A Court Covers Up (torture)

[EFerrari]

A Court Covers Up
Published: May 24, 2012

The Obama administration has added to its string of victories in a tawdry pursuit — making overly expansive claims of secrecy and executive power to deny full disclosure of torture and other abuses of prisoners committed during the George W. Bush administration.

A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York has upheld the administration’s claim that cables describing the Central Intelligence Agency’s use of waterboarding and a photograph of a “high value” detainee, Abu Zubaydah, taken during the time he was subjected to repeated waterboarding, are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA.

The new decision came as part of a long-running lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and other rights groups that are seeking records related to detainee mistreatment. Written by Judge Richard Wesley, the decision is too accepting of the government’s weak claim that revealing material redacted from the cables, along with the photo, would harm national security.

The court found that FOIA’s exemption for “intelligence methods” applied even though the brutal conduct illuminated by these records is considered illegal by President Obama and a host of laws and treaties and is not covered by the C.I.A.’s charter. The court also said the C.I.A. was justified in withholding two passages in Justice Department memos that appear to concern the origins of the Bush torture program.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/opinion/a-court-covers-up.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1337954999-cya/koaxxAZ+9WqtYU4kRg

[Angry Dragon]

1. a bunch of bull

[GeorgeGist]

2. Care to elaborate ...

or is your lizard brain just squawking?

[Angry Dragon]

6. It seems anything that is illegal or embarrassing is getting

put under National Security

[xocet]

3. Apparently, revealing a photograph of someone who has been tortured is not good for business....

...

B. The Photograph of Abu Zubaydah

4 Plaintiffs contend that the CIA failed to provide any
5 justification for withholding a photograph of Abu Zubaydah
6 taken while he was in CIA custody abroad and that the post
7 hoc explanations offered by the Government’s counsel do not
8 suffice to justify the withholding. We disagree. In a June
9 8, 2009 unclassified declaration, Director Panetta explained
10 that all of the records he reviewed in connection with his
11 invocation of FOIA Exemptions 1 and 3, including the
12 photograph, are “related to the contents of 92 destroyed
13 videotapes of detainee interrogations that occurred between
14 April and December 2002.” Panetta Decl. ¶ 3, June 8, 2009.
15 Director Panetta further declared that “miscellaneous
16 documents” in the sample records, including the photograph,
17 “contain[] TOP SECRET operational information concerning the
18 interrogations” of Abu Zubaydah. Id. ¶ 5. On appeal, the
19 Government has expanded upon Director Panetta’s
20 justification for withholding by explaining that the
21 photograph necessarily “relates to” an “intelligence source
22 or method” because it records Abu Zubaydah’s condition in

32

1 the period during which he was interrogated.
2 We have reviewed the photograph in camera. Our
3 examination has been informed by our contemporaneous review
4 of other sample records. Like the district court, we
5 observe that a photograph depicting a person in CIA custody
6 discloses far more information than the person’s identity.
7 We agree with the district court that the image at issue
8 here conveys an “aspect of information that is important to
9 intelligence gathering,” J.A. 1115, and that this
10 information necessarily “relates to” an “intelligence source
11 or method.” The Government’s justification for withholding
12 the photograph is thus both “logical and plausible.” See
13 Wilner, 592 F.3d at 75. Moreover, Director Panetta’s
14 declaration is entitled to substantial weight, see Wolf, 473
15 F.3d at 374, and this Court must adopt a “deferential
16 posture in FOIA cases regarding the uniquely executive
17 purview of national security,” Wilner, 592 F.3d at 76
18 (internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, we affirm
19 the district court’s conclusion that the Government has
20 adequately justified its withholding of the photograph under
21 FOIA Exemption 3.
22

33
...
(http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/43dcc84a-b97d-4cac-b2ca-df43325f7b00/1/doc/10-4290-cv_opn.pdf)

[sad sally]

4. Maybe it takes surviving imprisonment and torture and then being elected President of a country

before being able to understand covering it up only enhances its legitimacy.

SAO PAULO — The Rio de Janeiro state government said Friday it will apologize to Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff for the human rights abuses she suffered during the country's 1961-1985 dictatorship.

Rousseff is a former leftist guerrilla who spent three years in prison during the dictatorship and was tortured.

Paula Pinto, a spokeswoman for Rio's Social Assistance and Human Rights Department, said Rousseff is one of 120 people who will receive apologies from governor Sergio Cabral on June 4 for the imprisonment and torture they or their relatives suffered in the state.

Earlier this week, Rousseff swore in the seven members of a truth commission created to investigate human rights abuses under the dictatorship.

"We are not moved by revenge, hate or a desire to rewrite history," Rousseff said at the swearing-in ceremony. "The need to know the full truth is what moves us."

A study by the Brazilian government concluded last year that 475 people were killed or "disappeared" by agents of the military regime. A 33-year-old amnesty law has protected members of the military from being held accountable for any crimes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20120518/lt-brazil-president-torture-apology/

[EFerrari]

5. Yes. Dilma is a remarkable person. n/t

[annabanana]

7. (wound continues to fester) . . . n/t