Ex-CIA Agent, Whistleblower off to Prison While Torturers He Exposed walk FREE

[revelarts]

Former CIA agent John Kiriakou speaks out just days after he was sentenced to 30 months in prison, becoming the first CIA official to face jail time for any reason relating to the U.S. torture program. Under a plea deal, Kiriakou admitted to a single count of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act by revealing the identity of a covert officer to a freelance reporter, who did not publish it. Supporters say Kiriakou is being unfairly targeted for having been the first CIA official to publicly confirm and detail the Bush administration’s use of waterboarding. Kiriakou joins us to discuss his story from Washington, D.C., along with his attorney, Jesselyn Radack, director of National Security & Human Rights at the Government Accountability Project. "This ... was not a case about leaking; this was a case about torture. And I believe I’m going to prison because I blew the whistle on torture," Kiriakou says. "My oath was to the Constitution. … And to me, torture is unconstitutional." [inlcudes rush transcript]

Ex-CIA Agent, Whistleblower John Kiriakou Sentenced to Prison While Torturers He Exposed Walk Free (http://www.democracynow.org/2013/1/30/ex_cia_agent_whistleblower_john_kiriakou)

Do we see a pattern here?
the state protecting those who commit crimes for the state but punishes those that accuse the state of wrong doing.

D or R, does it really matter?

Agent Kiriakou and many others like him followed the law but have loss jobs, reputations and been jailed and are sane.
Unlike the L.A. cop who -by his account- exposed the states/police similar abuses and was punished for it as well.



<iframe width="400" height="225" src="http://www.democracynow.org/embed/story/2013/1/30/ex_cia_agent_whistleblower_john_kiriakou" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[PostmodernProphet]

(http://www.democracynow.org/2013/1/30/ex_cia_agent_whistleblower_john_kiriakou)
Do we see a pattern here?

bad things happen to stupid people?.......

[revelarts]

bad things happen to stupid people?.......

Bad things happen when you point out the gov't is breaking the law.

But i guess in context you might be right, You know it's like exposing the mafia.
'Bad tings mights hapens to yas, if yose say bad tings about the family kapeech, don'ts be stupid..'

[taft2012]

revealing the identity of a covert officer to a freelance reporter

I can remember when an allegation of this was big enough to turn our entire government on its head, even when it wasn't a "covert" officer, but only a loud-mouthed attention-whore desk jockey with an ideological/political axe to grind.

I wonder what's changed since then?

[revelarts]

:rolleyes:

JOHN KIRIAKOU: Sure. In 2002, I was the chief of counterterrorism operations for the CIA in Pakistan, and my job was to try to locate al-Qaeda fighters or al-Qaeda leaders and capture them, to turn them over to the Justice Department and have them face trial. That was the original—the original idea, not to have them sit in Cuba for the next decade.
But we caught Abu Zubaydah. He was shot three times by Pakistani police as he was trying to escape from his safe house. And I was the first person to have custody of him, to sit with him. We spoke to each other extensively, I mean, talked about everything from September 11th to poetry that he had been writing, to his family. And then he was moved on to a secret prison after that. Once I got back to headquarters, I heard that he had been subject to harsh techniques, then euphemistically called "enhanced interrogation techniques," and I was asked by one of the leaders in the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center if I wanted to be trained in the use of these techniques. I told him that I had a moral problem with them, and I did not want to be involved.
So, fast-forward to 2007. By then, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International had reported that al-Qaeda prisoners had been tortured, and ABC News called and said that they had information that I had tortured Abu Zubaydah. I said that was absolutely untrue. I was the only person who was kind to Abu Zubaydah, and I had never tortured anybody. So, they asked me to go on their show and defend myself. I did that. And in the course of the interview, I said that not only was the CIA torturing prisoners, but that it was official U.S. government policy. This was not the result of some rogue CIA officer just beating up a prisoner every once in a while; this was official policy that went all the way up to the president of the United States.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And so, what happened after that, in 2007, once you gave this interview? Can you explain what happened to you and to your family?
JOHN KIRIAKOU: Sure. Within 24 hours, the CIA filed what’s called a crimes report against me with the Justice Department, saying that I had revealed classified information, which was the torture program, and asking for an investigation with an eye toward prosecuting me. The Justice Department decided at the time that I had not revealed classified information, that the information was already in the public domain. But immediately, within weeks, I was audited by the IRS. I’ve been audited by the IRS every single year since giving that interview in 2007.
But a more important bit of fallout from that interview was that every time I would write an op-ed, every time I would give a television interview or give a speech at a university, the CIA would file a crimes report against me, accusing me of leaking additional classified information. Each time, the Justice Department determined that I did not leak any classified information. In fact, I would get those op-eds and those speeches cleared by the CIA’s Publications Review Board in advance.
Then the CIA started harassing my wife, who at the time was a senior CIA officer, particularly over an op-ed I had written. They accused her of leaking classified information to me for the purpose of writing the op-ed. Well, I said I had gotten the information in the op-ed from two UPI reports and from a South American Ministry of Foreign Affairs website. And they would back off.
But this sort of became our life. We would be under FBI surveillance. She would be called into the CIA’s Office of Security. I would have trouble getting a security clearance when I went to Capitol Hill. It just became this pattern of harassment.






NERMEEN SHAIKH: John Kiriakou, I want to play for you comments President Obama made four years ago, shortly before he took office, about whether CIA officials involved in torture should be prosecuted. He appeared on the ABC News’ This Week.

PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBAMA: I don’t believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. And part of my job is to make sure that—for example, at the CIA, you’ve got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don’t want them to suddenly feel like they’ve got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering.


GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: So no 9/11 Commission with independent subpoena power?

PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBAMA: You know, we have not made final decisions, but my instinct is for us to focus on how do we make sure that, moving forward, we are doing the right thing.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: That was President Obama speaking four years ago to ABC. John Kiriakou, your response to what the presient said?
JOHN KIRIAKOU: I supported the president’s response. I remember that interview, and I thought, "OK, he’s right. There are wonderful, talented, hard-working men and women at the CIA who need to be protected." But at the same time, it’s one thing to look forward; it’s another thing to look forward just for the torturers. It’s just not fair. It’s not fair to the American people. If we’re going to—if we’re going to make prosecutions or initiate prosecutions, those prosecutions can’t just be against the people who blew the whistle on the torture or who opposed the torture. You know, we haven’t—we haven’t even investigated the torturers, as Jesselyn said. We haven’t initiated any actions against the people who conceived of the torture and implemented the policy, or against the man who destroyed evidence of the torture, or against the attorneys who used specious legal arguments to justify the torture. If we’re going to move forward, let’s move forward, but you can’t target one person or two people who blew the whistle.

[taft2012]

We're still talking about throwing buckets of water at people, right?

[cadet]

We're still talking about throwing buckets of water at people, right?

With a towel over your face to simulate drowning.

So I'm still confused as to why he's getting the bad rep. He doesn't think torture is right, and is pointing out corrupted ways in our gov't system.

[Kathianne]

I'm still trying to figure out how 'water boarding' is considered torture and targeted drone attacks are considered acceptable.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'm still trying to figure out how 'water boarding' is considered torture and targeted drone attacks are considered acceptable.

Water boarding is torture because Bush did it while drone strikes are acceptable because obama does it.
A simple case of open hypocrisy by the same group of dem/libs /socialists etc.. -Tyr

[bingster]

We already knew water boarding was torture. The whole country knew water boarding was taking place. I don't understand why this guy thought he was a whistle blower when everyone knew it was going on.

[jimnyc]

With a towel over your face to simulate drowning.

At least it's only a simulation, and no water enters the lungs. A hell of a scare tactic though. I suppose it still beats a slow beheading, taped for viewing pleasure!

[Kathianne]

At least it's only a simulation, and no water enters the lungs. A hell of a scare tactic though. I suppose it still beats a slow beheading, taped for viewing pleasure!

This is all so much nonsense, the US has continued enhanced interrogations when called for, they just use extraordinary rendition to do so. Those who think target drones would be used and not techniques to get information are fooling themselves.

[Robert A Whit]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/icons/icon1.png Ex-CIA Agent, Whistleblower off to Prison While Torturers He Exposed walk FREE

Former CIA agent John Kiriakou speaks out just days after he was sentenced to 30 months in prison, becoming the first CIA official to face jail time for any reason relating to the U.S. torture program. Under a plea deal, Kiriakou admitted to a single count of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act by revealing the identity of a covert officer to a freelance reporter, who did not publish it. Supporters say Kiriakou is being unfairly targeted for having been the first CIA official to publicly confirm and detail the Bush administration’s use of waterboarding. Kiriakou joins us to discuss his story from Washington, D.C., along with his attorney, Jesselyn Radack, director of National Security & Human Rights at the Government Accountability Project. "This ... was not a case about leaking; this was a case about torture. And I believe I’m going to prison because I blew the whistle on torture," Kiriakou says. "My oath was to the Constitution. … And to me, torture is unconstitutional."


Ex-CIA Agent, Whistleblower John Kiriakou Sentenced to Prison While Torturers He Exposed Walk Free (http://www.democracynow.org/2013/1/30/ex_cia_agent_whistleblower_john_kiriakou)

Do we see a pattern here?
the state protecting those who commit crimes [I]for the state but punishes those that accuse the state of wrong doing.

D or R, does it really matter?

Agent Kiriakou and many others like him followed the law but have loss jobs, reputations and been jailed and are sane.
Unlike the L.A. cop who -by his account- exposed the states/police similar abuses and was punished for it as well.






He did not follow the law. That is why he got convicted.

Scooter on the other hand did not reveal any classified agents. His big crime was he alleged he learned the information from a reporter. Lying is pretty bad but what the hell? Clinton got off scott free for his lies. Double standard to Libby.

The law examined waterboardign before the CIA used it. The decision in part relied on the fact it is done as a routine measure to the Navy Seals.

They have not run around bawling out their eyes over it.

Yet let it happen to a pwooor twerrorist and all hell breaks out.

Why don't you crybabies who side with the Terrorists take a look in youtube at videos where they cut off the heads of Americans and do so rather grisly and slowly? Come on. Did you guys actually watch the terrorists do that?

Fuck that. I prefer to be waterboarded if you don't mind.

[Robert A Whit]

This is all so much nonsense, the US has continued enhanced interrogations when called for, they just use extraordinary rendition to do so. Those who think target drones would be used and not techniques to get information are fooling themselves.

I can't claim to know as you claim you know.

But my point on rendition is that most don't understand what it really is, and next that the program was started under Bill Clinton.

Forgive me but I thought the drones simply end lives? So who can you question?

[revelarts]

history review hour

Abu Zubaydah
the tortured AQ member who's 'intel' was all over the 911 report.

remember him?
Seems he was never a part of AQ, and nothing he said was true ... that he said under torture.
(but but but it wasn't torture even though the CIA destroyed all the tapes of their very "legal" forms of capture & interrogation... of people who don't know crap)
And the CIA KNEW IT at the time.

Do we learn from our mistakes or simply cover them up and attack the people who point them out?


2012
https://digwithin.net/2012/10/15/zubaydah/

....In an amazing turnabout in 2009, an attorney for Zubaydah wrote in The Guardian that the majority of the accusations against Zubaydah were understood by all parties to be false. In fact, he wrote, they “were known to be false when uttered.“[2] Attorney Brent Mickum said that his client, said to be the “number three man in al Qaeda,” was never a member or associate of al Qaeda and that — “These facts really are no longer contested: [Zubaydah] was not, and never had been, a member of either the Taliban or al-Qaida. The CIA determined this after torturing him extensively.” In fact, he “was never a member or a supporter of any armed forces that were allied against the United States,” and he was never the “head of a military camp that trained terrorists. That allegation is false at all levels.”It turns out that Mickum’s report was correct and that “Abu Zubaydah’s supposed relationship with al-Qaida is a complete myth.”[3]
We know this because, as of September 2009, the U.S. government agreed that Zubaydah was never an al Qaeda operative. In response to Zubaydah’s habeas corpus petition, the government admitted that Abu Zubaydah had never been a member of al-Qaeda, nor was he involved in the attacks on the African embassies in 1998, or the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001.[4] The motion, filed by the U.S. government, states:
…the Government has not contended in this proceeding that Petitioner [Zubaydah] was a member of al-Qaida or otherwise formally identified with al-Qaida.
Respondent [The United States Government] does not contend that Petitioner was a “member” of al-Qaida in the sense of having sworn a bayat (allegiance) or having otherwise satisfied any formal criteria that either Petitioner or al-Qaida may have considered necessary for inclusion in al-Qaida. Nor is the Government detaining Petitioner based on any allegation that Petitioner views himself as part of al-Qaida as a matter of subjective personal conscience, ideology, or worldview.
The Government has not contended in this proceeding that Petitioner had any direct role in or advance knowledge of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
… the Government has not contended that Petitioner had any personal involvement in planning or executing either the 1998 embassy bombings… or the attacks on September 11, 2001.
In his article that same year, attorney Mickum went on to point out that the torture tapes, which the CIA had first lied to the 9/11 Commission about and then destroyed, had a lot to do with Zubaydah. Mickum wrote: “the videotapes of his torture were destroyed. Just recently, the government revealed that 90 of the 92 videotapes that the CIA destroyed related to our client.” Not only that, Mickum went on to say that the U.S. government has removed all “reference to my client from the charge sheets and factual returns of other prisoners whose cases were being prosecuted. Abu Zubaydah has been linked to nearly 50 prisoners and former prisoners through media accounts and official Guantanamo Bay documents. Of these, approximately two dozen have either had their charges dropped or have been released from custody.” They have, essentially, “airbrushed Abu Zubaydah out of history.”...