WikiLeaks Revelation: The U.S. Tortured an Innocent Man and

Post Reply New Topic

WikiLeaks Revelation: The U.S. Tortured an Innocent Man and Threatened Germany to Not Prosecute the Torturers


From the small mountain of diplomatic cables that WikiLeaks is now slowly putting up at their website, one significant historical document has so far gotten only scant mention. It’s dated February 6, 2007 and directed to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. It reflects a meeting between John M. Koenig, the senior career diplomat at the U.S. Embassy in Berlin, and Rolf Nikel, the deputy national security advisor for Germany. The subject was the criminal investigation into the kidnapping and torture of Khaled El-Masri, a German greengrocer from the town of Neu-Ulm, seized in a case of mistaken identity. Koenig, aware that German prosecutors had issued arrest warrants against thirteen U.S. government agents who were involved in El-Masri’s abduction and torture, and that an effort would shortly be made to enforce them internationally, was pressing the German government to block this effort. It would have a “negative impact on our bilateral relationship,” he apparently told Nikel. While Koenig mouthed formulas about respect for the “independence” of the German criminal justice system, he noted that there was also a “political” element—unlike their colleagues in Italy and Spain, German prosecutors are subject to direction by the government on a political basis. Though this cable is framed in typically diplomatic politesse, the underlying message seems clear: it was a demand that Chancellor Merkel’s government intervene to block the criminal investigation, coupled with a threat of negative consequences if it failed to do so.

Over the Christmas-New Year’s holiday in 2003, Khaled El-Masri traveled by bus to Skopje, Macedonia. There he was apprehended by border guards who noted the similarity of his name to that of Khalid al-Masri, an Al Qaeda agent linked to the Hamburg cell where the 9/11 attacks were plotted. Despite El-Masri’s protests that he was not al-Masri, he was beaten, stripped naked, shot full of drugs, given an enema and a diaper, and flown first to Baghdad and then to the notorious “salt pit,” the CIA’s secret interrogation facility in Afghanistan. At the salt pit, he was repeatedly beaten, drugged, and subjected to a strange food regime that he supposed was part of an experiment that his captors were performing on him. Throughout this time, El-Masri insisted that he had been falsely imprisoned, and the CIA slowly established that he was who he claimed to be. Over many further weeks of bickering over what to do, a number of CIA figures apparently argued that, though innocent, the best course was to continue to hold him incommunicado because he “knew too much.” Dana Priest furnished the core of this account in an excellent 2005 Washington Post story. Other aspects have been slowly confirmed by German criminal investigators. By studying El-Masri’s hair and skin samples, for instance, they were able to confirm allegations that he was drugged and subjected to a bizarre starvation regimen. Throughout this process, El-Masri’s account of what transpired, part of which he wrote up as an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, has consistently been vindicated.

The El-Masri cable suggests that the Embassy in Berlin was trying to protect thirteen CIA agents then subject to an arrest warrant. These agents’ true names are now known, and an arrest warrant continues to hang over them–now issued by Spanish prosecutors after American diplomatic pressure effectively chilled the German investigation. But the most noteworthy thing about this cable is the addressee—Condoleezza Rice. Might she and her legal advisor, John Bellinger, have had an interest in the El-Masri case that went beyond their purely professional interest in U.S.-German diplomatic relations? The decision to “snatch” El-Masri and lock him up in the “salt pit” involved the extraordinary renditions program, and it seems as a matter of routine that this would have required not only the approval of the CIA’s top echelon but also the White House-based National Security Council. It’s highly likely that Rice and Bellinger would have been involved in the decision to “snatch” and imprison El-Masri. If authority was given by Rice, then responsibility for the mistake—which might well include criminal law accountability—may also rest with her, and this fact would also not have escaped Koenig as he performed his diplomatic duties.


http://harpers.org/archive/2010/11/hbc-90007831

bump.

Weren't there revelations of innocent torturing (or "enhanced interrorgating") before this leak?

Yes, and personally if it turns out the guy is innocent, it is my feeling the man should not only have an apology, but we should be getting this guy counselling and making sure he recovers from what happened. He should also be compensated financially.

I don't think the interegators should be charged, but I do think we owe the man an apology and see to it that he recovers.

I find it funny how we have Amnesty International et al. having a go at China for things like this, yet it's happening in one of the biggest, and the number one most powerful, country in the world... And little is said.

Well, it would be funny it is wasn't so tragic.

In China, they wouldn't particularly care, quite frankly I want whomever gave the people, whom had to make the call, on this bad information and get fired for incompetitence.

/2007/02/07BERLIN242.html:
S E C R E T BERLIN 000242

SIPDIS

NOFORN
SIPDIS

FOR S/ES-O, EUR AND L

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/06/2017
TAGS: KJUS PTER PREL PGOV GM
SUBJECT: AL-MASRI CASE -- CHANCELLERY AWARE OF USG CONCERNS

REF: A. BERLIN 230

¶B. BERLIN 200

Classified By: DCM John M. Koenig for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)

¶1. (S/NF) In a February 6 discussion with German Deputy
National Security Adviser Rolf Nikel, the DCM reiterated our
strong concerns about the possible issuance of international
arrest warrants in the al-Masri case. The DCM noted that the
reports in the German media of the discussion on the issue
between the Secretary and FM Steinmeier in Washington were
not accurate, in that the media reports suggest the USG was
not troubled by developments in the al-Masri case. The DCM
emphasized that this was not the case and that issuance of
international arrest warrants would have a negative impact on
our bilateral relationship. He reminded Nikel of the
repercussions to U.S.-Italian bilateral relations in the wake
of a similar move by Italian authorities last year.

¶2. (S/NF) The DCM pointed out that our intention was not to
threaten Germany, but rather to urge that the German
Government weigh carefully at every step of the way the
implications for relations with the U.S. We of course
recognized the independence of the German judiciary, but
noted that a decision to issue international arrest warrants
or extradition requests would require the concurrence of the
German Federal Government, specifically the MFA and the
Ministry of Justice (MOJ). The DCM said our initial
indications had been that the German federal authorities
would not allow the warrants to be issued, but that
subsequent contacts led us to believe this was not the case.

¶3. (S/NF) Nikel also underscored the independence of the
German judiciary, but confirmed that the MFA and MOJ would
have a procedural role to play. He said the case was subject
to political, as well as judicial, scrutiny. From a judicial
standpoint, the facts are clear, and the Munich prosecutor
has acted correctly. Politically speaking, said Nikel,
Germany would have to examine the implications for relations
with the U.S. At the same time, he noted our political
differences about how the global war on terrorism should be
waged, for example on the appropriateness of the Guantanamo
facility and the alleged use of renditions.

¶4. (S/NF) Nikel also cited intense pressure from the
Bundestag and the German media. The German federal
Government must consider the "entire political context," said
Nikel. He assured the DCM that the Chancellery is well aware
of the bilateral political implications of the case, but
added that this case "will not be easy." The Chancellery
would nonetheless try to be as constructive as possible.

¶5. (S/NF) The DCM pointed out that the USG would likewise
have a difficult time in managing domestic political
implications if international arrest warrants are issued. He
reiterated our concerns and expressed the hope that the
Chancellery would keep us informed of further developments in
the case, so as to avoid surprises. Nikel undertook to do
so, but reiterated that he could not, at this point "promise
that everything will turn out well."
TIMKEN JR

So you're saying you're okay with torturing people?

If you like the way China does things, move there and quit ruining this country.

Are you surprised? He's a right-winger; those people have no conscience or sense of decency.

Everyone involved in torture—the people who issued the orders, the people who carried it out, the people who covered it up—all need to be brought up on criminal charges and imprisoned. It is utterly despicable that the US government is engaging in such barbaric behavior in our names.

I'm generally not okay with people being tortured that said if it came down to choosing between torturing one man or a jumbo jet being flown into the Empire State Building, which would you choose? I only think it should be used in situations like the hypothetical one I'm describing. The fact that it is an innocent man makes me what to smack whomever came to the guy having to make the call on this that this man knew something that warranted this with a large trout upside the head (I would say baseball bat except it could be considered a deadly weapon while the fish can't).

@ Orwell and skafather84

Stop taking what I said out of context. I was making a distinction not expressing approval, at least most people in government would be extremely embarassed in the United States and not oh well collateral damage like in China.

Orwell, are you surprised that an agent of the Fourth International intent on destroying great anti-Communist George Soros wouldn't support torture? Trotsky was a totalitarian, after all.

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 04 Dec 2010, 6:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Neither. Life is not an episode of 24 and that doesn't happen. We knew that 9/11 was going to happen BEFORE the planes ever left the ground. Months before, actually. Nothing was done.

Are you so blind with nationalism that you can't see how this country is turning into a fascist state? Torture? Censorship? Kidnapping people? That's the kind of garbage that the USSR and Nazi Germany did. It's not American and it's damned sure not patriotic.

I reject your hypothetical situation. That's not how the real world works. Leaving aside moral arguments (since you and other pro-torture right-wing lunatics are apparently are unswayed by basic human morality) torture simply does not make us safer. It is a miserably unreliable way of gaining information, and it only serves to engender ever more hatred of us abroad, thus inspiring further terrorist acts. Even a heartless pragmatist would never be able to justify torture. No one with a conscience would ever even have to consider the practical consequences of torture.

I'm saying that we sometimes have situations like that, I'm not disputing what happened in this case was obviously wrong but you have to face the facts that some day a situation like that may happen. Al Qaeda tends to plan things out in advance not get up and decide one day they are going to fly a plane into a building.



Oh so you are acknowledging Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and Rush Limbaugh to be right?



It requires planning to conduct a terrorist style attack like that these kind of attacks are planned out in advance they aren't spontaneous.



I'm saying that they have to be sure that this guy knows something and the danger is imminent, just torturing someone for the sake of torture is flat out wrong. This is not a cut and dry issue. However if it is someone like Bin Laden, whom we know is a terrorist has information that of terror plot that is in the works, I don't see any moral qualms about waterboarding him.


That said, I'm looking at what was posted as to what happened again cause I will admit I only glanced at it and my attention is on a paper I'm writing.

...............




Okay I can see why this happened, doesn't anyone know how to spell anymore?

That said, this guy that got put through all of this first of all needs to be given an apology. Second of all when they found out he was innocent they should have stopped immediately. Okay, I'm changing my mind about these CIA agents on this one. I'm also getting the feeling that Bush didn't authorize this kind of treatment and would have been about ready to kill someone in the CIA for this or whomever authorized this.

That said I can tell you part of the post is either misinformed or deliberately implicating the wrong person.

Colin Powell was Secretary of State from 2001 to 2005, all of this happened in 2003.

Condalisa Rice was an advisor on National Security she wouldn't have had authority to authorize something like this. It would have had to have been Powell or Tenett.

Guys, I'm wondering if the CIA did this without authorization from President Bush (plausible deniability, see movie: Independence Day). I'm guessing this is why the CIA chief resigned in 2004, Bush did give him a medal, but I'm wondering if he was forced out cause President Bush found out about it and wasn't happy putting it mildly.

The more Muslims we can torture to death, the better. Islam and its adherents need to be eliminated from the face of the earth. 9-11 is all the justification needed, and there is no such thing as an "innocent" Muslim. They all support the terrorists, thus they all need to be killed. And Germany actually prospered under fascism, and would have become a dominant world power if the US hadn't been forced into war with them to destroy them by people who resented their success. That, and the Germans were about to default on their debt that they owed to some REALLY nasty people. Hitler decided to kill the bankers to get out of the debt, so the bankers destroyed Germany. It is easy to see the beneficial effects of a coordinated eugenics program. The US did it long after we destroyed Germany for supposedly doing it.