CCR Says Suspected Use of Torture Undermines Credibility of 9/11 Report
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 1, 2008
10:17 AM
CONTACT: Center for Constitutional Rights
Riptide Communications, Inc., 212.260.5000
CCR Says Suspected Use of Torture Undermines Credibility of 9/11 Report
NEW YORK, NEW YORK - January 31 - The Center for Constitutional Rights is outraged by new information that reveals that much of the information contained in the 9/11 Commissions Final Report regarding the planning and execution of the terror attacks on New York and Washington was supported by information gained from torture, including water boarding.
The analysis from NBC News shows that more than one quarter of all footnotes in the 9/11 Commission’s Report refers to controversial interrogation techniques, including information in the Report’s most critical chapters, those on planning and executing the attacks. Remarkably, Commission staffers and Executive Director Philip Zelikow admitted that though they were skeptical of the intelligence reports, they did not make any inquiries regarding cross-examination techniques.
CCR President Michael Ratner expressed shock at the revelations stating, “If the Commission suspected there was torture, they should have realized that as a matter of law, evidence derived from torture is not reliable, in part because of the possibility of false confession…at the very least, they should have added caveats to all those references.”
“The Commission’s heavy reliance on tainted sources reinforces the notion that we as a nation have not yet come to terms with the reality that the U.S. engaged in torture,” he added. “Until we do so, we undermine our credibility in the eyes of the world as a nation of hypocrites.”
CCR is currently seeking to preserve evidence of the torture of their client Majid Khan, a former CIA ghost detainee now held at Guantanamo. While held at a CIA black site, Majid was subject to hours of torture, which only stopped when he agreed to sign a statement that he wasn’t allowed to read.
“The effect of our government’s reliance on secrecy and torture not only shames the U.S. in the eyes of the world, but sacrifices our freedom and security here at home,” said Vincent Warren, the Executive Director of CCR.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
- LEH's blog
- Login to post comments
This is fantastic news
Hopefully, the other civil liberties organisations will come on board.
Shocked, shocked, I say!
Looks like even CCR refuses to forthrightly acknowledge what this really means---there is no evidence to support the justification for the "war on terror" and gutting the Constitution.
I'll have to go back through their work and see if this is a fair criticism. If I find they ever questioned the adequacy of the official story of 9/11 in a serious way, then maybe it's not fair.
I was pleased and surprised
I was pleased and surprised that someone finally acknowledged, albeit implicitly, that a goal of torture is to obtain observably FALSE confessions -- which is why the tapes were denied and destroyed. The statement does bring the legitimacy of the entire report into question.
It's another crack.
I know, it's just such an obvious point
Sorry to be so negative. I do see the positive.
Here's someone that made the point without needing the 9/11 Commission to lead the way..
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2007/03/true-confessions-tale-of-khali...
But he doesn't take that extra step either -- no reliable basis for the 9/11 official story.
Weak, very weak
Mr. Ratner says:
"at the very least, they should have added caveats to all those references.”
The fact is, they did add a caveat, as stated by Zelikow in an article that appeared the day before and quoted Michael Ratner.
http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/30/624314.aspx
Here is the full caveat:
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch5.htm
So the obvious response to this press release is: "We did issue a caveat. Has Mr. Ratner read our report?"
So CCR could have issued this press release in 2004, and said that the caveat is not enough and only shows that the 9/11 Commission report is not sufficient, and that we cannot base foreign and domestic policy on such flimsy evidence. People have been imprisoned based on this report, and many, many more have died, been maimed, or had their livelihoods destroyed and/or human rights violated because of it.
9/11 is in the background of all the issues that CCR identifies at their website:
Illegal Detentions and Guantanamo
Surveillance and Attacks on Dissent
Criminal Justice and Mass Incarceration
Corporate Human Rights Abuse
Government Abuse of Power
Racial, Gender and Economic Justice
International Law and Accountability
The only reference to the 9/11 commission I could find at their website cited it as authority:
http://www.ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-files-freedom-info...
"Thousands of others have suffered at the hands of the Special Registration program, a program that has been highly criticized by the public and members of the congress (the 9/11 commission in particular) for being ineffective and based on racial, ethnic, and religious profiling."
I would be happy to be proven wrong, but it would appear that for over 6 years, and perhaps even now, the Center for Constitutional Rights has accepted the completely unproven official story of 9/11 and its branding of Muslims as the villains, while decrying the inevitable effects of that branding.
As a radical group, in the true and best sense of radical, getting to the root of a problem, I expect more from CCR than I do from the ACLU.
For that reason, I say weak, very weak.
To clarify, I am not condoning human rights abuses by saying they are the inevitable result of branding Muslims as villains, nor am I disregarding CCR's excellent work. Of course what they fight is not justified by the official story of 9/11, but if we are going to balance liberty and security, should we not have a realistic view of that security? Assessing the evidentiary foundation of the 9/11 official story, and the legal implications of that story, are legal issues that CCR is well-suited to do but has not done. Japanese legislator Fujita said it as well as anyone: 9/11 was a crime and is also the premise for the "war on terror," and as such, a proper investigation is essential.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOF_pXW84io
Message to CCR
Why has it taken you so long to question the 9/11 Commission Report
I am not at all impressed with your press release about the 9/11 Commission, for reasons stated in comments here:
http://911blogger.com/node/13699
I am posting this message as a comment at the blog. Please sign up and respond. Thank you.
Dwight Van Winkle
Attorney
Seattle
Tapes+ torture = distraction
from the correct questions