CIA IG Report Due Today (Updated with Link to Report)

( – promoted by buhdydharma )

From emptywheel over at Firedoglake:

(Today is CIA IG Report day. While we wait, I’m re-posting two posts I did in June describing what we already know is in the report.)

In this post, I reviewed the known contents of the CIA IG Report’s 6-page section on torture for those who seem to forget we’ve seen substantive bits from that in the Bradbury memos. In this post, I’ll look at what else shows up in the Bradbury memos. In a follow-up post, I’ll look at what IG Report contents we haven’t seen (and therefore are all but guaranteed not to see).

From what we can reconstruct, the report appears to include the following:

Intro and summary

A history of CIA’s involvement in torture

A description of the development of the torture techniques as if they were developed for use for Abu Zubaydah

A review of the legal authorization for the program, with the critique that doctors were not involved in the pre-authorization review and, probably, a description of the ways that torture as practiced exceeded the guidelines included in Bybee Two  

An erroneous claim that everyone who should have been briefed was briefed

Apparently a general review of how the program was implemented, including a description of the close involvement of medical personnel, and a description of what was done to which High Value Detainees

A description of the decision to videotape and apparent reviews of what a review of the videotapes and cables revealed about whether the torture was what it was claimed to be

Forty pages of completely redacted material

The Effectiveness section

A policy section that notes that the program includes many of the same techniques as the State Department qualifies as abusive

Three pages of recommendations

A number of Appendices–the CIA appears to be hiding the very existence of about five of these and most of the contents of the rest of them

This Report has been delayed over and over again, and we can expect a lot of it to be redacted.

And in a related story, the New York Times reports Justice Dept. Report Advises Pursuing C.I.A. Abuse Cases, to-wit:

The Justice Department’s ethics office has recommended reversing the Bush administration and reopening nearly a dozen prisoner-abuse cases, potentially exposing Central Intelligence Agency employees and contractors to prosecution for brutal treatment of terrorism suspects, according to a person officially briefed on the matter.

I have a whole lot of questions about all this.  I have to wonder, during the time of the very long delay before releasing the CIA IG report, whether those who are the most vulnerable to prosecution were allowed to lobby for much of the report to be redacted.  I recall reading somewhere that this was the case — so if anyone can offer a link, I’d be grateful.

The New York Times story weasles out of using the word “torture,” by the way.

Stay tuned.

UPDATE: Here is the link to the report — 122 pages.

15 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. … here we go again.

  2. … this diary by Mel Goodman deserves some love and attention over at the orange, if you feel so inclined.  Title is:  “Time For The CIA’s Chief Apologist to Apologize” and is well worth reading.

    The Chief Apologist referred to, btw, is David Ignatius of the Washington Post.

    • Alma on August 24, 2009 at 5:22 pm

    Gonna be a hard read.

  3. … over at orange from Garrett.

    • Alma on August 24, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    Holder is poised to name John Durham

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/

  4. As expected, heavily redacted and the redaction seems to worsen as the report goes on!  Not at all surprised.

    Incidentally, in re Alma’s comment above, please note my comment on Magnifico’s thread on Four at Four.

  5. Please support the ACLU’s We need a full and thorough investigation. action page.

    And, take whatever further action you are able to using David Swanson’s comprehensive “What You Can Do” list here!

Comments have been disabled.