Hayden: Destruction Of Tapes Was ‘In Line With The Law’ Because Torture Advocate Rizzo Said So
Hayden: Destruction Of Tapes Was ‘In Line With The Law’ Because Torture Advocate Rizzo Said So
Yesterday, the New York Times revealed that, in 2002, the CIA videotaped its own officials administering harsh interrogation tactics against two al Qaeda operatives, but three years later, destroyed at least two videotapes documenting the incidents. One of the videotapes may have contained evidence of an al Qaeda operative being waterboarded.
The Times reports the destruction of the tapes occurred in the wake of the Abu Ghraib scandal and “CIA officers became concerned about a possible leak of the videos and photos.” In his agency’s defense, CIA Director Michael Hayden said, “What matters here is that it was done in line with the law.” As proof, he cited internal CIA legal decisions:
The decision to destroy the tapes was made within CIA itself. [...]
As part of the rigorous review that has defined the detention program, the Office of General Counsel examined the tapes and determined that they showed lawful methods of questioning.
The man in charge of this “rigorous review”? John Rizzo — the Acting General Counsel of the CIA. Recall, Rizzo was nominated by President Bush last year to become CIA General Counsel. At his confirmation hearings, Rizzo unapologetically stood behind his approval of the “Bybee memo,” which defined torture as “serious physical injury, such as organ failure.” When asked whether he still agreed with that decision, Rizzo answered, “I honestly — I can’t say I should have objected at the time.” Watch it:
After a coalition of human rights and advocacy groups and members of the Senate Intelligence Committee voiced strong objections to his nomination, the White House backed down and withdrew his nomination.
Rizzo effectively signed off on the destruction of evidence that may have proven that his original legal opinion was in violation of U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions. And now, Hayden is citing Rizzo’s signature as proof that the video destruction “was done in line with the law.”
UPDATE: The New York Times reports the chief of the CIA’s clandestine service “ordered their destruction in November 2005, taking the step without notifying even the C.I.A.’s own top lawyer, John A. Rizzo, who was angry at the decision, the officials said.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Can you say extreme conflict of interest?
I thought you could.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:33 amProsecute every… single… last… one of them, PLEASE!!!!
December 7th, 2007 at 10:36 amAnd what a true pity if one of those missing tapes showed that the waterboarding technique used yielded NO ACTIONNABLE INTELLIGENCE.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:38 amused yielded NO ACTIONNABLE INTELLIGENCE.
Comment by CitiDC — December 7, 2007 @ 10:38 am
Or even implicated someone in the Brusch Admin?
December 7th, 2007 at 10:43 amI bet you Bush watches a copy everynight, And also has a personal Saddam hanging Video
after all the B*stard is a relation of Vlad the Impailer
December 7th, 2007 at 10:43 amWho else thinks it’s Congressional Medal of Freedom time?
December 7th, 2007 at 10:44 amThe walls of democracy come down one brick at a time.
-GSD
Also, check out this theory that the tapes may have implicated Bush’s BFF the Saudis.
We can’t have anything bad about the Saudis being reported.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:48 am“In his agency’s defense, CIA Director Michael Hayden said, “What matters here is that it was done in line with the law.â€
Gee, and for a moment I was afraid our country’s moral character was in jeopardy. Shhhoo.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:50 amProsecute every… single… last… one of them, PLEASE!!!!
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — December 7, 2007 @ 10:36 am
-=–
Uh…no
Lets interrogate every last one of them , just to the point where their organs start to fail….
thats legal now
I would love to see a democratic president “interrogate” the F567CK out of all these republicans… for any reason at all
just to laff when they complain about how severe it is.
All these CIA Aholes should be executed for crimes against humanity.
Hayden can be tried and convicted of War Crimes first.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:52 amthis monstrous pig who has so defamed this country deserves to be handed over to the hague for trial for crimes against humanity.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:53 amI’ve always just assumed that this government , and every agency it in, routinely destroys any photos, files, emails, phone logs, and video that might one day come back to haunt them.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:54 amI have a couple of questions –
1) Why were these videotapes made in the first place? Is videotaping part of the interrogation procedure? I can see the wisdom of getting any useful information yielded by the detainee on tape, and I think it’s a good idea that interrogations be monitored to ensure it stays within the proper guidelines. But I’d like to know the “official” reason for it, and if interrogations are still being recorded.
2) If the interrogations were conducted within the law, why destroy the tapes? The tapes would be the only thing that would exonerate the interrogators. Without the tapes, there’s no way interrogators could refute a lot of ugly speculation regarding possible torture. The argument about possible leaks is bogus — how do we safeguard other classified material?
On the other hand, if interrogations were conducted using illegal methods, I can see why the tapes were destroyed. What other conclusion am I reasonably expected to draw from this?
December 7th, 2007 at 10:55 amI bet you Bush watches a copy everynight, And also has a personal Saddam hanging Video
hell yeah. and i bet you that many of the senators have their own personalized copies of the abu ghraib dvd… shit, considering the depravity of this cabal, i bet monkeyboy gives them out as xmas gifts to his highest rollers.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:55 amRemember, the CIA couldn’t protect Valerie “Plame” Wilson.
The tapes had to be destroyed so as not to reveal the identities of the interrogators – and protect them from Cheney’s men.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:56 amI’ve always just assumed that this government , and every agency it in, routinely destroys any photos, files, emails, phone logs, and video that might one day come back to haunt them.
oh yeah. tons of evidence have been destroyed.
http://wonkette.com/politics/dick-cheney/shreddin-with-dick-211028.php
December 7th, 2007 at 10:57 amall that have to to is blur out the faces of the interrogators…so lol to them…horrible liars…
December 7th, 2007 at 11:02 amThis is BLATANTLY illegal. What Congressman or judge could say with a straight face that the executive branch gets to decide BY ITSELF what is legal and then use that decision to destroy evidence of what it did (all the while claiming that it did do it).
Yet, this has been a PATTERN of behavior of this administration. The same exact thing happened with the FISA law. Deny wiretapping happened. When it is proven that it happened, claim it was perfectly legal and refuse access to details.
Or, how about the 2004 Ohio vote. Massive irregularities? Deny that anything untoward happened. Then, when the courts want to review the records, it is “ooopsie, they were destroyed by mistake! So sorry.”
If the administration may break the law with impunity, there is no law.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:02 amI wouldn’t be surprised if our good friend Donny Rumsfeld appears in these videos. It’s been admitted that he attended several of their so-called “harsh interrogations”. Also if anybody has copies of this I would place my bet on Dick Cheney. He probably watches them on his big screen TV while being felated by Jeff Gannon.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:04 amWhen are you sniveling liberals going to realize this is no longer a Democracy – THIS IS NOW A FASCIST STATE. The Rule of Law is no longer recognized – we do what we want, when we want, and if there is any wrong doing along the way, we will be sure to thoroughly destroy any/all evidence so that we will never be held accountable.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:08 amlinda @ 15:
Ah yes, the old mobile evidence destroying van. I’m in the wrong business.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:08 amThe prevailing assumption is that the tapes were destroyed to conceal harsh CIA interrogation methods. Gerald Posner suggests another possible explanation:
Re the breaking news that the CIA destroyed the videotapes of interrogations with 2 terror suspects, you might have seen that the tapes of the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah were destroyed.
You might also recall that in my 2003 NYT bestseller (reached #2), Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11, my last chapter was titled, “The Interrogation.” Based on two active US intelligence sources, I was the first to disclose Zubaydah’s interrogation. To date, I am the only reporter to have printed the info about what happened to him.
Zubaydah, wounded when he was captured in Pakistan, was fooled in a fake flag operation to believe that the Saudis held him. Instead of being afraid of the ‘Saudis,’ he demanded to talk to three Saudi princes (one, the nephew of the King, who happened to be in the U.S. on 9/11). He gave his interrogators the private cell phone numbers of all 3. He did the same regarding the chief of Pakistan’s air force.
After the U.S. told the Saudis and Pakistanis of Zubaydah’s finger pointing, all four men had tragic ‘accidents.’ The King’s nephew died of complications from liposuction at the age of 43. A day later, the 41 year old Prince named by Zubaydah died in a one-car accident on his way to the funeral of the King’s nephew. The third named prince, age 25, died a week later of “thirst,” according to the Saudi Royal Court. And shortly after that, the chief of Pakistan’s air force died when his plane exploded with his wife and 15 of his top aides on board
When my book was published, CIA officials trashed it ‘off the record,’ but made no public comment. I have always held the same position. There is (or was) firm evidence of what transpired, of whether my reporting was accurate or not. Make the interrogation tapes public and then we’ll know whether one of the top al Qaeda operatives accused leading Saudi royals and a top Pakistani military man – now all dead – of being his sponsors. And accused two of them – the King’s nephew and the Pakistani air force chief – of having advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Now, suddenly coincidence of coincidence, the CIA says the Zubaydah interrogation tapes are destroyed. How convenient.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:11 amYA !!!
HELL YA !!!!
when will you dumb ass liberals learn that the constitution means sh1t to republicans, and Bush is a dictator king who break laws because were so afraid of terrorism?
Kill me
December 7th, 2007 at 11:14 amah the old “trust us” strikes again….
got credibility?
December 7th, 2007 at 11:15 amVery interesting, Badmoodman. I hadn’t been aware of that. Thanks for the post.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:15 amRizzo effectively signed off on the destruction of evidence that may have proven that his original legal opinion was in violation of U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions. And now, Hayden is citing Rizzo’s signature as proof that the video destruction “was done in line with the law.â€
Wow. This is criminal. Can you say “consciousness of guilt?”
Time to break out the medals…
December 7th, 2007 at 11:25 amWAR CRIMINALS! COWARDS! CROOKS! THEY DESTROYED EVIDENCE OF A CRIME. A FEDERAL CRIMIE ITSELF! JUST LIKE THE CLEAN UP OF 9/11, SWIFT, FAST, AND WITHOUT PROPPER INVETIGATION. BUSH & Co. HAGE 09! TORTURERS!!!!!
December 7th, 2007 at 11:35 amThat is amazing Badmoodman!!!
December 7th, 2007 at 11:39 am…and this weak Congress will again do absolutely nothing! The scumbag in the oval office lie about Iran, and not a single news about it on the media… and Silence from congress!!!! What is the Rat Pelosi doing???!!!!
December 7th, 2007 at 11:43 amI don’t trust Israel and I’m totaly against what they do to the Palestinian people! If I was North American I would be extreemely concerned with the US’s blind and bias support for that terrorist state.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:46 amThe next president will need rubber gloves and a huge broom!
December 7th, 2007 at 11:52 amJust another of the thousands of coverups of Bush treason and torture… Treason to our Bill of Rights, treason to our Constitution, treason to America.
Impeach, then flush. Repeat.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:58 am“Rizzo” is just so….mmmm….mafia sounding, which would be quite appropriate considering this administrations conduct.
Bush/Cheney
Hague Trials ‘09
Buck Fush
December 7th, 2007 at 12:01 pmIf I was North American I would be extreemely concerned with the US’s blind and bias support for that terrorist state.
Comment by sacopenapa
You have to understand, some part of American population was scared that Sandinistas took over Texas by traveling three days through Mexico.
Some part of American population was scared of 40 railroad Cuban workers and amateur militia men in Grenade.
Some part of American population was scared of Iraq, a ruined country from all the economic sanctions placed upon it since 1991, with no airforce and no WMDs whatsoever.
Some part of American population thinks that caging Palestinians, driving them away from their homes, bulldozing its families, holding their wages, giving them permission to work inside their own country, taking their water resources, taking their fishing resources, telling them where they can not drive in their own country is the role of a victim country. Poor puppies.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:15 pm#1 raynman:
Can you say extreme conflict of interest?
Yes. Can you say “obstruction of justice”?
Cheers,
December 7th, 2007 at 12:24 pm“may have contained evidence”
(yawn)
December 7th, 2007 at 12:26 pmAs part of the rigorous review that has defined the detention program, the Office of General Counsel examined the tapes and determined that they showed lawful methods of questioning.
Yeah, and that’s why the had to destroy them…
December 7th, 2007 at 12:27 pmUn huh… Sure….Right,..Yup,,, OK…./snark
the bush administration, even when confronted with all manner of evidence to debunk any and all claims, will still find a way to weasel its way out of culpability:
“don’t recall”
“don’t remember”
“wasn’t aware”
December 7th, 2007 at 12:33 pmGod. I simply cannot express the depth of my repugnance for this administration.
If nobody is torturing anyone, why are they destroying the evidence and why is Bush threatening to veto proposed legislation to ban torture…?
December 7th, 2007 at 12:45 pmBadmoodman, I just posted Posner’s piece over at Raw Story (though I don’t know if they’ll allow them up); nice catch. Makes you wonder who has the juice to kill Saudi princes and the head of the Pakistani air force that quickly. Hmm. The CIA? CIA/Mossad/ISI/the Saudi royal family? Did the 9/11 hijackers get flight training in Pakistan?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:04 pmIf you are as concerned by Valerie Plame being outed by an irresponsible media, why wouldn’t you be concerned that the covert CIA agents on the tapes, would also be outted by the same irresponsible media?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 7, 2007 @ 1:11 pm
You compare someone who was doing critical work for the War on Terra with people actively breaking the law by engaging in torture?
Interesting comment on your moral values.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:13 pmDevil’s advocate. Was Plame and her husband doing critical work or were they undermining the efforts to make the world safer from terrorists.
If the CIA interrogaters were garnering valuable information, to head of future terror attacks, thereby making us safer, are they breaking the law or are they doing critical work for the War on Terror?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 7, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
That’s not devil’s advocacy, it’s just stupidity. Valerie Plame’s JOB was to do actual CIA research on WMDs. Maybe in your twisted mind that constitutes “undermining”, or maybe you’d like to actual produce some evidence that she was “undermining” the work. Or maybe, really, you just pulled this entirely stupid notion out of your butt.
If CIA interrogators are using torture, it doesn’t matter how noble their rationale, because IT IS AGAINST THE LAW. The Japanese who tortured American soldiers in WWII had perfectly noble reasons for doing it, and they were convicted and executed as war criminals.
Everyone who breaks a law has a perfectly good reason for doing so. It does not make it OK to break the law. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?
December 7th, 2007 at 2:03 pm