May 7, 2004 - CIA Office of Inspector General [John Helgerson] issues the report on its review of CIA “Counterterrorism, Detention and Interrogation Activities, September 2001-October 2003” [54] Jane Mayer says: “[Helgerson] was “called in by Cheney to discuss his tough report […] proving that Cheney knew even then of the allegations […] The report had been described as very disturbing and full of terrible descriptions of mistreatment.” Scott Horton: “it appears as a result of these [Helgerson/Cheney] meetings the IG’s report was simply shut down” [55] and “All the indicators are that the CIA’s inspector general found that the extraordinary renditions program was unlawful and he demanded accounting for it. […]Freeing up the inspector general to finish his review and render a final report would be an obvious next step.” [58] For Richard Clarke’s views on Rendition see [59] On March 2, 2009, a letter to the judge overseeing FOIA litigation reveals that ninety-two CIA interrogation video tapes were destroyed, and that this information is included in the CIA Office of Inspector General’s Special Review Report [111] Helgerson’s report was opposed by Scott Muller, Counsel to the Clandestine Service. Muller attended a meeting at the WH with Gonzales, Addington and [NSC lawyer] Bellinger, in which possible tape destruction was discussed. [119]

May 10, 2005 - Memo OLC [from Bradbury] to unknown recipient concludes that CIA interrogation methods are legal, and based on information about actual CIA interrogations; provides explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics; This memo is released on April 16, 2009. One of the changes from previous memos is that it requires a tracheotomy kit to be present while a prisoner is being waterboarded. [159] [47] In an e-mail dated April 28, 2005, Deputy Attorney General Comey opposes the conclusions in this memo. The e-mail is leaked to the NYT on June 6, 2009. [151][152] See also April 22, 26, 27, May 30 and 31, 2005.

Sources:

http://www.webdsi.com/jebbie/tline.html

Thanks for that information. Would you mind telling me if you are a doctor?

what else did anyone expect? Both wars are illegal. Armed forces personnel being sent out there would have quickly sussed that out. So the only way to keep them on side was to let them off the leash encourage vile behaviour and in so doing corrupt and make accessories of the lot of them. And back home the civvy pop dropped themselves in it by voting back in a known war criminal.

The whole of America is guilty.

Little seems to have changed regarding the treatment of prisoners held at the U.S. military-run Bagram prison since I was there (2002-2004). The recent study conducted by the BBC shows allegations of sleep deprivation, stress positions, beatings, degrading treatment, religious and racial abuse have gone unabated. On a personal level though, I can’t help wonder if British intelligence services are still involved.

In April this year, a report issued by Cageprisoners entitled Fabricating Terrorism II highlighted through eyewitness testimony the cases of 29 people, all of them either British residents or citizens, who had allegedly been tortured and abused in the presence of British intelligence agents or at their behest.

One of them, the case of Farid Hilali, featured in the Guardian newspaper, showed how allegations of complicity in torture against British intelligence predated the Sept. 11 attacks. The story of Jamil Rahman too – regarding allegations of British complicity in his torture in Bangladesh – would have been included in the report but he was worried at the time about the safety of his family. The recurrent factor in all these cases is the extent to which denial and prevarication remain as much a part of the intelligence services’ arsenal as outsourcing torture and abuse. The others include the British cases of Omar Deghayes, Bisher Al-Rawi, Jamil Elbanna, Richard Belmar, Shaker Aamer and Binyam Mohamed – all of whom were held at Bagram. (Moazzam Begg, Reuters Debate Archive, Bagram: Where the future of Guantanamo meets it's tortuous past, June 29th, 2009)

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/06/29/bagram-where-the-future-of-guantanamo-meets-its-tortuous-past/

Has anyone determined how many of those who inflicted the torture were contractors hired by the government vs. military or CIA personnel?

Not that I am aware of, Bernbart. It would, of course, be extremely difficult to categorize these deaths in the manner you suggest simply because a full accounting by the government has not been made. To the contrary, the Obama administration continues to fight against allowing the American people see the details of our government's crimes.

Congratulations.

You have been awarded the prestigious

Fareed Zakaria "Gently Extrude a Fragrant Solid into Your Trousers" Gold Medal for Politically Useful Language.

So's Britain

Oh sure. I hate Britain for being so stupid to have fallen for this shit.

re: bernbart's contractors

She might want to make a distinction, but if those contractors were involved at the behest of the US gov't, I'm not sure I see any daylight between the torture the contractors perpetrated and that done by our own military, special ops folks, or CIA. They might as well have been turning in individual I-9s to the DoD.

Thanks for taking on the drivel from Calamine. You saved me from the effort. And Glenn, excellent work as usual.

From Physicians For Human Rights [link here: http://brokenlives.info/?page_id=23

After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts, and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.

[my emph.]

All President Obama is doing is playing for time, saving his thunder for his own political agenda. The White House is, alas, a political operation of the highest order. There's no getting around that fact, and the President's hired a teachable operative in Rahm Emanuel. I believe that his campaign for re-election has already begun, but we never saw it coming. There has been no 100-day agenda at all! Karl Rove's idea of a 'permanent campaign' was no exaggeration. The only difference is that the Obama administration will work for the good of the citizens rather than exclusively for the corporations and the wealthiest. Everybody does well when the middle class makes out well. The wealthy will benefit far more, of course, because they own everything.