home

FBI Agent Warned About Illegality of Rendition

A supervisory FBI agent assigned to Guantanamo wrote a memo to his superiors warning of the illegality of its rendition plans, writes Michael Isikoff of Newsweek in an exclusive.

This memo appears to be the first that directly questions the legal premises of the Bush administration policy of "extraordinary rendition"—a secret program under which terror suspects are transferred to foreign countries that have been widely criticized for practicing torture.

After objecting to techniques such as exploiting "phobias" like "the fear of dogs" or dripping water "to induce the misperception of drowning," the agent discussed a plan to send the detainee to Jordan, Egypt or an unspecified third country for interrogation. "In as much as the intent of this category is to utilize, outside the U.S., interrogation techniques which would violate [U.S. law] if committed in the U.S., it is a per se violation of the U.S. Torture Statute," the agent wrote. "Discussing any plan which includes this category could be seen as a con-spiracy to violate [the Torture Statute]" and "would inculpate" everyone involved.

< Judy in the Sky With Diamonds | Time: Rove May Have Learned of Plame From White House >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Some brave federal prosecutor needs to test the FBI supervisor's legal theory that a discussion of rendition may constitute conspiracy to violate the U.S. Torture Act and bring a few of the folks in this administration up on charges.

    Re: FBI Agent Warned About Illegality of Renditio (none / 0) (#2)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:48 PM EST
    Uzbekistan has given the US 6 months to vacate K-2, our big staging base there. This because of the US involvement in the rendition of Uzbeck refugees from the recent uprisings. Nice Work Monkey Boy. Maybe you can buy them off with more of our tax money.

    exploiting phobias, like "the fear of dogs", dripping water "to induce the misperception of drowning"
    Sounds like terrorism to me.
    "...if committed in the U.S., it is a per se violation of the U.S.torture statute," the agent wrote.
    And this sounds like we may well be acting outside the law. What's the pot calling the kettle these days?

    Re: FBI Agent Warned About Illegality of Renditio (none / 0) (#4)
    by jimcee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:48 PM EST
    So if US prison camps (read Gitmo) are so awful then sending these fellas back to thier homeland seems kind of nice now doesn't it? Or are the countries that recieve these fine young men so horrible that a stint in an American prison seems rather nice? The Left is looking rather sad right now and though hypocracy has never been a problem with the Left it is fascinating to observe the knots that they will tie themselves into to make the Bushies look bad. Gitmo and Abu Ghraib are bad but returning them to thier home nations is even worse but that is what you are calling for. Or is the alternative just letting these guys go and to see what happenens? Sheesh.

    jimcee-
    it is fascinating to observe the knots that they will tie themselves into to make the Bushies look bad.
    It's fascinating for me to watch the wingnuts turn themselves into pretzels to try to make the bushies look good.

    And the really funny part? It isn't working.

    Re: FBI Agent Warned About Illegality of Renditio (none / 0) (#6)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:48 PM EST
    Nice Work Monkey Boy.
    Excuse me, that's President Monkey Boy, if you please.

    Re: FBI Agent Warned About Illegality of Renditio (none / 0) (#7)
    by veloer on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:48 PM EST
    I just do not understand. It seems any crime is just fine if you are a Republican. Every time I see a W04 on a car I want to ask: How do you feel, voting for some one who will put his party above his country?

    Re: FBI Agent Warned About Illegality of Renditio (none / 0) (#8)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:48 PM EST
    Not only was question raised of Bush's treatment of prisoners from the FBI, but also from the military's top legal experts. See the recently disclosed JAG memos. How sad that an administration that used Saddam's human rights abuses as justification for invading Iraq, now send prisoners to countries that abuse human rights. One is struck by these comments in the JAG memo from USAF Major General Jack Rives
    Finally, the use of the more extreme interrogation techniques simply is not how the U.S. armed forces have operated in recent history. We have taken the legal and moral "high-road" in the conduct of our military operations regardless of how others may operate...We need to consider the overall impact of approving extreme interrogation techniques as giving official approval and legal sanction to the application of interrogation techniques that U.S. forces have consistently been trained are unlawful.
    Bush has led our country down the legal and moral low road. He has given sanction to practices that have longed been considered immoral and unlawful. He has brought dishonor to our country.

    I do not think it is even a difficult legal question--the practice of extraordinary rendition is a clear violation of the U.S. Torture Act as well as the Convention Against Torture to which the US is a signatory. If the President thinks that abiding by the torture laws is hurting our national security, then he can ask Congress to repeal the law, and pull out of the Torture Convention. Until then--I think I've heard this somewhere before--he is not above the law. We have already sent suspected "terrorists" to Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Uzbekistan. All of these countries' use of torture is well documented by human rights groups and our own State Department. It would be hard to find a country that is a worse torture offender than Uzbekistan which still regularly boils people in oil during questioning. And yet Bush and his co-conspirators stand up and say that they don't believe anyone they have delivered to these governments has been tortured. The best part is how they say that they get "written assurances" from these governments that they detainees won't be tortured. I'm sure that is effective. I mean, just because a government regularly tortures and extrajudicially executes prisoners, that doesn't mean they won't honor their signed, written contract! What would the reaction be to a parent sending their child to stay with a known pedophile? Would people be any less outraged if the parent got that pedophile to give "written assurances" that he wouldn't rape her child? Of all the lows we have stooped to in our war on terror, this, to me, is the most reprehensible.