
CIA agents who tortured are vulnerable to prosecution in any country - rumcajz
http://amanpour.blogs.cnn.com/2014/12/12/cia-agents-who-tortured-are-vulnerable-to-prosecution-in-any-country-in-the-world-says-u-n-official/
======
beloch
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
The prestige hit and vulnerability to "letting down the troops" criticisms
will ensure this doesn't happen.

~~~
rhino369
The real reason is that they were carrying out the official policy of the US
government. Just calling it CIA torture is minimizing how far up this went.
Bush ordered it. DOD knew. DOJ not only knew, it crafted the governments
tortured definition of torture. Congress knew.

This isn't some off the books CIA wet team opp. It was planned and signed off
at the highest levels. John Yoo, who wrote the torture memos, is a professor
at Berkeley. That's how mainstream this was.

Furthermore, the people signed off on it. Not just through our Congressional
representatives. Not just because we re-elected the politicians who did it.
The public supported it directly. We've known for a long what was going on.

Prosecuting only the people who carried out the orders is cowardly.

You'd have to try Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, a bunch of high ranking DOD and DOJ
officials, a bunch of Generals and other officers, Congressional leadership
from that era, and former CIA directors too.

"Just following orders" didn't work at Nuremberg because we were trying the
people who gave the orders too.

~~~
snori74
The fact that "24" with Jack Bauer routinely using torture ran for eight years
with high ratings surely reflected the US public's tacit approval.

~~~
caf
I don't think you can sensibly infer anything of the sort from television
ratings.

As I recall, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad and Dexter all rated pretty well too.

~~~
rakoo
Jack Bauer is supposed to be the good guy; good guys aren't supposed to use
torture, yet he does.

I don't know about other shows, did "good guys" use torture ? Were they able
to walk away without any problems ?

~~~
tonyarkles
Since we're talking about fiction... In Burn Notice, they routinely _stop_
people from using torture to try to get actionable intel, because "people will
say whatever they think you want to hear, just to make it stop"

------
rasz_pl
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-c...](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/13/italy-
cia-rendition-abu-omar)

[http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-j...](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-
justice-department-immunity-bush-cia-torturer)

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
> 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
>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
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?

~~~
forgotpasswd3x
Come to Detroit!

------
pvaldes
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
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
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
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.

~~~
lotsofmangos
You know, that position on rights is fascism.

------
ck2
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.

------
molecule
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.”_

~~~
waps
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-
Cartoo...](http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/AS-Cartoon.jpg)
(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_peacek...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacekeepers)

[2]
[http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/04/un-3600-raped-d...](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/04/un-3600-raped-
drc-four-year-period-20144923542487129.html)

[3] [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1538476/UN-
staff-a...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1538476/UN-staff-
accused-of-raping-children-in-Sudan.html)

[4]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre#Expulsion_o...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre#Expulsion_of_Bosniaks_from_the_United_Nations_compound)

[5] [http://www.projectcensored.org/12-another-massacre-in-
haiti-...](http://www.projectcensored.org/12-another-massacre-in-haiti-by-un-
troops/)

[6]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council)

[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-
prin...](http://www.islamicinvitationturkey.com/2013/06/02/saudi-prince-rapes-
kills-saudi-girl/)

[9] [http://www.smh.com.au/world/saudi-royal-beat-strangled-
serva...](http://www.smh.com.au/world/saudi-royal-beat-strangled-
servant-20101006-167r2.html)

[10] [http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/saudi-prince-jailed-in-
br...](http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/saudi-prince-jailed-in-britain-for-
murder-flies-home/)

[11]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSMcnL1OfR0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSMcnL1OfR0)

~~~
mercurial
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
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...](http://www.amnesty.org.au/resources/activist/Report-
_Torture_in_2014_30_Years_of_Broken_Promises.pdf)

~~~
tripzilch
I live in the Netherlands, so I'm just going to assume your generalisations
about other countries are of similar accuracy.

BTW got a page nr. for that Amnesty report? Either it's not text-searchable or
the text "Netherlands" doesn't even occur in that PDF (and yes I did look at
the section about Europe).

I'm not saying the Dutch government is innocent, not at all. I do say,
however, your generalisations are suspect. Especially for the part of the US
respecting the human rights of their "residents on the streets" (I know that's
not what you meant, but it was pretty disgusting to see the streets and
subways of NYC "littered" with the mentally handicapped--hint: people don't
start mumbling to themselves or screaming for no reason _just_ because they're
homeless).

~~~
waps
Heh. I've lived in the Netherlands for 2 years. Firstly, you cannot discuss
politics in the Netherlands on the street. You just can't.

Furthermore, if you're looking for specifics, you can start here :

[http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-
work/countries/europe/netherla...](http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-
work/countries/europe/netherlands)

Works for other countries too. Essentially, the Dutch government had Pakistan
torture a terror suspect on it's behalf last year.

------
superuser2
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.

------
dsl
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
Oh they can be located, they are all living safely in US.

~~~
thawkins
One would wonder what would happen if they where "rendered" to a prison in
italy.

~~~
lotsofmangos
Well, if they end up at the Hague, there's always The Hague Invasion Act -
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-
Members%27_Pro...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-
Members%27_Protection_Act)

~~~
techdragon
Thanks for the link. Cant believe I never found this before during my regular
sojourns through wikipedia.

------
briandear
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.

~~~
kiiski
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
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
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.

------
fatman
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.

------
known
"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-i...](http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/nelson-mandela-iraq-
israel_b_4396638.html)

------
onnoonno
Interesting language in the title.

How about 'CIA agents who tortured could be brought to justice in any
country?'

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

------
agd
Presumably, if they prosecuted the people responsible then Bush would end up
in jail?

Can't see the US doing that.

------
squozzer
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.

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

~~~
a3n
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
But that's not the subject of this article.

------
istsehrgut
I bet not. Because America. That is all.

~~~
ProAm
They should be. Lead by example.

