<html>
<body>
<font size=3>
<a href="http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/20970" eudora="autourl">
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/20970<br><br>
</a></font><h1><b>CIA Has 3,000 Docs on Torture
Tapes</b></h1><font size=3>March 25, 2009 By <b>Jason Leopold</b>
<br><br>
<br>
The CIA has about 3,000 documents related to the 92 destroyed videotapes
that showed "war on terror" detainees being subjected to harsh
interrogations, the Justice Department has disclosed, suggesting an
extensive back-and-forth between CIA field operatives and officials of
the Bush administration.<br><br>
The Justice Department said the documents include "cables,
memoranda, notes and e-mails" related to the destroyed CIA
videotapes. Those tapes included 12 that showed two
"high-value" prisoners undergoing the drowning sensation caused
by waterboarding and other brutal techniques that have been widely
denounced as torture.<br><br>
The number of documents - but not their contents - was mentioned Friday
in a Justice Department letter from Lev Dassin, acting U.S. Attorney for
the Southern District of New York, to U.S. District Court Judge Alvin
Hellerstein in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the
American Civil Liberties Union.<br><br>
Dassin told Judge Hellerstein that unredacted versions of the materials
would be available for only him to review "in-camera" on March
26. The CIA also refused to provide the ACLU with a list of individuals
who watched the videotapes prior to their destruction because that
information "is either classified or otherwise protected by
statute."<br><br>
The number of relevant documents - "roughly 3,000," according
to the letter - adds weight to the belief that CIA interrogators were in
frequent communication with headquarters at Langley, Virginia, and with
senior Bush administration officials who were monitoring the harsh
techniques used and approving them one by one or even in
combination.<br><br>
The volume of communications also lends support to the suspicion that
many officials were involved in the debate about what to do with the
incriminating videotapes, not just one or two CIA officers acting on
their own. CIA officials have said the videotapes were destroyed to
prevent disclosure of how the agency's interrogators subjected "war
on terror" detainees to waterboarding and other brutal
methods.<br><br>
Torture Allegations<br><br>
Last weekend, author Mark Danner disclosed a report prepared by the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), concluding that the
abuse of 14 "high-value" detainees "constituted
torture."<br><br>
"In addition, many other elements of the ill treatment, either
singly or in combination, constituted cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment," according to the ICRC report. Since the ICRC's
responsibilities involve ensuring compliance with the Geneva Conventions
and supervising the treatment of prisoners of war, the organization's
findings carry legal weight.<br><br>
The ICRC report also found that there was a consistency in many details
from the detainees who were interviewed separately and that the first
"high-value" detainee to be captured, Abu Zubaydah, appeared to
have been used as something of a test case by his interrogators. Zubaydah
was one of the prisoners whose interrogations were videotaped by the
CIA.<br><br>
Another detainee subjected to waterboarding and other abuse was Abd
al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the alleged mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole
in 2000. Two weeks ago, the Justice Department released a heavily
censored page of what appears to be a CIA internal report about the
torture of "war on terror" detainees, which read:
"Interrogators administered [redacted] waterboard to
Al-Nashiri."<br><br>
The same page indicated that a dozen of the 92 destroyed videotapes of
the CIA's interrogations were of detainees undergoing brutal treatment.
"There are 92 videotapes, 12 of which include EIT [enhanced
interrogation techniques] applications," the page says.<br><br>
The ACLU criticized the Justice Department for continuing to withhold
documents related to the destruction of the torture tapes.<br><br>
"The government is still needlessly withholding information about
these tapes from the public, despite the fact that the CIA's use of
torture is well known," said Amrit Singh, staff attorney with the
ACLU. "Full disclosure of the CIA's illegal interrogation methods is
long overdue and the agency must be held accountable for flouting the
rule of law."<br><br>
Besides the ACLU's FOIA lawsuit, the destruction of the CIA tapes has
been the subject of a year-long criminal investigation by John Durham,
the acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia who was
appointed special prosecutor last year by Attorney General Michael
Mukasey.<br><br>
On Wednesday, the ACLU called on Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint
a special prosecutor to investigate Bush administration officials who
signed off on and approved the torture of prisoners.<br><br>
"The fact that such crimes have been committed can no longer be
doubted or debated, nor can the need for an independent prosecutor be
ignored by a new Justice Department committed to restoring the rule of
law," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero.<br><br>
"Given the increasing evidence of deliberate and widespread use of
torture and abuse, and that such conduct was the predictable result of
policy changes made at the highest levels of government, an independent
prosecutor is clearly in the public interest," Romero said.<br><br>
The Justice Department's restrictive handling of the 3,000 documents
comes one day after Attorney General Holder issued sweeping new Freedom
of Information guidelines for all Executive Branch agencies to
"apply a presumption of openness when administering the
FOIA."<br><br>
"The American people have the right to information about their
government's activities, and these new guidelines will ensure they are
able to obtain that information under principles of openness and
transparency," Holder said Thursday. <br><br>
Holder said FOIA requests would be denied and records withheld "only
if the agency reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an interest
protected by one of the statutory exemptions, or disclosure is prohibited
by law." But even then, all federal agencies were directed to at
least "release records in part whenever they cannot be released in
full." <br><br>
<br><br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>