War Without End

Alpha

http://www.scvhistory.com/scvhistory/signal/iraq/

http://www.absitinvidia.com/mt/archives/000110.html

Like a Sieve: Prisoner Abuse Documents Keep Leaking
• Intelligence personnel swear they carried out the wishes of senior military and administration officials. By Leon Worden

Signal City Editor Saturday, June 19, 2004

One by one, sworn statements from all four military intelligence officers and contractors identified as "responsible" parties in the Taguba report have now been leaked to the press — and each to a different news organization.
Army officials don't know the sources of the leaks but say they must be springing in several places.
"I wish I knew, so I could have a private talk with them," Lt. Col. Pamela Hart told The Signal.
The signed statements are among the estimated 6,000 pages that comprise Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba's investigation of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison.
Technically, the Army still considers the entire report classified — even the widely disseminated 53-page summary that was leaked in late April, around the time CBS broke the initial story on "60 Minutes."
One of the first signed statements from intelligence personnel to be reported was that of John B. Israel, a 48-year-old Iraqi-American translator from Canyon Country.
The New York Times obtained his testimony around May 26. In it, Israel, a private contractor, simply answered, "No I have not," when asked by an Army investigator if he had witnessed any abuses, the newspaper said.
Among the latest to leak was the statement of Lt. Col. Steve L. Jordan, the No. 2 intelligence officer at the prison. USA Today said Thursday it had received a copy.
According to USA Today, Jordan told of "instances where I feel that there was additional pressure" to extract information from detainees.
Jordan named nearly everyone above him as a source of that pressure, and he even described a visit in November from an aide to National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice. Jordan said Rice's aide told him "many, many, many times" to make interrogators work harder to "pull the intelligence out" of prisoners.
The aide, Fran Townsend, told USA Today this week that she had gone to Iraq to learn more about the increasing attacks by insurgents, and to make sure intelligence units were sharing information effectively. She said she spent about 15 minutes in the cell blocks at Abu Ghraib and saw no abuse. She termed it "ridiculous" to think she hounded Jordan to squeeze more from detainees.
In his statement, Jordan discussed the intelligence value of a female detainee with ties to Saddam Hussein, who was then at large. Jordan claimed the woman told one of his interrogators that Saddam "had a big white beard, that he was basically living in a hole, that he was driving a taxi." Indeed, when Saddam was found in a hole Dec. 13 he had a long beard, and a taxi was parked nearby.

* * *

Jordan testified that he worked out a "joint venture" with CIA operatives to hide "ghost detainees" from Red Cross inspectors when they visited in October. (Some Arab news organizations have faulted the International Committee of the Red Cross for hiding its findings from the public until they, too, were leaked in early May.)
In his report, Taguba determined that MP guards, acting on behalf of "OGAs" — a common euphemism for the CIA — had indeed shuffled six or eight "ghost detainees" around the facility so Red Cross officials wouldn't find out about them. "This maneuver was deceptive, contrary to Army doctrine, and in violation of international law," Taguba wrote.
He may not have checked with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld before he denounced the practice.
In a press conference Thursday, Rumsfeld said he made good on a request from former CIA Director George Tenet to hide one such "ghost detainee" last fall. Rumsfeld acknowledged that the detainee, a suspected leader of a Kurdish militant group, was hidden from Red Cross inspectors at a detention center for high-value prisoners near Baghdad International Airport.
"I was requested by the director of Central Intelligence to take custody of an Iraqi national who was believed to be a high-ranking member of Ansar al-Islam, and we did so," Rumsfeld said.
The detainee was held in secret for more than seven months before he was released into the regular prison population. Rumsfeld wouldn't say why Tenet wanted him hidden.
The remaining statements from accused intelligence personnel are those of Thomas M. Pappas, commander of the military intelligence brigade, and Steven A. Stefanowicz, a hired interrogator.
Pappas' statement was "provided to" the Washington Post in late May, the newspaper said, and The Associated Press came up with a copy of Stefanowicz's testimony on Monday. Only The Associated Press has shared its prize on the Internet.
In his testimony, Pappas told Taguba that the peculiar interrogation protocols at Abu Ghraib, including the use of military working dogs as an intimidation tactic, "were enacted as a specific result of a visit" in early September from Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, then-commander of the military detention center at Guantanamo Bay. Miller, who now heads all U.S. prisons in Iraq, denied through a spokesman that he gave Pappas any such notions.
Pappas further testified that Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, commander of U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq, approved the protocols once they were drawn up. Sanchez said last month that he never even saw them.
Meanwhile, Stefanowicz described routines where interrogators would supply MP guards with written and verbal instructions that contravened Army policy, and he outlined sleep and meal deprivation regimens that likely violated Geneva conventions.

* * *

Taguba incorporated some of the men's testimony into his final report but felt they understated their own culpability. Now all four — Pappas, Jordan, Stefanowicz and Israel — are presumed targets of a second Army inquiry that is designed to delve deeper and higher.
Army officials worry that the leaking of the sworn statements, collected by Taguba's people in January, could impinge on the new inquiry.
"Any time you have the investigation being tried in the press, it does have some bearing on the outcome," the Army spokeswoman said. "It can't help but have an influence on the investigators or on the people who may eventually sit on a jury."
Hart said there are "any number of places (the leaks) could come from," but she wouldn't speculate on how many government hands have legitimately passed over the documents.
Unlike the seven MP guards who have been charged with crimes, the four members of the intelligence brigade haven't been charged — so they don't have defense attorneys who could rightfully obtain or distribute their classified testimony.
Nor are the four men themselves the likely source, because they wouldn't have received copies, Hart said.
All the leaks make it "harder and harder to maintain the purity of the case," she said.

HISTORY IN PICTURES] Army Adds Stars to Intelligence Inquiry
• Four-star general to decide who will lead investigation of intelligence personnel at Abu Ghraib prison. By Leon Worden

Signal City Editor Friday, June 18, 2004
Gen. Paul J. Kern will review Maj. Gen. George R. Fay's inquiry into questionable intelligence practices at Abu Ghraib prison and possibly replace him with a higher-ranking officer. US Army photo
O
ut with a three-star general whose veracity has been questioned, in with a four-star general who has stayed away from the fray.
Heeding calls to turn up the heat, the Army has made a mid-course adjustment to its investigation of intelligence practices at Abu Ghraib prison.
Acting Army Secretary Les Brownlee announced Wednesday that he has appointed Gen. Paul J. Kern, head of the Army's procurement system, to oversee the ongoing inquiry of the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade. Kern, in turn, is expected to name a new chief investigator.
Two senior officers and two civilian contractors assigned to the 205th, including John B. Israel, an Iraqi-American translator from Canyon Country, are suspected of sharing responsibility for the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib last fall.
The investigation of the 205th is the Army's second full-blown inquiry into the abuse scandal.
The first, conducted by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, focused on the lowest echelon at the prison — the military police brigade that was supposed to secure and protect the prisoners. The inquiry led to criminal charges against seven MP guards, and Taguba recommended a second inquiry to determine the degree to which Israel and other intelligence personnel were culpable.
Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the three-star general who appointed Taguba, put another two-star general, George R. Fay, in charge of the intelligence investigation.
Fay's appointment drew fire both inside and outside the government when fingers started pointing at Sanchez. Fay, an Army reservist who sits on the board of an insurance company in civilian life, was perceived to lack sufficient authority to follow the trail of responsibility up the chain of command.
Last week, Gen. John Abizaid, commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, asked Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to approve Sanchez's request to be recused from his duties as the "appointing officer" — the person who appoints the chief investigator.
Kern is Sanchez's replacement. Head of the Army Materiel Command at Ft. Belvoir, Va., Kern will likely remove Fay from the hot seat, although it isn't a certainty.
"Gen. Kern may retain Maj. Gen. George R. Fay as the investigating officer or may appoint another officer after reviewing the current status of the initial investigation," the statement said.
As for Sanchez, the Army is in full retreat from him. On Tuesday the Pentagon announced that Sanchez will be replaced as the commander of coalition forces in Iraq following the June 30 transfer of power to the new Iraqi government. As recently as one month ago, Sanchez was expected to keep his command when Coalition Joint Task Force-7 becomes Multinational Force-Iraq (MNFI) in July.
Sanchez, who put the 205th in charge of operations at Abu Ghraib in November, has come under increasing scrutiny. In Senate testimony May 19 he denied ever seeing, much less authorizing, special interrogation rules for Abu Ghraib. The rules, posted on the prison walls, called for Sanchez's personal approval whenever interrogators wanted to use military dogs, keep prisoners in isolation longer than 30 days, or deprive them of food or sleep.
Sanchez's removal from the investigation clears the way for him to be questioned without a direct conflict of interest.
Pentagon officials anticipate the naming of a new chief investigator who out-ranks Sanchez — possibly another three-star general with higher seniority.
Kern will still lead Army procurement. Reviewing the intelligence investigation is an additional duty, a Pentagon spokesman said.
Kern is a 1967 West Point graduate with a master's degree in engineering from the University of Michigan. He served two combat tours in Vietnam, led a brigade in the 1991 Gulf War, commanded the 4th Infantry Division and was the senior military assistant to former Defense Secretary William Perry

Excellent Documentary on PNAC (Project for the New American Century):

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/27/154222&mode=thread&tid=25

James Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book on the Neoconservative warmongers:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/06/14/iraq-war-for-israel-according-to-james-bamford-s-new-book.php

Abu Ghraib Prison Torture Scandal Goes to the Highest Level:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/articles/2004/06/13/interrogation-abuses-were-approved-at-highest-levels.php

Alpha

A special team was set up at the prison called "the break team," he said,
"to take the difficult people and break them. That shows you the mentality."
+++++

Interrogator in Iraq Recalls Conditions

Fri Jun 18, 8:44 PM ET

By ROBERT TANNER, AP National Writer

A professional interrogator, Nelson brought his skills to Iraq (news - web
sites) to ask questions and convince prisoners to open up. Now he's the one
doing the talking - helping investigators who are conducting a broad review
of military intelligence operations.

The 35-year-old Nelson went to Iraq and the Abu Ghraib prison as a civilian
contractor, though one with extensive military experience: He spent eight
years in the Army and four with the Utah National Guard, specializing in
interrogations.

He landed in Iraq around Thanksgiving of last year, a few weeks after the
infamous photos of prisoners being menaced and abused were taken. "It was
fairly chaotic from the first day I got there," Nelson said in an interview
with The Associated Press in which he recounted some of his experiences and
observations.

Both the Utah National Guard and CACI International Inc., Nelson's employer
in Iraq, confirmed his time with them. The report on Abu Ghraib by Maj. Gen.
Antonio Taguba cites him as a witness.

Nelson, who lives in Utah and spoke to the AP during a recent trip to
Washington, D.C., ticked off a list of problems at the prison. There was too
much involvement between military police and intelligence gatherers, and the
facilities were badly overcrowded, with poor supervision, he said.

Nelson would not say what he has told military investigators about specific
incidents, though he did know and work with some of the seven low-level
military police who have been charged with abuses.

Housing prisoners in Abu Ghraib was a mistake in the first place, Nelson
said. With busy roads north and south, a farm on one side and an apartment
complex on the other, it was always exposed to attacks.

"We had thousands of guys inside who hated us, and thousands of guys on the
outside who hated us," he said. One detainee, who was smuggled a gun by an
Iraqi prison guard working for Americans, shot a guard. Only the soldier's
body armor saved him, Nelson said.

That incident also was discussed in a hearing for one of the seven soldiers
charged for incidents at Abu Grahib, Sgt. Javal Davis.

The scene at the prison was dramatically different from Guantanamo Bay,
where Nelson served with the Utah National Guard, even though both places
have drawn complaints, he said. At Guantanamo, a small number of detainees
were being held and interrogated in a secure location with adequate troops;
at Abu Ghraib, thousands of detainees were being held by too few troops, who
were steadily under attack.

"My anxiety about the whole affair really started to peak after Dec. 14,
with the capture of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)," Nelson said, who
sensed new pressure as the insurgency escalated.

A special team was set up at the prison called "the break team," he said,
"to take the difficult people and break them. That shows you the mentality."

It also cut against Nelson's belief that coercion and physical pressure are
the exact wrong tactics to get someone to talk.

"Interrogation isn't about breaking someone's will, it's about breaking down
the barriers between you," he said. Most people want to talk, if not
confess; small bits of crucial, relevant information can be gleaned without
any dramatic scenes, he said.

Nelson said he didn't know of any specific orders for military police to
"loosen up" detainees, as the soldiers' lawyers have contended. But
low-level military police were given too much responsibility, Nelson
believes.

"They were open to suggestions by the military intelligence operatives," he
said. "They all felt they were part of the team, working together."

Nelson left Abu Ghraib in early February. After others at the prison learned
he was cooperating with the Taguba investigation, he was ostracized and felt
he could no longer do his job well or safely, he said.

CACI has disputed any allegations of illegal behavior of its employees. The
company, in a release, said its interrogation services is part of its
"tactical intelligence and field services line of business." Its employees
are under direct supervision of the Army, it said.

Nelson wants to keep speaking out about his experience, and feels his
background and status as a witness, but not a suspect, puts him in a good
position to do so. However, he is concerned that some campaign work he did
for former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean (news - web sites)
might be used against him by people who see him as anti-Bush administration.

"For the American people, this needs to be brought as open as possible, as
transparent as possible," he said. "Let's not focus on politics. Let's focus
on a breakdown in the system."

The military and the country need to recognize how critical information is
to any fight against terrorists, he said. That means giving soldiers in
military intelligence better training and more responsibility, while at the
same time making clear the line between good interrogation techniques and
unacceptable threats and abuses.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Army Widens Abuse Probe

Mon May 24, 7:55 AM ET

By Greg Miller and Richard A. Serrano Times Staff Writers

WASHINGTON — As the investigation of prisoner abuses in Iraq (news - web
sites) shifts to the role of military intelligence, two intelligence
soldiers identified in the notorious pictures from the Abu Ghraib detention
facility have been ordered to remain in Baghdad as part of the expanding
probe, according to witness statements and commanders of the soldiers'
reserve units.

U.S. Army Spcs. Armin J. Cruz and Israel Rivera, both members of a reserve
unit in Texas, are so far the only military intelligence soldiers known to
be at the scene of the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners in a high-security
cellblock at Abu Ghraib.

Neither Cruz nor Rivera has been charged. But their role in the burgeoning
scandal may be an important link for investigators seeking to determine
whether the abuses were the work of a rogue unit of military police, or were
directed by intelligence officers pushing guards to "soften up" detainees
for interrogation.

More broadly, the photographs from Abu Ghraib have focused attention on U.S.
interrogation practices and raised questions about systemic problems in
military prisons from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Bagram air base in
Afghanistan (news - web sites).

Senior military officials and defense lawyers said additional charges may be
pending, raising the prospect that the criminal probe is poised to expand
beyond the guilty plea of one MP and the planned courts-martial of six
others accused of taking part in the abuse.

Neither Cruz nor Rivera could be reached for comment. Military officials at
the Pentagon (news - web sites) declined to describe their legal status, or
say whether they are represented by attorneys. Both have been ordered to
remain in Baghdad, months after the rest of their unit returned home.

According to witness statements, Cruz was disciplined by commanders at the
prison for violent outbursts toward detainees and his alleged involvement in
an incident in which a prisoner was forced to strip.

This is the first time Rivera's name has been connected publicly with the
scandal. Cruz was first identified in The Times on May 13.

On Sunday, The Times reported that 25 members of the prison's intelligence
units were questioned but none admitted seeing any of the sadistic abuse and
humiliation that was rampant at Abu Ghraib. However, apparently neither Cruz
nor Rivera answered the questionnaires by Army investigators seeking leads
into the prisoner abuse.

"They were involuntarily extended" to remain in Iraq, said Maj. Tom Barbeau,
commander of the 325th Military Intelligence Battalion, a reserve unit based
in Waterbury, Conn. It was unclear whether they were potential targets of an
investigation or potential witnesses.

Barbeau said Rivera and Cruz were transferred from their home unit in Texas
to help fill out the Connecticut battalion before it deployed to Iraq last
year.

Barbeau said that he had not had contact with either man, beyond intervening
to resolve an Army pay glitch, and that he had been given no details on the
case. "The only thing I know was that they didn't get to come home with the
rest of my guys, and that it was somehow related to this investigation,"
Barbeau said.

He added that he was under the impression that "they were assisting with the
investigation but not implicated." The commander of the soldiers' home unit
in Texas provided a similar account.

"They got extended in theater, and it had something to do with providing
testimony," said Lt. Col. Greg Williams, commander of the 321st Military
Intelligence reserve battalion in Austin, Texas. Both commanders described
Rivera and Cruz as eager young recruits who were trained as military
intelligence analysts. Both men were awarded Purple Hearts after sustaining
injuries in a mortar attack on Abu Ghraib last September that also claimed
the lives of two intelligence soldiers, Barbeau said.

"They're two such good kids that I can't imagine them even being in the same
room" with MPs engaged in abuse of prisoners, Barbeau said. "They were both
very good soldiers."

But in sworn testimony in a military hearing in Baghdad this spring, Tyler
Pieron, one of the military investigators involved in the case, said
"Specialist Cruz and Specialist Rivera were identified in one of the
photographs" depicting prisoner abuse. The shot appears to show both men
standing near a pile of detainees shackled together.

Pieron said Cruz "never came forward to report any misconduct" to military
authorities. He did not indicate whether Rivera had done so. Testimony from
other witnesses suggested that Cruz was disciplined for taking part in
abusive interrogations.

Cruz "was known to bang on the table, yell, scream, and maybe assaulted
detainees during interrogations in the booth," Sgt. Samuel J. Provance III,
another intelligence soldier who managed the prison's classified computer
network, said in a sworn statement.

Edward J. Rivas, a chief warrant officer at the prison, testified that Cruz
"was removed [from interrogation duty] because of a situation when a
detainee was stripped naked." Rivas was referring to an incident in which
Cruz and another Army specialist, Luciana Spencer, forced a prisoner to walk
naked past other inmates to humiliate him and punish him for not
cooperating.

Another interrogator, Sgt. Theresa A. Adams, told Army investigators that
the prisoner was completely stripped and then walked to the interrogation
booth "as part of the approach" for getting him to talk.

In an interview last week, Provance said that although Cruz and Rivera were
both analysts, there was such a shortage of interrogators at Abu Ghraib that
it was common for soldiers with no training to be sent into the booth to
question prisoners. " 'Interrogator' is kind of a loose term out at Abu
Ghraib," Provance said.

Military officials who worked at the prison said analysts often accompanied
interrogators into the booth but were not supposed to take part in
questioning prisoners.

The military police officers implicated in the abuse, and their lawyers,
contend that the MPs were told by military intelligence officials to "soften
up" the prisoners prior to interrogation, in the expectation that the
prisoners would then be more forthcoming with information.

In an interview, Houston defense attorney Guy L. Womack, who represents Army
Cpl. Charles A. Graner Jr., said that he expected a wave of charges in
coming weeks against military intelligence officers, who he believed were
directing the abuse of prisoners on Tier 1A at Abu Ghraib.

"There is no way these low-ranking military police officers did this on
their own," he said. "It's like pulling up a tree. There are roots going
everywhere away from these guys. The MPs were not rogues. They were not
criminals acting out some sort of fantasy. They were acting on orders, and
they thought those orders were appropriate."

A defense lawyer representing another guard being court-martialed said Cruz
and Rivera were present on the tier during the torture because they wanted
to make sure the abuse was carried out.

"These guys were actually directing them to do these things," said Harvey
Volzer, who represents Spc. Megan Ambuhl. "They wanted to make sure their
orders were being followed."

Interrogators and military intelligence officers who worked at the prison
disputed that allegation, saying two Army specialists would have had little
authority to direct the activities of higher-ranking MPs.

The interrogators and officers, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said
they believed Rivera and Cruz may have wandered into the cellblock and
failed to report what they saw. One interrogator described the two men as
"very young and very green."

Although Rivera and Cruz are the only U.S. Army intelligence troops
identified in the photos so far, others involved in military intelligence
have been caught up in the scandal. Military sources noted that at least one
picture appears to show a contract interrogator, Steven Stephanowicz,
present in the cellblock while detainees were being abused.

Torin Nelson, a civilian interrogator, gave investigators a written
description of how another interrogator dragged a detainee by his handcuffs
as punishment for falling off a truck en route to the prison.

"The detainee told me about this and showed me bruises (yellow and brown) on
his left arm, and the bump on his left forehead, which he said he got when
an interrogator [threw] him into a wall head first," Nelson wrote. "The
detainee is in his early 60s and is considered by medical personnel to be in
less than good health."

Naseef Bakeer, a civilian translator, told investigators that he saw two
instances in which an interrogator forced a detainee to walk naked along the
cellblock and say, "Look at me."

"This was done in an effort to humiliate the detainee prior to
interrogation," Bakeer said.

Alpha

NLG DETROIT CHAPTER CALLS FOR

EMERGENCY MOBILIZATION AGAINST WAR CRIMES AND TORTURE

With the disastrous occupation of Iraq continuing in bloodshed and chaos, in the spring of 2004 we learned that officials in the highest ranks of the Bush/Cheney administration apparently approved the use of torture against detainees. A series of internal legal memoranda developed by administration and Pentagon lawyers reveal an outrageous, illegal, and unconscionable plan to:

narrow the definition of "torture" so unreasonably that inhuman, brutal and harmful acts could be "justified;" and
set up the president/commander-in-chief as a figure above the law who could approve such abuses.
This is completely unacceptable. The American People must rise up now and say "no" to the Bush/Cheney regime of torture, lawlessness, and unilateral preemptive war.

PROPOSAL

Form a national emergency network;
Organize, agitate and advocate locally, with forums and letters to congressional representatives, senators and editors;
The Message: Every US legislator must take a position on this issue. War crimes and violations of human rights by top officials of the Bush/Cheney administration must be investigated and prosecuted under law; and
Whether through electoral defeat, impeachment, or indictment, before or after November 2004-January 2005, Bush must go.
We propose the formation of local Emergency Mobilization Committees in local

communities, targeting US representatives and senators, as well as local media through letters to editors and op-eds. The NLG Detroit Chapter will be holding a regional conference in the fall (in conjunction with the University of Detroit Law School Chapter’s annual Liberty Keepers Conference), featuring the theme of accountability for war crimes by the top officials of the US government.

US foreign policy has long targeted the weakest among us for ruthless, violent, and racially discriminatory exploitation. But the imperialists have so overplayed their hand under the Bush/Cheney administration that even former insiders in the corridors of power in Washington DC have been repelled, and have taken action to stop the Bush pirate gang. There has been an unprecedented flood of leaks, regarding everything from the blatant lies used to justify aggression against Iraq, to the systematic use of torture against those seized by US forces in the fraudulent "war on terror." The legitimacy and credibility of the US government has never sunk so low, not even at the height of the massive atrocities in Southeast Asia almost 40 years ago. It is up to us, an awakened and energized American People, to take strong action, and to take back our democracy from the sleazy criminals who have occupied the White House and the Pentagon ever since the stolen election of 2000.

On May 18, in response to revelations of abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, at Bagram air base in Afghanistan, at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere, as well as the unraveling of the illegal US military occupation of Iraq, Detroit Chapter President John Philo and Executive Board Member Tom Stephens sent a letter to Congressman John Conyers, asking him to begin the process of seeking appointment of a special counsel to investigate the top figures in the Bush/Cheney Administration, as well as a few of their most notorious co-conspirators, for war crimes, conspiracy, and cover-up. Specifically, we suggested that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Stephen Cambone, Douglas Feith, Lewis Libbey, Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, Michael Ledeen, James Woolsey, Newt Gingrich, and John Ashcroft, among others, should be investigated.

Rep. Conyers is a great friend and supporter of the work of the National Lawyers Guild, and of freedom-loving People everywhere. Only two days later, on May 20, Rep. Conyers, along with all the other Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Ashcroft, requesting that he "appoint a special counsel to investigate whether high ranking officials within the Bush Administration violated the War Crimes Act, 18 USC 2441, by approving the use of torture techniques banned by international law."

The following days and weeks brought a flood of revelations: knowledge and approval of torture coming from the highest levels of the US government. Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh wrote that Rumsfeld (with the full knowledge and approval of Bush and Rice, among others) had approved a secret "special access program" for torture of suspects seized in Afghanistan and imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. In 2003, Rumsfeld ordered a similar program in Iraq, code-named "copper green," that apparently led directly to the notorious photographic evidence of sexual and physical abuse in Abu Ghraib. The Army has admitted that it is investigating the deaths of at least 37 detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan, which does not include the most well-publicized atrocities, involving deadly air strikes against civilians (wedding parties, for example), the recent slaughter of hundreds earlier this year in Fallujah, Iraq, or the massacre of a large number of prisoners by US Afghan warlord allies in Kunduz, Afghanistan, when the victims were packed into airless shipping containers and allowed to suffocate and die,

The New York Times reported on a legal memorandum addressed to White House counsel Alberto Gonzalez, assessing the "issue" of how much pain constitutes "torture" under the law, and referring to the requirements of the Geneva Conventions as being "obsolete" and "quaint." The damning internal government documentation was only beginning to emerge. Even more stunning, the Wall Street Journal revealed a memo prepared by a team of administration lawyers, developing at length the argument that "torture" is not "torture," without "specific intent" to cause severe and long-lasting harm (i.e., if the torturer’s intent is to get information, and pain and suffering is an unfortunate collateral consequence, the Bush/Cheney 21st century Torquemadas take the position that, in effect, it’s not – and can’t be - torture).

Perhaps even more appalling from a purely legal point of view, this leaked internal Justice Department document, which has become widely known as "the torture memo," argues for a quasi-royal prerogative, that the president as commander-in-chief of the military, is not and cannot be bound by legal prohibitions on torture. Still, the leaks haven’t stopped. The Center for Constitutional Rights posted on their web site lengthy excerpts from an extensive Pentagon torture manual. Its official name is "Working Group Report on Detainee Interrogations in the Global War on Terrorism: Assessment of Legal, Historical, Policy, and Operational Considerations." But Orwellian and Kafkaesque word games aside, it’s a torture manual.

In light of what we now know from the offensive pictures taken inside Abu Ghraib, and also from the Bush/Cheney administration’s many coded admissions (for example, Bush’s own statement in his 2003 State of the Union Address: "…[M]any others have met a different fate. Let’s put it his way. They are no longer a problem…") the leaked torture documents opened coast-to-coast floodgates of righteous democratic anger and opposition. San Diego University law professor Marjorie Cohn, an NLG member, has written that these revelations mean it is now time to call for the impeachment of Bush. Former New York City Congresswoman and prosecutor Elizabeth Holtzman (who served on the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment of Nixon) has also called for appointment of a Special Prosecutor. On June18 the NLG National Office issued a press release demanding prosecution of Bush for war crimes and torture. NLG President Michael Avery aptly described the Justice Department’s torture memorandum as reading "like a pre-trial brief on behalf of the Nazi defendants in the Nuremberg trial."

Nevertheless, the new Lords of Torture in the US government aren’t about to give up their torture-based policies of domination and injustice without a fight. Even after all the recent turmoil (and perhaps with tougher times yet to come, such as expected criminal indictments in the Valerie Plame case, involving White House betrayal of secret CIA undercover operations, in order to punish and threaten those who revealed their lies in attempting to justify their aggression against Iraq), the Republican majority on the Senate Judiciary Committee voted down a subpoena for all the Justice Department’s torture memos. Since so many damaging documents have been leaked to the media anyway by insiders, it appears that this may only be one legal skirmish, in what could be a long and intense confrontation over the separation of powers, the White House’s responsibility for torture and other war crimes in Iraq and elsewhere, conspiracy and cover-up, fundamental human rights protections, and the fight to restore sanity and credibility to US foreign policy after the debacle of the last year and a half.

TAKE ACTION: Contact lebensbaum4@earthlink.net (Tom Stephens in Detroit) or director@nlgno.org (Heidi Bhogosian in New York) for further information. Form a local Emergency Mobilization Committee. Write your congressional representatives and senators and your local and national media. Demand the investigation and prosecution of war crimes by the top officials of the Bush/Cheney administration!

Tom Stephens
4595 Hereford
Detroit, Michigan 48224
(313) 885-8857
(586) 419-9230 (cell phone)
(313) 962-6540 (Guild/Sugar Law Center)
lebensbaum4@earthlink.net
tstephens@sugarlaw.org

*************Legal Notice***************
This message is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
Any interception, detection, magic-lantern hoodoo, voodoo,
"Sneak 'n' Peek" maneuver, or any other sort of unethical or
unconstitutional spying on the part of the U.S. Department of
Justice [sic], FBI, CIA, NSA, or office of Homeland Security is
strictly prohibited. Violations will be prosecuted and publicized.
Thank you for your cooperation.

"I've come to understand that to care for freedom and pay for it
is a never-ending job. Democracy is very fragile. And if we do
not tend to it and care for it, it will disappear." - Harry Belafonte
----- Original Message -----
From: MORRIS434@aol.com
To: lebensbaum4@earthlink.net
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 5:20 AM
Subject: John Israel in the Taguba Report

I provided material to Robert Fisk which resulted in the article below that is now linked in the left margin (under May 26th, 2004) at www.counterpunch.org as well. I think you would find what is at the following URL to be of interest as John Israel is living in the Canyon Country (Santa Clarita) area which is about a 30 minute drive north of downtown Los Angeles:

http://www.scvhistory.com/scvhistory/signal/iraq/

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/story.jsp?story=524859

The things Bush didn't mention in his speech

The re-writing of Iraqi history is now going on at supersonic speed

By Robert Fisk

26 May 2004

I can't wait to see Abu Ghraib prison reduced to rubble by the Americans -
at the request of the new Iraqi government, of course. It will be turned to
dust in order to destroy a symbol of Saddam's brutality. That's what
President Bush tells us. So the re-writing of history still goes on.

Last August, I was invited to Abu Ghraib - by my favourite US General Janis
Karpinski, no less - to see the million-dollar US refurbishment of this
vile place. Squeaky clean cells and toothpaste tubes and fresh pairs of
pants for the "terrorist" inmates. But now, suddenly, the whole kit and
caboodle is no longer an American torture centre. It's still an Iraqi
torture centre, and thus worthy of demolition.

The re-writing of Iraqi history is now going on at supersonic speed.
Weapons of mass destruction? Forget it. Links between Saddam and al-Qa'ida?
Forget it. Liberating the Iraqis from Saddam's Abu Ghraib life of torture?
Forget it. Wedding party slaughtered? Forget it. Clear the decks for both
"full (sic) sovereignty" and "chaotic events". This is, at any rate,
according to Mr Bush. When I heard his hesitant pronunciation of Abu Ghraib
as "Abu Grub" on Monday night, I could only profoundly agree.

But we're in danger again of missing the detail. Just as the unsupervised
armed mercenaries being killed in Iraq are being described by the
occupation authorities as "contractors" or, more mendaciously, "civilians"
- so the responsibility for the porno interrogations at Abu Ghraib is being
allowed to slide into the summer mists over the Tigris river. So let's go
back, for a moment, to the long weeks in which the Department of Bad Apples
allowed its jerks to put leashes around Iraqi necks, forced prisoners to
have sex with each other and raped some Iraqi lasses in the jail.

And let's cast our eyes upon that little, all-important matter of
responsibility. The actual interrogators accused of encouraging US troops
to abuse Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib jail were working for at least one
company with extensive military and commercial contacts with Israel. The
head of an American company whose personnel are implicated in the Iraqi
tortures, it now turns out, attended an "anti-terror" training camp in
Israel and, earlier this year, was presented with an award by Shaul Mofaz,
the right-wing Israeli defence minister.

According to Dr J P London's company, CACI International, the visit of Dr
London - sponsored by an Israeli lobby group and including US congressmen
and other defence contractors - was "to promote opportunities for strategic
partnerships and joint ventures between US and Israeli defence and homeland
security agencies".

The Pentagon and the occupation powers in Iraq insist that only US citizens
have been allowed to question prisoners in Abu Ghraib - but this takes no
account of Americans who may also hold double citizenship. The once secret
torture report by US General Antonio Taguba refers to "third country
nationals" involved in the mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq.

General Taguba mentions Steven Staphanovic and John Israel as involved in
the abuses at Abu Ghraib. Staphanovic, who worked for CACI - known to the
US military as "Khaki" - was said by Taguba to have "allowed and/or
instructed MPs (military police), who were not trained in interrogation
techniques, to facilitate interrogations by 'setting conditions' ... he
clearly knew his instructions equated to physical abuse". One of
Staphanovic's co-workers, Joe Ryan - who was not named in the Taguba report
- now says that he underwent an "Israeli interrogation course" before going
to Iraq.

We know the Pentagon asked Israel for its "rules of engagement" in the
occupied West Bank and Gaza. Israeli officers have briefed their US
opposite numbers and, according to the Associated Press, "in January and
February of 2003, Israeli and American troops trained together in southern
Israel's Negev desert ... Israel has also hosted senior law enforcement
officials from the United States for a seminar on counter-terrorism".

Staphanovic of CACI, who may also be Australian, was accused by Taguba's
army report of making "a false statement to the investigation team
regarding ... his knowledge of abuses". Another outside interrogator, Adel
Nakhla,who may be of Egyptian origin, was a witness to the "stacking" of
naked prisoners in Abu Ghraib. John Israel "misled" investigators by
denying he had witnessed misconduct and did not have "security clearance".
Israel, according to Titan - two of whose employees were mentioned in
Taguba's report - works for one of the company's "sub-contractors". Titan
refused to name the "sub-contractor".

Why? Among the company's former directors is ex-CIA director James Woolsey,
one of the architects of the US invasion of Iraq, a friend of Ahmed Chalabi
and a prominent pro-Israeli lobbyist in Washington. Dr London says CACI
"does not condone or tolerate or endorse in any fashion (sic) any illegal,
inappropriate behaviour on the part of its employees in any circumstances
at any time anywhere".

But it is clear the torture trail at Abu Ghraib has to run much further
than a group of brutal US military cops, all of whom claim "intelligence
officers" told them to "soften up" their prisoners for questioning. Were
they Israeli? Or South African? Or British? Are we going to let the story
go?

Check out this Must read article about Abu Ghraib:

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=2591

Another example of Fisk's excellent writing is included at the following URL:

http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles114.htm

Forwarded:

Senator Akaka (of Hawaii) asked General Miller during the recent Senate hearing who the third country nations ('John Israel' and others mentioned in the Taguba Report) were, and General Miller refused to answer... One answer is so obviously Israel:

http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen05102004.html

May 10, 2004

The Israeli Torture Template
Rape, Feces and Urine-Dipped Cloth Sacks
By WAYNE MADSEN

With mounting evidence that a shadowy group of former Israeli Defense Force and General Security Service (Shin Bet) Arabic-speaking interrogators were hired by the Pentagon under a classified "carve out" sub-contract to brutally interrogate Iraqi prisoners at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, one only needs to examine the record of abuse of Palestinian and Lebanese prisoners in Israel to understand what Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld meant, when referring to new, yet to be released photos and videos, he said, "if these images are released to the public, obviously its going to make matters worse."

According to a political appointee within the Bush administration and U.S. intelligence sources, the interrogators at Abu Ghraib included a number of Arabic-speaking Israelis who also helped U.S. interrogators develop the "R2I" (Resistance to Interrogation) techniques. Many of the torture methods were developed by the Israelis over many years of interrogating Arab prisoners on the occupied West Bank and in Israel itself.

Clues about worse photos and videos of abuse may be found in Israeli files about similar abuse of Palestinian and other Arab prisoners. In March 2000, a lawyer for a Lebanese prisoner kidnapped in 1994 by the Israelis in Lebanon claimed that his client had been subjected to torture, including rape. The type of compensation offered by Rumsfeld in his testimony has its roots in cases of Israeli torture of Arabs. In the case of the Lebanese man, said to have been raped by his Israeli captors, his lawyer demanded compensation of $1.47 million. The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel documented the types of torture meted out on Arab prisoners. Many of the tactics coincide with those contained in the Taguba report: beatings and prolonged periods handcuffed to furniture. In an article in the December 1998 issue of The Progressive, Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb reported on the treatment given to a 23-year old Palestinian held on "administrative detention." The prisoner was "cuffed behind a chair 17 hours a day for 120 days . . . [he] had his head covered with a sack, which was often dipped in urine or feces. Guards played loud music right next to his ears and frequently taunted him with threats of physical and sexual violence." If additional photos and videos document such practices, the Bush administration and the American people have, indeed, "seen nothing yet."

Although it is still largely undocumented if any of the contractor named in the report of General Antonio Taguba were associated with the Israeli military or intelligence services, it is noteworthy that one, John Israel, who was identified in the report as being employed by both CACI International of Arlington, Virginia, and Titan, Inc., of San Diego, may not have even been a U.S. citizen. The Taguba report states that Israel did not have a security clearance, a requirement for employment as an interrogator for CACI. According to CACI's web site, "a Top Secret Clearance (TS) that is current and US citizenship" are required for CACI interrogators working in Iraq. In addition, CACI requires that its interrogators "have at least two years experience as a military policeman or similar type of law enforcement/intelligence agency whereby the individual utilized interviewing techniques."

Speculation that "John Israel" may be an intelligence cover name has fueled speculation whether this individual could have been one of a number of Israeli interrogators hired under a classified contract. Because U.S. citizenship and documentation thereof are requirements for a U.S. security clearance, Israeli citizens would not be permitted to hold a Top Secret clearance. However, dual U.S.-Israeli citizens could have satisfied Pentagon requirements that interrogators hold U.S. citizenship and a Top Secret clearance. Although the Taguba report refers twice to Israel as an employee of Titan, the company claims he is one of their sub-contractors. CACI stated that one of the men listed in the report "is not and never has been a CACI employee" without providing more detail. A U.S. intelligence source revealed that in the world of intelligence "carve out" subcontracts such confusion is often the case with "plausible deniability" being a foremost concern.

In fact, the Taguba report does reference the presence of non-U.S. and non-Iraqi interrogators at Abu Ghraib. The report states, "In general, US civilian contract personnel (Titan Corporation, CACI, etc), third country nationals, and local contractors do not appear to be properly supervised within the detention facility at Abu Ghraib."

The Pentagon is clearly concerned about the outing of the Taguba report and its references to CACI, Titan, and third country nationals, which could permanently damage U.S. relations with Arab and Islamic nations. The Pentagon's angst may explain why the Taguba report is classified Secret No Foreign Dissemination.

The leak of the Taguba report was so radioactive, Daniel R. Dunn, the Information Assurance Officer for Douglas Feith's Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Policy (Policy Automation Services Security Team), sent a May 6, 2004, For Official Use Only Urgent E-mail to Pentagon staffers stating, "THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT IS CLASSIFIED; DO NOT GO TO FOX NEWS TO READ OR OBTAIN A COPY." Considering Feith's close ties to the Israelis, such a reaction by his top computer security officer, a Certified Information System Security Professional (CISSP), is understandable, although considering the fact that CISSPs are to act on behalf of the public good, it is also regrettable..

The reference to "third country nationals" in a report that restricts its dissemination to U.S. coalition partners (Great Britain, Poland, Italy, etc.) is another indication of the possible involvement of Israelis in the interrogation of Iraqi prisoners. Knowledge that the U.S. may have been using Israeli interrogators could have severely fractured the Bush administration's tenuous "coalition of the willing' in Iraq. General Taguba's findings were transmitted to the Coalition Forces Land Component Command on March 9, 2004, just six days before the Spanish general election, one that the opposition anti-Iraq war Socialists won. The Spanish ultimately withdrew their forces from Iraq.

During his testimony before the Senate Armed Service Committee, Rumsfeld was pressed upon by Senator John McCain about the role of the private contractors in the interrogations and abuse. McCain asked Rumsfeld four pertinent questions, ". . . who was in charge? What agency or private contractor was in charge of the interrogations? Did they have authority over the guards? And what were the instructions that they gave to the guards?"

When Rumsfeld had problems answering McCain's question, Lt. Gen. Lance Smith, the Deputy Commander of the U.S. Central Command, said there were 37 contract interrogators used in Abu Ghraib. The two named contractors, CACI and Titan, have close ties to the Israeli military and technology communities. Last January 14, after Provost Marshal General of the Army, Major General Donald Ryder, had already uncovered abuse at Abu Ghraib, CACI's President and CEO, Dr. J.P. (Jack) London was receiving the Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah's Albert Einstein Technology award at the Jerusalem City Hall, with right-wing Likud politician Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and ultra-Orthodox United Torah Judaism party Jerusalem Mayor Uri Lupolianski in attendance. Oddly, CACI waited until February 2 to publicly announce the award in a press release. CACI has also received grants from U.S.-Israeli bi-national foundations.

Titan also has had close connections to Israeli interests. After his stint as CIA Director, James Woolsey served as a Titan director. Woolsey is an architect of America's Iraq policy and the chief proponent of and lobbyist for Ahmad Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress. An adviser to the neo-conservative Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs, Project for the New American Century, Center for Security Policy, Freedom House, and Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, Woolsey is close to Stephen Cambone, the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, a key person in the chain of command who would have not only known about the torture tactics used by U.S. and Israeli interrogators in Iraq but who would have also approved them. Cambone was associated with the Project for the New American Century and is viewed as a member of Rumsfeld's neo-conservative "cabal" within the Pentagon.

Another person considered by Pentagon insiders to have been knowledgeable about the treatment of Iraqi prisoners is U.S. Army Col. Steven Bucci, a Green Beret and Rumsfeld's military assistant and chief traffic cop for the information flow to the Defense Secretary. According to Pentagon insiders, Bucci was involved in the direction of a special covert operations unit composed of former U.S. special operations personnel who answered to the Pentagon rather than the CIA's Special Activities Division, the agency's own paramilitary group. The Pentagon group included Arabic linguists and former members of the Green Berets and Delta Force who operated covertly in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan. Titan also uses linguists trained in the languages (Arabic, Dari, Farsi, Pashto, Urdu, and Tajik) of those same countries. It is not known if a link exists between Rumsfeld's covert operations unit and Titan's covert operations linguists.

Another Titan employee named in the Taguba report is Adel L. Nakhla. Nakhla is a name common among Egypt's Coptic Christian community, however, it is not known if Adel Nakhla is either an Egyptian-American or a national of Egypt. A CACI employee identified in the report, Steven Stephanowicz, is referred to as "Stefanowicz" in a number of articles on the prison abuse. Stefanowicz is the spelling used by Joe Ryan, another CACI employee assigned with Stefanowicz to Abu Ghraib. Ryan is a radio personality on KSTP, a conservative radio station in Minneapolis, who maintained a daily log of his activities in Iraq on the radio's web site before it was taken down. Ryan indicated that Stefanowicz (or Stephanowicz) continued to hold his interrogation job in Iraq even though General Taguba recommended he lose his security clearance and be terminated for the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

In an even more bizarre twist, the Philadelphia Daily News identified a former expatriate public relations specialist for the government of South Australia in Adelaide named Steve Stefanowicz as possibly being the same person identified in the Taguba report. In 2000, Stefanowicz, who grew up in the Philadelphia and Allentown areas, left for Australia. On September 16, 2001, he was quoted by the Sunday Mail of Adelaide on the 911 attacks. He said of the attacks, "It was one of the most incredible and most devastating things I have ever seen. I have been in constant contact with my family and friends in the US and the mood was very solemn and quiet. But this is progressing into anger." Stefanowicz returned to the United States and volunteered for the Navy in a reserve status. His mother told the Allentown Morning Call in April 2002 that Stefanowicz was stationed somewhere in the Middle East but did not know where because of what Stefanowicz said was "security concerns." His mother told the Philadelphia Daily News that her son was in Iraq but she knew nothing about his current status.

Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and columnist. He served in the National Security Agency (NSA) during the Reagan administration and wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth. He is the co-author, with John Stanton, of "America's Nightmare: The Presidency of George Bush II." His forthcoming book is titled: "Jaded Tasks: Big Oil, Black Ops, and Brass Plates."

Madsen can be reached at: WMadsen777@aol.com

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who is John Israel?
He could be one of the secret masterminds behind the Abu Ghraib outrage (see the 'Who is John Israel' article which is linked on the right side at the following URL):

http://www.antiwar.com/justin

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following URL (link) will take you right to Seymour Hersh's latest article for the New Yorker magazine which is a must read at your earliest convenience:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact

Amy Goodman did an excellent interview with Seymour Hersh this morning on the 'Democracy Now' radio program that she hosts (as you can listen to the interview via clicking on the link for it after accessing the following URL as Hersh discusses his article - the one which is linked above):

Rumsfeld Knew: Iraq Prison Abuse Part of Pentagon-Approved Black Ops Program:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/17/1431219

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Looks like the Israeli association to the intelligence/torture is completely being white- washed for Israel (read former Republican Congressman Paul Findley's 'They Dare to Speak Out' book to see why) as the following article (URL) also conveys how closely tied the US is to Israeli 'anti-terror' tactics:

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=
3446

Israeli link possible in US torture techniques
By Ali Abunimah
Special to The Daily Star
Tuesday, May 11, 2004

In exchange for interrogation training, did Washington award security
contracts?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Israeli lessons for the US in Iraq:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/C182D988-28E3-4D48-ADFC-F15D6509B0EC.htm

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEOCON PENTAGON OFFICIAL CLASHES WITH GENERAL TAGUBA:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/05/12/officials-clash-on-roles-at-iraq-prison.php

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is Israel behind the orders for the tortures in Iraq?:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/05/09/is-israel-behind-the-orders-for-the-tortures-in-iraq.php

Jason Vest had earlier written the 'Men from JINSA and CSP' article
( http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&s=vest ) for 'The Nation' about the JINSA/PNAC Neocon cabal at the Pentagon as he just came out with the following article for 'The Nation' as well which connects the neocons to the torture in the Iraqi prison (s). You can also listen his excellent interview about such on the 'To the Point' national radio program from earlier today on your computer via the following URL:

http://www.moretothepoint.com/cgi-bin/db/kcrw.pl?show_code=tp&air_date=5/18/04&tmplt_type=Show

Jason Vest's latest article can be found on the web at:

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040531&s=vest2

PENTAGON NEOCON CABAL ORDERED IRAQ PRISON TORTURE:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/05/17/pentagon-neocon-cabal-ordered-iraq-prison-torture.php

Alpha

Subj: Bush Claimed Right to Waive Torture Laws
Date: 6/23/04 1:27:50 AM Pacific Daylight Time

White House - AP

Bush Claimed Right to Waive Torture Laws

26 minutes ago

By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) claimed the right to waive anti-torture laws and treaties covering prisoners of war after the invasion of Afghanistan (news - web sites), and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld authorized guards to strip detainees and threaten them with dogs, according to documents released Tuesday.

Latest headlines:
· Lawyer's Resignation Delayed Abuse Hearing
AP - 17 minutes ago

The documents were handed out at the White House in an effort to blunt allegations that the administration had authorized torture against al-Qaida prisoners from Afghanistan and Iraq (news - web sites). "I have never ordered torture," Bush said. "I will never order torture. The values of this country are such that torture is not a part of our soul and our being." The memos were meant to deal with an election-year headache that followed revelations about abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, but the documents also brought to light some practices that the administration decided had gone too far. Amnesty International revived its call for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate any torture and ill-treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody. The Justice Department (news - web sites) disavowed a memo written in 2002 that appeared to justify the use of torture in the war on terror. The memo also argued that the president's wartime powers superseded anti-torture laws and treaties. That 50-page document, dated Aug. 1, 2002, will be replaced, Justice Department officials said. White House counsel Alberto Gonzales said that some legal memos contained "unnecessary and overbroad discussions" that could be "subject to misinterpretation." But he added, "The analysis underpinning the president's decisions stand and are not being reviewed." A new memo will instead narrowly address the question of proper interrogation techniques for al-Qaida and Taliban detainees, the Justice Department said. Bush had outlined his own views in a Feb. 7. 2002, document regarding treatment of al-Qaida detainees from Afghanistan. He said the war against terrorism had ushered in a "new paradigm" and that terrorist attacks required "new thinking in the law of war." Still, he said prisoners must be treated humanely and in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. "I accept the legal conclusion of the attorney general and the Department of Justice (news - web sites) that I have the authority under the Constitution to suspend Geneva as between the United States and Afghanistan, but I decline to exercise that authority at this time," the president said in the memo, entitled "Humane Treatment of al-Qaida and Taliban Detainees." Explaining Bush's memo, Gonzales said the United States "is fighting "an enemy that does not fight, attack or plan according to accepted laws of war — in particular the Geneva Conventions." In a separate Pentagon (news - web sites) memo, dated Nov. 27, 2002, the Defense Department's chief lawyer, William J. Haynes II, recommended that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld approve the use of 14 interrogation techniques on detainees at Guantanamo Bay, such as yelling at a prisoner during questioning and using "stress positions," like standing, for up to four hours. Haynes also recommended approval of one technique among harsher methods requested by U.S. military authorities at Guantanamo: use of "mild, non-injurious physical contact such as grabbing, poking in the chest with the finger and light pushing." Among the techniques that Rumsfeld approved on Dec. 2, 2002, in addition to the grabbing, the yelling and the stress positions: _ Use of 20-hour interrogations. _ Removal of all comfort items, including religious items. _ Removal of clothing. _ Using detainees' "individual phobias such as fear of dogs to induce stress."
Rumsfeld scribbled a note on Haynes' memo that said, "However, I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours." In a Jan. 15, 2003, note, Rumsfeld rescinded his approval of Haynes' recommendations and said a review would be conducted to consider legal, policy and operational issues relating to interrogations of detainees held by the U.S. military in the war on terrorism. Rumsfeld's decision was prompted at least in part by objections raised by some military lawyers who felt that the techniques might go too far, officials said earlier this year. The review was completed in April 2003, and on that basis Rumsfeld reissued his guidance on April 16, 2003. He approved 24 interrogation techniques, to be used in a manner consistent with the Geneva Conventions, but said that any use of four of those methods would have to be approved by him in advance: the use of rewards or removal of privileges; attacking or insulting the ego of a detainee; alternating the use of friendly and harsh interrogators, and isolation. The April 2003 review said that removing a detainees' clothing would raise legal issues because it could be construed as degrading, which is against the international convention on torture. The removal of clothing, approved by Rumsfeld for use at Guantanamo Bay in late 2002, was not among the authorized techniques in his revised guidelines issued in April 2003. At the Justice Department, senior officials said that the 50-page memo issued to the White House on Aug. 1, 2002, would be repudiated and replaced. The memo, signed by former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, included lengthy sections that appeared to justify use of torture in the war on terrorism and it contended that U.S. personnel could be immune from prosecution for torture. The memo also argued that the president's powers as commander in chief allow him to override U.S. laws and international treaties banning torture. Critics on Capitol Hill and elsewhere have said that memo provided the legal underpinnings for subsequent abuses of prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq. Reacting to the White House release, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, the senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee (news - web sites), accused the administration of continuing to withhold information. "Though this is a self-serving selection, at least it is a beginning," Leahy said. "But for the Judiciary Committee and the Senate to find the whole truth, we will need much more cooperation and extensive hearings." ___ Associated Press writers Curt Anderson, Robert Burns and Scott Lindlaw contributed to this article.

Abu Ghraib Prison Torture Scandal Goes to the Highest Level:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/articles/2004/06/13/interrogation-abuses-were-approved-at-highest-levels.php

James Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book on the Neoconservative warmongers:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/06/14/iraq-war-for-israel-according-to-james-bamford-s-new-book.php

9/11 Attack Happened because of US Support for Israel:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/06/19/9-11-attack-happened-because-of-us-support-for-israel.php

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lawyer's Resignation Delayed Abuse Hearing

By ESTES THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer

RALEIGH, N.C. - A three-week delay in the military court hearing for a soldier seen in some of the most notorious abuse photos from an Iraqi prison was caused by the resignation of another of her lawyers.

Rose Mary Zapor of Denver said Tuesday in an e-mail that she left Pfc. Lynndie England's defense team Monday because of unspecified health problems suffered by her husband. The hearing, scheduled to begin Tuesday at Fort Bragg, was postponed Monday to July 12, initially without explanation. The Aricle 32 hearing, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, will determine if a court-martial is held. Last month, lawyer Giorgio Ra'Shadd left England's defense team by mutual agreement with her family after it was revealed he faces a September trial in Colorado that could result in his disbarment. The lawyers in the case are all volunteers. England, an Army reservist from West Virginia, was photographed holding a naked Iraqi prisoner by a leash and smiling and giving the thumbs-up in other pictures taken at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison. England's lawyers are expected to argue that the 21-year-old only posed in the photos on specific orders from higher-ups. England faces 13 counts, including three of assaulting detainees. If convicted on all counts, she faces a dishonorable discharge and up to 15 1/2 years in prison. England is one of six soldiers who still face charges in the scandal; Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits has already pleaded guilty and been sentenced to a year in prison. In an interview broadcast by NBC, England said if she had it to do all over she would "go back in time and not join the Army." "I just want to go home, get it over with," she said. England also said she does not believe she should go to jail: "I think that none of the seven of us should."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subj: AP: Israeli Torture Methods Used at Abu Ghraib
Date: 6/21/04 4:41:23 AM Pacific Daylight Time

Judge: Abu Ghraib a Crime Scene
By FISNIK ABRASHI and JIM KRANE, AP

Sgt. Javal S. Davis

Col. James Pohl issued the decisions at a hearing for Sgt. Javal S. Davis, one of seven soldiers charged in the case. Another, Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits, pleaded guilty last month and was sentenced to a year in prison.

Pohl was also to hear motions Monday in the cases against two other defendants - Spc. Charles A. Graner Jr. and Staff Sgt. Ivan L. "Chip'' Frederick II.

The judge turned down motions by Davis' lawyers to move the trial out of Iraq and to order a new Article 32 hearing, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding.

Pohl declared the prison a crime scene and said it could not be destroyed prior to a verdict. President Bush had offered to dismantle the facility to help remove the stain of torture and abuse from the new Iraq; but Iraqi officials have declined, calling it a waste of resources. Saddam Hussein used Abu Ghraib to torture and murder his opponents.

Davis' civilian lawyer, Paul Bergrin, won permission to seek testimony from the top U.S. general in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, and from the chief of the U.S. Central Command, Gen. John Abizaid.

But the judge turned down a request to seek testimony from higher-ranking witnesses, including Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Pohl left open the possibility of calling other senior figures if the defense could show their testimony was relevant.

Lawyers for the soldiers have long maintained their clients were simply following orders to treat Iraqi detainees harshly and that the instructions came from the highest levels of the U.S. government.

Bergrin told reporters during a recess that he thought the hearing had gone well. He said lower-echelon troops at the prison had worked under intense pressure from their commanders and the CIA and had used nudity and other "Israeli methods'' considered effective against Arab prisoners.

The hearings took place in the Baghdad Convention Center in the heavily guarded Green Zone, the nerve center of the American-run occupation of Iraq. U.S. authorities hope the proceedings will convince Iraqis that the United States does not tolerate abuses of civil liberties.

Davis' military lawyer, Capt. Scott Dunn, failed to win an order to reopen the Article 32 investigation, which would have in effect dismissed the current charges. Dunn had argued that the military neglected to make a witness available during the Article 32 proceedings, which ended with a recommendation for court martial.

However, the judge granted a request by Bergrin to declassify all parts of an Army investigation report conducted by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba.

On May 19, Sivits became the first soldier convicted and sentenced in the scandal. Sivits pleaded guilty and received the maximum penalty of one year in prison, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank to private and a bad conduct discharge.

The three defendants who appeared in court Monday face more serious charges and could receive long prison terms.

As the session began, Dunn said that while he understands security conditions in Iraq make it difficult to provide access to some witnesses, his client still has a right to confront his accusers. Dunn wanted to question an inmate at Abu Ghraib.

"We couldn't go to him. They wouldn't bring him to us. They said it was impossible to obtain any telephone testimony. We object to not obtaining his testimony at all,'' Dunn said.

The Army has argued that a sharp rise in violence in April, including the siege of nearby Fallujah, made the area around Abu Ghraib too dangerous.

Bergrin said last week that he would argue for a dismissal of charges because of "improper command influence'' extending to President Bush.

Bergrin alleged that senior U.S. military officers sanctioned harsh treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison and said he would seek evidence that Davis was simply following orders.

Frederick's civilian lawyer, Gary Myers, has said he will ask the judge for an investigator. Myers also said he would request a new Article 32 hearing because his client was not allowed to gather evidence or interrogate witnesses at his first session.

The seven soldiers charged in the case were from the 372nd Military Police Company, an Army Reserve unit from Cresaptown, Md. The abuse scandal broke in April when CBS' "60 Minutes II'' aired photographs of hooded and naked prisoners. Since then other photographs showing sexual humiliation have surfaced, generating worldwide criticism of the United States and undercutting American moral authority abroad.

A separate hearing for another soldier charged in the scandal, Pfc. Lynndie England, 21, was scheduled for Tuesday at Fort Bragg, N.C., where she is now stationed.

The military has not decided whether to refer the cases against two others - Spc. Sabrina Harman and Pfc. Megan Ambuhl - to courts martial.

Coalition officials said the judge wanted to complete all three hearings Monday but that the proceedings could last for three days.

Graner, of Uniontown, Pa., has been accused of jumping on several detainees as they were piled on the floor. He is also charged with stomping the hands and bare feet of several prisoners and punching one inmate in the temple so hard that he lost consciousness.

He also faces adultery charges for having sex with England last October. He could receive 24 1/2 years in jail, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank, and a dishonorable discharge.

Frederick, of Buckingham, Va., is accused of forcing prisoners to masturbate, placing naked detainees into a human pyramid and placing wires on a detainee's hands, telling him he would be electrocuted if he fell off a box on which he was forced to stand.

He faces a maximum punishment of 16 1/2 years in confinement, forfeiture of pay, reduction of rank, and a dishonorable discharge.

Davis, of Maryland, is accused of maltreating prisoners, stomping on their hands and feet and putting detainees in a pile on the floor to be assaulted by other soldiers. He faces maximum of eight and a half years in jail, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank and a dishonorable discharge.

06/21/04 05:11 EDT

Cowboy

Top · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 10:25 pm Post subject:

Alpha · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 11:57 pm Post subject: EXACTLY, TOP...

Alpha

Justice Dept. Rewrites Prison Advice

50 minutes ago
Add Top Stories - AP to My Yahoo!

By CURT ANDERSON, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - The Justice Department (news - web sites) is rewriting its legal advice on how far U.S. interrogators can go to pry information from detainees, working under much different circumstances from the writers of earlier memos that appeared to justify torture.

The first memos were written not long after the Sept. 11 attacks, while the new advice is being crafted against the backdrop of prisoner abuse in Iraq (news - web sites). Justice Department lawyers will spend several weeks reviewing and revising several key 2002 documents, especially a 50-page memo to the White House on Aug. 1, 2002, that critics have characterized as setting the legal tone for the mistreatment of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison. "The reason the original memo was so damaging was that it was consistent with a pattern of conduct from Afghanistan (news - web sites) to Guantanamo Bay to Iraq," Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University, said Wednesday. A day after releasing hundreds of pages of legal memos on the terror war, Bush administration officials reiterated that even though President Bush (news - web sites) signed a declaration in 2002 saying he had the authority to ignore international rules for treatment of captives, no orders were given to torture or mistreat prisoners. The unusual decision to release the memos and disclose that some were being revised came amid intense political pressure from Democrats and other critics stemming from the Iraq and Afghan abuses. Yet no Bush administration officials flatly said the memos were wrong. Current and former Justice Department officials rejected criticism that the Aug. 1 memo, signed by then-Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, laid a legal foundation for torture. They said that the memo's sections along such lines never became administration policy and that no detainees had been mistreated at Guantanamo Bay. They also said that no Justice Department memo on interrogations addressed the war in Iraq, which the administration determined was governed by the Geneva Conventions and that treaty's rules for treatment of prisoners of war. One of the most controversial sections of the Bybee memo that appears targeted for change or removal is entitled "The President's Commander-in-Chief Power." Over the next nine pages, Bybee lays out arguments that a key U.S. anti-torture law would be unconstitutional "if it impermissibly encroached on the president's constitutional power to conduct a military campaign." "One of the core functions of the commander in chief is that of capturing, detaining, and interrogating members of the enemy," the Bybee memo said. Critics say that reasoning goes too far. Some say it would give the president absolute authority in the waging of war. "The administration has shown a stunning disregard for the law, resorting time and again to saying 'we are at war,'" said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass. "We are not under martial law in this country. The laws and the Constitution are not suspended because we are at war." Democrats on Capitol Hill are pushing to secure release of more Bush administration documents, with some in the House calling for a special committee to investigate abuses at Abu Ghraib. "We can't get to the bottom of this unless there is a clear picture of what happened at the top," said Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee (news - web sites). Although the administration released memos on interrogation techniques approved for military personnel, the advice given to the CIA (news - web sites) and other intelligence agencies remains classified and will not be released, officials say. One CIA contractor has been indicted on charges of severely beating an Afghan prisoner who later died, and others are under investigation. It is clear that, in a presidential election year, photos of U.S. personnel abusing prisoners in Iraq made the conclusions of the post-Sept. 11 memos untenable for the Bush administration, legal experts say. "The highly charged political context of prisoner mistreatment highlights the sensitive nature of earlier (Justice Department) opinions and casts their manipulation of the law in a critical light," said Thomas Sargentich, an American University law professor and former attorney with the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel.
John Yoo, a University of California, Berkeley law professor and former Justice Department official, said government lawyers were confronted with a unique foe after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, one to whom conventional rules of war meant nothing. "Sept. 11 started a completely new kind of conflict, with a new non-state enemy that fights in unconventional ways that violate the very core notions of the laws of war," Yoo said. "In this new conflict, I think it's good practice for the government to ask questions about the legal lines established in statute by Congress." Yoo, who worked with Bybee in the Bush administration's Office of Legal Counsel, declined to comment on the substance of the memos. Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites) also refused to comment Wednesday, saying that senior agency officials insisting on anonymity had given an "unprecedented" briefing about the documents a day earlier. "I don't expect to make further comments about that," Ashcroft said. ___ On the Net: Justice Department: http://www.usdoj.gov

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20040623/6310123s.htm
Page 1A

General promised quick results if Gitmo plan used at Abu Ghraib But Miller asked for extra guards and legal adviser

By Blake Morrison and Peter Eisler
USA TODAY

The general who pushed for more aggressive interrogation tactics at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison predicted better intelligence within a month if his strategies were adopted, according to a copy of his classified plan obtained by USA TODAY.

In the plan, sent in early September to top military officials in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller promised that ''a significant improvement in actionable intelligence will be realized within 30 days.'' His strategy involved having military police acting as prison guards ''setting the conditions to exploit internees to respond to questions.''The recommendations in Miller's 12-page report were based on the interrogation operation he supervised at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where suspected members of al-Qaeda are held. The report lists a roster of the 17-person team culled entirely from the Guantanamo operation. The team spent 10 days at Abu Ghraib with Miller in late summer, before he submitted the plan. Several interrogation teams from Guantanamo subsequently trained those at Abu Ghraib.By Oct. 12, the Army moved ahead with Miller's strategy to team guards and interrogators, an approach at odds with long-established military doctrine. But commanders were slow to implement other aspects of Miller's plan that might have helped prevent misconduct. Those recommendations called for increasing the number of guards and interrogators, improving their training and assigning a legal adviser to Abu Ghraib who was dedicated to monitoring the intelligence-gathering operation. Miller's plan, disclosed publicly for the first time, underscores the urgency top officials felt last fall about finding both Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction and quelling an increasingly deadly Iraqi insurgency. It also raises questions about whether the Army cut corners in its quest for intelligence and created pressures that may have contributed to the abuses. By late October, guards began abusing prisoners and taking humiliating photos of them. Prisoners say guards stripped them naked, forced them to masturbate and put hoods over their heads. One of the six soldiers who still face courts-martial for misconduct, Sgt. Javal Davis, told Army investigators that interrogators encouraged guards to ''loosen this guy up'' or ''make sure he gets the treatment'' before interrogations. A seventh has pleaded guilty. Miller's plan was not among documents released Tuesday by the White House. Rather, it is part of the classified section of the report prepared by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who conducted the Army's internal investigation into abuses at Abu Ghraib. Miller, who was not interviewed in that investigation, was subsequently put in charge of all detention and interrogation operations in Iraq.Guantanamo was viewed as a successThe interrogation tactics used at Guantanamo were viewed as highly successful by the Pentagon. This month, Gen. James Hill, who heads the U.S Southern Command and oversees Guantanamo, noted that interrogators there continue to get useful intelligence, including information on al-Qaeda cells and insights into the organization and its finances.That's why U.S. military officials turned to Miller, who had taken charge of interrogation operations at Guantanamo, to help pull better information from detainees in Iraq. According to the report Miller sent Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, Miller used the interrogation procedures at Guantanamo as ''baselines'' for his recommendations.Many of Miller's findings focused on the lack of a ''unified strategy'' for detaining and interrogating prisoners in Iraq. There was no system, he said, for communicating to interrogators what sort of intelligence commanders needed, or for coordinating the information interrogators gleaned. He also noted that the analysis of that information was weak, hampered in part by a substandard database that did not allow intelligence officers to check the statements of detainees against information that commanders already had.More involvement by MPsBut much of Miller's report dwelled on the interrogations themselves -- and their lack of success. It was in this context that he urged far more involvement by military police guards in eliciting intelligence from prisoners.In his report to Sanchez, Miller urged that commanders at Abu Ghraib ''dedicate and train a detention guard force . . . that sets the conditions for the successful interrogation and exploitation of internees/detainees.'' That guard force, Miller said, should be joined with interrogators under a single commander from military intelligence.The plan violated long-established military doctrine, which stipulates that military police ''do not participate in military-intelligence-supervised interrogation sessions.'' But Miller told Congress that, with his report, he provided top military officials a list of procedures used at Guantanamo that set limits on the role of MPs in interrogations.''The recommendation was that the MPs conduct passive intelligence gathering . . . to observe the detainees, to see how their behavior was, to see who they would speak with, and then to report that to the interrogators,'' Miller testified. Officials who helped set up the operation at Guantanamo, nicknamed ''Gitmo'' by the military, say there would have been no problems at Abu Ghraib if the plan had been managed as well as it had been at the facility in Cuba. ''Had the policies that were in place at Gitmo from detention to interrogation been fully implemented with proper oversight, none of this likely would have happened,'' says Mark Jacobson, a former Pentagon adviser on interrogations.Abu Ghraib was differentBut the conditions at Abu Ghraib differed dramatically from those at Guantanamo. In his report, Taguba said ''there is a strong argument that the intelligence value of detainees held'' at Guantanamo ''is different than that of the detainees/internees held at Abu Ghraib and other detention facilities in Iraq. Currently, there are a large number of Iraqi criminals held at Abu Ghraib. These are not believed to be international terrorists or members of Al Qaida, Anser Al Islam, Taliban and other international terrorist organizations.''The officer overseeing detention facilities in Iraq, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, also says she warned Miller in September that Abu Ghraib lacked enough military police to emulate the operation at Guantanamo. ''At Guantanamo, they had 800 MPs for 640 prisoners,'' or more than a guard for each inmate, Karpinski says. ''At Abu Ghraib, we had about 300 MPs for about 6,600 prisoners,'' or one for every 22 prisoners. That meant MPs at Abu Ghraib, unlike those at Gitmo, would not be able to devote special attention to detainees, their diets, their sleep habits and their moods. In fact, the MPs there had trouble controlling the riots that periodically erupted.In addition, the chaotic environment at Abu Ghraib, an overcrowded prison that came under frequent mortar attack, was nothing like the quiet, tightly controlled, well-equipped detention center in Cuba.Karpinski says Miller didn't seem interested in her concerns. He told her he had been given the go-ahead from Sanchez to remake the prison as he saw fit.''He said, 'Look, we can do this my way or we can do this the hard way,' '' Karpinski says. ''The communication was, 'This was a done deal. And because he set the tenor of this from the beginning, I was not about to argue with Miller. He had Sanchez's endorsement.''Karpinski says she never saw Miller's written plan until months later, after the abuses occurred. Even so, Karpinski says, she pledged her support. Miller and other top military officials told Congress last month that the interrogation plan and the abuse were not related. They testified that rogue guards, poorly trained and supervised by Karpinski and her officers, were responsible.Karpinski blames Miller for the well-documented abuses at Abu Ghraib. She says his pledge to produce intelligence fast could not be kept ''without aggressive techniques.'' ''What became the catalyst for those things to take place? Miller's visit and his efforts to Gitmo-ize the operation,'' she says. ''It is the only explanation for the abuses we've seen.'' Continued fromCover storyCover storyCover storySee COVER STORY next page

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62516-2004Jun22?language=printer
washingtonpost.com Bush Administration Documents on Interrogation

Wednesday, June 23, 2004; 3:30 AM The following is a summary of White House, Pentagon and Justice Department documents about interrogation policies. The documents were released by the Bush administration on June 22. Some files are presented as PDF files, which require the Adobe Acrobat Reader, and may require high-speed Internet connections to download.Jan. 22, 2002: Justice Department Memo to the White House and Pentagon Counsels (3.3MB)
A 37-page memo written by Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee and addressed to White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales and the Pentagon's general counsel, William J. Haynes II. Bybee argued that that the War Crimes Act and the Geneva Convention did not apply to al Qaeda prisoners and that President Bush had constitutional authority to "suspend our treaty obligations toward Afghanistan" because it was a "failed state." Bybee, then head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, has since become a federal judge. Feb. 1, 2002: Letter to President Bush From the Attorney General (49KB; from FindLaw)
The memo by Attorney General John D. Ashcroft summarized the Justice Department's position on why the Geneva Convention did not apply to al Qaeda and Taliban detainees. The memo was Ashcroft's personal response to the State Department position that, as a matter of law, the Geneva Conventions protected Taliban soldiers. Ashcroft warned that if the president sided with the State Department, American officials might wind up going to jail for violating U.S. and international laws.Feb. 7, 2002: Justice Department Memo to the White House Counsel (49KB; from FindLaw)
A memo written by Jay S. Bybee, then head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, advised White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales that the president had "reasonable factual grounds" to determine that Taliban fighters captured in Afghanistan were not entitled to prisoner of war status.Feb. 7, 2002: Memo Signed by President Bush (130KB)
Bush's presidential memorandum to members of his national security team said he believed he had "the authority under the Constitution" to deny protections of the Geneva Conventions to combatants picked up during the war in Afghanistan, but that he would "decline to exercise that authority at this time." The memo settled the dispute between the State and Justice departments over the issue.Feb. 26, 2002: Justice Department Memo to the Pentagon's General Counsel (2.5MB)
A memo to the Pentagon's general counsel, William J. Haynes II, written by Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee examined constitutional questions related to detainees captured in Afghanistan, including the admissibility of statements made in interrogations.Aug. 1, 2002: Justice Department Memo to the White House Counsel (864KB; from FindLaw)
A memo to White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales from Jay S. Bybee of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel concluded that techniques used to interrogate al Qaeda operatives would not violate a 1984 international treaty prohibiting torture. Bybee also concluded that the interrogation of al Qaeda members was outside the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, but warned that a "rogue prosecutor" could choose to investigate U.S. interrogation techniques because the international court "is not checked by any other international body, not to mention any democratically-elected or accountable one."Aug. 1, 2002: Justice Department Memo to the White House Counsel (27.5MB; from FindLaw)
The memo from Jay S. Bybee, head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, to White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales found that torturing terrorism suspects might be legally defensible. Bush administration officials said on June 22, 2004 -- when the document was publicly released -- that the memo's conclusions were overbroad and would be rewritten.Dec. 2, 2002: Defense Department Memo Regarding "Counter-Resistance Techniques" (780KB)
A memo written by the Pentagon's general counsel, William J. Haynes II, on Nov. 27 and approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Dec. 2 summarized specific interrogation techniques that could be used at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; this document also includes a series of related memos on interrogation techniques.A related one-page summary document (56KB) issued to reporters by Bush aides on June 22, 2004, reviewed which specific techniques were approved and used.Jan. 15, 2003: Rumsfeld Memo to the Head of U.S. Southern Command (47KB)
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's memo rescinded his approval for some interrogation techniques for Guantanamo Bay. The memo allowed commanders to seek Rumsfeld's direct approval to use the tougher techniques if they are "warranted in an individual case" but would require a "thorough justification."Jan. 15, 2003: Rumsfeld Memo to the Pentagon Counsel (53KB)
The defense secretary's memo to William J. Haynes II, the Pentagon's general counsel, asked Haynes to convene a working group to examine all aspects of interrogation policies. The memo also was referenced in Rumsfeld's memo to the head of U.S. Southern Command dated the same day.Jan. 17, 2003: Memo From the Pentagon Counsel to the General Counsel for the Air Force (56KB)
Pentagon general counsel William J. Haynes II designated Mary L. Walker, the general counsel for the Air Force, to head the working group Rumsfeld requested in his Jan. 15 memo.April 4, 2003: Report of the Pentagon Working Group (6.7MB)
The 85-page report requested by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in January reviewed "legal, historical, police and operational considerations" and made recommendations to the Pentagon on what techniques should be approved.April 16, 2003: Rumsfeld Memo to the Head of U.S. Southern Command (1.6MB)
The defense secretary, acting on the working groups' recommendation, restates which specific interrogation techniques are approved for Guantanamo Bay and which require his direct approval. The document also includes excerpts from the Army Field Manual.Compiled by Mark Stencel, The Washington Post, and Ryan Thornburg, washingtonpost.com

dangerousdna · Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 1:01 am Post subject:

The Bush administration just has shown themselves as ridiculous liars to the world.

After viewing the videos and pics then saying how disgusting they were and that they never knew this was going on, just a few bad apples, his highness said.

Since we know Bush and the WH mafia cartel are guilty, then why are those few soldiers being prosecuted and jailed for being ordered what to do by higher officials?

Bush and cabal should be the ones behind bars.

Alpha · Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2004 11:36 pm Post subject: CIA Puts Harsh Tactics On Hold

washingtonpost.com

CIA Puts Harsh Tactics On Hold
Memo on Methods Of Interrogation Had Wide Review

By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 27, 2004; Page A01

The CIA has suspended the use of extraordinary interrogation techniques approved by the White House pending a review by Justice Department and other administration lawyers, intelligence officials said.

The "enhanced interrogation techniques," as the CIA calls them, include feigned drowning and refusal of pain medication for injuries. The tactics have been used to elicit intelligence from al Qaeda leaders such as Abu Zubaida and Khalid Sheik Mohammed.

Current and former CIA officers aware of the recent decision said the suspension reflects the CIA's fears of being accused of unsanctioned and illegal activities, as it was in the 1970s. The decision applies to CIA detention facilities, such as those around the world where the agency is interrogating al Qaeda leaders and their supporters, but not military prisons at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere.

"Everything's on hold," said a former senior CIA official aware of the agency's decision. "The whole thing has been stopped until we sort out whether we are sure we're on legal ground." A CIA spokesman declined to comment on the issue.

CIA interrogations will continue but without the suspended techniques, which include feigning suffocation, "stress positions," light and noise bombardment, sleep deprivation, and making captives think they are being interrogated by another government.

The suspension is the latest fallout from the abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and is related to the White House decision, announced Tuesday, to review and rewrite sections of an Aug. 1, 2002, Justice Department opinion on interrogations that said torture might be justified in some cases.

Although the White House repudiated the memo Tuesday as the work of a small group of lawyers at the Justice Department, administration officials now confirm it was vetted by a larger number of officials, including lawyers at the National Security Council, the White House counsel's office and Vice President Cheney's office.

The memorandum was drafted by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel to help the CIA determine how aggressive its interrogators could be during sessions with suspected al Qaeda members. The legal opinion was signed by Jay S. Bybee, then head of the office and now a federal judge. The office consists mainly of political appointees and is considered the executive branch agencies' legal adviser. Memos signed by the head of the office are given the weight of a binding legal opinion.

A Justice Department official said Tuesday at a briefing that the office went "beyond what was asked for," but other lawyers and administration officials said the memo was approved by the department's criminal division and by the office of Attorney General John D. Ashcroft.

In addition, Timothy E. Flanigan -- then deputy White House counsel -- discussed a draft of the document with lawyers at the Office of Legal Counsel before it was finalized, the officials said. David S. Addington, Cheney's counsel, also weighed in with remarks during at least one meeting he held with Justice lawyers involved with writing the opinion. He was particularly concerned, sources said, that the opinion include a clear-cut section on the president's authority.

That section of the memo has become among the most controversial within the legal community that has analyzed the opinion since it was made public by The Washington Post. During Tuesday's briefing, White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales called the commander in chief section "unnecessary."

The Justice Department, he said, "will make a decision as to whether or not that is something that should continue to remain in the opinion." Justice Department officials said it would be scrapped.

The commander in chief section of the opinion said laws prohibiting torture do "not apply to the President's detention and interrogation of enemy combatants" in his role as commander in chief. Congress, which has signed international laws prohibiting torture, "may no more regulate the President's ability to detain and interrogate enemy combatants than it may regulate his ability to direct troop movements on the battlefield," according to the August memorandum.

Another element of the opinion criticized by outside lawyers is that it defines torture as pain "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death." That standard would allow a variety of tactics that would be considered cruel and inhumane under international law, legal experts have said.

At a briefing Tuesday, Gonzales declined to answer repeated questions about how the legal opinion, or the upcoming review of it, affected the CIA. But, he added, "As far as I'm told, every interrogation technique that has been authorized throughout the government is lawful and does not constitute torture."

Asked yesterday about the memo's circulation to a wider group of officials than previously known, White House spokeswoman Erin Healy replied in an e-mail: "It would not be uncommon for the Department of Justice to discuss issues with lawyers throughout the administration. Regardless, the President's policy is very clear. He expects detainees to be treated in a manner consistent with our laws, treaties and values. The President has spoken out against torture, he has never authorized it, nor will he. As we have said, portions of the memo are overbroad and the Department of Justice is reviewing it."

The legal debate over CIA interrogation techniques had its origins in the battlefields of Afghanistan, secret counterterrorism operations in Pakistan and in President Bush's decision to use unconventional tools in going after al Qaeda.

The interrogation methods were approved by Justice Department and National Security Council lawyers in 2002, briefed to key congressional leaders and required the authorization of CIA Director George J. Tenet for use, according to intelligence officials and other government officials with knowledge of the secret decision-making process.

When the CIA and the military "started capturing al Qaeda in Afghanistan, they had no interrogators, no special rules and no place to put them," said a senior Marine officer involved in detainee procedures. The FBI, which had the only full cadre of professional interrogators from its work with criminal networks in the United States, took the lead in questioning detainees.

But on Nov. 11, 2001, a senior al Qaeda operative who ran the Khaldan paramilitary camp in Afghanistan was captured by Pakistani forces and turned over to U.S. military forces in January 2002. The capture of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a Libyan, sparked the first real debate over interrogations. The CIA wanted to use a range of methods, including threatening his life and family.

But the FBI had never authorized such methods. The bureau wanted to preserve the purity of interrogations so they could be used as evidence in court cases.

Al-Libi provided the CIA with intelligence about an alleged plot to blow up the U.S. Embassy in Yemen with a truck bomb and pointed officials in the direction of Abu Zubaida, a top al Qaeda leader known to have been involved with the Sept. 11 plot.

In March 2002, Abu Zubaida was captured, and the interrogation debate between the CIA and FBI began anew. This time, when FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III decided to withhold FBI involvement, it was a signal that the tug of war was over. "Once the CIA was given the green light . . . they had the lead role," said a senior FBI counterterrorism official.

Abu Zubaida was shot in the groin during his apprehension in Pakistan. U.S. national security officials have suggested that painkillers were used selectively in the beginning of his captivity until he agreed to cooperate more fully. His information led to the apprehension of other al Qaeda members, including Ramzi Binalshibh, also in Pakistan. The capture of Binalshibh and other al Qaeda leaders -- Omar al-Faruq in Indonesia, Rahim al-Nashiri in Kuwait and Muhammad al Darbi in Yemen -- were all partly the result of information gained during interrogations, according to U.S. intelligence and national security officials. All four remain under CIA control.

A former senior Justice Department official said interrogation techniques for "high-value targets" were reviewed and approved on a case-by-case basis, based partly on what strategies would work best on specific detainees. Justice lawyers suggested some limitations that were adopted, the former official said.

The former official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said the administration concluded that techniques did not amount to torture if they did not produce significant physical harm or injury. However, interrogators were allowed to trick the detainees into thinking they might be harmed or instructed to endure unpleasant physical tasks, such as being forced to stand or squat in stress positions.

"Clearly, that is not considered torture," the former Justice official argued. "It might be unpleasant and it might offend our sensibilities in most situations, but in these situations they were necessary and productive."

At the same time, the former official said, "we never had a situation where we said, 'You can do anything you want to.' We never, ever did that. We were aggressive, but our people were very scholarly and lawyerlike."

Staff writers John Mintz and Dan Eggen contributed to this report.

War Without End

The global war against terror, news about the illegal invasion of Iraq, the corporate puppet presidents, the war criminal Tony Blair, September 11th 2001, the USS Liberty and New World Order crimes against humanity.

Interrogation abuses were 'approved at highest levels' - page 3