SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
ALERT: Usernames and passwords from the old Harpers.org will no longer work. To create a new password and add or verify your email address, please sign in to customer care and select Email/Password Information. (To learn about the change, please read our FAQ.)
Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
Create a login here. Forgot password? Forgot email? More help here.
On Monday, in a post entitled “Inside the Salt Pit,” I noted that the identity of the CIA agent who managed the Salt Pit at the time of Gul Rahman’s death in 2003 was, perhaps inadvertently, disclosed in filings submitted on behalf of Judge Jay Bybee to the Justice Department, which were posted at the Judiciary Committee’s website. As Jane Mayer notes at the New Yorker, the page with the disclosure has now been modified and the name redacted. This vanishing act achieves very little in fact, since the page exists in thousands of copies. But it does suggest the Agency’s zeal in “disappearing” unpleasant facts.
The Bybee letter gives us a glimpse at how the Justice Department handled a matter which offered every prospect of embarrassing them. Here’s how Mayer describes it:
The Bybee document reflects arguments made by lawyers in the Bush Justice Department, who held that, despite Rahman’s death, the “manager of the Saltpit site” should not be prosecuted for torture, because he lacked the requisite criminal intent. According to the Bush Administration’s interpretation, the site manager had not intended for Rahman to “suffer severe pain from low temperatures in his cell,” and was therefore not criminally liable for the accidental death.
Note that the declination, issued by politically loyal U.S. attorneys who were subsequently rewarded with high postings at Main Justice, carefully follows the rationalizations that Yoo and Bybee advanced for not prosecuting deaths or serious physical harm resulting from state-sanctioned torture. But the obvious problem, as John Sifton notes at Slate, is that torture and homicide are hardly the only charges that could be brought in such a circumstance. Negligent homicide or milder abuse charges would have obviously been available, and a survey of comparable cases in the setting of state and local prisoners suggests that they are far more common. By looking only at homicide and torture, the prosecutors were paving the way for a decision not to charge. But the zeal shown by the Eastern District prosecutors in closing the book is striking, and worthy of independent scrutiny. I stress that the big story here doesn’t really focus on the CIA. The more worrisome miscreants were at the Justice Department itself.
Jeff Stein offers a fresh take on all these developments in the Washington Post.
More from Scott Horton:
No Comment — April 12, 2013, 11:11 am
A new report from Seton Hall University exposes government surveillance of attorney-client conversations
No Comment, Six Questions — March 18, 2013, 9:00 am
Rashid Khalidi on how the United States sustains the failure of the Israel-Palestine peace process
No Comment, Six Questions — February 4, 2013, 9:00 am
Alex Gibney on his documentary investigating the Roman Catholic Church’s handling of child sex-abuse cases


Percentage by which the risk of type 2 diabetes increases for every two hours a day that a person watches television:

Two bottled ghosts—of an old man and a young girl—were sold at auction in New Zealand.

The practice of sexualized eyeball licking was causing conjunctivitis in Japanese sixth graders.