E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSMarch 16, 2010: Former CIA interrogator John Kiriakou argues that waterboarding can be necessary and immoral when fighting al-Qaida.
A former CIA officer who participated in the capture and interrogation of alleged terrorist Abu Zubaydah was charged Monday with disclosing classified information to journalists, the Justice Department announced.
In a statement, the department said John Kiriakou, 47, revealed the name of a covert CIA officer and the role of another CIA agent in classified activities involving the capture and detention of Zubaydah, who had been the third most senior al-Qaida figure and who is now at the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay.
Kiriakou, who wrote a book about the CIA and was on the team that captured Zubaydah in Pakistan in 2002, made an initial court appearance on Monday afternoon.
Prosecutors started their investigation after defense attorneys for suspected terrorists filed a classified legal brief in 2009 that included details that had never been provided by the government. Authorities concluded that Kiriakou had leaked the information to reporters, and that reporters had provided the information to the defense.
March 20, 2010: Msnbc's Alex Witt talks with author John Kiriakou about his new book "The Reluctant Spy."
"The investigation revealed that on multiple occasions," the department stated, "one of the journalists to whom Kiriakou is alleged to have illegally disclosed classified information, in turn, disclosed that information to a defense team investigator, and that this information was reflected in the classified defense filing and enabled the defense team to take or obtain surveillance photographs of government personnel."
According to an affidavit, FBI agents interviewed Kiriakou last week, and he denied leaking the names of covert CIA officers. When specifically asked whether he had provided the name of Zubaydah's interrogator to the New York Times for a 2008 article, he replied "Heavens no."
DOCUMENT: Read the complaint against Kirakou
Kiriakou, who worked for the CIA from 1990 to 2004 and has been a consultant for ABC News, has told reporters that the interrogation of Zubaydah included the technique known as waterboarding and that he believes it led to valuable information that helped foil al-Qaida plots.
In a statement to CIA staff made public by the agency, CIA Director David Petraeus said that "When we joined this organization, we swore to safeguard classified information; those oaths stay with us for life. Unauthorized disclosures of any sort -- including information concerning the identities of other Agency officers -- betray the public trust, our country, and our colleagues."
The charges also accuse Kiriakou of lying about his actions in an effort to convince the CIA to let him publish a book. The book's title is "The Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA's War on Terror."
Dec. 11, 2007: Former CIA agent John Kiriakou talks about the destruction of CIA interrogation tapes.
A judge last year refused to find the CIA in contempt of court when it destroyed dozens of videotapes of the interrogation of Zubaydah and other detainees.
In December 2007, the CIA acknowledged doing so as part of the detention program begun after the Sept. 11 attacks.
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
God forbid that the Defense would have access to information helpful to the defendant! That is so un-American! (sarcasm)
You should re-read the article.
"The investigation revealed that on multiple occasions," the department stated, "one of the journalists to whom Kiriakou is alleged to have illegally disclosed classified information, in turn, disclosed that information to a defense team investigator, and that this information was reflected in the classified defense filing and enabled the defense team to take or obtain surveillance photographs of government personnel."
Seems to me that Kiriakou revealed this information on purpose, so that the defendant can have a proper trial, not a mockery of justice. He was in general very supportive of CIA, down to defending torture as a viable means of obtaining valuable intelligence. He strikes me as a pragmatic person who is interested in justice and truth. I wish him well.
Hummmmmmmmmmmmmm "Bad Boy!" .... lol .. Don't Fook with the "Company!" ... ask Ed Wilson ....
Thank you for your service John Kiriakou.
Max^108: We need more people like him. Our government has long forgotten the meaning of justice.
how would his trial be a "mockery"?
where was waterboarding defined as torture when this guy was captured? i mean since you insist it is torture.
That is true Debi - but only because so many ordinary Americans have also forgotten the meaning of justice, blinded by real hurt (9/11) and fake war propaganda machine. We must voice our disapproval to induce a change. Look at people here on the Vine - so many voices... but not so many calling for justice.
Rufus - let me waterboard you, to see if you still don't consider it a torture afterward.
again; where was it LEGALLY defined as such genius?
Max^; should i post slower for you? it has to be a crime in order for it to be illegal. where was waterboarding defined as torture at the time?
That's hilarious!
I'm not coming down on Rufus or even his point. But I think its pretty clear waterboarding is torture, whether we decided to try to work our way around it legally or not.
what 'justice" max^? justice for whom?
When is Cheney's trial for releasing classifed CIA material and blowing the cover of a CIA agent??
I never said that waterboarding is defined as torture by US law. Regrettably so. But it is torture nonetheless, using a general definition of torture in US and international law. You are trying to pull Bill Clinton "depending on what the definition of the word 'is' is..."
As to your 'justice for whom?' question... It is rather a question of 'justice BY whom?'
It is WE who must act in a just manner, regardless who is on the receiving end. Preferential justice is NO justice.
no' im not trying a clinton here. it's either against the law or it isnt. clintonb comited perjury; there was no confusion there
and you are wrong again Max; when he was waterboarded it wasnt defined as torture in international law either
That's hilarious!
I'm not coming down on Rufus or even his point. But I think its pretty clear waterboarding is torture, whether we decided to try to work our way around it legally or not
For something to be classifed as torture. You may want to formulate a few tests.
Is the nature of the inducement likely to result in maiming, disfigurement, or death as direct result of its use against the suspect? Then it could easily be called torture.
Did anyone, while undergoing the inducment die as a direct result of purposful or accidental use of the process or procdure? Then it could easily be called torture.
Folks, we are not talking about a few tickles, harsh words or bread 'n water instead of hot meals or an uncomfortable bed and no TV for a few weeks.
By the way, let's not forget that Dick Cheney 'decided' to define 'torture' as 'organ failure.' So as long as your organs didn't fail, you weren't having anything illegal done to you. Sort of like saying as long as you didn't have any bones broken, you weren't beaten.
Max is fundamentally correct. You can call it legal, or not legal, under US law. You can say it was deserved or not deserved as far as these terrorists were concerned. But you have to literally twist the english language (yay lawyers with no scruples) to come up with a definition that has water boarding not be torture.
Remember, too, that torture has been proven to be an ineffective means for which to gather information from an enemy. Who would do such a study and come to that conclusion? Yeah, the Nazis. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say given their track record, they probably did a disturbingly thorough and accurate study :P
read up on drowning reflex?
Once it starts - it can not be stopped, is highly uncomfortable and without assistance may lead to tramatic brain injury or death... near-drowning or wet drowning, the reactions are nearly the same they can not be reversed by will or training. Actually, trained swimmers are easier to train into Near-drowning than untrained swimmers.
Those scientist really earned their money, and the Soldier, Salior, Marines who participated in the study were minimally compensated (in other words - disposable).
Max^108: Judging by some of the comments, their moral compass is completely out of whack.
Waterboarding was introduced in medieval times not as a more humane version of the old dunk drowning torture, but as a way to avoid accidental drowning of the suspect before the required testimony was extracted. The pain and anguish of the subject are similar to that of a forced drowning, but the risk of an actual drowning is much smaller. Waterboarding was used by US military in the past, and it was especially common during the brutal war in the Philippines, which was more of a genocide than a war.
Every book a CIA official (current and former) submits for publishing goes through a redaction process whereby the CIA edits out the parts that are secret.
No body can get around it. Are they saying he did? If so who's fault is that? Something doesn't add up here. Who did this guy piss off?
They're not saying the information came out of the book, they're claiming it was "revealed" to "journalists" or "reporters".
Did they interview him after the book came out? Did they "infer" certain information if they received the "I can neither confirm nor deny" answer? Did the "journalists" or "reporters" use multiple sources with varying bits of information to "stitch together" (sorry priceline.. it's a good line for this) a story?
Yeah, there's a great deal of information NOT being divulged. But that's part of the classified world they live and work in.
Sorry but I cant agree.
CIA agents sign a confidentiality agreement. It is NOT up to each individual agent to decide what IS or is NOT to be divulged, or what IS or ISNT in the nation's "best interests".
If he's guilty, he should get the death penalty, if applicable in this fact pattern. (Treason - during time of war)
We'll get that information when he shows up dead in his fishing boat of a heart attack. Which. if he's guilty of aiding and abetting a known terrorist is how he deserves to go, sleeping among the fishes. One, I don't equate terrorist with enemy combatants, they operate outside of the Geneva Convention and any and all known military codes of conduct. They can therefore not or should not expect to be treated or judged by those same standards. Two, let anyone who believes that we are not playing by the same rules they play by take your holier than thou ass and move to Iran or Syria. The Constitution was written for AMERICAN citizens who play by our set of rules, no where in its mandate is a provision that we have to judge a clear sub human, by definition, anyone who wantonly kills people by sneak attack for political or religious or no reason, qualifies as a sub human to me, and it is no reflection on our system of jurisprudence. We treat dogs as dogs because they are dogs, we should treat terrorist as terrorist because they are terrorist and not as human beings worthy of being judged as human.
It wasn't the fact that they were using the technique, which makes them so angry. What they were and still are P.O-ed about is they were unable to lie about using it or deny it ever happened.
Water boarding was never misunderstood as to whether it was torture or not, it obviously is. The main issue is confirmed testimony which corroborates its use on undeclared, enemy combatants. That was a s!hat storm they really, really wanted to avoid.
Honestly - I can't say I am 110% against extream measure being taken. What I will say is - I am appalled that they do it so badly.
Whats the use of having covert services, if everytime you look around there is another leak? FUBAR or SNAFU situation we all have to live down?
No one got spanked for 'outing' Valerie Plame (Scooter got spanked for lying during the investigation and obstructing justice). Someone is trying to make an example this time around.
no one got spanked cuz no one outed her.
What Scooter did was treason, as it was done during a time of war and the penalty is death. But of course he is one of those that lied about what really was going on over there along with tricky Dicky so he got off.
you dingbat; what do you mean what scooter did? was he convicted or even tried for outing anyone? he should be executed cuz yudont like him? you libs are scary; scary stupid and dangerous
So let me get this straight, the CIA wasn't disclosing information pertinent to the defense of a suspect in a court case (thats illegal from what I understand). The ex-CIA agent disclosed this information to reporters, the reporters then "revealed" the information to the suspects defense somehow (a story or during research). The defense then used that information in court to file for release of records pertinent to the defense of their client? Sounds like the justice system working to me. If anything the person(s) responsible for withholding the information from the suspects defense should be up on charges.
Ano.... actually, I just read the complaint.
What the man did... IF PROVEN GUILTY, was to disclose the name of a covert operative of the CIA to a journalist. THAT IS ILLEGAL. Period, end of story.
By doing so, he put that person(s) and his/her entire family at risk of retaliation including possibly being murdered or kidnapped by our adversaries.
Yes, we have done things wrong. But to put anothers life and the life of his family at risk to ostensibly promote your book is beyond the pale and should be dealt with harshly.
XD - yes, it is illegal, unless you work for president Bush. His closest staff outed Valerie Plame and got away with it.
yeah... too many people without a need to know, knew or "heard" things. Unfortunately, in that case there was no single line to point to. In this situation, the line is rather short.
Hummmmmmmmmmmmmm .... since there are around one million intelligence operatives on the government payroll .... Thats right 1,000,000 ...... do you really think there is a hell-of-lot thats really very secret? ...
And When does the government cross that "magic" line ...? When their actions are so socially & humanly deplorable that it calls for any non psychotic human with a conscience to cry out? ...
Let me add promoting a book doesn't qualify ... As a company employ your first act should be to offer your resignation ... there are those that have ............
XD, so didn't Cheney, et. al. Remember Valerie Plame was a covert CIA agent when she was outed after her husband Joe Wilson plublically deflated the Bush Admin's yellowcake propoganda. You can't blame one and not another for doing the exact same thing under the same law. Either it applies to everyone or no one.
If this is still an active case, what Judge would ever agree to the CIA destroying evidence prior to a trial?!? There's definitely something very fishy going here. T
he media was at one time called the fourth branch of goverment---the fly on the wall providing the people access to officials/agencies on government matters that are material to the operation of our Republic. The public needs to know this, and whether one is a CIA covert operative or not...they still MUST obey the US Constitution and any Treaty we are a signatory to, period.
Real men must ignore unjust laws.
you would think
but that's not how some agents within our government work
remember chainy defending the guy you exposed an undercover agent just to get back at a critic and nothing happened to him.
Corruption is alive and well in our system like any other. they are hypocrites
Max^108
Valerie Plame was not at the time nor for over 10 previously, considered covert. Richard Armitage was the one who mentioned to a journalist (now dead) that she worked for the CIA.
SpryLynnx
In the Plame incident, there was a lot of finger pointing. Some viable some not. I do remember that Armitage (Democrat) was involved as was Cheney (Republican). Who did what is debatable at best, and there were no "smoking guns" to speak of.
This situation is fairly clear cut. At least if you actually read the "complaint" against him. Of course, it must still be PROVED in court, so until that time, the man is innocent.
John, WAS a former covert operative of the CIA. He DID write a book, which was reviewed by the CIA before publication. None of these actions are illegal nor being questioned.
What he is being accused of IS a violation of Federal Law. He is accused of providing the TRUE name of a CIA Covert Operative. Doing so puts the Operative and his/her entire family at risk of retaliation and effectively ends the individuals future with the CIA as a covert operative. If this is in fact true, the man has violated not only the law, but the faith and trust bestowed on him by the Federal Government, the CIA, and his FORMER COWORKER. He has put his former co-worker and his/her family in jeopardy for the purpose of furthering a personal goal of selling more books. If it is in fact true, he has violated a personal trust and bond between himself and all other CIA employees and their families.
False. The CIA says she was a covert agent, and the records they provided to the court prove that she had covert status under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/ns/politics/t/plame-was-covert-agent-time-name-leak/
you're comical; you want people to believe her status was covert as detailed in an UNCLASSIFIED document? go read your article again. see if it makes any sense
I'm sure you don't hold with Prosecutors withholding pertenent, but deemed by him to be irrevelent information also. When you sit in the drivers seat you get to steer the car. Have you ever wondered what an analylist does with the bits and pieces of irrevelent information he receives from a multitude of sources. He gleans sometime vital information about the enemy. If he tells where he got the information from the enemy can plug that hole. It works in reverse also knowing what we know can give the enemy an edge on future actions, this is why some information that is not disclosed to terrorist on trial. When the ex CIA agent disclosed any classified information, if he did, which I doubt, I am more inclined to believe that this was a planned type operation where we wanted the enemy to learn a bit of disinformation. He had too many years in the service, his book was not redacted, and his status is ex CIA, he was not of retirement age nor had eough time in service for retirement. You know, cop is thrown of the force, put in jail to get information on some crook while incarcerated. All a cover. Mr. ex CIA is let go, writes a book, reporters who are known CIA tools blows whistle on him. He is now in a position to be turned by some terror organization or another as a disgruntled ex CIA agent. You write the script.
No, it sounds like an act of treason to me. Too bad there are so many libtards responding to this. You are in the CIA. YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO TELL ANYBODY ANYTHING. WHAT DON'T YOU PEOPLE UNDERSTAND.
Yes, it is treasonous, unless you work for president Bush. His closest staff outed Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA agent.
Please explain something for me. What is this word "libtard" I see referenced more and more on this site. I do not understand it and could use a definition. Thanks.
This Jerk knew what he was doing, Fry him
By your logic, Dick Cheney and his coterie of scumbags knew what they were doing and therefore should fry for outing Valerie Plame?!
Hey, I'm all for that!!!!!!
Oath or not, when you publicly reveal classified information which exposes the acts of your government as being either illegal, immoral, or unconstitutional, you should be called a PATRIOT and given the highest honors and awards your country has to offer. Not called a "traitor" and forced to run through a monkey-trial then locked up in prison.
The classified information in question was the true name of a covert operative. That puts the operative and his/her entire family at risk of retaliation. That's why doing so IS a federal crime.
It wasn't any "illegal activity", it was a name.
Exactly what "illegal activity" did he leak? Waterboarding was not illegal at the time but divulging the name of a covert agent was. Scooter Libby went to jail for lying to investigators on a case of a leaked name and he never leaked it. Armitage on the other hand DID lead a name and he walked away free.
Why don't you run for President, then you could be given a daily print out on situations and actions being carried out by intelligence and military personal all over the world. Would you disclose some of these as being un American and worthy of public dissemmination even if it cost us an agent here or a soldier there. Some men are charged with protecting America in a world gone mad, what they learn may not be information that can be given to Joe Blow even though YOU think you have a right to know. What did you and your old lady do last night in the confines of your bedroom, oh, that's private you say, but I want to know because under your definition nothing should remain behind closed doors. Get real.
What we need more of in this country are less agents like this!! Like Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men," he says, paraphrased, effectively that most Americans have no idea of what it takes to run a country, that provides you with the very security from which you condemn the process. It's true, the majority of people have no idea of why it is they have the right to do the things they choose. It comes with a price, a covert price.
Yes, I suppose an alternative like educating the populace is a terrible idea.
How dare people know what is being done in their name, with their money.
yes trip; how dare an agency that us supposed to operate in secret want to operate in secret. i mean wrap that around your barney go-good attitude
When you join an agency such as the CIA, you are signing a contract swearing that you will not divulge any covert/classified information to ANYONE! That is honestly a breach of contract first of all. Second of all, he gave sensitive information outing covert agents. Wouldn't that put in jeopardy the lives and safety of our other government officers who are doing their job in protecting our country from men like the one mentioned was water boarded. He is/was a terrorist. He should be water boarded. And people who give that kind of information to the press should be held responsible, and called a traitor, he essentially helped the defense for a terrorist. That attorney should be tried too.
More of GW's war on Freedom
Yep, that war on the freedom of terrorists to attack you here in the US. Damn that man for trying to keep these jihadists from killing you and your family!
Let's try this one more time for the hopelessly clueless. Richard Armitage, a dem, outed Valerie Plame who wasn't even a CIA operative. Libby got nailed for lying under oath (like Clinton) and Cheney gets blamed because the left hates him. Simple enough? I think this guy's in trouble because he credited waterboarding as having produced valuable results. Something those on the left hate to admit.
No need to confuse them with facts; their mind is already made up. Notice how all the libtards use the exact same responses and rhetoric? All they can do is dig up old news, then try to twist to something like"GW did this", "it's not my fault", you know the drill.
Rove and Cheney outed Plame. Libby took the fall. Bush was clueless. I guess you have to be a former CEO or with the powers that be to get away with treason.
repeating a lie doesnt make it so; no court ever found rove or cheney outed anyone. ust like repeatint the lie that obama isnt a failure doesnt mean he isnt; you cant just make stuff up
How greater the betrayal of Vice President Cheney, so easy to crush the flea and let power be. They tease and mock us with THEIR "justice"
except that cheney didnt do what the loony left says he did. lol sux 2 b u
so sad how quickly the the exchange of thoughts, beliefs and ideas turns to personal attacks and the truth is left in the wreckage
if it was the truth you could back it up. you didnt. you wont. you cant. in other words you are being intellectually dishonest and are now shocked to find yourself being attacked?? i'm so sorry!!! lol
One word, TREASON! Execute him now, stop the media fanfare, the hype, the hoopla. M-4'S AT 50 FEET!
Leaks is another word for " let's coddle the poor man, he just did not know they were secrets, even though it said "secret" and "eyes only" on the file.
Apparently it's OK for the CIA to illegally torture someone and destroy the evidence of that crime in direct violation of a court order, but not to inform the press of that crime.
Maybe you should try reading comprehension as your next class. His "crime" was not informing the press of any information regarding torture.
His crime was providing the true name of a covert operative. That puts the operative and his/her family in jeopardy of retaliation, and effectively negates the operatives future in the clandestine environment in which he/she works.
He broke the law and should pay the price if in fact found guilty of providing the true name of another operative.
what illegal torture? be specific
If he is in fact guilty? He should be treated no differently than the young soldier that is currently facing court martial for leaking information to WIKI-LEAKS. Only difference is he would be tried in a civilian court of law.
Check my logic here. An agency that makes its living by lying lied to the courts but they were allowed to lie. Then the agency of liars accused a trained liar of lying but the alleged liar said he never lied to the agency of liars. The new director of this agency of liars reminded us that the government doesn't allow lying.
your logic is spotless as far as it goes. unfortunately it goes nowwhere and is worthless
Freddy Boy...
He provided the true name of a covert operative. Doing so IS a violation of federal law. It puts the operative and his/her family at risk of retaliation by others. It also diminishes or effectively ends the "named" operatives future viability in the clandestine environment he/she works in. Had he used the pseudo fictitious name, which would lead nowhere in the real world, he would have been off the hook. He knew that but chose not to, and knowingly violated the trust and faith put in him not only by the government, but by HIS FORMER CO-WORKER WHO IS NOW AT RISK, AS IS HIS/HER FAMILY.
Elaine,it sounds like treason to you.The man has not been convicted of any crime but yet you are saying he commited treason..You're saying,"guilty until proven innocent??"
if you are saying she said it sounds like treason to her than she cant have convicted him right? she is entitled to her opinion
Freddy Boy,you hit the nail on the head..
Will you clowns EVER stop re-writing history. The facts of this event are all ready known. Smarten up, stop spreading outright lies. Someday (hopefully) you trolls will stop getting your paychecks and we can have discussions that are based in fact not fallacy!
So, does this mean he's on the short list for Republican VP candidates?
Apparently George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove did not get the memo when they committed treason and outed one of our CIA agents and put in jeapordy dozens of agency personnel and covert operations for their own personal polictical purposes.
.....and YOU my dear Benet have ALL of the irrefutable facts; have concluded that they are guilty; and are ready to execute them. Since you can't get over your bias against President Bush and his administration, you must be an unbiased Barack Hussein Obama myopic supporter whether or not he is an empty-suit, ineffective President and merely an intelligent, articulate snake-oil salesman and you have bought it.
TJC-Ex-New Yorker : The American auto industry is now first in the world again. We have had 22 months of consistent recovery, The stockmarket is posting record numbers again, Jobless claims are at their lowest since the president took over, Companies are hiring at an ever increased rate, we are out of one useless and illegal war and well on our way to being out of another. etc. etc. etc.
Your reparte seems to lack the single thing I find missing in conservative discourse...actual numbers. Baby Jesus ain't gonna help you with those. If you enter a discussion where facts are possible - try peppering the conversation with a few. You belong to a portion of the American public that will say and do anything to get a "black" man out of the "White" house. During the Republican debates we have heard it all, and the only guy up there that makes any sense is Ron Paul. And everyone from your side of the fence thinks he is crazy.
Yes, I know a fact or two, and yes it is clear to me that the previous administration went on a cover up mission to hide the fact that a president so much wanted to go to war to prove to his Daddy that he was a real man, that he lied about a country and killed 100,000 of thousands of people. Now we know his entire reason for going to war was a complete lie. And this makes his cover up even more obvious. And it makes those in his administration war criminals.
ha i knew benet was a pathetic lefty. i tried to avoid immediately assuming it cuz you dont HAVE to be a lefty to land on the side of terrorists and traitors; but it helps. 22 months of recovery huh? well doesnt that say just how far we came down under obama and dems? because we STILL aren't back to where unemployment was when Bush left office; let alone his average of 5.2%
There are many degrees of treasonous acts and the punishment should fit the crime. The individual in question was attempting to capitalize on his knowledge and may have caused irreparable harm to the U.S., and if so, shame on him.
You are telling me, they used the waterboards the wrong way?
it is to bad kennedy was assasinated, because he wanted to get rid of the cia which would have eliminated a lot of problems
yes of course; it's always a good idea for the most powerful nation on earth to not have any form of intelligence; cuz bad guys dont really want to harm us!! lol
you idiots are a laugh riot. no republican outed anybody. repeating lib bullshat doesnt make it true
It is profoundly sad you think that compromising American citizens and foreign nationals who work in service of your freedom to be a laughing matter. You disrespect every servicemen, agent, or asset we have in the field by your cavalier attitude and you unwillingness to hold our public officials accountable for war crimes against others and this nation.
it's profoundly sad watching you embarrass yourself making accusations without any facts
what war crimes? be specifc. spell them out
the only one being cavalier here is you; making serious accusations of war crimes without offering a shred of evidence, proof or anything at all for that matter to back up your charges
With any luck Bush, Cheney, Yoo, Addington, Bybee and the other torturer conspirators will one day receive justice.
USC 2340 and USC 2441 both call for life imprisonment for torturer conspirators when death results from the torture (as it did with the Afghan Dilawar), otherwise just 20 years imprisonment.