[Congressional Record: December 13, 2007 (Senate)] [Page S15452-S15453] CIA DESTRUCTION OF INTERROGATION RECORDINGS Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it seems that every week there is a new revelation about how this administration has engaged in activity that is not consistent with American laws or values when it comes to the issue of torture. Last week, CIA Director Michael Hayden acknowledged that Central Intelligence Agency officials destroyed videotapes of detainees being subjected to so-called ``enhanced interrogation techniques.'' These techniques reportedly include forms of torture like waterboarding. The New York Times reported, ``The tapes were destroyed in part because officers were concerned that video showing harsh interrogation methods could expose agency officials to legal risks.'' The CIA apparently withheld information about the existence of interrogation videotapes from official proceedings, including the 9/11 Commission and the Federal court hearing the case of Zacarias Moussaoui. General Hayden asserts that the videotapes were destroyed ``in line with the law,'' but it is the Justice Department's role to determine whether the law was broken. Last week I asked Attorney General Mukasey to investigate whether CIA officials who covered up the existence of these videotapes violated the law. To his credit, the Attorney General has begun a preliminary inquiry. This week there is a new revelation. The CIA has already acknowledged videotaping interrogations of detainees in CIA custody. Now it appears that there may be videotapes of detainees who the CIA transferred or rendered to other countries to be interrogated. According to the Chicago Tribune, in February 2003, the CIA detained a man named Abu Omar in Italy. The CIA then took Abu Omar to Egypt and turned him over to the Egyptian government. Abu Omar claims he was tortured and that his Egyptian interrogators recorded, ``the sounds of my torture and my cries.'' In response to this story, CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said he could not ``speak to the taping practices of other intelligence services.'' Notice what he did not say. He did not say whether the CIA is aware of foreign countries recording interrogations of detainees who were transferred to them by the CIA. In fact, if the CIA sends a detainee [[Page S15453]] to a foreign country for the purpose of interrogation, it seems reasonable to expect that we would monitor the interrogation by video or audio recording or by some other means. Why are we sending detainees to other countries to be interrogated in the first place? Under the Bush administration, the CIA has reportedly transferred detainees to countries that routinely engage in torture so that these detainees can be interrogated using torture techniques that would not be permissible under U.S. law. The administration calls this practice rendition. Others call it by a different name outsourcing torture. The Torture Convention, which the United States has ratified, makes it illegal to transfer individuals to countries where they are likely to be tortured. The administration has said that it stands by this legal prohibition. However, the administration has said that it will transfer a detainee to a country that routinely engages in torture if the State Department receives so-called ``diplomatic assurances'' that the detainee will not be tortured. Based on diplomatic assurances, the administration has reportedly sent detainees to countries that systematically engage in torture, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. Some of these detainees, like Abu Omar, say that they were then tortured in these countries. Now there may be video or audio taped evidence of that. Even with diplomatic assurances, should we be sending people to countries like Egypt to be interrogated? Every year, our State Department issues Country Reports on the human rights practices of countries around the world. Here is what the most recent Country Report on Egypt says: Principal methods of torture . . . included stripping and blindfolding victims; suspending victims from a ceiling or doorframe with feet just touching the floor; beating victims with fists, whips, metal rods, or other objects; using electrical shocks; and dousing victims with cold water. The State Department claims that it monitors compliance with diplomatic assurances. Experts point out that it is very difficult to monitor whether a country has kept its promise not to torture someone. Now it appears that there may be recordings to help the State Department make this determination. This week's news raises many questions: Have recordings been made of interrogations of detainees who were rendered by the CIA to foreign countries? Were these recordings made at the request of the CIA? Are these recordings in the possession of the CIA? Have these recordings been destroyed by or at the request of the CIA? Do these recordings contain evidence that detainees were tortured? Has the State Department reviewed these recordings to determine whether foreign countries have complied with their ``diplomatic assurances'' not to torture detainees who we transfer to them? Yesterday, I sent a letter to CIA Director Michael Hayden to ask him about the CIA's involvement in these recordings. I also sent a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asking her whether the State Department has reviewed these recordings to determine whether detainees we have transferred to foreign countries were tortured. And, finally, I sent a letter to Attorney General Mukasey asking him to expand the Justice Department's inquiry into the CIA torture tapes to cover recordings of detainees who the CIA sent to foreign countries for the purposes of interrogation. I am glad that Attorney General has opened a preliminary inquiry into this issue. Now comes the difficult part getting to ground truth. Unfortunately, there certainly will be more revelations to come. It will be a long time before we get to the bottom of this torture scandal. I fear it will be even longer before we undo the damage done to America's image and our values. ____________________