Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Addington's War Crimes Problem In Light of His Personal Visit To Guantanamo With CIA

avatar
Mr Nadler asked him whether he would bear some responsibility if the CIA interrogation program, which included simulation of drowning called waterboarding, was found by a court to be illegal.

Addington: "No, I wouldn't be responsible."

Small problem for Addington: Nuremberg precedents, and Addington's visit to Guantnanamo with the CIA General Counsel in 2002.

The SASC25 data show Addington attended a meeting, knew about the dual-track interrogations, but asked no questions. Clearly, Addington was well aware of what was going on, but failed to ensure Geneva was fully applied to the United States as a detaining power, regardless the status of the prisoners.

The two tracks were an intelligence gathering track, where prisoners, tainted by coercive interrogations, would not be brought to trial; and a second track where prisoners, not abused, would be tried. See 35-6 of 63

33 of 63 Shows a legal analyis summary referring to a White House staff study, clearly showing Geneva was reviewed, but (illegally) rejected as a legal constraint on the United States as a detaining power.

Addington's problem with respect to the CIA interrogations and tape destruction was that at 32 of 63 the government expressly discussed foreseeable litigation, known subpoenas, and the attached requirement to retain data.

Addingto's problem with respect to the CIA tape destruction is simple: 12 of 63 shows Addington traveled to Guantanamo, but asked no question because he was well aware of what was going on. CIA Acting GC Rizzo was there as well, meaning Addington and Rizzo had the opportuntiy to review the foreeable risk of litigation, and develop a tape-retention plan.

Yet, the CIA would have us believe nobody imagined there would be a need to retain the data.

Addington's problem is the Nuremberg Justice trial: Lawyers, who failed to ensure the laws of war were fully enforced, were adjudicated with war crimes.

Addington is a former CIA General Counsel, and would have known what was going on inside the CIA. If he didn't he should have discussed this with Rizzo. Either way, he has a very big problem.

Comments (2)

I think there'll be a lot of Bush regime left-overs who do all their vacationing within the good ol' US of A! Can you imagine these criminals going off to spend their spoils on a trip to France, Mexico, Italy, or anywhere else; and being spirited off in a "rendition" to someplace like Germany? Egypt? Syria?

Oh, the very thought of it warms my heart! I can hear them now: "I'll tell you anything you want to know -- just let me go! Excecutive Priviledge? Forget it -- I wanna go home!"

avatar

well of course addington isn't guilty of any war crimes

and of course AlQueda is after addington because addington is responsible for torturing Al Queda suspects

I don't know how these two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive statements could be true

but john mcsame just claimed that he supported the Webb GI bill, after he had opposed it publically just last week

And mcsame just claimed that he helped pass the Webb bill, even though the only two Senators not voting were Ted Kennedy and john mcsame

I guess when you're a repuglitard, you get to create your own reality

Post a Comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Book Club Calendar

Coming Soon



Nov. 30-Dec. 4



January 12-16



« Book Club ArchiveFull calendar »

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address