Silly you, that’s not redaction, it’s one of those CIA highlighters

f*ckers

You uncultured slob. You simply have no appreciation for abstract art.

Look at the bold lines, the use of black, the contrast, the clarity between black and white to clarify the legal absolution between right and wrong. You look at this and see absence of someone else’s thoughts, but you’ve missing the point. This frees your imagination from the construct imposed by the words of others. To envision this as you want to, to insert yourself into the document. This is true art. Art that gives so generously to the viewer’s experience rather than takes away.

It’s like jazz. It’s the words they don’t show.

what kilo said ^^^ double down …

Despite the redactions, though, I learned torture has an acronym: EIT

The utter banality of evil

EIT, aka compassionate conservatism.

Funny, isn’t it? What they left showing makes sense.

War criminals… we need more laws calling this type of behavior and lies through abuse of secrecy as treason!

good post, attackerman

dugg

Death jazz… like death metal only it’s intellectual and helps national security.

Cooler.

Dugg

dugg it!

Well the page does contain some information.

For one thing, there was a decision to tape the interrogations. That means someone who had such authority made the call. That would be whoever ran the CIA interrogation center on up to the White House. Now the taping of interrogations might have been made by the CIA chief running the facility but the much longer taping indicates a procedure which someone higher up (Langley to WH) signed off on (and if they signed off on this they signed off on the waterboarding tapes as well)

And we know that both the Inspector General and the CIA’s General Counsel also viewed the tapes so that their existence had to have been known about by numerous people all through the CIA’s chain of command.

You see they can black out lots of stuff but what they can’t hide is the organizational structure. If the tapes touched certain of these, then they had to have been dealt with by other groupings. What this page does not show is any evidence that knowledge of the tapes was stovepiped to just a few individuals. Otherwise the OGC and OIG contacts with them would be more problematic.

Spencer, how did you get that redacted quote?

What did the redactions conceal? This quote by a CIA instructor: “Hurm. Just give me time and man’s index finger. Will get information. Never compromise. Even in face of armageddon. Never compromise.”

“Tape and rewind” could, perhaps, be read to imply a routine where interrogations are done and taped during the day, and then the day’s tape is transmitted back to HQ that night. (Or copied, and the copies shipped off.) So maybe “Tape and rewind” is death-jazz for “Please be kind, Rewind!”

damn
dugg

Thanks for the reminder.

BTW … ygm

More than that…whoever ordered it did so for all the interrogations. Which means that the 92 tapes destroyed are essentially all the original evidence of those interrogations. It’s not, as some surmised, videos of the individuals in their cells (though there may be tapes of that as well). But what they have done is eliminated any original images of confessions or statements by the detainees. It’s essentially “trust us…this is what they said”.

And it looks as if the Office of General Counsel reviewed first, with the Inspector General doing so later. The following material after the review by the attorney from OGC likely represents an action s/he suggested, or further review of issues. Then “As a result…the OIG reviewed the tapes…”But I would caution against interpreting that this “occurred” in May 2003. That was my first conclusion. But if that was true then one might expect the date to either immediately precede or follow the subject…i.e.

“In May 2003 the OIG reviewed the videotapes and….” or “The OIG reviewed the videotapes in May 2003, and…”

But there is redacted material of at least several words between the subject and the date. Maybe it says something like “The OIG reviewed the videotapes, [and notified DCIA Tenet], in May 2003″????

It’s also a curious gap where it says “interrogators administered…..the waterboard to Al Nashiri.” It’s a relatively short break. Could that be a reference to a time period For example “20 minutes of”???

When did Ramirez supposedly destroy the tapes?

Cheney uses then as porn along with the tape of Saddam’s execution.

The CIA will never be held accountable for what happened, and neither will the Bush Administration. They have too many supporters that believe torture is acceptable in the face of possible terrorist attacks on United States soil. Torture advocates don’t need anything like a majority to stop justice from being done. They only need one or two people in key positions to grind the wheels of any investigation to a standstill. Quite obviously there are plenty of people in place in Washington willing to do just that, and there are Democrats among them (just to add extra sting).

I’ve never before so strongly hoped I was wrong about something than about this. We’ll see. Yoo referred to the United States Constitution as irrelevant and unnecessary, and Obama seems to have picked up fighting against the rule of law right where Bush left off (on a number of fronts).

Sorry, it’s a joke — that line is delivered by Rorschach in the Watchmen comic book. I was about to see the movie when I wrote this post.

But it really does say that Paul’s dead, doesnt it?

oh… i bet there are more than a few boxed sets gifted out to the torturers’ nearest and dearest.