Why the CIA destroyed "interrogation" tapes


#1

[Read the post]


#2

This is totally unsurprising.
But: in my ideal world, the intentional destruction of evidence would be tantamount to admission of guilt, and parties would be able to be prosecuted based on that.
It’s probably a good thing I’m not in charge.


#3

The Russians have a saying, “the fish rots from the head down”.

The Bush administration was a safe haven for sociopathic sadists who gloried in human degradation, and the so-called “intelligence” work that accompanied their military adventuring in the Middle East was a sick tapestry of rape, child abuse, and many other forms of torture. If there’s anybody left in the world who doesn’t know this, they must be very far out of touch with reality.

The big question remains, is the Obama administration really any better in this regard? Their obsessive secrecy suggests that they aren’t.


#4

No-one in jail for authoring a policy of torture. No-one in jail for destroying evidence of the scale of the crimes.
Truth, Freedom, Justice - the UnAmerican Way!


#5

We did jail the CIA agent that exposed the torturing though! That counts for something right? facepalm


#6

In my perfect world the whole “we’ve done something so horrible that the world can’t even see the pictures” would be impetus to stop doing the thing, as opposed to just hiding the pictures better.

And, unfortunately, not surprising.


#7

Usually, the coverup is a worse crime than the original action. But in this case, it should be safe to assume that the original crime was pretty obviously reprehensible, and the result of conscious lawbreaking. But it was done in the name of all of us, to keep us safe allegedly, and then hidden from us, also to keep us safe from our own moral outrage apparently, so what-eva.

As long as we allow crimes to occur on our behalf with no consequences, the crimes will continue.


#8

Yes, mistakes were made. You were never supposed to find out about this, for one.


#9

Destroying evidence is also not survivable. We’ll assume the worst, CIA, and feel vindicated and justified in defying federal authority in any/all forms. So, ask yourself, do you want to be held accountable, or do you want to lose the nation, your authority, and potentially your ‘life’ as an agency? You cannot rule without the consent of the governed.


#10

Not any better on secrecy. Likely worse on drone strikes (if only because he has more at his disposal than his predecessor). Hopefully better on torture.


#11

Yes, mistakes were made. You were never supposed to find out about this, for one.

What we have to do is bury this, forget about
it, and move on having learned nothing. Besides, the whistleblower who
exposed this [is unpleasant/is weird/fled the country/etc] and the
material exposed can therefore be ignored for some reason.


#12

“Obstruction of Justice” is a crime, at least if they feel like prosecuting you for it.


#13

Isn’t it illegal to knowingly destroy evidence of a crime?

Maybe it doesn’t count for crimes against humanity…


#14

As usual, Bloom County already nailed this:


#15

Why did the CIA destroy their torture footage?

Seriously?

Because if it got out and everyone saw it, they might have to be held accountable for their crimes against humanity! Duh!

Why do children glue together broken lamps? Because they know they’ll get in trouble if mom and dad find out!


#16

As we all know, if you’re the perpetrator, it isn’t.


#17

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.