". This nation long ago passed a horrible milestone, and there will be no returning to a respect for the rule of law by our political leadership.
fuzz wrote on December 6, 2007 7:00 PM:Bob,
Are you crazy?
What if I said "Bob's the bad guy! I repeat, Bob's the bad guy? You're going to give him a trial? Nonsense! He's the bad guy!"
The whole point of the United States is that we don't do this to people.
Our president, unfortunately, is not locked up on an island somewhere so that he can suffer treatment that would not be allowed on US soil.
Nonetheless, I agree that a trial sounds like a dandy idea.
linda wrote on December 6, 2007 7:05 PM:this is just fucking mindblowing. pamela hess/upi has her story:
Hayden Says CIA Videotapes Destroyed
December 6, 2007 - 5:24pm
CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden speaks at the Intelligence and National Security Alliance dinner in Washington, in this Sept. 18, 2007 file photo. By PAMELA HESS
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The CIA videotaped its interrogations of two 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.
CIA Director Michael Hayden said House and Senate intelligence committee leaders were informed of the existence of the tapes and the CIA's intention to destroy them. He also said the CIA's internal watchdog watched the tapes in 2003 and verified that the interrogation practices were legal.
**********
if that is true that memberss of the senate and house intel cmtes knew and did nothing to prevent it, aren't they accessories to a crime.
every last one of these motherfucking bastards needs to finds their asses sitting on the dock at the hague.
will o dwisp wrote on December 6, 2007 7:07 PM:Bush on trial -great idea Bob -thanks for coming up with it
JW wrote on December 6, 2007 7:13 PM:One other thing- the flip side of my earlier comment. If I could pose a single question to the democratic presidential candidates, it would be this: Will you swear before God and the people to investigate and prosecute any and all criminal acts committed by members of the Bush administration and their collaborators?
Liam wrote on December 6, 2007 7:22 PM:CIA logic:
If our agents are ever seen on video their cover will be blown, therefore why don't we video tape our own agents. However, once we have made the videos of our agents, we must make sure that no one ever sees them, and therefore must destroy them. What A Crock!
Either way the sound like they are either lying or they are just plain stupid. Keep in mind, these are the gang that the nation depends on to provide the proper information before we go to war. Now they tell us that they are stupid enough to put their own covert agents on video. What a bunch of Maroons.
Orwell's Intuition wrote on December 6, 2007 7:23 PM:Is it just my imagination or does all incriminating evidence connected with the GOP end up in the Memory Hole?
fuck bob wrote on December 6, 2007 7:24 PM:Bob, you're just a fucking jackass, OK?
You have NO IDEA if these are the bad guys, get it? Neither does the Administration.
Not to mention, you're not getting reliable information in torturing detainees. What you *are* doing is making sure that more Muslims turn towards fundamentalist idiocy that infects every religion, Christianity included, which doesn't exactly help to subvert the influence of Islamic fundamentalists in the Great Patriotic War (on Terror).
Unfortunately, we have extremely stupid individuals (like yourself) and ruthless, craven operators at the highest levels of this Administration, who come to the same fucked up conclusions you are, Bob-O.
Thanks to you and dumbasses like you, we're losing. YOU flagpin-wearing fake patriots are the TRUE TRAITORS!!
biggerbox wrote on December 6, 2007 7:30 PM:Serious security risk???
Yeah, well, that's the thing about evidence of a crime. It usually does put someone's security at risk: the criminal's. If those tapes existed, then people would definitely be at risk of prosecution and jail. In a system based on the rule of law, this is normally considered a Good Thing.
And, after Abu Gharib, even more was at risk: their claim that it was just a bunch of bad apples in Iraq. That might have even risked George Bush's and Donald Rumsfeld's security.
I've suspected this for a long time. I'm surprised that it's actually been confirmed. (Not that it happened, just that we're actually hearing confirmation.)
Leg wrote on December 6, 2007 7:33 PM:Bob, Bob, Bob,
Unfortunately, massive secrecy and obstruction of justice at every level of this brazenly corrupt, criminal and illegitimate administration will make the chances of a trial a long shot. I would love to see it, though.
BTW, "if we don't want to protect ourselves"? please show me ANY proof that this administration did ANY thing that would protect us pre 9/11. I would like to see if a little waterboarding might get us the truth of what Dick Cheney did to protect the nation that morning. How about allowing a plane to attack the pentagon?
At the very least, this White House id GUILTY of criminal negligence.
moondancer wrote on December 6, 2007 7:45 PM:Gee I feel sorry for Nixon. In todays climate, he'd be president for life. What a chump actually complying with oversite. He should have listened to the young dick Cheney and burned all the evidence. He might have been emperor with a royal tomb next to the great Reagan Pyramid, you know where the Lincoln Memorial used to be.
nofltwlt wrote on December 6, 2007 7:46 PM:I think we should just close up the Justice department. Change the name to the Hall of Inquisition. Off all the lawyers and just concentrate on the private lives of citizens. Lets make the US just a great big Gitmo. What say you Bob?
The CIA has become the problem not part of the solution. Why are they so inept and why should we fund it. Maybe it is time to disband the CIA.
linda wrote on December 6, 2007 7:53 PM:these 'interrogators' committed war crimes, there was evidence of it, the cia destroyed that evidence, with prior knowledge of the members of the senate and house intel committees.
rule of law, my ass. the profound contempt these monstrous people have for this country and its people is staggering.
FannyK wrote on December 6, 2007 7:53 PM:JW wrote on December 6, 2007 7:13 PM:
One other thing- the flip side of my earlier comment. If I could pose a single question to the democratic presidential candidates, it would be this: Will you swear before God and the people to investigate and prosecute any and all criminal acts committed by members of the Bush administration and their collaborators?
You are absolutely right. Any odds on who will pose the question? (As if anyone would.)
MillionthMonkey wrote on December 6, 2007 7:57 PM:"YET YOU SAY OUR PRESIDENT IS GUILTY WITHOUT A TRIAL!!"
You're right. I'll let him out of prison right now.
mo2 wrote on December 6, 2007 7:57 PM:I feel like a collaborator if I pay my taxes this year. I think the US public should just say No. No More!
Joe wrote on December 6, 2007 7:59 PM:If the CIA IG watched them and said they were legal, then they must have a record of it. Congress could make the CIA IG report to the Intelligence committees about what took place.
Hayden's argument that they might be leaked out to the public is preposterous. When was the last time the public saw an internal video of CIA employees doing anything? Never. It doesn't happen. The real reason may have been the risk of a future Attorney General having a different interpretation of what constitutes torture.
On a different note, the book "One Percent Doctrine" quotes sources who claimed that Abu Zubaida was far from being an Al Qaida mastermind. It claims he handled minor logistical issues and wasn't trusted because of his severe mental problems. I suppose that could put a different spin on the legality of waterboarding this guy, especially if the next AG works for Hillary Clinton.
Michael A wrote on December 6, 2007 7:59 PM:I agree 1000% FannyK and JW. I want to see jail time. I want to see the king in the dock in the hague along with darth vader. I want to seem them rot in jail. This will be the way that the US can restore its credibility in the world. We need to show the world that we believe in the rule of law and that war criminals will be prosecuted and punished.
Steve B wrote on December 6, 2007 8:07 PM:Only 2 terrorists? Can't believe the CIA would be so lame as to record the interrogations in the first place. At least they were smart enough to destroy them!
Sammy wrote on December 6, 2007 8:08 PM:"YET YOU SAY OUR PRESIDENT IS GUILTY WITHOUT A TRIAL!!"
I'll bet he'd cop to it if he were waterboarded.
topsight wrote on December 6, 2007 8:14 PM:Bad guys. Bad guys. Is no one considering that one of the main reasons for dumping evidence of this nature is that if this evidence were ever to get to a criminal court in or out of the U.S. investigating war crimes, the foo hits the shan.
TheraP wrote on December 6, 2007 9:11 PM:If they can't subpoena the tapes, then some Congressional committee can subpoena the CIA chief and find out who to subpoena next. Who destroyed the tapes? Get that on record. Who watched the tapes? Subpoena them and find out exactly what they saw!
As for the guilt of the chimp, he has already admitted behavior which broke the law. No question, he's already convicted himself!
moondancer: your comment was outstanding!
Questions wrote on December 6, 2007 9:27 PM:Hit "questions" for some ideas of where to look. Things aren't adding up for some reason.
seeker of truth wrote on December 6, 2007 9:31 PM:Kucinich is trying to start the impeachment ball rolling against Cheney. I liked his response to the question by Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) who asked why he was going after Cheney first, rather than Bush. He said that since Darth Vader had pushed the whole Iraq debacle, going after Bush first would put the country of having to have two presidential impeachments immediately following one another. I hope all those who expressed a desire to see these clowns prosecuted will take a moment out to write to their members of Congress (and to John Conyers) to support this impeachment effort.
Right Fools wrote on December 6, 2007 9:56 PM:Hey Bob in #1: Who are the BAD GUYS?
seeker of truth wrote on December 6, 2007 10:06 PM:Whoops, bad edit. That should say "...would put the country in the position of having to have..."
enough wrote on December 6, 2007 10:32 PM:Crime after crime, but nobody will be prosecuted? We no longer have a country of laws, but of men and women who think they own the place. Impeachment now.
TJ wrote on December 6, 2007 10:46 PM:It will obviously take decades to uncover & find out about all the illegal & unethical activities this fascist bunch has taken part in & been responsible for during the last 7 years.
Dr. Zoom wrote on December 6, 2007 11:37 PM:
Dr. Zoom wrote on December 6, 2007 11:38 PM:Tut, tut! Quit all yer yammering - this nuthin' compared to fibbing about a blow job ...
gandhi wrote on December 6, 2007 11:47 PM:Tut, tut! Quit all yer yammering - this nuthin' compared to fibbing about a blow job ...
When will you stupid Americans reclaim your country from these mongrels?
gandhi wrote on December 6, 2007 11:58 PM:Yeah, stupid stupid stupid stupid!
That's right at the core of this whole problem, isn't it?
I know most TPM readers don't fit into that category, but as a generalization it certainly highlights the basic underlying problem, doesn't it?
John Ryan wrote on December 7, 2007 12:19 AM:waterboarding has always been acknowledged as an effective tool of interrogation. The only way that Christian Europe was able to survive the Satanic witch infestation was through its use. Using it witches would not only confess, they would also identify all of the other witches, including the most difficult to find "sleeper witches". It was only through these confessions that witches were able to save their souls from eternal damnation
Xenos wrote on December 7, 2007 6:15 AM:There must be financial aspect to this whole mess. Every damn dictatorial regime in history, in the course of its systematic violations of law, has always gotten its fingers in the till as well. It is just too tempting.
At some point there will be a massive embezzlement uncovered... there is no way this crew is ethical enough to avoid it, and there is just no good way to hide a large theft. When this comes up, it will be the last, undefendable scandal, and the whole house is going to fall on Bushco.
I look forward to the day...
al75 wrote on December 7, 2007 8:10 AM:the NYT tip-toes around the Porter Goss issue. Goss, Ciqui, was a right wing Republican congressman who was appointed DCIA by bush to "clean up" the cia. He installed a bunch of cronies who, among other things ran a whorehouse out of the watergate with duke cunningham
Nice guy.
ihatebeets wrote on December 7, 2007 9:03 AM:Um, when do the Congressional hearings on this start? Anyone?
NitPicker1 wrote on December 7, 2007 9:30 AM:Long memory, I can't let this go:
"We were never torturers until post-9/11."
Not true at all. Click on my name for more information about Dan Mitrone, who trained the police in Brazil and Uruguay in torture techniques in the 1960s while posing as a US AID officer until he was notoriously kidnapped and killed in 1970. His legacy is all over Latin America. "The precise pain, in the precise place, in the precise amount, for the desired effect."
What is different today is that our government is no longer ashamed to admit that we are promoting torture, and beyond that, actually carrying out the torture ourselves instead of training and supervising third parties.
al75 wrote on December 7, 2007 9:38 AM:I'm still thinking about the Porter Goss connection. Goss -- as was covered extensively in TPM at the time -- came into the CIA and installed 4 political hacks in all the senior spots of the CIA in what was touted as an effort to "de-politicize" the CIA (i.e. put an end to the resistance to Dick Cheney/Doug Feith's intelligence-fixing operations, etc, which was seen as treason by the Cheney-ites).
One of Goss's associates had to quit immediately, because it turned out he had been canned from the CIA previously for a shoplifting conviction. Leaking of this shady background was seen as another act of treason by insiders at the CIA.
Another of Goss's Cronies was Dusty "nine fingers" Foggo, who with Brent Wilkes ran a "hospitality suite" for US congressman complete with hookers bussed in under a DHS contracted limousine company.
As reported in TPM at the time, Foggo was an impulsive moron with a long history of screwing up when he was a low-level operative at the CIA, and a rumored history of being the go-to guy for hookers in Honduras the 1980's, for Republicans visiting the contras.
Many members of congress, including powerful Democrats (remember the Democrats?) visited the "hospitality suites", but they did so only for "poker games". The only Congressman who was ever id'd as laying with the hookers was Duke Cunningham.
All those hookers, a whole limousine operation, just to service one fat, dumb Republican? Damn. Must have had balls of tungsten!
All kidding aside, the story was an utter disgrace. At the very least, it represented a gross breach of security at the CIA. Espionage 101 involves getting your target to lay with hookers etc. so you can blackmail them.
There is also a real question in my mind as to whether the "poker game" was a blackmail/bribery operation being run BY Goss and Foggo. Certainly the involvement of prominent Dems (on from Texas as I recall) was one of the reasons this story never saw the light of day, other than hideous radical America-hating blogs run by Josh Marshall.
Goss quickly and quietly stepped down to spend more time with his family. His name is almost never mentioned by the MSM. Even in the times today, the fact that he was DCIA at the time is (as far as I could read) not mentioned -- they only publish his denial that he knew anything.
Clearly, Goss's "clean-up" at the CIA was on of complete lawlessness, and an effort to subordinate the agency to Cheney's agenda using cash, poon-tang, and muscle -- remember that the Valerie Plame burn was ongoing at the same time: an effort to slam and burn spooks who actually thought they were in the intelligence business, rather than the unitary executive propaganda business.
Is it a coincidence that this story follows th Iran NIE story by two days?
Is there somebody out there planting this stuff who doesn't give a shit that Dems were involved?
Will anybody actually start talking about Porter Goss?
Paging Josh Marshall...
Luxdem wrote on December 7, 2007 11:50 AM:Who wants to see torture tapes anyway? They should never have been made in the first place.
Evadt wrote on December 7, 2007 10:34 PM:The media reports that Democrats are pissed, that they - apparently alone - are calling for inquiry.
Where are God's Republicans on this issue? Are they not also outraged?
parrot wrote on December 8, 2007 4:21 AM:Gee, fellas, why don't we have a trial for all the thugs and criminals that tortured people illegally? You know, like they used to do before there were such things as films and pictures? Because just because there aren't photos and videos doesn't mean that crimes haven't been committed and that the people behind those crimes cannot be convicted. There are witnesses...and I daresay many who would testify if there was anything like justice actually operating in the United States at this time. So, is there?
Anonymous wrote on December 8, 2007 12:04 PM:Think people.
Why is this old story in the news today and why is being spun to embarass the CIA? Clearly the Hayden memo was leaked, but why isn't anyone publishing it in full so you can see all the details?
Could it be that the CIA just published an unclassified version of the NIE that makes the POTUS look like an idiot has anything to do with it?
Find the memo, read it for yourselves, and then decide who should be the target for your anger.