POW FOIA: DOJ JCON Database Review in re "Leading Question"
The Department of Justice has an internal internet. It's called the Justice Consolidated Office Network (JCON). JCON contains emails, files, and DOJ calendars. DOJ Staff counsel use JCON to do legal research.
This is an example war crimes discovery of the JCON database.
Leading Question Search Within JCON
Prisoners may provide interrogators with information the prisoner may believe the interrogator wants, but it not reliable or accurate. A "leading question" provides the POW within information about a desirable answer. With successive interrogations, the "leading question" can induce the prisoner to visualize asked-about-details of an event, even though the event never occurred. You may ask for specific examples where leading questions were discussed, how concerns were resolved, and how legal counsel planned to defend at trial the use of information gleaned from leading questions.
Attorney Client Privilege Exception
Attorney client privilege can be trumped using the fraud-crime exception. This FOIA request relates to alleged discussions that were intended to ignore Geneva, and use unreliable information for other alleged illegal purposes.
The DOJ OLC memoranda and file notes to request relate to concerns about POW interrogations and unreliable information. Leading questions can cause problems, and confuse POWs.
Leading Questions In Re FISA Violations Against US Citizens
Ask for in the FOIA documents in the JCON database related to concerns "leading questions" would produce unreliable information. Ask for the concerns that information gleaned from a "leading question" was transferred to the NSA for domestic surveillance.
Ask for messages, documents, and evidence that DOJ OLC legal staff accessed databases and law material related to "leading questions". Review the planned exceptions under the rule of "necessity" to ask leading questions, use information gleaned from leading questions, and suppress evidence leading questions were used. Review the discussions DOJ OLC had with DoD General Counsel related to planted images; or the problem that POWs would, with enough isolation, hallucinate details related to the interrogator's leading question, not real events.
Documented Telecom Objections
Review how the telecoms raised concerns with the information gleaned from leading questions. Review why DOJ AG approved use of this unreliable information for alleged unlawful, subsequent uses.
This is an example war crimes discovery of the JCON database.
Leading Question Search Within JCON
Prisoners may provide interrogators with information the prisoner may believe the interrogator wants, but it not reliable or accurate. A "leading question" provides the POW within information about a desirable answer. With successive interrogations, the "leading question" can induce the prisoner to visualize asked-about-details of an event, even though the event never occurred. You may ask for specific examples where leading questions were discussed, how concerns were resolved, and how legal counsel planned to defend at trial the use of information gleaned from leading questions.
Attorney Client Privilege Exception
Attorney client privilege can be trumped using the fraud-crime exception. This FOIA request relates to alleged discussions that were intended to ignore Geneva, and use unreliable information for other alleged illegal purposes.
The DOJ OLC memoranda and file notes to request relate to concerns about POW interrogations and unreliable information. Leading questions can cause problems, and confuse POWs.
Leading Questions In Re FISA Violations Against US Citizens
Ask for in the FOIA documents in the JCON database related to concerns "leading questions" would produce unreliable information. Ask for the concerns that information gleaned from a "leading question" was transferred to the NSA for domestic surveillance.
Ask for messages, documents, and evidence that DOJ OLC legal staff accessed databases and law material related to "leading questions". Review the planned exceptions under the rule of "necessity" to ask leading questions, use information gleaned from leading questions, and suppress evidence leading questions were used. Review the discussions DOJ OLC had with DoD General Counsel related to planted images; or the problem that POWs would, with enough isolation, hallucinate details related to the interrogator's leading question, not real events.
Documented Telecom Objections
Review how the telecoms raised concerns with the information gleaned from leading questions. Review why DOJ AG approved use of this unreliable information for alleged unlawful, subsequent uses.
Advertisement
I don't follow... are you saying you have access to the JCON database, and you, personally, are leaking this? If this is everywhere, and you're simply reposting, this is a new story for me.
May 10, 2008 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The information is news because it doesn't exist:
You may conduct a search engine review and find the material does not exist on the web. There is no reference, but one, now two, to:
The information is not public. If you would like more information about why this is not public; or why the information has not been disclosed, the Department of Justice may or may not respond to a FOIA request.
The same people allegedly complicit with war crimes have the say on whether you can see that alleged war crimes evidence.
However, if the attorney-client exception of "fraud-crime" is invoked, that is a way to bypass the DOJ OLC claim of attorney-client privilege, and get access to the alleged war crimes evidence in re mistreatment of POWs.
Outside Legal Counsel
It will be the job of the outside legal counsel allegedly complicit with the rendition, POW abuse, and NSA violations to explain how the information was disclosed, obtained, accessed, or reviewed:
If someone within the Department of Justice would like to explain to the FBI how this information was accessed, transferred, then disclosed, that will be something of interest for the House and Senate Judiciary Committees to discuss. This is alleged war crimes evidence.
If Senator McCain, Senator Obama, or Senator Clinton would like to discuss this alleged war crimes evidence in the JCON database, they are free to start an inquiry now. They remain sitting Senators, and can conduct inquiry into any matter.
They have refused. Every day that the alleged war crimes evidence is not confronted, disclosed, discussed, or used to enforce the laws of war, is another day that American civilians might be subject to abuses.
The three Senators running for President should show they are serious about reviewing this alleged evidence of war crimes in the JCON database. It is May 2008, and the three Senators need to explain why they have not asked for, reviewed, or conducted hearings on these issues and alleged information related to war crimes in the Department of Justice database. Here is more.
May 11, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
WARNING!!! WARNING!!! WARNING!!!
All beware the poster of this blog is a known spammer on TPM that throws unsubstantiated allegations on the news blogs that link to his unsubstantiated rants on this blog.
If you chose to leave a comment on his blog that does not agree with his conspiracy driven dribble, the blogger will in turn attack you. He has a history of flaming people throughout the TPM site.
He rants that anyone that disagrees with him is somehow connected to the DOJ, attempting to spread misinformation since the poster does not agree with him, attempts to connect the poster to another poster in a means of discrediting him/her, or attempts to claim the commenter is violating TPM policy for posting a divergent point of view.
While there may be some truth in the posting, it is only surely a result of pure accident on his part if there is so. Testing simply posts things he does not know about and then says because no one has stopped to explain the topic to him and the ins and outs, there must be a conspiracy.
Proceed at your own risk.
May 13, 2008 8:10 AM | Reply | Permalink