If you are not happy with the results below please do another search
People close to Condi Rice and Porter Goss appear to be significant sources for a NYT article adding new data points to the torture narrative. They’re self-serving. But if Condi and Goss want to turn on Cheney, I’ll take it.
John Lopresti noted that it might be helpful to have a timeline of all the torture documents released in the last several weeks. And you know I can’t resist requests for timelines.
April 6: NYRB posts the Red Cross report on high value detainees
I’ve been scouring the 9/11 Report to see whether interrogation reports derived from waterboarding provided useful intelligence. It looks like Zelikow will be addressing that issue himself, shortly.
Michael Hayden and the rest of the torture apologists have been wandering around all week claiming that the Administration could have won its FOIA case against ACLU and withheld the torture memos.
If this ruling from Juge Hellerstein is any indication, they couldn’t be more wrong. It did five things:Demanded a full “Vaughn” index for the FOIAed materials, describing the people involved and the dates.Refused the government’s attempt to limit production of
It appears more and more likely that the Harman story broke when it did in an attempt to keep her quiet about torture.
According to one of the OLC memos, KSM was waterboarded 183 times in one month.
The AP reports that George Tenet and Porter Goss have criticized Obama’s release of the torture memos.
Of course they would. Those memos, after all, implicate both of them legally.
The May 10, 2005 “Techniques” memo makes it clear that the torturers who claim the Bybee memo legalized their water-boarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah are wrong.
That’s because the torturers didn’t do what the memo authorized.
The same night they captured Abu Zubaydah, the US got a young associate of his, Noor al-Deen, who warned them Abu Zubaydah was not who they thought he was. But the US ignored that information and tortured Abu Zubaydah anyway.
The New Yorker has a piece with long excerpts from the leaked Red Cross report on American torture of high value detainees. The article sure makes it sound like the torture tapes were an attempt to document which torture methods worked and which did not. Which I guess explains why they had to be destroyed.
