Spring Break
Destruction of tapes raises serious questions
Sean Reed
Issue date: 12/10/07 Section: Opinion
The Central Intelligence Agency announced late last week the destruction of hundreds of hours of videotape of the interrogations of potential terrorists.
Now the Justice Department and the CIA's internal watchdog want to know why.
The tapes in question showed the "severe interrogations" of Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, two suspected al Qaeda operatives, according to the New York Times.
The announcement of the tapes' destruction was hinted at in a memo to employees sent CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden on Thursday.
After the announcement, Intelligence Committees in both the House and Senate started their own investigations.
While evidence at the CIA is authorized for destruction rather often, this case is particularly troubling for a variety of reasons.
For one, according to the New York Times, it is unclear as to whether or not John Helgerson, CIA inspector general, signed off on the destruction of the tapes, a move necessary for any destruction of evidence. The fact that he now is showing concern over the case would suggest not.
In addition, back in 2003, the CIA had been advised by top attorneys in both the White House and the Justice Department not to destroy the tapes, according to CNN. After this suggestion, the evidence was still destroyed without even the consultation of the CIA's senior lawyer John Rizzo, which is highly unusual.
What's particularly troubling about this move, however, is not the unorthodox manner in which the destruction was carried out, but rather the implications such a move brings with it.
These tapes were made at a time when the U.S. was experimenting with new, aggressive forms of interrogation. The CIA has acknowledged using "noise, stress positions, isolation and waterboarding" in their interrogation of Zubaydah to gather information about the operations of al Qaeda and other operatives working within U.S. borders.
Waterboarding, a interrogation technique that simulates the feeling of drowning, has been a target for controversy lately as many at home and abroad say that it amounts to torture.
Now the Justice Department and the CIA's internal watchdog want to know why.
The tapes in question showed the "severe interrogations" of Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, two suspected al Qaeda operatives, according to the New York Times.
The announcement of the tapes' destruction was hinted at in a memo to employees sent CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden on Thursday.
After the announcement, Intelligence Committees in both the House and Senate started their own investigations.
While evidence at the CIA is authorized for destruction rather often, this case is particularly troubling for a variety of reasons.
For one, according to the New York Times, it is unclear as to whether or not John Helgerson, CIA inspector general, signed off on the destruction of the tapes, a move necessary for any destruction of evidence. The fact that he now is showing concern over the case would suggest not.
In addition, back in 2003, the CIA had been advised by top attorneys in both the White House and the Justice Department not to destroy the tapes, according to CNN. After this suggestion, the evidence was still destroyed without even the consultation of the CIA's senior lawyer John Rizzo, which is highly unusual.
What's particularly troubling about this move, however, is not the unorthodox manner in which the destruction was carried out, but rather the implications such a move brings with it.
These tapes were made at a time when the U.S. was experimenting with new, aggressive forms of interrogation. The CIA has acknowledged using "noise, stress positions, isolation and waterboarding" in their interrogation of Zubaydah to gather information about the operations of al Qaeda and other operatives working within U.S. borders.
Waterboarding, a interrogation technique that simulates the feeling of drowning, has been a target for controversy lately as many at home and abroad say that it amounts to torture.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
Chris Ernst
posted 12/11/07 @ 3:35 PM MST
Sean,
Nice article. I suggest you focusing on the destruction of tapes a little closer to home, like the ones destroyed in the Tim Masters case. I dont think you guys have covered this case at all. (Continued…)
Peace Love
posted 12/12/07 @ 8:55 PM MST
"Suspected potential terrorists"
"Particularly troubling"
"Attorneys in both the White House and the Justice Department"
"Severe interrogations"
"Waterboarding amounts to torture"
"Aggressive forms of interrogation"
And people wonder why 3000 American civilians were slaughtered by suspected potential terrorists. (Continued…)
Oh Tham Eng
posted 12/14/07 @ 3:31 AM MST
Welcome to the Never-Never Land!
It's of course very sad that 'torture' has to be used sometimes to extract information from those demonoids. Sad also that some Americans are agonising more over how to ensure those demonoids have a nice time in American prison enjoying nice American food and a protected, cosy life at the expense of American taxpayers. (Continued…)
Bdygard
Craig Hawley
posted 12/18/07 @ 12:33 AM MST
Great the tapes were destroyed. If I could have i would have destroyed them my self.
No reason to keep them. The only reason the Liberals and Democrats want the tapes it to one destroy the administration , two to undermine the war and our intelligence agency's , and three to leak it to the press so it can go global and cause the deaths of thousands of people from the backlash. (Continued…)
Post a Comment