The Man Who Ordered CIA's Tape Destruction

(CBS)  He is the man who ordered the destruction of video tapes documenting the CIA's interrogation of two high-level al Qaeda operatives.

The then-head of the clandestine service, Jose Rodriguez, ordered the tapes destroyed shortly after a Washington Post expose focused attention on the CIA's secret prisons, CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports.

"Well, I think there might have been concern that those tapes could have been called for by some outside body and the CIA would no longer maintain control over them," said retired CIA officer John Brennan, who is now a CBS News consultant.

Brennan says Rodriguez was also worried the Justice Department was backing away from its earlier support of harsh interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding.

"And that therefore agency officers who participated in those interrogation sessions may be subject to some type of prosecution," Brennan said.

Rodriguiz ordered the tapes destroyed without telling then-CIA director Porter Goss and against the advice of the CIA's own general counsel, the White House deputy counsel and the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

"I expressed concern about destroying any video tapes and said that would be a very ill-advised move by the agency," Rep. Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said.

Former CIA officer John Kiriakou led the raid, which captured the al Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah, told CBS News he and at least one other CIA officer refused to use the harsh interrogation techniques.

That job, he said, was turned over to retired commandos under contract to the CIA.

[infidel_us]

Well Jose....good luck back in Mexico. I''m sure you''ll have no trouble finding suitable employment in either the food service or hospitality industries!

[mudrose-2009]

yahright2,

That''''s pretty f*cked up right there, dude.

Posted by rafterman1

I CONCUR. HELL IS DEFINITELY WARMING UP.

[realpatriot1]

If the CIA felt that what they were doing was in the best interests of Americans they should''ve retained the tapes. The fact that they felt compelled to cover up says all that needs to be about how morally correct they felt about what they were doing.

No one is crying any tears for the detainees who we know for a fact are Al Quaeda operatives.

What makes the overall policy so disgusting is that we''ve profiled people, grabbed them off the street, detained them for years with no attorney or trial or any evidence against them being provided to an independent judge. We don''t know if any of these people have been tortured or not. All we have to go on in that regard is the perverted way that prisoners
were treated in Iraq and that doesn''t instill confidence in the wisdom of our government.

[mudrose-2009]

If it takes some officer dumping water over a terrorist%u2019s face to stop 3,000 American Civilian Deaths%u2026%u2026.So be it.

Posted by pzabbie

Exactly. We shouldn''t pamper terrorists and poop on our troops.

[pzabbie]

O.K. Rafterman1,
You got me. I understand your point. And I respect John McCann. Torture is not a reliable source. If I were to endure enemy interrogation, I would tell them what they wanted to hear, try to drop a few clues to our people, and do what I needed to survive. But%u2026You still don%u2019t respond to my assertion that the Constution only applies to American Citizens??!!

[mudrose-2009]

Some people at the CIA may have feared its employees were liable to being judged by retroactive standards. That prospect is not an excuse for a cover-up of possible wrongdoing. The Justice Department is right to investigate how the tapes were destroyed and who made the decision.

But while it''s truth-telling time, let''s hear the members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, give a thorough timeline of what they knew about interrogations. Let''s hear what they allowed to take place. Let''s hear them explain why anti-terrorism efforts they thought were necessary in 2002 are unacceptable today.

All you SOBs do is sell this country out to the highest bidder.

[mudrose-2009]

The Washington Post reported Sunday that interrogation methods now widely reviled on Capitol Hill evoked very different reactions in September 2002, when the horror of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks was fresh. Back then, four senior members of Congress -- including Nancy Pelosi, now speaker of the House -- got a thorough briefing on waterboarding and other techniques used to extract critical information from terror suspects.

Their response? No one objected, and "at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder," two U.S. officials told the Post.

The CIA held some 30 briefings in all for members of Congress who had oversight of national intelligence agencies. "Officials present during the meetings described the reaction as mostly quiet acquiescence, if not outright support," the Post reported.

Today, some leaders of Congress are expressing outrage at harsh interrogation techniques, and working on legislation specifically to ban waterboarding. Some members obviously find such tactics more dispensable now than they did five years ago.

[pzabbie]

==One of the founding fathers'''' principles was that the Constitution could be a blueprint of rules for all of mankind==

Rafterman1.
Again, I disagree. Ask any of the 9/11 relatives/ survivors if they don%u2019t feel threatened by %u201CAmerica will never be threatened by a bunch of guys living in caves and running around with AK47''''s%u201D. Mohammad Atta didn%u2019t live in a cave, and didn%u2019t carry an AK47. If it takes some officer dumping water over a terrorist%u2019s face to stop 3,000 American Civilian Deaths%u2026%u2026.So be it.

[mudrose-2009]

Pelosi declined to comment directly on her reaction to the classified briefings. But a congressional source familiar with Pelosi''s position on the matter said the California lawmaker did recall discussions about enhanced interrogation. The source said Pelosi recalls that techniques described by the CIA were still in the planning stage -- they had been designed and cleared with agency lawyers but not yet put in practice -- and acknowledged that Pelosi did not raise objections at the time.

Harman, who replaced Pelosi as the committee''s top Democrat in January 2003, disclosed Friday that she filed a classified letter to the CIA in February of that year as an official protest about the interrogation program. Harman said she had been prevented from publicly discussing the letter or the CIA''s program because of strict rules of secrecy.

"When you serve on intelligence committee you sign a second oath -- one of secrecy," she said. "I was briefed, but the information was closely held to just the Gang of Four. I was not free to disclose anything."

But you did know now didn''t you Pewlosi?

[mudrose-2009]

Part VII

I can''t describe that program to you," Hayden said. "But I would suggest to you that it would be wrong to assume that the program of the past is necessarily the program moving forward into the future."


Bush Derangement Syndrome. Boring!!!!!