|
The War Profiteers - War Crimes,
Kidnappings & Torture |
|
June 9th,
2009 - CIA Urges Judge To Keep Bush-Era Documents Sealed |
|
CIA Urges Judge To Keep
Bush-Era Documents Sealed Al-Qaeda Could Use Contents, Agency Says By R. Jeffrey Smith Washington Post June 9, 2009 The Obama administration
objected yesterday to the release of certain Bush-era documents that detail
the videotaped interrogations of CIA detainees at secret prisons, arguing to
a federal judge that doing so would endanger national security and benefit al-Qaeda's
recruitment efforts. In an affidavit, CIA
Director Leon E. Panetta defended the classification of records describing
the contents of the 92 videotapes, their destruction by the CIA in 2005 and
what he called "sensitive operational information" about the
interrogations. The forced disclosure of
such material to the American Civil Liberties Union "could be expected
to result in exceptionally grave damage to the national security by informing
our enemies of what we knew about them, and when, and in some instances, how
we obtained the intelligence we possessed," Panetta argued. Although Panetta's statement
is in keeping with his previous opposition to the disclosure of other
information about the CIA's interrogation policies and practices during George
W. Bush's presidency, it represents a new assertion by the Obama
administration that the CIA should be allowed to keep such information
secret. Bush's critics have long hoped that disclosure would pinpoint
responsibility for actions they contend were abusive or illegal. Last month, President Obama
said he would seek to bar the release of photographs being sought by other
nonprofit groups that depict abusive interrogations at military prisons
during the Bush administration. Panetta argued that none of
the 65 CIA documents immediately at issue, which the ACLU has sought for
several years in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, should be released. He
asked U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein to draw a legal distinction
between the administration's release in April of Justice Department memos
authorizing the harsh interrogations and the CIA's desire to keep classified
its own documents detailing the specific handling of detainees at its secret
facilities overseas. He said that while the
Justice Department memos discussed harsh interrogation "in the
abstract," the CIA information was "of a qualitatively different
nature" because it described the interrogation techniques "as
applied in actual operations." The "disclosure of
explicit details of specific interrogations" would provide al-Qaeda
"with propaganda it could use to recruit and raise funds," Panetta
said, describing the information at issue as "ready-made
ammunition." He also submitted a classified statement to the court that
he said explains why detainees could use the contents to evade questions in
the future, even though Obama has promised that the United States will not
use the harsh interrogation techniques again. Jameel Jaffer, director of
the ACLU's national security program, said yesterday evening that it is
"grim" and "troubling" for the Obama administration to
say that information about purported abuses should be withheld because it
might fuel anti-American propaganda. He said that amounts to an assertion
that "the greater the abuse, the more important it is that it should
remain secret." Jaffer said the ACLU is convinced that the public should
have "access to the complete record of what took place in the CIA's
prisons and on whose authority." Although the ACLU first
sought CIA documents related to harsh interrogations in 2004, it moved in
2007 to have the court hold the CIA in contempt following disclosures about
the agency's destruction of the videotapes. The ACLU demanded as a remedy
access to internal e-mails and other information that would reveal the
contents of the videotapes and who participated, approved or endorsed their
destruction. Hellerstein has repeatedly
denied CIA motions demanding that the case be dismissed, but has not declared
the agency in contempt. Instead, he ordered the CIA to surrender some of the
records and provide details of others it is withholding; the agency has
responded mostly by giving the documents to the court under seal. A federal prosecutor
continues to investigate the destruction of the videotapes. In total, the CIA has said
that 580 documents are related to the ACLU's 2007 request; Panetta said that
his statement applies to all of the 65 documents selected so far by the court
for potential release and that the CIA will in the future consider releasing
"non-operational documents" in the larger set. In two exhibits given to the
court along with Panetta's affidavit, the CIA said the material that must be
withheld includes a photograph of Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Hussein, known as
Abu Zubaida, the first detainee that the CIA believed to be of high value; a
lengthy handwritten summary of notes taken after reviewing the videotapes; a
five-page account by a CIA lawyer detailing the agency's policy and legal
guidance about the destruction of the videotapes; an e-mail to CIA managers
summarizing the opinions of others about the tapes; a six-page account by an
agency employee of a discussion with an agency lawyer about the tapes; and a
series of e-mails discussing what the CIA should say publicly about the destruction. It also said that one of the
documents summarized "details of waterboard exposures from the destroyed
videotapes," referring to a simulated-drowning technique that Obama and
his appointees have said amounted to illegal torture. Although the CIA frequently
redacts sometimes extensive portions of the documents it releases, Panetta
said he had "determined that no meaningful segregable information can be
released from the operational documents at issue." Some, he said, were
covered by attorney-client privilege, and nearly all contain personal
information about CIA employees and others that would, if disclosed,
"constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Panetta also said he wanted
to emphasize that his request was "in no way driven by a desire to
prevent embarrassment for the U.S. government or the CIA, or to suppress
evidence of any unlawful conduct." He said his only purpose was to
prevent harm to U.S. national security and to protect intelligence sources
and methods. Staff researcher Julie Tate
contributed to this report. External link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/08/AR2009060804117.html |