CIA Flying Suspects To Torture?

[Darius11 12]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/04/60minutes/main678155.shtml

Quote

You may not have heard the term "rendition," at least not the way the Central Intelligence Agency uses it. But renditions have become one of the most important secret weapons in the war on terror.

In recent years, well over 100 people have disappeared or been "rendered" all around the world. Witnesses tell the same story: masked men in an unmarked jet seize their target, cut off his clothes, put him in a blindfold and jumpsuit, tranquilize him and fly him away.

They're describing U.S. agents collaring terrorism suspects. Some notorious terrorists such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the mastermind of 9/11, were rendered this way.

But as Correspondent Scott Pelley reports, it's happening to many others. Some are taken to prisons infamous for torture. And a few may have been rendered by mistake.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the covert missions happened in Stockholm, and the details have touched off a national scandal in Sweden.

Two Egyptians living in Sweden, Mohammad Al-Zery and Ahmed Agiza, were arrested by Swedish police and brought to an airport. An executive jet was waiting with a crew of mysterious masked men.

"America security agents just took over," says Tomas Hammarberg, a former Swedish diplomat who pressed for and got an investigation into how the Egyptians disappeared.

"We know that they were badly treated on the spot, that scissors and knives were used to take off their clothes. And they were shackled. And some tranquilizers were put in the back of them, obviously in order to make them dizzy and fall asleep."

An airport officer told 60 Minutes she saw the two men hustled to the plane. She didn't want to be identified, but she had no doubt about where the plane came from: "I know that the aircraft was American registration ... because the 'N' first, on the registration."

The so-called "N" number marks an American plane. Swedish records show a Gulfstream G5, N379P was there that night. Within hours, Al-Zery and Agiza, both of whom had been seeking asylum in Sweden, found themselves in an Egyptian prison. Hammarberg says Sweden sent a diplomat to see them weeks later.

What did they tell the diplomat about how they were being treated?

"That they had been treated brutally in general, had been beaten up several times, that they had been threatened," says Hammarberg. "But probably the worst phase of torture came after that first visit by the ambassador. ... They were under electric torture."

The Egyptians say Agiza is an Islamic militant and they sentenced him to 25 years. But Al-Zery wasn't charged. After two years in jail, he was sent to his village in Egypt. The authorities are not allowing interviews.

"The option of not doing something is extraordinarily dangerous to the American people," says Michael Scheuer, who until three months ago was a senior CIA official in the counterterrorist center. Scheuer created the CIA's Osama bin Laden unit and helped set up the rendition program during the Clinton administration.

"Basically, the National Security Council gave us the mission, take down these cells, dismantle them and take people off the streets so they can't kill Americans," says Scheuer. "They just didn't give us anywhere to take the people after we captured."

So the CIA started taking suspects to Egypt and Jordan. Scheuer says renditions were authorized by Clinton's National Security Council and officials in Congress - and all understood what it meant to send suspects to those countries.

"They don't have the same legal system we have. But we know that going into it," says Scheuer. "And so the idea that we're gonna suddenly throw our hands up like Claude Raines in 'Casablanca' and say, 'I'm shocked that justice in Egypt isn't like it is in Milwaukee,' there's a certain disingenuousness to that."

"And one of the things that you know about justice in Egypt is that people get tortured," says Pelley.

"Well, it can be rough. I have to assume that that's the case," says Scheuer.

But doesn't that make the United States complicit in the torture?

"You'll have to ask the lawyers," says Scheuer.

Is it convenient?

"It's convenient in the sense that it allows American policy makers and American politicians to avoid making hard decisions," says Scheuer. "Yes. It's very convenient. It's finding someone else to do your dirty work."

The indispensable tool for that work is a small fleet of executive jets authorized to land at all U.S. military bases worldwide.

Scheuer wouldn't tell 60 Minutes about the planes that are used in these operations - that information is classified. The CIA declined to talk about it, but it turns out the CIA has left plenty of clues out in the open, in the public record.

The tail number of the Gulfstream was first reported by witnesses in Pakistan. In public records, the tail number came back to a company called Premiere Executive Transport Services, with headquarters listed in Dedham, Mass. But Dedham is a dead end. The address is a law office on the second floor of a bank -- there's no airline there.

But there was one thing in the records that did lead somewhere - a second tail number. That number belonged to an unmarked 737. 60 Minutes found the jet in Scotland, apparently refueling. It's possible to track these plans by their flight plans. Often the information is on the Internet.

Using the Web and aviation sources, 60 Minutes was able to find 600 flights to 40 countries. It appears the number of flights increased greatly in the Bush administration after Sept. 11.

The planes are based in North Carolina. They usually fly to Dulles Airport outside Washington before heading overseas. Major destinations read like a roadmap to the war on terror - 30 trips to Jordan, 19 to Afghanistan, 17 to Morocco, 16 to Iraq. Other stops include Egypt, Libya, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The flight log shows one flight took the 737 to Skopje, Macedonia, to Baghdad and finally Kabul, Afghanistan. 60 Minutes found a man who says he was on that flight.

Khaled el-Masri was born in Kuwait, but he now lives in Germany with his wife and four children. He became a German citizen 10 years ago. He told 60 Minutes he was on vacation in Macedonia last year when Macedonian police, apparently acting on a tip, took him off a bus, held him for three weeks, then took him to the Skopje airport where he believes he was abducted by the CIA.

"They took me to this room, and they hit me all over and they slashed my clothes with sharp objects, maybe knives or scissors," says el-Masri.

"I also heard photos being taken while this was going on - and they took off the blindfold and I saw that there were a lot of men standing in the room. They were wearing black masks and black gloves."

El-Masri says he was injected with drugs, and after his flight, he woke up in an American-run prison in Afghanistan. He showed 60 Minutes a prison floor plan he drew from memory. He says other prisoners were from Pakistan, Tanzania, Yemen and Saudi Arabia. El-Masri told 60 Minutes that he was held for five months and interrogated by Americans through an interpreter.

"He yelled at me and he said that, 'You're in a country without laws and no one knows where you are. Do you know what that means?' I said yes," says el-Masri. "It was very clear to me that he meant I could stay in my cell for 20 years or be buried somewhere, and nobody knows what happened to you."

He says they were asking him "whether I had contacts with Islamic parties like al Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood or aid organizations, lots of questions."

He says he told the Americans he'd never been involved in militant Islam. El-Masri says he wasn't tortured, but he says he was beaten and kept in solitary confinement. Then, after his five months of questioning, he was simply released.

At that point, did anyone ever tell him that they'd made a mistake? "They told me that they had confused names and that they had cleared it up, but I can't imagine that," says el-Masri. "You can clear up switching names in a few minutes."

He says he was flown out of Afghanistan and dumped on a road in Albania. When he finally made his way back home in Germany, he found that his wife and kids had gone to her family in Lebanon. He called there to explain what happened.

El-Masri says that his wife believed him: "I never lied to her, and my appearance showed that I had been in prison."

How did he explain what happened to him to his son? "I explained to him what happened to me. And he understood," says el-Masri. "I said it was the Americans [who did this to me]."

"How do you know if you're picking up the right people," Pelley asked Scheuer.

"You do the best you can. It's not a science," says Scheuer. "It's gathering as much information as you can, deciding on the quality of it and then determining the risks the person poses. If you make a mistake, you make a mistake."

There's another destination that 60 Minutes noticed frequently in the plane's flight logs: Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan, a predominately Muslim country, with a reputation for torture.

Craig Murray is the former British ambassador there. He told 60 Minutes that Uzbek citizens, captured in Afghanistan, were flown back to Taskent on the American plane.

"I know of two instances for certain of prisoners who were brought back in a small jet, and I believe it was happening on a reasonably regular basis," says Murray.

Murray says the jet was operated by Premiere Executive Airlines.
He says in Uzbekistan, many prisoners are subject to torture techniques straight out of the Middle Ages: "Techniques of drowning and suffocation, rape was used quite commonly, and also immersion of limbs in boiling liquid."

Murray complained to his superiors that British intelligence was using information gleaned by torture. He was recalled by London four months ago and quit the foreign service.

Is there any reason to believe that the CIA knows that people are being tortured in these jails?

"The CIA definitely knows. I asked my deputy to go and speak to the CIA, and she came back and reported to me that she'd me with the CIA head of station, who told her that 'Yes, this material probably was obtained under torture, but the CIA didn't see that a problem.'"

The CIA disputes that. The agency told 60 Minutes that the meeting Murray described didn't happen. The CIA also says it does not knowingly receive intelligence obtained by torture.

President Bush, in a January interview with the New York Times, said: "Torture is never acceptable." He added, "nor do we hand over people to countries that do torture."

Scheuer says, in his experience, the United States asks receiving countries to promise that suspects will be treated according to the laws of that country.
"I'm not completely confident that any of the information received was exacted by torture," says Scheuer.

In Egypt?

"In Egypt. Again, I think we have people in the Middle East in the various services we deal with who are extraordinarily experienced in debriefing people," says Scheuer.

"I personally think that any information gotten through extreme methods of torture would probably be pretty useless because it would be someone telling you what you wanted to hear. The information we have received as a result of these programs has been very useful to the United States."

"And if some of that useful information is gleaned by torture, that's OK," asks Pelley.

"It's OK with me," says Scheuer. "I'm responsible for protecting Americans."

Scheuer says in the Clinton and Bush administrations, and in Congress, details of rendition flights were known to top officials. Now that the missions are coming to light, Scheuer says there is worry in the CIA that field agents will take the fall if any of the missions are later deemed illegal.

Are CIA people feeling vulnerable to that?

"I think from the first day we ever did it there was a certain macabre humor that said sooner or later this sword of Damocles is gonna fall because if something goes wrong, the policy maker and the politicians and the congressional committees aren't gonna belly up to the bar and say, 'We authorized this,'" says Scheuer.

Sorry it is very long.
But it might wake up the people who think we are hated because we are free.
We are hated because we have no regards for anyones freedom but our own, and we trample anyones rights for our own good. We are hated because are government is selfish.

No this is not against Bush this was thought up in the Clinton administration but used more often in this one.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[TomAiello 26]

There was a lengthy article about this in Newsweek (or one of the other newsmags?) a few weeks ago. They tracked CIA flights, followed at least one person, etc.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Darius11 12]

I thought I would add a brief explanation of the article because it is so long.



I’ll make it short.

The CIA has Jets that they use to kidnap people who they think are terrorist or somehow related to terrorism. They take these people to countries where they can torture them to get information.
They have already made mistakes. The explanation that was given by the person who thought of this program was that his job is only to take care of Americans. He also admitted he knew about the torture but didn’t seem to care.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[wmw999 2,447]

It was on "60 minutes" last night.

I really hope there's more to the story. We joke about turning someone loose in prison and passing the word that he's a child molester, hoping that "nature will take its course," but that's really depraved indifference.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Gawain 0]

It's difficult to discuss this without getting into "situational ethics". I do believe it applies in these cases though. I also recognize the "slippery slope" this could pose. Having stated that, these aren't "Mr. Rogers" type characters here and their tales of "poor me" in light of civilians getting their heads cut off do not stir any sympathy from me.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[wmw999 2,447]

Some of them are innocent. I guess it just sucks to be them, huh.

Looking like, or having a name like, someone who is guilty doesn't cut it.

And some of the constitution is there because it's right. This kind of shuttling, to bypass what would happen in the US, is chickenshit.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[TomAiello 26]

The trick is being sure that the folks you grab really aren't "Mr. Rogers." A mix up in normal, western, criminal justice can be corrected much more easily than with this kind of system. And even then, the level of injustice done in the meantime is pretty large.

Truthfully, if you could guarantee 100% accuracy (i.e. everyone you do the snatch and grab on really is a bona fide terrorist) I'd have no issues with this at all. When you step outside the rules, you're going to have to play the rough and tumble.

It's the chance for mistakes that bothers me. What's an acceptable level of error? Perfect accuracy would be great. But any system is going to have some error level. So would 5% innocents getting grabbed be ok? I'm really wondering this for myself, not trying to be sarcastic.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[sfzombie13 324]

wow. i read th whole thing, and don't know what to say. i don't know about situational ethics. to me, it's more black and white. i have been in combat twice, but have never had any hard choices. in a tank in desert storm, it was pretty clear we were hitting tanks, that was still pretty bad, though. for every fireworks show i saw, that meant four poor sob's didn't get to kiss their wives again, or their kids. and for what? pardon me for saying this, but: oil. we need to free ourselves from this anchor and then examine ourselves. just my opinion.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

And some of the constitution is there because it's right. This kind of shuttling, to bypass what would happen in the US, is chickenshit.

When criminals can avoid prosecution by just being in another country, it seems reasonable to take extra-territorial measures.

I guess what I'm saying is that, in the same way I don't believe the army ought to exercise police powers in the US, or that the State Department shouldn't have powers to arrest people domestically, I also believe that all of our normal domestic rules can't necessarily be made to apply outside the US. There really are two bodies of law, and two sets of procedures, one for internal and one for external matters, and I believe such a system has evolved for necessary reasons.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[wmw999 2,447]

There's a lot of room in here; "Johnny does it" was never a good justification for my doing something (at least that's what my mom told me), but, well, situations do drive things.

But this just has that "icky" feel. Turning people over to the authorities in the country you're in is one thing -- even if you know that country doesn't follow your same laws. Asking for access so that you can question them is OK. But somehow, flying them to a fourth or fifth country (i.e. not their native country, not where they live, not where they were found, and not the US) just seems bad.

It's like a kid going to both parents separately to ask for permission to do something. Parents don't like that shit.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Gawain 0]

Quote

The trick is being sure that the folks you grab really aren't "Mr. Rogers." A mix up in normal, western, criminal justice can be corrected much more easily than with this kind of system. And even then, the level of injustice done in the meantime is pretty large.

Truthfully, if you could guarantee 100% accuracy (i.e. everyone you do the snatch and grab on really is a bona fide terrorist) I'd have no issues with this at all. When you step outside the rules, you're going to have to play the rough and tumble.

It's the chance for mistakes that bothers me. What's an acceptable level of error? Perfect accuracy would be great. But any system is going to have some error level. So would 5% innocents getting grabbed be ok? I'm really wondering this for myself, not trying to be sarcastic.

I agree with your point also. I may be oversimplifying some it -- if you spend enough time in a barber shop, your hair will get cut.

As to the 5% question, again, it would depend. Remember, the President gave the order to shoot down the planes on 9/11 if our fighters could get there in time. That would have been several hundred innocent lives lost (albeit, not to torture), sparing thousands. As it happened, no one was spared.

I think it stemms from the premise of having no "good" decision to make when faced with the possible alternatives or consequences.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 2,991]

>I also believe that all of our normal domestic rules can't necessarily
>be made to apply outside the US.

Or, apparently, inside the US (i.e. Jose Padilla.) If an organization exists that can take americans, including US citizens, to a different country where US laws (or even normal humanitarian laws) do not apply, then they have discovered a very efficient way to avoid constitutional protections.

Throughout history there have been secret police forces that operate 'outside the law' to 'preserve the state.' They all operate pretty much the same way - midnight snatches, secret prisons, no trial, torture, death threats, people 'disappearing' etc. We condemn such organizations pretty universally when they're in other countries. You would think we'd think twice about doing it ourselves.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

The Chicago Tribune had an article about this about a month or two back. I think Andyman posted it here. Edit to add: Found it http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1424426;#1424426

Also, Real Time on HBO covered this topic on Saturday night as well. They made mention that someone tried to put a bill up to stop this practice and no one came on board.

Here is an interesting thought - the US Gov't can enforce any of it's laws on it's citizens even if they break them offshore. One big area they are cracking down on are those that fly to other countries to have sex with children. This means they can even bust you for smoking pot or doing hash while in Amsterdam. Why is it ok for our gov't to be above the law?

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[TomAiello 26]

I didn't say I thought it was ok to grab people inside the US. We do have (generally) an operating criminal justice system for that kind of thing. If I recall correctly, I already posted (above) a statement to the effect that I didn't think it was appropriate for our foreign policy instruments to be operating domestically.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

It's difficult to discuss this without getting into "situational ethics". I do believe it applies in these cases though. I also recognize the "slippery slope" this could pose. Having stated that, these aren't "Mr. Rogers" type characters here and their tales of "poor me" in light of civilians getting their heads cut off do not stir any sympathy from me.

Tell that to the guy who was kidnapped from Germany, then tortured for five months until they finally figured out they had the wrong guy, so they dumped him off in Albania.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Skyrad 0]

Its what the US have been doing for decades, fighting unethical wars by proxy. Isn't Camp X-Ray and then Camp Delta doing just the same thing as far as the law is concerned? Who knows how far the torture there goes?

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Trent 0]

Quote

Tell that to the guy who was kidnapped from Germany, then tortured for five months...

He actually said he wasn't tortured. It's important to read the whole thing so you don't make assumtions that EVERYONE is being tortured. You may still disagree with the practice in place, but it doesn't help to exaggerate.

In my opinion, it sucks that it has to exist... but it IS necessary to have this kind of operation going on. If we can't get our hands on guys who are trying to kill Americans because they're hiding out in a "no extradition" country, we lose potentially valuable information. It is an ugly and necessary business in times like this. Many of you don't like it. I can understand that totally. But what would you suggest we do instead?

Oh, hello again!

[Darius11 12]

Quote

So would 5% innocents getting grabbed be ok? I'm really wondering this for myself, not trying to be sarcastic

The thing that bothers me is many will think 5% is ok if the persons in that 5% are not Americans, and that will just breed hate and rightfully so I might add.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Guest]

Quote

>I also believe that all of our normal domestic rules can't necessarily
>be made to apply outside the US.

Or, apparently, inside the US (i.e. Jose Padilla.) If an organization exists that can take americans, including US citizens, to a different country where US laws (or even normal humanitarian laws) do not apply, then they have discovered a very efficient way to avoid constitutional protections.

Throughout history there have been secret police forces that operate 'outside the law' to 'preserve the state.' They all operate pretty much the same way - midnight snatches, secret prisons, no trial, torture, death threats, people 'disappearing' etc. We condemn such organizations pretty universally when they're in other countries. You would think we'd think twice about doing it ourselves.

I'm afraid that 9/11 has made our government let slip the dirtiest dogs of war, but better them than us - at least our government is making war on foreigners for a change, and not on our own citizens the way the Clinton / Reno administration did.

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[markd_nscr986 0]

I find it really hard to work up a sense of outrage over this.........

In the cases of mistaken identity,that's unfortunate,and I feel in those cases,the Gov't should make it up to them somehow.....but mistakes will happen in an op like that.

When they do grab a terrorist,good for them,and if he winds up in a hell hole somewhere deprived of our due process systems,it's probably better than he deserves....

I guess if a "real" benefit is gained by conducting these ops then they should continue

Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004

[Darius11 12]

This was started in the Clinton administration. Ever think maybe things like this are why we are hated, And why we have more and more terrorism.

I’ll tell you if I knew the government had special rules for me just because I am Tan then I can justify a lot of hate for them.


I always wonder what peoples reaction would be if the story said the KGB has plains to take people and a few were Americans.

It is the definition of racism to think you are above others simply because of your race, religion, or country.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[billvon 2,991]

>I'm afraid that 9/11 has made our government let slip the dirtiest dogs of
>war, but better them than us . . .

"Them" and "us" have a funny way of changing when fear is used as a weapon. Witness all the people branded communists by McCarthy during the 50's. Imagine what would have happened if we had had a secret police who could 'disappear' such communists as Lucille Ball.

The USSR, on the other hand, DID have such a secret police force, dedicated to preserving the security of the government. Didn't seem to work for them in the long run.

>at least our government is making war on foreigners for a change . . .

Again, google Jose Padilla. US citizen arrested within the US and taken overseas so US laws would not apply.

[rasmack 0]

Quote

When they do grab a terrorist,good for them,and if he winds up in a hell hole somewhere deprived of our due process systems,it's probably better than he deserves....

What planet are you from? I have a hard time to hear someone from "the land of the free" say that it is OK to deprive human beings of due process. If you feel that the constitution really does not matter, then what are you defending? Please tell me I misunderstood you.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[jdhill 0]

Quote

Gov't should make it up to them somehow

Hard to do that without admitting that they did it in the first place, deniablity is the point of a clandestine operation...

One aspect I find sad about this is that the CIA can't cover their tracks better...

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[Trent 0]

Quote

Ever think maybe things like this are why we are hated, And why we have more and more terrorism.

Nope, I don't think so. The hatred began before things like this happened, so did terrorism. It's just another convenient excuse for people to use to justify their hate for the US.

Quote

I always wonder what peoples reaction would be if the story said the KGB has plains to take people and a few were Americans.

Don't wonder about it... read. It did happen. Ask the pilots who flew in Vietnam and Korea. And it wasn't just the Russians, the Chinese did it too.

Quote

It is the definition of racism to think you are above others simply because of your race, religion, or country.

Exactly my thoughts about the people in the Muslim world who would attack innocent civilians in the US and other locations, simply because they were Israeli, European, or American. The difference here is that we have people who feel that they are religiously superior to us (among other things), who do not care who they kill, as long as it is one of "us" and that we die. These covert squads taking people are not targeting them because they are brown, or named Mohammed, or because they were born in Syria... they are being targeted because they are suspected in criminal activities. That is a big difference.

I know, I know... why are they criminals just because we suspect them? The US is wrong. We're the bad guys. But at a very minimum, since we're capitalist pigs, do you think that the government would really go out of its way to kidnap some random innocent guy, when it probably costs tons just to get it done? I'm not saying they're going to be always right, but I'll bet it takes more investigation than just, "Achmed said he was a bad guy" to authorize a pickup like this.

Oh, hello again!