home

The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney

Jeffrey St. Clair, writing for Counterpunch, has a lot of new details on Torture Air, the Gulfstream jet that has flown detainees all over the world for interrogation. Canadian Mahar Arar was flown from New York to Jordan on the plane - before being handed over to Syria.

St. Clair charges that Vice President Dick Cheney not only knew about the secret CIA flights, he authorized the torturous interrogations.

First, more on Maher Arar:

Arar was held in a federal cell for 13 days while he was interrogated about a man US intelligence believed was linked to al-Qaeda. Arar told his captors that he had never met the man in question, although he had worked with his brother on a construction project.

Then one night two plainclothes officers came for Arar, placed a hood over his head, secured his hands with plastic cuffs and shackled his feet in leg irons. He was taken from the federal jail to the airport, where he was placed on the Gulfstream V jet. The plane flew to Washington, DC, then to Portland, Maine. It stopped once in Rome, then landed in Amman, Jordan. During the flight, Arar recalls that he heard the pilots and crew referring to themselves as members of the "Special Removal Unit".

Arar was held in a cell in Amman for 10 hours. He pleaded with his captors to release him or allow him to talk with a lawyer. They refused. He was placed in a van and driven across the border into Syria, where he was handed over to a secret police unit. He was taken to a dark underground cell and immediately his interrogators began to beat him with battery cables. The beatings went on, day after day.

Back to Jordan, where St. Clair says:

...the CIA runs a "ghost prison" for the detention, interrogation and torture of some of the most senior members of al-Qaeda captured by US forces over the last three years.

According to St. Clair, Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed are part of this group of prisoners.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed, a suspected planner of the 9/11 attacks was captured in Pakistan in March, 2003. Mohammed was reportedly taken to a US base in Afghanistan for his initial interrogation and then was sent to the prison in Jordan, where he was subjected to range of tortures, including the infamous "water-boarding" technique, where the victim is bound tightly with ropes to a piece of plywood and then dunked in ice cold water until he nearly drowns.

The water-boarding method was one of several varieties of torture approved by President Bush in an executive order issued in February 2002. Bush's order, which exempted the CIA from compliance with the rules of the Geneva Conventions, was extended seven months later by an August 2002 memorandum signed by Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee. The Bybee Memo (largely written by his deputy John Yoo) called for the continuation of CIA interrogation methods, including rendition, and blessed as legal methods of physical and psychological coercion that inflicted discomfort "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death".

According to St. Clair, the C.I.S. has 24 secret interrogation centers around the world. He details the White House legal memos, particularly those authored by former deputy assistant attorney general the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel (now a Berkeley law professor) John Yoo, claiming the Genva Conventions don't apply to these prisoners and Congress can't limit the President's options on how to deal with them.

Yoo contends that the Bush administration is free to ignore US laws against torture. "Congress doesn't have the power to tie the hands of the President in regard to torture as an interrogation technique," said Yoo. "It's the core of the Commander-in-Chief function. Congress can't prevent the president from ordering torture."

Yoo claims that if Congress has a problem with Bush flouting its laws, the solution is simple: impeachment. He also argued that the US public had its shot at repudiating Bush's detention and torture program and instead endorsed it. "The issue is dying out," Yoo told the New Yorker magazine. It "has had its referendum."

As to the Cheney authorization, St. Clair says:

Qs in so many cases with the Bush administration, it appears that Dick Cheney himself gave the greenlight for the kidnapping and torture scenario. Cheney even dropped a public hint that the Bush administration was going deal savagely with suspected terrorists. During an interview on Meet the Press, a week after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Cheney said that the administration wasn't going to shackle itself to conventional methods in tracking down suspected terrorists.

"A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies, if we're going to be successful", Cheney said. "That's the world these folks operate in. And so it's going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal, basically, to achieve our objective. We may have to work through, sort of, the dark side."

How long do you think it will be until John Yoo is nominated for a federal judgeship?

< President Bush Gets an iPod | The Remix of the America Stand as One Video >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 11, 2005 at 07:52:20 PM EST
    Connect the dots. You think Dubya and Cheney asked Alberto to draft the "torture isn't really torture" memo as a legal exercise prior to appointment as Atty General? The orders came from the top. These are treaty violations. They are evidence of a rogue nation on the loose. Remember that Ashcroft was the voice in this crew who was saying, wait a minute, maybe we shouldn't be doing some of this. I respect that Ashcroft is actually driven by his principles, I just disagree with many of his conclusions and almost all of his politics. Lovely singing voice, though. Let the beagle soar...

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#2)
    by Darryl Pearce on Mon Apr 11, 2005 at 07:56:01 PM EST
    "Congress doesn't have the power to tie the hands of the President in regard to torture as an interrogation technique," said Yoo. "It's the core of the Commander-in-Chief function. Congress can't prevent the president from ordering torture." All hail Bush, ruler of the Earth!

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 02:13:04 AM EST
    What can i say? this guy will likly be our next President because he is doing a great job-of-work for the enemies that hate us, what more can dick do to help Bin Laden? maybe have camps opened up with the name Dick-camp-west or east or midwest or south camps!.. this way he can just walk up to anyone and point at that person for torture. Yes Dick Cheney the guy of our future. I for one can't wait until i have my hands cut-off by order of Dick.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:59:10 AM EST
    See the story in today's LA Times about another detainee spirited INTO Afghanistan by the friendly CIA air

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:11:30 AM EST
    If you have a problem with this, you're not serious about protecting the country, and your kind has no business in power in times like these (which, thank goodness, appears to be not much of a threat).

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:38:40 AM EST
    et al - You know, recently sailor accused me of being for rendition. My comment was that I had problems with the accusers. Can we talk? You know what bothers me? It’s things like these from St. Clair: “since early 2002, when spotters at international airports began to take note of its regular arrivals and departures, usually at night, from military air bases from Jordan to Indonesia.” I mean how did they know? Did they have observers keeping logs on all departures/arrivals from all military airbases, and did they have observers at all international airports keeping logs on all arrivals/departures? Somehow, I don’t think so. “came for Arar, placed a hood over his head, ….. He was taken from the federal jail to the airport, where he was placed on the Gulfstream V jet.” Now, how did he know it was a Gulfstream V? Remember, he had a hood over his head. Was it taken off? If so, is he an expert on the interior of Gulfstream V’s? And Special Removal Unit? Overheard? Now that makes no sense. People don’t talk to each other like that. “Uh, yes, I am a member of the Special Removal Unit. What is your job? And how do we know the aircraft flew to DC, Portland. Maine and on to Rome? Were the arrivals announced? “Okay, Arar, we’ll be touching down in Rome… shall we send out for some pasta?” “The prison in Jordan is only one of 24 secret detention and interrogation centers worldwide operated by the CIA. According to a report by Human Rights Watch, "at least half of these operate in total secrecy." Well, if they are secret, how does anyone know? And then come to the “at least half operate in total secrecy.” Really? How do we know? Read that paragraph back with a skeptical eye, and you have to start saying… What is this? And then we have the jet. I know corporations that have four or five jets, and the CIA only has one? And why are they landing at Dulles? Here you have a secret operation, and you land at Dulles? I seem to remember several military bases in that area. McGuire, Andrews. How about the old navy flight training base at Lexington Park? Why land at Dulles? It makes no sense if you are involved in a secret operation. And then we have : “President Bush in an executive order issued in February 2002. Bush's order, which exempted the CIA from compliance with the rules of the Geneva Conventions..” What is the number of the EO, and where is a copy? You know, all of the charges may be true. But many of the details do not ring true if subjected to some critical thinking. And, if St. Clair is to write for the general public rather than just the Left, he needs some backup. Some links. Without them, I just agree that Arar's situation was bad, but I'm leary of the torture charges. And I'm still curious as to why Canada wouldn't take him prior to his trip to Syria. He was offerred to them. I'm also curious as to why Syria is cooperating with the CIA. Doesn't make sense. Syria is part of the problem, yet they are questioning suspected terrorists for us?

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#8)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:47:35 AM EST
    Jim, Well you also thought Abu Ghraib was a resort.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:20:46 AM EST
    Che - Well, I did until I discovered they didn't take American Express. BTW - Do you still think Che was a sweetheart? (Don't answer, no need to screw up thread.) I note you ignore my point that too many of these accusations are long on rant and short on verifiable facts. Care to respond?

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#10)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:50:43 AM EST
    not that ppj will follow the links but for the edification of all:
    Federal Aviation Agency records show that a Gulfstream III jet, tail number N829MG, followed a flight path matching the route he described. The flight, hopscotching from New Jersey to Virginia to Maine to Rome and beyond, took place on Oct. 8, 2002, the day after Arar’s deportation order was signed.
    According to FAA flight logs for Oct. 8, 2002, only one aircraft flew that route: the 14-passenger Gulfstream III jet, operated by Presidential Aviation, a charter company in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
    And best proof of all, the doj admits it:
    In papers filed in a New York court replying to Arar’s lawsuit, Justice Department lawyers say Arar was deported to Syria based on secret information that he was a member of the Al-Qaeda, an accusation he denies.


    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:15:20 AM EST
    That's right Sailor, nobody's denying it. In fact, they did a piece on it on 60 Minutes, where the CIA agent "we have gained very valuable information though the rendition program." Who knows how many American lives have be saved by this program. 1000s perhaps? Maybe you'd prefer we talk to the terrorists nicely so that we get nothing from them. Clearly, you're in favor of Americans dying in terrorists' attacks. Well how nice. I applaud this program.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:17:53 AM EST
    MB - and that's one reason you are limited to four comments a day on TalkLeft.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:20:00 AM EST
    why TalkLeft? I'm happy to comply with your limitation, but what I said is a perfectly legitimate point of view (which I promise you is held by the vast majority of Americans) which you just happen to disagree with. Please explain....

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:43:40 AM EST
    ...which I promise you is held by the vast majority of Americans...
    love the way you wingers speak for the vast majority of americans, would that be the 48% of voting americans who oppose bushCo, his policies and tactics. ?what's the penalty if you can't keep your promise? i suggest you voluntarily limit your input to 2 comments a day, or better none, "children should be seen and not heard".

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:51:06 AM EST
    love the way you wingers speak for the vast majority of americans, would that be the 48% of voting americans who oppose bushCo, his policies and tactics. It's not about whether you voted for Bush, it's about whether you adopt some extreme left-wing point of view which literally puts more importance on the treatment of terrorists than saving American lives. The vast (vast) majority of Americans do not. Nobody has a problem with the rendition program. It's been out there for a while. Where's all the outrage? That should tell you something.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 11:26:24 AM EST
    You're right - I have a problem with the rendition program, MB. Thankfully, you don't really speak for the "vast (vast) majority" of Americans; I wonder if all the major newscasts did stories on this - unbiased, fact-only stories - if we'd start to see a bit of an outrage... Perhaps you've heard of a quote from Ben Franklin - that bit about giving up liberty for security? Jim, to answer another of your questions: yes, there are people who sit around observing military airports and recording takeoffs and landings online. A dKos poster suggests Google searching for "N379P movements". Scary that some people have that kind of time, really. --Phoenix Rising

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:27:33 PM EST
    sailor - You are trying to get a camel through the eye of a needle. I didn't say Arar wasn't sent to Syria, I just questioned all the background information the the author throws in, with little to no back up. i.e. The article makes a big deal out of, "with the tail number N379P," owned by Bayard Marketing out of Portalnd, OR, which St. Clair defines as a front for the CIA. How does he know? Where is proof? Your response says, "N829MG," owned by Presidential Aviation. Now who is correct? St. Clair, or your references? And why the discrepancies? And if these can't be matched, what else is incorrect in the details? Torture? Nobody - Yes, but what about N829MG? Who was watching for it? And who can show coordinated take off and landings? The answer is, of course, no one.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 02:59:36 PM EST
    MB, I'm sure I'm wasting my time, but it's time for a civics lesson: Fact: The USA is a signatory to and has ratified the Convention Against Torture. The implementing legislation has been signed into law. It is commonly known as The Torture Statute. Accordingly the terms of the Convention Against Torture are law in the US. I call your attention to Article 2 of the Convention Against Torture:
    Article 2 1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction. 2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. 3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
    Under US law, then, there are no circumstances under which torture is allowable. I call your attention to Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture:
    Article 3 1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. 2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.
    If you want to see the records of individual countries to see if they have a "consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights," you need only click here to review the State Department's most recent country reports on human rights. Just what part of "it's against the law" do you not understand?

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 03:01:41 PM EST
    According to records, the tail number of the plane has changed. Additionally, there are reports of a second (non-Gulfstream) plane being used in addition to N379P. I'm sure if you replaced N379P with N829MG in the Google search you'd come up with some more info. It appears this plane, Gulfstream serial number 1172, has been renumbered several times (ref: the KC Star article). These trips have been covered by more than just Counterpunch and St. Clair. You can try The Kansas City Star or The Washington Post on the same subject. Many other papers and online sources have also done articles... Sorry, Jim. This is pretty well-documented at this time.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#20)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 05:36:20 PM EST
    ppj, the gov't confirmed these detalis; why are you disputing them?

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 05:51:53 PM EST
    sailor - My problem with all of this is that much of the info is meaningless. PR - Shannon is an international refueling stop. If you started calling every plane that stopped there a CIA plane, the list would be long indeed. And note how the article starts off talking about a 737 and, after making a few claims, shifts over to Gulfstreams. These are serious charges and desere some serious research by the reporters involved. Charges with no support help no one.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#22)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:59:57 PM EST
    No, jim, your problem is whenever you are proved wrong you just shift the goalposts to whatever the rnc talking points are at that moment. And golly, 'there was too much accurate information provided' is just laughable. You work/have worked in tech fields, you should understand that more data is always better. You can always throw out the outliers, (and especially the out and out liars;-) On a personal note, and I wish I knew another forum to ask you this, but are you OK? Your posts don't quite have the same quality as before. Speaking of which, has anybody heard from '-cliff' He hasn't, AFAIK, posted for awhile. I never agreed with him but I hope he is happy and healthy, the same as I wish for everyone else.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:16:39 PM EST
    sailor - Your concern is quite touching. Perhaps you are detecting a mild case of spring fever, seeing as how spring has sprung here at the palatial retirement compound, catfish pond and BBQ stand and it is difficult to concentrate on saving western civilization when the birds are singing and my lawn tractor beckons me for a ride. I will try to do better, as my goal is to but serve. And no, I haven't changed the goal posts, just noted that the Left always comes up with these shotgunned charges, with things reported as significant that means nothing. i.e. Shannon used as a refueling stop. So? The tail number is different? Well, the registeration has changed. This plane has been taking off from Dulles, and this one can land at any military base in the world. So? It is not that the information is too much, just that the writer(s) demand that the reader "believe" whatever is put before them. When I read these I get the feeling that you could slightly alter the wording and be reading an article about UFOs and abductions by ET's po'd parents.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#24)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:28:20 PM EST
    I was sincere, my apologies. The left didn't come up with charges, they are on federal record and the feds admitted to them. Justify rendition if you want, but the facts are not in dispute.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:05:30 PM EST
    sailor - Just kidding, a little sarcasm. ;-) I justify nothing. I still note that even with the feds giving up, a credible case can't be built for the totality of the charges. Overstatements.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#26)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:50:36 PM EST
    Jim, It is not that the information is too much, just that the writer(s) demand that the reader "believe" whatever is put before them. Isn't that the writer's goal? Maybe not demand necessarily, but maybe command that you believe their formation. The trick is for the readers to stay objective and decide for themselves.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 09:07:27 AM EST
    Che - The converted will always believe. What the writer should be striving for is a piece of information with accurate references and back up. St Clair's article failed the test. i.e. It is not up to the reader to prove the writer correct. Let me say it another way. Claiming one thousand bad actions is no more effective than claiming ten when there is no backup. In fact, it is less effective because the reader may well say, Gee. This is happening all the time? If so, why haven't I heard about it.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 10:34:25 AM EST
    Jim, I pointed you to several mainstream press articles. I've pointed you to a Google search where you can verify the flight patterns of these planes. The Government verifies at least those renditions the press has been able to trace beyond a reasonable doubt (see the mainstream press articles). What more do you want? A better-written article on a Liberal-biased news site? Write CounterPunch and tell them. You want something more organized than the little tidbits I've been feeding? You're expecting a bit much from a blog post...

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 03:17:16 PM EST
    I think PPJ just wanted to be in the rool while Maher Arar was being tortured. That appears to be the only level of proof satisfactory to him.

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 05:54:08 PM EST
    PR - I really don't want anything. I'm just pointing out how the inaccuracies and overstatements hurt the story. RandyPaul - Thinking? You?

    Re: The CIA Gulfstream, Torture and Cheney (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Apr 14, 2005 at 03:21:06 PM EST
    Yes, PPJ I think, unlike you who simply reacts.