Monday, December 15, 2014

Don't you know your queen?

There is almost nothing new in the Torture Report, except perhaps for demonstrating how obsessed the CIA is with the male butt.  I wonder if they have some kind of 'fruit machine' to determine whether someone is qualified to join the CIA interrogation squad.  Don't you know your queen?

Tweet (Sam Husseini; his posting on the issue):
"Key torture report finding buried in footnote 857: torture helped produce bogus case for Powell on Iraq war"
Landay at McClatchy, 2009 (without the specifics, but with clear understanding that the torture was intended to produce lies to be used for propaganda):  "Report: Abusive tactics used to seek Iraq-al Qaida link"

We could even go further back to the Executive Intelligence Review News Service, 2005:  "DIA Proof Of Cheney's Lies Released" (based on the CIA's President's Daily Briefing of September 21, 2001, before Ibn Shaykh al-Libi had been captured and interrogated by the Americans, and before his rendition to Egypt, where torture created his testimony of an Iraq-al Qaeda connection).  This means that the intelligence community knew the stories they were creating using torture were lies.

The newest revelation, separate from the Torture Report, is that Levin has details from the classified March 2003 - just before the American attack on Iraq started - CIA cable warning that the allegation that Mohamed Atta had met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague was false.  Ironically, it appears that Brennan has released this in order to attempt to protect the CIA's reputation by emphasizing that Bush/Cheney/Powell had been given due warning from the CIA that the propaganda basis for the American attack on Iraq was a lie.  Levin:
"There is a second recent revelation about how the “Prague meeting” progressed from unsubstantiated report to justification for war. It comes from Jiri Ruzek, who headed the Czech counterintelligence service on and after 9/11. Mr. Ruzek published a memoir earlier this year, which we have had translated from Czech. It recounts the days after the terror attack, including how his nation’s intelligence services first reported a single-source rumor of a Prague meeting between Atta and al-Ani, how CIA officials under pressure from CIA headquarters in turn pressured him to substantiate the rumor, and how U.S. officials pressured the Czech government when Czech intelligence officials failed to produce the confirmation that the Bush administration sought.
Mr. Ruzek writes, “It was becoming more and more clear that we had not met expectations and did not provide the ‘right’ intelligence output.” Mr. Ruzek goes on: “The Americans showed me that anything can be violated, including the rules that they themselves taught us. Without any regard to us, they used our intelligence information for propaganda press leaks. They wanted to mine certainty from unconfirmed suspicion and use it as an excuse for military action. We were supposed to play the role of useful idiot thanks to whose initiative a war would be started.”
That’s chilling. We have a senior intelligence official of a friendly nation describing the pressure that he and other Czech officials were under to give the Bush administration material it could use to justify a war."

The Atta Prague meeting is the creation of Douglas Feith, who created the lie in the face of specific CIA information to the contrary, and passed it on through Libby to Cheney and Powell (of course, the suppressed 'Able Danger' material informs us that 'Atta' was working for the US government throughout, as one of those false flag recruiters/military trainers in the mold of Ali Mohamed, a role much beloved by the Pentagon, so the CIA or Pentagon knew where 'Atta' was at all times, including not being in Prague at the relevant time; my emphasis in red and green):
"Cheney's public statements before and after the war about the risks posed by Iraq have closely tracked the briefing Feith's office presented to the vice president's then-chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. That includes the briefing's depiction of an alleged 2001 meeting in Prague between an Iraqi intelligence official and one of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers as one of eight "Known Iraq-Al Qaida Contacts."
The defense report states that at the time, "the intelligence community disagreed with the briefing's assessment that the alleged meeting constituted a 'known contact' " -- a circumstance that the report said was known to Feith's office. But his office had bluntly concluded in a July 2002 critique of a CIA report on Iraq's relationship with al-Qaeda that the CIA's interpretation of the facts it cited "ought to be ignored."
The briefing to Libby was also presented with slight variations to then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, then-CIA Director George J. Tenet and then-deputy national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley. It was prepared in part by someone whom the defense report described as a "junior Naval Reservist" intelligence analyst detailed to Feith's office from the DIA. The person is not named in the report, but Edelman wrote that she was requested by Feith's office."
I wonder if the DIA connection means it was the DIA, and not the CIA, that was directing the various torturers in what specific story they wanted from the torture.  You also have to wonder if she was part of an Israeli conspiracy with Feith.  It is not clear that the Prague meeting came out of a guided torture session, or whether she and Feith just made it up.

And more background:
  1. "Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq"
  2. "Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations"
  3. "Humanitarian Aid Worker: Torture Only Stopped When I Pretended I Was In Al Qaeda"
  4. "U.S. Officials Guilty of War Crimes for Using 9/11 As a False Justification for the Iraq War"
  5. "The Media Is Focusing On the WRONG Senate Torture Report"
blog comments powered by Disqus