Comments on: SSCI Torture Narrative

By: Nell

Nell — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:17:26 +0000

That is weird; the whole timeline/narrative only mentions Senate intel people. WTF? Just because SASC is a Senate committee is no reason to omit crucial points in a narrative.

By: Nell

Nell — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:04:30 +0000

I don’t quite understand your point. Feinstein would have been part of briefings where all SSCI members were present, otherwise played no role. The timeline only goes up through the end of Rockefeller’s chairmanship.

What mention of Feinstein do you think should be there that isn’t?

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:00:28 +0000

In the nyt piece, Pelosi admits she was briefed on torture techniques and their “legality” too, but I don’t see a date on the timeline for that. Do we have one?

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:53:04 +0000

It’s fixed. Levin? That’s interesting.

By: emptywheel

emptywheel — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 02:21:51 +0000

And incidentally, this narrative brings the events from the DOJ IG report back a few days.

Yet another piece of evidence that suggests one of the 10 pieces of evdience the 9/11 commission used was pre-torture.

By: emptywheel

emptywheel — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 02:20:27 +0000

It was Daniel Levin (that’s in the DOJ IG report). I think I fixed it–did I?

By: readerOfTeaLeaves

readerOfTeaLeaves — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:37:48 +0000

Just watched it, and am impressed that Karpinski is still in contact with former soldiers under her command (who are serving time in prison). She seemed more ‘outraged’ than ‘angry’. (And good for her!)

Anyone who cares as much as she seems to about the welfare of soldiers (formerly) under her command is okay by me. Too bad that Mr Five Deferrments Cheney, and Mr AWOL GW Bush didn’t care even half that much about the soldiers.

Her recommendation that an investigation be done, including members from US allied nations, seemed very smart. That would pull the conversation out of a Dem/Republican tug-of-war, and focus on the deeper issues.

Great interview!

By: decotodd

decotodd — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:20:28 +0000

By: decotodd

decotodd — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:19:44 +0000

What’s with this WaPo article (and maybe the SSCI report?) claiming that Rumsfeld didn’t know until 2003? (”Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld were not briefed on the program until Sept. 2003, according to the narrative.”) http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..id=topnews

That doesn’t jibe with McClatchy article about Rumsfeld/Cheney seeking Al Qaeda/Sadaam link: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/66622.html

But for most of 2002 and into 2003, Cheney and Rumsfeld, especially, were also demanding proof of the links between al Qaida and Iraq that (former Iraqi exile leader Ahmed) Chalabi and others had told them were there.”

It was during this period that CIA interrogators waterboarded two alleged top al Qaida detainees repeatedly — Abu Zubaydah at least 83 times in August 2002 and Khalid Sheik Muhammed 183 times in March 2003 — according to a newly released Justice Department document.

“There was constant pressure on the intelligence agencies and the interrogators to do whatever it took to get that information out of the detainees, especially the few high-value ones we had, and when people kept coming up empty, they were told by Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s people to push harder,” he continued.

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:18:59 +0000

EW - I don’t think that would be Wainstein, although timing is very “interesting”

From a couple of sources, “On July 16, 2002, Mr. Wainstein was appointed to serve as the FBI’s General Counsel, and on March 31, 2003, he assumed the position of Chief of Staff to Director Mueller.”

Can’t find who the COS was before him in a fast google