FBI files implicate Bush, Cheney and Co.

FBI files indict Bush, Cheney and Co. as war criminals

www.wsws.org

By Bill Van Auken
23 May 2008

The most stunning revelation in a 370-page Justice US Department Inspector General’s report released this week was that agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation had formally opened a “War Crimes” file, documenting torture they had witnessed at the Guantánamo Bay US prison camp, before being ordered by the administration to stop writing their reports.
---------
The report makes it absolutely clear that torture was ordered and planned in detail at the highest levels of the government—including the White House, the National Security Council, the Pentagon and the Justice Department. Attempts to stop it on legal or pragmatic grounds by individuals within the government were systematically suppressed, and evidence of this criminal activity covered up.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Edit title to more accurately reflect article content

[edit on 23-5-2008 by SystemiK]

Interesting article here. I'm not familiar with the source (WSWS.org) but the reporting seems solid.

Given that the White House seems to have "lost" all it's pertinent emails regarding the run up to the war and it's hand in establishing torture in military prisons, it's good to see that this information has not been completely covered up.

Whether such an investigation will produce any tangible results is certainly debatable. The article brings up the fact that the Democrats are also complicit, leading to a situation where few are willing to deal with these issues and a tendency to sidestep entirely. Don't look to anyone in congress to carry this torch, they ALL have much to loose when the facts begin to see the light of day.

www.wsws.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

Interseting that this comes out at the same time a seven billion dollar lawsuit is being leveled at them, citing supposedly credible documents.

EDIT to add link:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 5/23/0808 by jackinthebox]

what is the possible outcome to those in question if the accusations are proven true?

I would use the word accuse rather than indict in that title, but that's just me. At this point there is no indictment. I don't even know if this report has been vetted properly. So this FBI file may or may not actually exist. Should there be such a file? I think so.

reply to post by Icarus Rising


I thought about that as well but I prefer to use actual titles when posting news items rather than write my own. I believe it's usage is technically correct though it does leave itself open to misinterpretation.

As for the report, most links on google point back the the site I linked in the OP. I did however, find this Newsweek article which does cooroborate the existence of the report.

Newsweek Article

The long-awaited 370-page Justice report on the abuse issue may be the most authoritative public account yet on the fierce internal struggles within the Bush administration over how terror suspects should be interrogated. The report states that one FBI agent who witnessed the CIA's interrogation of Zubaydah in the spring of 2002 was so upset that he protested that it amounted to "borderline torture." But when investigators from the Office of the Inspector General sought to question Zubaydah in January 2007 (who by then had been transferred from an overseas agency "black" site to Guantánamo Bay), the CIA's acting general counsel, John Rizzo, refused to let them do so, the report states.

As far as repercussions, well, we all know how slippery the Bush administration has been in the past concerning attempts to hold them accountable for their actions. Personally, I would not expect much to come of this but one can always hope...



[edit on 23-5-2008 by SystemiK]

To the OP - I saw that article earlier today and felt it was a Sorcha Faal type over-dramatization, uber-hype, and felt it was completely unreliable.

Later you posted a Newsweek article to back-up the first one - but, I see NO similiarity between the two. The Newsweek article is probably closer to the truth on the 370 page document than than Socialist one you originally linked.

Hopefully, you can get the thread title changed quickly before you get the dreaded HOAXER label slapped down on this thread.

To Jackinthebox - there's no $7 million dollar lawsuit. Click the wiki link I gave in that ATS thread you linked and you'll notice that was filed in 2002 and thrown out of court in 2004 because you can't file a civil suit on the President.

reply to post by SystemiK


I know you have to use the title provided, so I wasn't making any reference to you personally. I don't want you to get the wrong impression. There is always hope.

reply to post by Trexter Ziam


It's not a matter of the title being a hoax, as the original title I posted was the actual headline of the article. I went ahead and modified it though, that headline was a bit misleading.

As I see it, this is simply a report (albeit a rather damning one). The report was only released within the last week, so at this point opinions are rather speculative as to what might come of it.

Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
Click the wiki link I gave in that ATS thread you linked and you'll notice that was filed in 2002 and thrown out of court in 2004 because you can't file a civil suit on the President.

Yep, I saw that too, but I tried finding various viewpoints on the interview...And couldn't find much. I think Houston brought it to court as a civil suit, not to really get anywhere with it, but perhaps just bring attention of the issue to the public eye.

I'm still not sure what to think about the article (particularly the name of the source) linked from the OP here...I may have to try a little cross-checking.

Something a bit more tangible, I believe, are some petitions I saw at We the People Foundation. No, I'm not asking that anyone sign any of them or anything...Just read them. All of the grievances listed in the petitions are based on public-access information...Information that anyone can freely access with just a bit of research. They may also point out a few bits & pieces of information we may have missed here at ATS & provide new leads for our own researches...
Or they may give people some examples of good petition-writing in case people want to write some of their own. (Ooops! No, Forget that I said that! )

The petitions there that focuses on the main topic of this thread would be abuses of the War Powers Clauses & the Patriot Act (for abuses related to human Rights). These petitions list numerous explicit violations that could easily be brought up as charges. They're also petitions that are circulating all over Washington D.C. right now...While WTP is currently stuck in court right now defending the First Amendment. This is why it's probably pointless to ask anyone to sign them, and if I were to do so I'd stand a good chance of getting banned from ATS anyway.

An indictment is common law term for; an accusation of committing a crime.

Depending on the jurisdiction an indictment is an issuance by a Grand Jury as a complaint or informant which is verified by probable cause and evidence when reviewed by a judge or jury

An indictment of an elected official is an impeachment, which is a term used to denote how the accused will by tried, generally by peer review and not a sitting jury

so, I think your title is just fine !

reply to post by SystemiK


Thank you Systemik! Your new choice of title is much more appropriate! We ARE allowed to change a title's name IF the title is misleading. I do understand why you originally posted it using the article's title.

You're great! Thanks!

reply to post by Trexter Ziam

You are most welcome TZ.

Perhaps now that we have reached a concensus on the title of the thread we can actually discuss the content within....

This Is Interesting . Could This Be Tied Into The Issuing Of A Supeona against Karl Rove ? I have not Heard Much More About That One !

The report does exist. It's called 'A Review of the FBI's Involvement in and Observations of Detainee Interrogations at Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan and Iraq'.

It can be found here

If in fact George W. Bush has purchased an enormous acreage of land 98,840 acres near Chaco, Paraguay and the question is why? Could he for see that the Democrats could get in power and try to prosecute him with the war crimes act and has to have a place to run away to.

Does the President know of an imminent danger to the planet Earth and has a safe haven to run too and hide? These are valid questions and never listen to what people say most of the time watch what they do. You need water to survive a catastrophic event and lots of it including free flowing natural gas and a military to protect you.

The land he purchased is next to large Bolivian gas reserves and the Guarani indigenous water reserve, one of the largest water reserves in South America. Did you know that his land that he supposedly purchased is just a few miles away from the U.S. Mariscal Etigarriba Military base? Could this be for protection and how many individuals in this country knew that the U.S. had a military base in Paraguay?

How much money does the United States of America give to Paraguay each year and for what purpose? Even with the dumbing down of America many Americans can still read between the lines. Rik Riley

Originally posted by coughymachine
The report does exist. It's called 'A Review of the FBI's Involvement in and Observations of Detainee Interrogations at Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan and Iraq'.

It can be found here

Thats an amazing find CM, THANK YOU! 438 pages, very interesting from what I've read so far.