|
|
,
Add to My Group(s)
Add to My Group(s)
By Skeeter Sanders (about the author)
Page 2 of 3 page(s)
For his part, Hayden said in a statement on Thursday that the destroyed tape of Zubaydah’s interrogation was "not relevant" to the Moussaoui trial, but he neither confirmed or denied that either Zubaydah or al-Nashiri were among the suspects interrogated in the Moussaoui case tapes.
But Moussaoui's attorney, Edward MacMahon Jr., said in an interview published Friday in The New York Times that it was "obvious" to him that the CIA "destroyed material evidence in the case.”
Former Head of CIA's Clandestine Operations Under Scrutiny
Meanwhile, both the Justice Department and the CIA announced Saturday that they would launch a joint investigation into the tapes' destruction to determine whether it constitutes an obstruction of justice, while congressional Democrats called for the appointment of a special prosecutor to handle the issue.
The investigations are almost certain to zero in on Jose Rodriguez Jr., a former chief of the CIA’s clandestine operations. It was Rodriguez who emerged in media reports over the weekend as the official who issued the order in November 2005 to destroy the interrogation tapes -- despite warnings that to carry out the order at a time of intense congressional and judicial scrutiny of the CIA’s interrogation and detention program would raise suspicions of a cover-up of evidence of torture.
Some of the destroyed videos may have shown the use of "waterboarding" -- a technique that simulates drowning in a controlled environment. It consists of immobilizing an individual on his or her back, with the head inclined downward, and pouring water over the face to force the inhalation of water into the lungs.
For decades before President Bush took office in 2001, waterboarding was considered a war crime by the U.S., which had criminally prosecuted individuals for employing the technique.
Ironically, Porter Goss, the CIA director at the time the tapes were destroyed, warned the agency two years earlier while serving as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee to keep the tapes intact, according to former intelligence officials who spoke with The New York Times on condition of anonymity.
Goss, whose tenure as CIA director ended with his resignation in 2006 amid much controversy over his management style, was not told in advance about Rodriguez’s decision, the former officials said. Indeed, according to the Times, Rodriguez appeared to have acted unilaterally, without notifying anyone -- not even John Rizzo, the CIA's chief counsel.
Was Rodriguez Guided By Gonzales' 2002 Torture Memo?
Little is known about Rodriguez, but there is some speculation that his decision to destroy the interrogation memos may have little to do with Hayden's public statement that they were destroyed to protect the identities of the CIA operatives in the tapes.
Rather, Rodriguez may have been influenced by former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' controversial 2002 memorandum to CIA interrogators that critics have branded "The Torture Memo."
Gonzales, then the White House counsel, approved -- without consulting military and State Department experts in the laws of torture and war -- the memo that gave the green light for the interrogators to employ "enhanced" techniques, including waterboarding.
Working closely with a small group of right-wing lawyers at the White House, the Justice Department and the Pentagon -- and shoving aside dissenting viewpoints in the process -- Gonzales helped chart other controversial legal paths in the handling and imprisonment of suspected terrorists, often in direct conflict with the Geneva Conventions and with America's own Uniform Code of Military Justice.
The so-called "torture memo" became a red-hot issue that nearly derailed Gonzales' 2005 nomination by Bush to succeed the retiring John Ashcroft as attorney general. Gonzales himself resigned in disgrace in September amid accusations that he had eight U.S. attorneys fired for partisan political reasons -- which, if true, would be in violation of the Hatch Act.
Biden Wants Special Prosecutor to Probe Tapes' Destruction
Page 2 of 3 page(s)
But Moussaoui's attorney, Edward MacMahon Jr., said in an interview published Friday in The New York Times that it was "obvious" to him that the CIA "destroyed material evidence in the case.”
Former Head of CIA's Clandestine Operations Under Scrutiny
Meanwhile, both the Justice Department and the CIA announced Saturday that they would launch a joint investigation into the tapes' destruction to determine whether it constitutes an obstruction of justice, while congressional Democrats called for the appointment of a special prosecutor to handle the issue.
The investigations are almost certain to zero in on Jose Rodriguez Jr., a former chief of the CIA’s clandestine operations. It was Rodriguez who emerged in media reports over the weekend as the official who issued the order in November 2005 to destroy the interrogation tapes -- despite warnings that to carry out the order at a time of intense congressional and judicial scrutiny of the CIA’s interrogation and detention program would raise suspicions of a cover-up of evidence of torture.
Some of the destroyed videos may have shown the use of "waterboarding" -- a technique that simulates drowning in a controlled environment. It consists of immobilizing an individual on his or her back, with the head inclined downward, and pouring water over the face to force the inhalation of water into the lungs.
For decades before President Bush took office in 2001, waterboarding was considered a war crime by the U.S., which had criminally prosecuted individuals for employing the technique.
Ironically, Porter Goss, the CIA director at the time the tapes were destroyed, warned the agency two years earlier while serving as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee to keep the tapes intact, according to former intelligence officials who spoke with The New York Times on condition of anonymity.
Goss, whose tenure as CIA director ended with his resignation in 2006 amid much controversy over his management style, was not told in advance about Rodriguez’s decision, the former officials said. Indeed, according to the Times, Rodriguez appeared to have acted unilaterally, without notifying anyone -- not even John Rizzo, the CIA's chief counsel.
Was Rodriguez Guided By Gonzales' 2002 Torture Memo?
Little is known about Rodriguez, but there is some speculation that his decision to destroy the interrogation memos may have little to do with Hayden's public statement that they were destroyed to protect the identities of the CIA operatives in the tapes.
Rather, Rodriguez may have been influenced by former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' controversial 2002 memorandum to CIA interrogators that critics have branded "The Torture Memo."
Gonzales, then the White House counsel, approved -- without consulting military and State Department experts in the laws of torture and war -- the memo that gave the green light for the interrogators to employ "enhanced" techniques, including waterboarding.
Working closely with a small group of right-wing lawyers at the White House, the Justice Department and the Pentagon -- and shoving aside dissenting viewpoints in the process -- Gonzales helped chart other controversial legal paths in the handling and imprisonment of suspected terrorists, often in direct conflict with the Geneva Conventions and with America's own Uniform Code of Military Justice.
The so-called "torture memo" became a red-hot issue that nearly derailed Gonzales' 2005 nomination by Bush to succeed the retiring John Ashcroft as attorney general. Gonzales himself resigned in disgrace in September amid accusations that he had eight U.S. attorneys fired for partisan political reasons -- which, if true, would be in violation of the Hatch Act.
Biden Wants Special Prosecutor to Probe Tapes' Destruction
http://www.skeeterbitesreport.com
I'm a native of New York City who's called the Green Mountain state of Vermont home since the summer of 1994. A former freelance journalist, I'm a fiercely independent freethinker who's highly skeptical of authority figures -- especially when (more...)
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Editor |
Comments
The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.
This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.
| 1 comments |
To view all comments:
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
Leverage for Tomorrow!
by cluelessfl on Monday, Dec 10, 2007 at 11:09:26 PM