Did Logistics Guy John Brennan Set Up the Torture Taping System? Did He Buy the Torture Coffin?

[youtube]mRAHa_Po0Kg[/youtube]

This was one of the most interesting little-noticed exchanges at John Brennan’s confirmation hearing last week.

CHAMBLISS: In 2002 what was your knowledge of interrogation videotapes about Abu Zubaydah, and did you seek any information about an Office of General Counsel review of them in 2002?

BRENNAN: I have — I don’t have a recollection of that, Senator.

CHAMBLISS: Of the tapes, or that request?

BRENNAN: At the time, in 2002, I do not know what my involvement or knowledge was at the time of the tapes. I believe that they — I was aware of the Abu Zubaydah debriefings and interrogation sessions being taped.

John Brennan not only knew of the torture tapes but … well, he doesn’t remember whether he asked about the OGC review of torture tapes or not.

As a threshold matter, remember that Brennan was in a logistical role at the time the torture sessions were first taped. He had nothing to do with the development of the techniques, he says. But thus far, I think no one has asked him if he procured any of a number of items the torturers used.

For example, did John Brennan help set up the torture taping system? That would explain how he knew they were taping the sessions.

But that’s not all. Remember, the Office of General Counsel reviewed the torture tapes — originally as a preliminary to them being destroyed in 2002 — to make sure what the torturers did matched what DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel approved them to do.

We know they shouldn’t have. We know the tapes should have shown the torturers exceeding the guidelines of waterboarding. We know the tapes should have shown the torture preceding the date when OLC actually approved it.

And we know the tapes should have shown the torturers putting Abu Zubaydah in a box as part of a mock burial, the only torture technique John Yoo ever labeled illegal.

In short, we know that the tapes should have shown that the torturers exceeded even the limited restrictions OLC put on them.

Instead, by the time OGC reviewed the torture tapes, 15 of the tapes were already partially or entirely destroyed. Some were taped over, some were broken, some showed the taping system had been shut off. 21 hours of Abu Zubaydah’s torture somehow did not remain on the tapes at the time of the OGC review in November to December 2002. As it happened, when the Inspector General later reviewed the tapes and compared what John McPherson, the OGC lawyer who had reviewed the tapes, actually recorded, he discovered that McPherson had found it unremarkable that the torturers were deviating from the guidelines approved by OLC.

But it appears, given Saxby’s comment, that Brennan was not so much interested in what the IG found, but in what McPherson found. Brennan appears to have been interested in what remained on the tapes after they had been partially destroyed, the first time, after the presumably most incriminating aspects of Abu Zubaydah’s torture had been destroyed.

Here’s another question. Did logistics guy John Brennan procure the waterboard the use of which exceeded the guidelines laid out by OLC? More importantly, did logistics guy John Brennan procure the box used to conduct an even-John-Yoo-said-it-was-illegal mock burial? And if so, did John Brennan know that the torturers considered the box a coffin?

Did John Brennan know, because he had done the logistics for the torture program, that the torturers had violated the only law Yoo ever put into place?

It would sure explain why the Obama Administration worked so hard to cover up the torture program.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+1Email to someone

8 Responses to Did Logistics Guy John Brennan Set Up the Torture Taping System? Did He Buy the Torture Coffin?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @PaulGizelt Oops. Peeking. I couldn't do it. I was curious if people knew it.
5mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @catchtheleaves Tho I think they adopted Mountbatten during WWI, so I see the reason it's necessary, to avoid looking like the enemy.
5mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @catchtheleaves It's kind of funny when you think abt it that people whose family tree accords such power can rename it with such abandon.
6mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @TotalHIPAA: Documentary reveals password to London railway signals is "Password 3." http://t.co/wu8GLDaEKr Thx @pogowasright, we're cr…
9mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @catchtheleaves Yes, they laundered out the German to Mountbatten.
10mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV May The Fourth (Amendment) Be With You https://t.co/t2kjCyzool
16mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @Casual_Obs Philip Philip?
23mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @AnthonyMKreis Still more competent!
30mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @astepanovich Yes. But this bill, for starters, gives FBI much greater access to this data. Uncounted back door searches. Not true now.
32mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel How many of you non-British people know Prince Philip's ordinary-person last name, without peaking?
33mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Carly Rae Jepsen would make a more competent Presidential candidate than Carly Fiorina. More successful business record too!
35mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @astepanovich I mean, if we don't think FBI wants iMessage metadata, we've been missing Comey's encryption theatrics of last 9 months.
35mreplyretweetfavorite
February 2013
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728