CIA Destroyed Interrogation Tapes

WASHINGTON — The CIA destroyed nearly 100 videotapes of interrogations and other U.S. treatment of terror suspects, far more than previously acknowledged, the Obama administration said Monday as it began disclosing details of post-Sept. 11 Bush-era actions.

The interrogations were a highly contentious issue during the administration of President George W. Bush, with many Democrats and other critics saying that some methods used amounted to torture _ a contention Bush and other officials rejected. A criminal prosecutor is wrapping up his investigation in the matter.

Monday's acknowledgment, however, involved a civil lawsuit filed in New York by the American Civil Liberties Union seeking more details of the interrogation programs following the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

"The CIA can now identify the number of videotapes that were destroyed," said the letter submitted in that case by Acting U.S. Attorney Lev Dassin. "Ninety-two videotapes were destroyed."

It is not clear what exactly was on the recordings. The government's letter cites interrogation videos, but the lawsuit against the Defense Department also seeks records related to treatment of detainees, any deaths of detainees and the CIA's sending of suspects overseas, known as "extraordinary rendition."

At the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters he hadn't spoken to the president about the report, but called the news about the videotapes "sad," and said Obama was committed to ending torture while also protecting American values.

ACLU attorney Amrit Singh said the CIA should be held in contempt of court for holding back the information for so long.

"The large number of videotapes destroyed confirms that the agency engaged in a systematic attempt to hide evidence of its illegal interrogations and to evade the court's order," Singh said.

Story continues below

advertisement

CIA spokesman George Little said the agency "has certainly cooperated with the Department of Justice investigation. If anyone thinks it's agency policy to impede the enforcement of American law, they simply don't know the facts."

The details of interrogations of terror suspects, and the existence of tapes documenting those sessions, have become the subject of long fights in a number of different court cases. In the trial of Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, prosecutors initially claimed no such recordings existed, then acknowledged after the trial was over that two videotapes and one audiotape had been made.

The Dassin letter, dated March 2 to Judge Alvin Hellerstein, says the CIA is now gathering more details for the lawsuit, including a list of the destroyed records, any secondary accounts that describe the destroyed contents and the identities of those who may have viewed or possessed the recordings before they were destroyed.

But the lawyers also note that some of that information may be classified, such as the names of CIA personnel who viewed the tapes.

"The CIA intends to produce all of the information requested to the court and to produce as much information as possible on the public record to the plaintiffs," states the letter.

The separate criminal investigation includes interrogations of al-Qaida lieutenant Abu Zubaydah and another top al-Qaida leader. Tapes of those interrogations were destroyed, in part, the Bush administration said, to protect the identities of the government questioners at a time the Justice Department was debating whether or not the tactics used during the interrogations were legal.

Former CIA director Michael Hayden acknowledged that waterboarding _ simulated drowning _ was used on three suspects, including two whose interrogations were recorded.

John Durham, a senior career prosecutor in Connecticut, is leading the criminal investigation, out of Virginia, and had asked that he be given until the end of February to wrap up his work before requests for information in the civil lawsuit were dealt with.

Durham's spokesman, Tom Carson, had no immediate comment.

___

Associated Press Writers Pamela Hess, Philip Elliott and Matt Apuzzo contributed to this report.

Comments

[Vet4Victory]

Cut the CIA's funding? Are you people seriously that naive and oblivious to the happenings in the world? Wow.

[Heavy]

blah blah blah you people blah blah blah. wow

[Vet4Victory]

You offer some very constructive rebuttals to my concerns. Thank you, now go outside and play.

[truthynesslover]

Let recall their last "victories" shall we?
didnt forsee the collpapse of Russia even though Russia had been PAINTING it rusty ships for years...$$­$$???
Didnt forsee 9/11.
Were used as a tool for Iraq...$$$­$$????.

[Vet4Victory]

You must truly have a simplistic way of viewing things. Truth be told, these issues tend to go much deeper than you're willing to look into. The case can and should be made that the firewalls that were in place in the intelligence community preventing them from communicating with each other prior to 9/11 MIGHT of had something to do with the attack. But again, why look deeper when your talking points don't require you to.

[walk0nwalls]

GOOD MORNING MY CYNICISM!

[Ergon]

No no, they mo der ated them.

[haval2]

Oh my God what could Rush think about this...bel­oved Conservatives in the mix of illegal activities­...please what does the voice of the GOP have to say??????

[YellowPanties]

Evil must be punished, you hear that, Obama administration? Get the special prosecutors on the case, pronto!

[Jason G]

Cut these people's funding dear god. CIA is mostly adults playing with fancy toys and pretending to be James Bond. I get ill thinking about how much money I give to these people every April.

[Joethepauper]

How convenient??! I could have told you that in late 2001. That's what the CIA does best: Doing secret things in secret places with no oversight (because it's classified). And if anything they did was illegal, they just destroy the evidence and plead ignorance. I'm very surprised they never found the WMD, because I always figured it was the job of the CIA to cover Bush"s @ss and plant them. That is the single most perplexing thing in the last 8 years I could never understand.

Does that mean that there were at least 92 people tortured? They have been saying it was just KSM and one or two others. Who are the other people? Was their interrogation really bad enough to warrant destruction of the tapes? Either the torture was more widespread than they have been telling us, or the wholesale destruction of tapes was more widespread, or both. There were Abu Ghraib pictures that were never broadcast by the MSM because they were too graphic. Disinfo.com has/had them, and if the tapes were anything like those pics, people who took part in it or destroyed the evidence need to go to jail. I know they have a tough job to do in very dangerous parts of the world, but even the CIA has to have some moral fiber.

[truthynesslover]

the c.I.a. are a private army for corporations paid for by the taxpayer.
Until the american public wake up to that fact theyll be up to no good.

the late great patrick moynihan tried to do something.­..

But Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) complains that given its large (classified) annual budget, the CIA should have foreseen the implosion of the Soviet Union. Moynihan is pushing a bill that would shut down the CIA and spin off its functions to the State Department, the Pentagon, and other agencies. Unlikely to pass, Moynihan's bill nevertheless reflects one mood in Congress.

[MomfromTexas]

What? A Republican administration destroyed tapes that could be used as evidence against the administration??? Noooooo. WHAT a surprise!

[DavidEBrown]

This business reminds me of the Watergate case in almost all respects, except that it appears to be much more sinister and far more damaging. It just keeps expanding and deepening as time goes by. We all bear a certain level of responsibility for tolerating even what we already know for as long as we have.

I see very few appropriate remedies but two come to mind immediately. One is that, no matter the original charges against the remaining prisoners, these cases have been so profoundly contaminated that it is likely to be impossible to determine any longer what the truth of the matter is in each case. How can we still justify holding anyone under such conditions? We would very likely consider going to war if any other country were doing this to our citizens. I fully understand the danger which might ensue, but even though it might well put everyone in greater danger as a consequence, including me, it is my considered opinion that they should all be either charged and tried this year, or released.

The second most reasonable remedy is to hold a full enquiry, under oath, not as a witch hunt, but with a primary purpose of determining what happened, how it happened, and how to keep it from ever happening again. If, in the process of that enquiry, it is found that there have been egregious violations, those individuals should not be given a free pass, but neither should they be subjected to retribution.

[truthynesslover]

Crooks and liars;
For eight years, Stanisic was the CIA's main man in Belgrade. During secret meetings in boats and safe houses along the Sava River, he shared details on the inner workings of the Milosevic regime. He provided information on the locations of NATO hostages, aided CIA operatives in their search for grave sites and helped the agency set up a network of secret bases in Bosnia.

At the same time, Stanisic was setting up death squads for Milosevic that carried out a genocidal campaign, according to prosecutors at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, which was established by the U.N. Security Council in 1993 to try those responsible for serious human rights violations in the Balkan wars.

Now facing a trial at The Hague that could send him to prison for life, Stanisic has called in a marker with his American allies. In an exceedingly rare move, the CIA has submitted a classified document to the court that lists Stanisic's contributions and attests to his helpful role. The document remains sealed, but its contents were described by sources to The Times.

Aiding a genocide for information?
Sounds about right.We should have gotten rid of the C.I.A. when Moynihan called for it.

[JungleRoses]

Is this why a pair of shoes was thrown at the former President Bush!

[guntotinganglion]

Of course the CIA destroyed torture documents. They know precisely what they are doing, and they know that no one has the power to stop them. They are beyond the Constitution and law, they are the covert strong arm of the executive branch that has been interfering in foreign governments for decades, and certainly have been using methods right out of the Dark Ages to "extract" data from valuable "targets".

I suspect their techniques would make Tomás de Torquemada throw up. I suspect if Americans knew what they've done in our name, they'd be praying, to whatever god they believe in, for forgiveness.

[mitsie]

That's not true, they are not a covert strong arm of the Executive branch. They are answerable to the Executive branch and Congress. They do have to follow the constitution as well as other laws. These people work for us, and they alike many other government employees are just trying to earn a living. Many of them are honest and God fearing people, so don't make them sound all bad. I agree that they have done some terrible things, but that dosen't mean you can sweep them all with the same brush.

[TFlint]

You are living in Fantasy Land. Nothing you are saying has any relationship to fact.

[NPA]

When you don't have or abide by the Rule of Law, then you have nothing.

[SecondBase]

Or, put another way...

When you don't have or abide by (enforce) the Rule of Law, then anything goes.

[mitsie]

Yes they are suppose to abide by the rule of law, when they don't the Congress and President have to make them accountable.

[garymc8]

No American is bound by any law any more. If they don't apply to our politicians and gov or the gop, they do not apply to ME.

[FairTalk]

The CIA now says they destroyed the evidence? Why do I not believe this?

[biabouman41]

You have got a point.

[AKJM]

A very good point.

[ramblin jack]

Like other times it may go un punished

[FatherKindly]

I think your supposition is a pretty sure bet.