10 ms·

CIA agents who tortured are vulnerable to prosecution in any country

221 points by rumcajz 12y ago

istsehrgut 12y ago
I bet not. Because America. That is all.
- ProAm 12y ago
  They should be. Lead by example.
molecule 12y ago
Any country, except the United States. > Prosecutions by the U.S. itself, however, seem very unlikely. In 2012, the Department of Justice said that “the Department would not prosecute anyone who acted in good faith and within the scope of the legal guidance given by the Office of Legal Counsel regarding the interrogation of detainees.”
- mindcrime 12y ago
  Translated: "We told you to break the law, so we won't hold you accountable for breaking the law". OK. That'll hold up until somebody high ranking in the DOJ or State Department or $WHEREVER starts getting their feet held to the fire. IF that happens, I'm sure they'll sell out the underlings in the blink of an eye. By analogy, it's like the head football coach who fires his offensive or defensive coordinator, in order to appease the owner and save his own job.
- waps 12y ago
  Supporting the UN human rights council ? Really ? Have you ever looked at who you're supporting just to get your way ? I mean, I'm all for holding those responsible to account, but, firstly, nothing will change unless the US itself holds those people to account. Second the UN are firmly on the side of human rights violators that make Hitler look like a beginner, and the UN itself also feels the need to commit massacres and mass-rapes on a regular basis. No one has even been held to account, not even in Northern Europe. I mean, I understand the concept of realpolitik, but this is driving things very, very far. Furthermore, there is no such thing as international jurisdiction, despite what the UN would want you to believe. It is about as legal as the US' execution of Bin Laden. If countries were to start persecuting each other's armies it would quickly end very badly, obviously. Hell, the half of the Saudi royal family would probably be sentenced to death in the US in the first month (because half of them have tortured and killed servants [8] [9] [10]). Do you think it'd be smart to do that ?. Also note that this is normal practice in Saudi Arabia [11]. Personally I find the UN's distasteful double standard an atrocious joke. Since 1994, the majority of UN member countries have constitutions in direct contradiction with human rights, the biggest one being China (well, in terms of power and population), and the biggest block being islamic nations, that disallow freedom of religion and equality of sexes (and usually equality of ethnicities as well, ie. direct legal racism, like it exists in the majority of islamic nations, as well as in China and other nations). And that's ignoring the many, many, many human rights violations perpetrated by the UN itself [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] As you can see on the Human Rights Council' wikipedia pages [6], the biggest human rights issues are : 1) Israel. Since 2006, EVERY meeting of the human rights council has over half of the time dedicated to Israel's human rights abuses. The person currently in charge of setting the agenda for this part of the meeting felt the need to publish this picture : http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/AS-Cartoon.jpg http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/AS-Cartoo... (note the kippah on the dog) "There has never been a single resolution about the decades-long repression of the civil and political rights of 1.3 billion people in China, or the more than a million female migrant workers in Saudi Arabia being kept as virtual slaves, or the virulent racism which has brought 600,000 people to the brink of starvation in Zimbabwe. Every year, UN bodies are required to produce at least 25 reports on alleged human rights violations by Israel, but not one on an Iranian criminal justice system which mandates punishments like crucifixion, stoning, and cross-amputation. This is not legitimate critique of states with equal or worse human rights records. It is demonization of the Jewish state." [7] 2) Defamation of religion (dozens of resolution calling for world-wide introduction of blasphemy laws) And internal politics concerning who gets a seat (and over a million bucks per year, free travel, a staff, ...) These are the guys you're asking for help. These guys should be taken out, dragged before a court, sentenced to death, and executed for their OWN crimes long before they pass judgement on anyone else. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacekeepers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacek... [2] http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/04/un-3600-raped-drc-four-year-period-20144923542487129.html http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/04/un-3600-raped-d... [3] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1538476/UN-staff-accused-of-raping-children-in-Sudan.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1538476/UN-staff-a... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre#Expulsion_of_Bosniaks_from_the_United_Nations_compound http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre#Expulsion_o... [5] http://www.projectcensored.org/12-another-massacre-in-haiti-by-un-troops/ http://www.projectcensored.org/12-another-massacre-in-haiti-... [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou... [7] Bayefsky, Anne. "Perspectives on Anti-Semitism Today". Lecture at conference "Confronting Anti-Semitism: Education for Tolerance and Understanding", United Nations Department of Information, New York, June 21, 2004. [8] http://www.islamicinvitationturkey.com/2013/06/02/saudi-prince-rapes-kills-saudi-girl/ http://www.islamicinvitationturkey.com/2013/06/02/saudi-prin... [9] http://www.smh.com.au/world/saudi-royal-beat-strangled-servant-20101006-167r2.html http://www.smh.com.au/world/saudi-royal-beat-strangled-serva... [10] http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/saudi-prince-jailed-in-britain-for-murder-flies-home/ http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/saudi-prince-jailed-in-br... [11] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSMcnL1OfR0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSMcnL1OfR0
  - mercurial 12y ago
    You are quite right in saying that the UN Human Rights committee is a farce. However, find me a nation-state with no double standards. The behaviour of the US, as self-proclaimed champion of freedom and democracy, is especially egregious. It imposes an embargo on Cuba while shaking hands with the Saudis and thinks Israel can do no wrong. Not to mention its longstanding record of supporting human rights in some parts of the world while installing pet thugs in other parts of the world. In this light, a lecture on the UN's hypocrisy is laughable.
    - waps 12y ago
      I will go so far as to say that the US is better than the UN Human Rights Committee. Why ? I have walked around in the US, in Europe, in Israel (and the West Bank, not Gaza though), and Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and India. The US, on the street and for it's residents, is 99.99% a free country that respects human rights (presumably at least in part because it's population constantly throws up stinks like this one). Walking around the US, well, I don't need to tell you what you see. I feel a lot safer on the streets of the US just talking to people and saying whatever my political opinion is than even compared to the Netherlands (it sometimes seems like 50% of the population there believes in a Jewish or US or "Capitalist" or sometimes communist conspiracy and they will shout at you, or worse if you try to reason with people about it). Saudi Arabia is a country of thugs where everybody in the streets is afraid of everybody else, and your sex and skin color, and to a lesser extent your dress, determine your worth (and if you're able to enter malls, bars and shops). Pakistan is 80% Saudi Arabia and 20% free. I'm not saying the US beats other countries in everything, far from it, but in freedom and "not getting your head bashed in/arrested/fired/... because you like political party X", it is by far the best country I've ever seen. The most aggressive response I've ever seen in the US to a political opinion is laughter. And I have never, ever, seen anyone in the US refuse someone access to a bar, shopping mall, store, or ... based on skin color, sex or religion. I have seen it often in Europe (bars only), and in the middle east it's considered normal to have ethnic, sex and religious restrictions on half the buildings in a city. And frankly, the fact that the US Congress even looks at allegations of torture by a state agent, shows it's moral superiority over the UN. The fact that people can and do write about what the CIA did without losing their jobs, disappearing, getting shot or beat up, and worse, is a situation superior to what is found in the vast majority of UN member nations. Again, this, in my mind, proves the moral superiority of the US. Hell, even compared to Russia, which is definitely a first world country. Do you think Russia doesn't torture people ? When are you expecting the 2 first pages of the Moscow times to get dedicated to a 2 day session in the Duma about the Russian army's use of torture ? Hell, according to amnesty international, Ukraine, Poland, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands' governments have committed torture in 2014 [1](and some/most of them assisted the currently being discussed CIA program as well) [1]. I seem to be unable to find any discussion in their parliaments of that. They mostly seem to be talking about austerity measures, leaving/joining Europe, that sort of thing. Here's a paragraph on Russia, from amnesty international : "Torture methods documented by Amnesty International range from beatings, suspension from ceiling hooks, asphyxiation with plastic bags, to electrocution, inserting needles under finger or toenails, dousing with freezing water and even rape." About EU countries : "The denial of police abuses is still the default reaction across the EU and the Balkans, where the institutional response and thoroughness of investigations are frequently inadequate." Again this is much better than their reports on the middle east and Asia (even the complaints about Russia and Turkey, at least in Russia and Turkey it seems to be easy to avoid state-sponsored brutality, which is not true at all in the middle east and a lot of Asia) The UN has never even looked into allegations of it's own wrongdoing. And what half of UN member nations do comes dangerously close to "state-sponsored genocide" in many cases. The US has moral imperfections. And yes, there's assholes that are employed by the US government in positions of power. This is no different from any other nation. They are bad, and must be dealt with, I fully agree there. The UN, however, is a collection of thugs, massacrers, racists and worse. The argument you're making "the US and UN are both imperfect" is of course true, it is also completely useless. There is no hair on my head that doubts that the US has a massive moral advantage over the UN. I feel that at the very least we owe it to Congress to let it figure out what to do. I'd be amazed if they didn't at least pass a law that this can never happen again. [1] http://www.amnesty.org.au/resources/activist/Report-_Torture_in_2014_30_Years_of_Broken_Promises.pdf http://www.amnesty.org.au/resources/activist/Report-_Torture...
beloch 12y ago
It would actually be in the U.S.'s own interests to prosecute these CIA agents and their superiors. First, this would show support for international laws against torture and help put the lid back on Pandora's box. This would directly reduce the probability of captured U.S. citizens being tortured. No, that probably does not include those captured by ISIL, but are rogue terrorist organizations all U.S. citizens will need to worry about both now and in the future? Second, it would close a dangerous precedent. Prosecuting those who committed illegal acts, even though they were assured of immunity, sends a clear message that individuals are still responsible for their actions. Without this sense of individual responsibility U.S. agencies will be capable of utterly anything and, the way things work, capability becomes reality more often than not. Most Americans would sleep better knowing that the NSA's workers are accountable to the law rather than immune to it if their superiors say so, as is currently the case due to the precedent set by the CIA. Third, the implications for future diplomacy are a nightmare if the U.S. does nothing. There will be no moral high ground for the U.S. to stand on if the U.S. refuses to seek justice. Finally, it's the right thing to do. The U.S. could set an example for others to follow. To do nothing does precisely the opposite.
- alexandros 12y ago
  The prestige hit and vulnerability to "letting down the troops" criticisms will ensure this doesn't happen.
  - logn 12y ago
    It will never happen because the prosecution would logically include Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and some legislators. I don't see a Republican administration prosecuting them because of loyalty, and I don't see a Democratic one doing that because I suspect Pelosi and Obama could be prosecuted as well (if new evidence comes to light). And without going after the very highest level offenders, you're throwing the CIA under the bus, and that won't end well.
    - wavefunction 12y ago
      Obama probably would not be part of the group but Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein would. Jay Rockefeller as well. These three very senior leaders in the Democratic party have sat on the Foreign Intelligence Committee during this period of torture and while supposedly not completely in-the-loop approved of what they did know of.
dsl 12y ago
Keep in mind, 23 CIA employees have already been convicted and sentenced by an Italian court for a rendition operation. None of these people can be located.
- rasz_pl 12y ago
  Oh they can be located, they are all living safely in US.
  - thawkins 12y ago
    One would wonder what would happen if they where "rendered" to a prison in italy.
    - etherael 12y ago
      Nobody wonders this at all.
    - lotsofmangos 12y ago
      Well, if they end up at the Hague, there's always The Hague Invasion Act - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pro...
      - techdragon 12y ago
        Thanks for the link. Cant believe I never found this before during my regular sojourns through wikipedia.
- briandear 12y ago
  The Italians can go pound sand. They had no problem allowing the lead Achille Lauro hijacker safe passage to Egypt. And in 2008 they release another Achille hijacker -- a murderer and PLO terrorist. I don't really care if the Italians had their sensibilities offended by rendition. Rendition never resulted in an Italian citizen's death, but the Achille Lauro incident certainly resulted in an American's death. I am not making a statement about if rendition is good or bad; I'm only addressing the Italian's hypocrisy.
rasz_pl 12y ago
We've been over this already. US just fucking doesnt care. Extradition treaties are ONE WAY. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/13/italy-cia-rendition-abu-omar http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/13/italy-c... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-justice-department-immunity-bush-cia-torturer http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-j... One of kidnapper/torturer fuckers was even apprehended, and despite international arrest warrant magically released very next day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Seldon_Lady https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Seldon_Lady Those people are untouchable. They will remain untouchable until real revolution in US, or some sort of vigilantism movement. Any official charges against them would expose whole chain of command up to CIA/NSA directors to legal action, it will never happen.
- VieElm 12y ago
  > until real revolution in US, or some sort of vigilantism movement America doesn't need a revolution, it just needs more informed and motivated voters who vote in their self-interest. Maybe that counts as a revolution, but the way you paired it with "vigiliantism movement" suggested some kind of violence or government overthrow which would be pretty awful to be honest and I hope never happens in my life time or the life time of my children.
  - eli_gottlieb 12y ago
    >America doesn't need a revolution, it just needs more informed and motivated voters who vote in their self-interest. No, one of two things is needed: either a revolution, or a mass migration of voters to places where their votes actually count. Both gerrymandering and the tendency of American seat allocation to favor rural districts have strongly reduced the effect of voting on the formation of actual governments.
    - gomerclaus 12y ago
      I've been screaming the "Let's migrate!" mantra for years. If we want rational politics in this country, we have to stack the polls with rational votes. As it stands, our voice is largely--in some instances, mostly--drowned out by single party voters. A pragmatic solution would be for the people who recognize the problem to migrate to the same city or county and work our way up the political ladder. I'm down; where are we moving to?
superuser2 12y ago
CIA agents are vulnerable to prosecution everywhere for crimes like espionage and high treason. That's what the CIA is for. This doesn't seem to change much.
briandear 12y ago
One huge peave of mine reflects a general level of ignorance about CIA by both media and commentators; they aren't CIA 'Agents' they are CIA 'officers.' It might sound like a nitpick, but if the news media repeatedly gets such a fundamental detail wrong, how can they be even remotely viewed as credible in the bigger issues? It would be like a reporter referring to RAM as ROM; hard to to have any faith that they even have ever spoken to a CIA officer let alone have the basic knowledge necessary to write national and international media reports on the subject. In case anyone is curious an 'agent' is a foreign national recruited by a CIA officer to spy. A CIA officer is the one that runs the agents. The FBI has special agents, but not officers.
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  If the story was "ROM chips made by child slaves", but they were really RAM chips, then like this story, it'd be rather immaterial to the subject.
- kiiski 12y ago
  Perhaps they are not using the word "agent" as a CIA job title, but rather in the actual meaning of the word: An agent is one who acts for, or in the place of, another, by authority from him; one entrusted with the business of another.
  - pavelrub 12y ago
    The media uses the word "agent" to refer only to those who work in intelligence and defense agencies, so your explanation doesn't seem sufficient. And even if you are right - the word "agent" has a clear and different meaning in the context of intelligence, so at best this is a really bad choice of words.
    - briandear 12y ago
      It's an innaccurate choice of words and reflective of media ignorance on the subject. The media doesn't use the term "police agent" to describe cops nor do they call State Department consular officers "consular agents." The media, if they are interested in accuracy ought to start by getting the simple stuff correct. If someone is giving a talk at a conference about RAM and they keep saying ROM, perhaps you'd doubt their understanding of the subject. That's my point, the media loses credibility when they maintain use of innaccurate terminology yet they want to be perceived as an expert on the subject.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
agd 12y ago
Presumably, if they prosecuted the people responsible then Bush would end up in jail? Can't see the US doing that.
onnoonno 12y ago
Interesting language in the title. How about 'CIA agents who tortured could be brought to justice in any country?'
_delirium 12y ago
I also found this analysis of whether ICC jurisdiction applies to be informative: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/12/10/the-torture-report-and-the-possibility-o-international-criminal-court-charges/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014...
fatman 12y ago
Nuremburg was an exception to the general rule that you couldn't prosecute soldiers for carrying out the orders of their superiors - establishing that the mass genocide of innocent people crosses a line. However, the torture of a handful of active enemy participants might not.
squozzer 12y ago
It would not surprise me if certain countries interpret the meaning of "conspiracy" to include any US citizen, as one could argue that anyone who benefits - even passively - from a criminal act can be held liable.
pvaldes 12y ago
And meanwhile in tortureland... "no country wants the guantanamo people incarcered in Guantanamo, so we need to keep him incarcerted because we are really very afraid of them" What?. No country wants the leftovers? They are not animals, are humans without rights. USA, YOU create this shame, it is your duty to solve it. So you want options? ok, here goes one option... what if you'll release him and give them the USA citizenship and formal apopogies as retaliation?, A very small one for all they have suffered, seems to me. Free this people, return them their dignitiy, a job and a life, and them disintegrate the guantanamo buildings to the roots, You can start the demolition just tomorrow if you wish. > But they could be terrorists! A lot of CIA agents ARE terrorists, and they are free. Nobody seems worried in USA by the idea of have one of this sadistic people in his neighborhood This is not a shame to USA, is a shame and a pain for all the human race, and WE are the human race.
- icantthinkofone 12y ago
  These are people who are charged with wanting to kill people and otherwise destroy the USA. There is no shame in locking people up who want to do that, though you can disagree with the charges all you want.
  - pvaldes 12y ago
    Wake-up. Where are his lawyers? where is the invisible jury? If a real judge finds that some of they are guilty they should just be put in a real Jail. Just like any other american citizen. Can't see any real problem with this. Guantanamo IS still helping to destroy the USA, in fact, and should have been destroyed many years ago.
    - sseveran 12y ago
      Why would a non-nation state actor need a lawyer? I could see returning the Taliban fighters to Afganistan since they were representing some sort of government. For people who have been picked up as part of Al Qaeda and its affiliate networks I don't really have a problem with holding them indefinitely. I find the use of drones to kill Americans, and the casual acceptance of collateral damage to be far, far worse. Those Americans may have done terrible things but were still Americans with Constitutional rights, unlike someone we picked up in Yemen or Somalia.
icantthinkofone 12y ago
I question the validity of this article. How would anyone know who the agents were? It's not like the CIA publishes a list. I doubt they used their real names.
icantthinkofone 12y ago
Can anyone explain to me why stories like this are on HN?
- a3n 12y ago
  There's the "of interest" clause. But more specifically, we talk a lot here about telecom and internet surveillance. It's good to raise up your head once in awhile and recognize that technical acts are not done for themselves, they're done for a larger goal. All of these breaches we talk about here by the US and other governments are much more than offenses against technology, they resolve up the tree to support policy. To support kidnapping, torture and murder. It's not just bits, it's blood.
  - icantthinkofone 12y ago
    But that's not the subject of this article.
known 12y ago
"If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the USA. They don't care." --Nelson Mandela http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/nelson-mandela-iraq-israel_b_4396638.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/nelson-mandela-i...
ck2 12y ago
You can't even get a cop to trial for shooting unarmed people to death in this country. So good luck getting politicians to prosecute someone in the cia, especially when they got to destroy their own video tapes without penalty. Just like the TSA, then the NSA and now the CIA, people get bored with all the alarms and warnings about extreme overreach and just go back to shopping and drinking. As long as they can do that, politicians have learned they can get away with anything. I also noticed no-one gives a darn we are still using drones to kill large groups of unidentified people overseas. I guess the "drone report" will be for the next president and congress to deal with in 8 years.

221 points by rumcajz 12y ago

istsehrgut 12y ago

I bet not. Because America. That is all.

ProAm 12y ago
They should be. Lead by example.

molecule 12y ago

Any country, except the United States. > Prosecutions by the U.S. itself, however, seem very unlikely. In 2012, the Department of Justice said that “the Department would not prosecute anyone who acted in good faith and within the scope of the legal guidance given by the Office of Legal Counsel regarding the interrogation of detainees.”

mindcrime 12y ago
Translated: "We told you to break the law, so we won't hold you accountable for breaking the law". OK. That'll hold up until somebody high ranking in the DOJ or State Department or $WHEREVER starts getting their feet held to the fire. IF that happens, I'm sure they'll sell out the underlings in the blink of an eye. By analogy, it's like the head football coach who fires his offensive or defensive coordinator, in order to appease the owner and save his own job.
waps 12y ago
Supporting the UN human rights council ? Really ? Have you ever looked at who you're supporting just to get your way ? I mean, I'm all for holding those responsible to account, but, firstly, nothing will change unless the US itself holds those people to account. Second the UN are firmly on the side of human rights violators that make Hitler look like a beginner, and the UN itself also feels the need to commit massacres and mass-rapes on a regular basis. No one has even been held to account, not even in Northern Europe. I mean, I understand the concept of realpolitik, but this is driving things very, very far. Furthermore, there is no such thing as international jurisdiction, despite what the UN would want you to believe. It is about as legal as the US' execution of Bin Laden. If countries were to start persecuting each other's armies it would quickly end very badly, obviously. Hell, the half of the Saudi royal family would probably be sentenced to death in the US in the first month (because half of them have tortured and killed servants [8] [9] [10]). Do you think it'd be smart to do that ?. Also note that this is normal practice in Saudi Arabia [11]. Personally I find the UN's distasteful double standard an atrocious joke. Since 1994, the majority of UN member countries have constitutions in direct contradiction with human rights, the biggest one being China (well, in terms of power and population), and the biggest block being islamic nations, that disallow freedom of religion and equality of sexes (and usually equality of ethnicities as well, ie. direct legal racism, like it exists in the majority of islamic nations, as well as in China and other nations). And that's ignoring the many, many, many human rights violations perpetrated by the UN itself [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] As you can see on the Human Rights Council' wikipedia pages [6], the biggest human rights issues are : 1) Israel. Since 2006, EVERY meeting of the human rights council has over half of the time dedicated to Israel's human rights abuses. The person currently in charge of setting the agenda for this part of the meeting felt the need to publish this picture : http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/AS-Cartoon.jpg http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/AS-Cartoo... (note the kippah on the dog) "There has never been a single resolution about the decades-long repression of the civil and political rights of 1.3 billion people in China, or the more than a million female migrant workers in Saudi Arabia being kept as virtual slaves, or the virulent racism which has brought 600,000 people to the brink of starvation in Zimbabwe. Every year, UN bodies are required to produce at least 25 reports on alleged human rights violations by Israel, but not one on an Iranian criminal justice system which mandates punishments like crucifixion, stoning, and cross-amputation. This is not legitimate critique of states with equal or worse human rights records. It is demonization of the Jewish state." [7] 2) Defamation of religion (dozens of resolution calling for world-wide introduction of blasphemy laws) And internal politics concerning who gets a seat (and over a million bucks per year, free travel, a staff, ...) These are the guys you're asking for help. These guys should be taken out, dragged before a court, sentenced to death, and executed for their OWN crimes long before they pass judgement on anyone else. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacekeepers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacek... [2] http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/04/un-3600-raped-drc-four-year-period-20144923542487129.html http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/04/un-3600-raped-d... [3] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1538476/UN-staff-accused-of-raping-children-in-Sudan.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1538476/UN-staff-a... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre#Expulsion_of_Bosniaks_from_the_United_Nations_compound http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre#Expulsion_o... [5] http://www.projectcensored.org/12-another-massacre-in-haiti-by-un-troops/ http://www.projectcensored.org/12-another-massacre-in-haiti-... [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou... [7] Bayefsky, Anne. "Perspectives on Anti-Semitism Today". Lecture at conference "Confronting Anti-Semitism: Education for Tolerance and Understanding", United Nations Department of Information, New York, June 21, 2004. [8] http://www.islamicinvitationturkey.com/2013/06/02/saudi-prince-rapes-kills-saudi-girl/ http://www.islamicinvitationturkey.com/2013/06/02/saudi-prin... [9] http://www.smh.com.au/world/saudi-royal-beat-strangled-servant-20101006-167r2.html http://www.smh.com.au/world/saudi-royal-beat-strangled-serva... [10] http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/saudi-prince-jailed-in-britain-for-murder-flies-home/ http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/saudi-prince-jailed-in-br... [11] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSMcnL1OfR0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSMcnL1OfR0
- mercurial 12y ago
  You are quite right in saying that the UN Human Rights committee is a farce. However, find me a nation-state with no double standards. The behaviour of the US, as self-proclaimed champion of freedom and democracy, is especially egregious. It imposes an embargo on Cuba while shaking hands with the Saudis and thinks Israel can do no wrong. Not to mention its longstanding record of supporting human rights in some parts of the world while installing pet thugs in other parts of the world. In this light, a lecture on the UN's hypocrisy is laughable.
  - waps 12y ago
    I will go so far as to say that the US is better than the UN Human Rights Committee. Why ? I have walked around in the US, in Europe, in Israel (and the West Bank, not Gaza though), and Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and India. The US, on the street and for it's residents, is 99.99% a free country that respects human rights (presumably at least in part because it's population constantly throws up stinks like this one). Walking around the US, well, I don't need to tell you what you see. I feel a lot safer on the streets of the US just talking to people and saying whatever my political opinion is than even compared to the Netherlands (it sometimes seems like 50% of the population there believes in a Jewish or US or "Capitalist" or sometimes communist conspiracy and they will shout at you, or worse if you try to reason with people about it). Saudi Arabia is a country of thugs where everybody in the streets is afraid of everybody else, and your sex and skin color, and to a lesser extent your dress, determine your worth (and if you're able to enter malls, bars and shops). Pakistan is 80% Saudi Arabia and 20% free. I'm not saying the US beats other countries in everything, far from it, but in freedom and "not getting your head bashed in/arrested/fired/... because you like political party X", it is by far the best country I've ever seen. The most aggressive response I've ever seen in the US to a political opinion is laughter. And I have never, ever, seen anyone in the US refuse someone access to a bar, shopping mall, store, or ... based on skin color, sex or religion. I have seen it often in Europe (bars only), and in the middle east it's considered normal to have ethnic, sex and religious restrictions on half the buildings in a city. And frankly, the fact that the US Congress even looks at allegations of torture by a state agent, shows it's moral superiority over the UN. The fact that people can and do write about what the CIA did without losing their jobs, disappearing, getting shot or beat up, and worse, is a situation superior to what is found in the vast majority of UN member nations. Again, this, in my mind, proves the moral superiority of the US. Hell, even compared to Russia, which is definitely a first world country. Do you think Russia doesn't torture people ? When are you expecting the 2 first pages of the Moscow times to get dedicated to a 2 day session in the Duma about the Russian army's use of torture ? Hell, according to amnesty international, Ukraine, Poland, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands' governments have committed torture in 2014 [1](and some/most of them assisted the currently being discussed CIA program as well) [1]. I seem to be unable to find any discussion in their parliaments of that. They mostly seem to be talking about austerity measures, leaving/joining Europe, that sort of thing. Here's a paragraph on Russia, from amnesty international : "Torture methods documented by Amnesty International range from beatings, suspension from ceiling hooks, asphyxiation with plastic bags, to electrocution, inserting needles under finger or toenails, dousing with freezing water and even rape." About EU countries : "The denial of police abuses is still the default reaction across the EU and the Balkans, where the institutional response and thoroughness of investigations are frequently inadequate." Again this is much better than their reports on the middle east and Asia (even the complaints about Russia and Turkey, at least in Russia and Turkey it seems to be easy to avoid state-sponsored brutality, which is not true at all in the middle east and a lot of Asia) The UN has never even looked into allegations of it's own wrongdoing. And what half of UN member nations do comes dangerously close to "state-sponsored genocide" in many cases. The US has moral imperfections. And yes, there's assholes that are employed by the US government in positions of power. This is no different from any other nation. They are bad, and must be dealt with, I fully agree there. The UN, however, is a collection of thugs, massacrers, racists and worse. The argument you're making "the US and UN are both imperfect" is of course true, it is also completely useless. There is no hair on my head that doubts that the US has a massive moral advantage over the UN. I feel that at the very least we owe it to Congress to let it figure out what to do. I'd be amazed if they didn't at least pass a law that this can never happen again. [1] http://www.amnesty.org.au/resources/activist/Report-_Torture_in_2014_30_Years_of_Broken_Promises.pdf http://www.amnesty.org.au/resources/activist/Report-_Torture...

beloch 12y ago

It would actually be in the U.S.'s own interests to prosecute these CIA agents and their superiors. First, this would show support for international laws against torture and help put the lid back on Pandora's box. This would directly reduce the probability of captured U.S. citizens being tortured. No, that probably does not include those captured by ISIL, but are rogue terrorist organizations all U.S. citizens will need to worry about both now and in the future? Second, it would close a dangerous precedent. Prosecuting those who committed illegal acts, even though they were assured of immunity, sends a clear message that individuals are still responsible for their actions. Without this sense of individual responsibility U.S. agencies will be capable of utterly anything and, the way things work, capability becomes reality more often than not. Most Americans would sleep better knowing that the NSA's workers are accountable to the law rather than immune to it if their superiors say so, as is currently the case due to the precedent set by the CIA. Third, the implications for future diplomacy are a nightmare if the U.S. does nothing. There will be no moral high ground for the U.S. to stand on if the U.S. refuses to seek justice. Finally, it's the right thing to do. The U.S. could set an example for others to follow. To do nothing does precisely the opposite.

alexandros 12y ago
The prestige hit and vulnerability to "letting down the troops" criticisms will ensure this doesn't happen.
- logn 12y ago
  It will never happen because the prosecution would logically include Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and some legislators. I don't see a Republican administration prosecuting them because of loyalty, and I don't see a Democratic one doing that because I suspect Pelosi and Obama could be prosecuted as well (if new evidence comes to light). And without going after the very highest level offenders, you're throwing the CIA under the bus, and that won't end well.
  - wavefunction 12y ago
    Obama probably would not be part of the group but Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein would. Jay Rockefeller as well. These three very senior leaders in the Democratic party have sat on the Foreign Intelligence Committee during this period of torture and while supposedly not completely in-the-loop approved of what they did know of.

dsl 12y ago

Keep in mind, 23 CIA employees have already been convicted and sentenced by an Italian court for a rendition operation. None of these people can be located.

rasz_pl 12y ago
Oh they can be located, they are all living safely in US.
- thawkins 12y ago
  One would wonder what would happen if they where "rendered" to a prison in italy.
  - etherael 12y ago
    Nobody wonders this at all.
  - lotsofmangos 12y ago
    Well, if they end up at the Hague, there's always The Hague Invasion Act - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pro...
    - techdragon 12y ago
      Thanks for the link. Cant believe I never found this before during my regular sojourns through wikipedia.
briandear 12y ago
The Italians can go pound sand. They had no problem allowing the lead Achille Lauro hijacker safe passage to Egypt. And in 2008 they release another Achille hijacker -- a murderer and PLO terrorist. I don't really care if the Italians had their sensibilities offended by rendition. Rendition never resulted in an Italian citizen's death, but the Achille Lauro incident certainly resulted in an American's death. I am not making a statement about if rendition is good or bad; I'm only addressing the Italian's hypocrisy.

rasz_pl 12y ago

We've been over this already. US just fucking doesnt care. Extradition treaties are ONE WAY. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/13/italy-cia-rendition-abu-omar http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/13/italy-c... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-justice-department-immunity-bush-cia-torturer http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-j... One of kidnapper/torturer fuckers was even apprehended, and despite international arrest warrant magically released very next day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Seldon_Lady https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Seldon_Lady Those people are untouchable. They will remain untouchable until real revolution in US, or some sort of vigilantism movement. Any official charges against them would expose whole chain of command up to CIA/NSA directors to legal action, it will never happen.

VieElm 12y ago
> until real revolution in US, or some sort of vigilantism movement America doesn't need a revolution, it just needs more informed and motivated voters who vote in their self-interest. Maybe that counts as a revolution, but the way you paired it with "vigiliantism movement" suggested some kind of violence or government overthrow which would be pretty awful to be honest and I hope never happens in my life time or the life time of my children.
- eli_gottlieb 12y ago
  >America doesn't need a revolution, it just needs more informed and motivated voters who vote in their self-interest. No, one of two things is needed: either a revolution, or a mass migration of voters to places where their votes actually count. Both gerrymandering and the tendency of American seat allocation to favor rural districts have strongly reduced the effect of voting on the formation of actual governments.
  - gomerclaus 12y ago
    I've been screaming the "Let's migrate!" mantra for years. If we want rational politics in this country, we have to stack the polls with rational votes. As it stands, our voice is largely--in some instances, mostly--drowned out by single party voters. A pragmatic solution would be for the people who recognize the problem to migrate to the same city or county and work our way up the political ladder. I'm down; where are we moving to?

superuser2 12y ago

CIA agents are vulnerable to prosecution everywhere for crimes like espionage and high treason. That's what the CIA is for. This doesn't seem to change much.

briandear 12y ago

One huge peave of mine reflects a general level of ignorance about CIA by both media and commentators; they aren't CIA 'Agents' they are CIA 'officers.' It might sound like a nitpick, but if the news media repeatedly gets such a fundamental detail wrong, how can they be even remotely viewed as credible in the bigger issues? It would be like a reporter referring to RAM as ROM; hard to to have any faith that they even have ever spoken to a CIA officer let alone have the basic knowledge necessary to write national and international media reports on the subject. In case anyone is curious an 'agent' is a foreign national recruited by a CIA officer to spy. A CIA officer is the one that runs the agents. The FBI has special agents, but not officers.

MichaelGG 12y ago
If the story was "ROM chips made by child slaves", but they were really RAM chips, then like this story, it'd be rather immaterial to the subject.
kiiski 12y ago
Perhaps they are not using the word "agent" as a CIA job title, but rather in the actual meaning of the word: An agent is one who acts for, or in the place of, another, by authority from him; one entrusted with the business of another.
- pavelrub 12y ago
  The media uses the word "agent" to refer only to those who work in intelligence and defense agencies, so your explanation doesn't seem sufficient. And even if you are right - the word "agent" has a clear and different meaning in the context of intelligence, so at best this is a really bad choice of words.
  - briandear 12y ago
    It's an innaccurate choice of words and reflective of media ignorance on the subject. The media doesn't use the term "police agent" to describe cops nor do they call State Department consular officers "consular agents." The media, if they are interested in accuracy ought to start by getting the simple stuff correct. If someone is giving a talk at a conference about RAM and they keep saying ROM, perhaps you'd doubt their understanding of the subject. That's my point, the media loses credibility when they maintain use of innaccurate terminology yet they want to be perceived as an expert on the subject.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

agd 12y ago

Presumably, if they prosecuted the people responsible then Bush would end up in jail? Can't see the US doing that.

onnoonno 12y ago

Interesting language in the title. How about 'CIA agents who tortured could be brought to justice in any country?'

_delirium 12y ago

I also found this analysis of whether ICC jurisdiction applies to be informative: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/12/10/the-torture-report-and-the-possibility-o-international-criminal-court-charges/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014...

fatman 12y ago

Nuremburg was an exception to the general rule that you couldn't prosecute soldiers for carrying out the orders of their superiors - establishing that the mass genocide of innocent people crosses a line. However, the torture of a handful of active enemy participants might not.

squozzer 12y ago

It would not surprise me if certain countries interpret the meaning of "conspiracy" to include any US citizen, as one could argue that anyone who benefits - even passively - from a criminal act can be held liable.

pvaldes 12y ago

And meanwhile in tortureland... "no country wants the guantanamo people incarcered in Guantanamo, so we need to keep him incarcerted because we are really very afraid of them" What?. No country wants the leftovers? They are not animals, are humans without rights. USA, YOU create this shame, it is your duty to solve it. So you want options? ok, here goes one option... what if you'll release him and give them the USA citizenship and formal apopogies as retaliation?, A very small one for all they have suffered, seems to me. Free this people, return them their dignitiy, a job and a life, and them disintegrate the guantanamo buildings to the roots, You can start the demolition just tomorrow if you wish. > But they could be terrorists! A lot of CIA agents ARE terrorists, and they are free. Nobody seems worried in USA by the idea of have one of this sadistic people in his neighborhood This is not a shame to USA, is a shame and a pain for all the human race, and WE are the human race.

icantthinkofone 12y ago
These are people who are charged with wanting to kill people and otherwise destroy the USA. There is no shame in locking people up who want to do that, though you can disagree with the charges all you want.
- pvaldes 12y ago
  Wake-up. Where are his lawyers? where is the invisible jury? If a real judge finds that some of they are guilty they should just be put in a real Jail. Just like any other american citizen. Can't see any real problem with this. Guantanamo IS still helping to destroy the USA, in fact, and should have been destroyed many years ago.
  - sseveran 12y ago
    Why would a non-nation state actor need a lawyer? I could see returning the Taliban fighters to Afganistan since they were representing some sort of government. For people who have been picked up as part of Al Qaeda and its affiliate networks I don't really have a problem with holding them indefinitely. I find the use of drones to kill Americans, and the casual acceptance of collateral damage to be far, far worse. Those Americans may have done terrible things but were still Americans with Constitutional rights, unlike someone we picked up in Yemen or Somalia.

icantthinkofone 12y ago

I question the validity of this article. How would anyone know who the agents were? It's not like the CIA publishes a list. I doubt they used their real names.

icantthinkofone 12y ago

Can anyone explain to me why stories like this are on HN?

a3n 12y ago
There's the "of interest" clause. But more specifically, we talk a lot here about telecom and internet surveillance. It's good to raise up your head once in awhile and recognize that technical acts are not done for themselves, they're done for a larger goal. All of these breaches we talk about here by the US and other governments are much more than offenses against technology, they resolve up the tree to support policy. To support kidnapping, torture and murder. It's not just bits, it's blood.
- icantthinkofone 12y ago
  But that's not the subject of this article.

known 12y ago

"If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the USA. They don't care." --Nelson Mandela http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/nelson-mandela-iraq-israel_b_4396638.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/nelson-mandela-i...

ck2 12y ago

You can't even get a cop to trial for shooting unarmed people to death in this country. So good luck getting politicians to prosecute someone in the cia, especially when they got to destroy their own video tapes without penalty. Just like the TSA, then the NSA and now the CIA, people get bored with all the alarms and warnings about extreme overreach and just go back to shopping and drinking. As long as they can do that, politicians have learned they can get away with anything. I also noticed no-one gives a darn we are still using drones to kill large groups of unidentified people overseas. I guess the "drone report" will be for the next president and congress to deal with in 8 years.