It only takes a minute for everything to turn wrong.
This was a special crowd situation — in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, after the announcement that Husni Mubarak was stepping down from his long-held — since the assassination of his predecessor, Anwar Sadat — post as Egypt’s president. There had been months of tension, weeks of world attention, adrenalin was flowing, the crowd was mixed and certainly infiltrated with people with all kinds of motives.
But, what happened to Lara Logan, CBS reporter visibly working in Tahrir Square with her producer and cameraman and crew and bodyguard who was suddenly set-upon set, in a frenzy, in an instant, can — and has — happened in other situations as well.
She was taken as a symbol, and not as a human being. This happens to women all the time, in many places around the world — but it seems to happen differently, if not more, in the area stretching from North Africa through West Asia.
Mukhtaran Mai, the then-illiterate Pakistani woman who was hauled before her village council, because they had actually ordered her to be raped. This outrageous order, a violation of all religious principles and all laws, was given for the most unjust of reasons: to avenge for something here 12-year-old brother was alleged to have done with a woman from a different tribe [later reports indicated that he had in fact been raped himself by men from that other tribe, and there was clear reason to believe he had not done what he was accused of]. The gang rape of Mukhtaran Mai then took place more or less in public, on the spot, and she was forced to walk home “semi-naked”, reports said — when they could more accurately have written “naked”. It was done without any pity, without the slightest pity, to an innocent human being. Last week, on 21 April, five out of the six of her assailants who were tried and convicted were released by Pakistan’s Supreme Court, and the sentence of the sixth man was commuted from the death penalty to life in prison. She has now said that with the release of the five men earlier convicted of raping her (there were apparently at least 13 other men involved who were not prosecuted), she fears for her life…
This is a story about an American diplomat in Algiers — apparently the CIA bureau chief, and surprisingly a convert to Islam (unusually tolerant for the CIA, no?) — whose name is Andrew Warren, who apparently had a very bad habit of putting rather common drugs (xanax and valium) into women’s drinks, that caused violent nausea almost immediately, then a kind of paralyis … Then, this guy videotaped his “conquests” of his drugged victims — and some 33 tapes were found in his official residence and shipped to the U.S.A. as evidence for use in his trial.
The Egyptian blogger, Zenobia, is one of those following this case on her site — covering the Egyptian angle in particular. One of her recent posts is here. Zenobia writes that Egyptian officials, at least, suspect that Warren was trying to recruit his victims as agents.
Zenobia has a particularly interesting post, here.
In this post, she embds a Youtube video (also viewable here of an ABC television news report on this case:
An affadavit sworn by a U.S. Department of State diplomatic security officer to obtain a court order for a search warrant, described the extraordinary and sensational charges — that while on duty in Algiers, Warren offered and prepared in his home alcholic drinks to two women of Algerian origin, and he then raped them. This affadavit is posted online here.
In this affadavit, which was posted on the ABC news website, Victim One (Vi) said that she was invited to a party by U.S. Embassay employees at Warren’s home. She stated that Warren mixed for her, out of her sight, several drinks of cola and whisky. Toward the end of the evening, after the last drink that Warren prepared, “she suddenly felt nauseated and felt an immediate need to vomit. and violent onset of nausea as nothing like the physiological effects of alcohol that she had experienced while consuming alcohol on previous occasions. V1 physically held her hand over her mouth in order to avoid vomiting on the floor of the residence. V1 ran to a bathroom where she vomited into a toilet. While V1 was vomiting, Witness #1 (“W1”), a female, was trying to assist V1 in the bathroom. V1 remembered Warren standing in the bathroom doorway while she was sick, saying that V1 should stay the night at his house. After this memory, V1 could not remember anything that happened the rest of the evening. W1 stated that all of the other individuals at the party left the house around this time, and that only V1, W1 and Warren stayed the night in the residence” … and so on.
Victim Two (V2) had known Warren in Egypt, then visited him in Algiers in February 2008 after he was transferred there. She testified that Warren invited him to his new home (which, according to the affadavit, is “within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States”), and prepared apple martinis for both of them, then a second drink for her, and that “While drinking the second apple martini, V2 suddenly felt faint and felt the immediate needed to vomit. V2 described the sudden and violent onset of the illness as nothing like the physiological effects of alcohol related sickness that she had experienced when she consumed alcohol on previous occasions. V2 stated she immediately began to pass in and out of consciousness. V2’s recollections of the ensuing events are characterized as passing in and out of consciousness, due to the debilitating effects of the illness. After nearly fainting and experiencing the immediate need to vomit, V2’s next recollection was being located in Warren’s upstairs bathroom, on the floor. V2 could see and hear, but she could not move” … and so on,
The affadavit adds that “V2 told her husband and her psychologist about the
incident on February 17, 2008, but did not inform anyone at the United States Embassy
until she next returned to Algeria in September 2008. On October 9, 2008, Warren flew from Algeria to the United States, for a meeting scheduled on October 10, 2008. On October 9, 2008, Warren checked into Hilton Washington Hotel, Room 7212, located at 1919 Connecticut Ave., NW, Washington, DC. This hotel is located in the District of Columbia. On October 10, 2008, I met with Warren at his place of employment in Northern Virginia to inform him of the allegations leveled against him by V1 and V2. During this meeting, Warren agreed to cooperate with the investigation. Warren admitted during this meeting that he had engaged in consensual sexual intercourse with V1 and V2 at his residence in Algiers, Algeria. Warren informed me that his personal lap top computer was in his hotel room located at the Washington Hilton Hotel and that photographs of V1 and V2 were probably on his personal lap top computer. Following this meeting, Warren voluntarily surrendered his cell phone and digital camera, which were located in his rental car, to me for forensic analysis. That analysis uncovered multiple photographs of V1 and V2, along with various other women. He declined consent to the seizure or search of his personal computer”.
The diplomatic security agent added, in the report, that “Through the toxicology expert, I learned that drugs which are commonly used to facilitate sexual assault are prescribed sleeping medications, muscle relaxants, anxiety pills, Xanax, and Valium, which are then converted from pill form to powdered form … These drugs are rapidly absorbed and metabolized by the body. Detectable levels remain in the urine for 8 to 12 hours and in the blood for 4 to 8 hours. Symptoms of these drugs appear within 15 to 30 minutes of ingestion, and the effects persist for 3 to 6 hours … [and that] information on how to obtain and use the above-described substances to facilitate sexual assaults can be found on the Internet”.
The diplomatic security agent then adds, in his affadavit in support of a search warrent, that “Searching computer systems requires the use of precise, scientific procedures
which are designed to maintain the integrity of the evidence and to recover
‘hidden’, erased, compressed, encrypted or password-protected data. Computer
hardware and storage devices may contain ‘booby traps’ that destroy or alter data
if certain procedures are not scrupulously followed. Since computer data is
particularly vulnerable to inadvertent or intentional modification or destruction, a
controlled environment, such as a law enforcement laboratory, is essential to
conducting a complete and accurate analysis of the equipment and storage devices
from which the data will be extracted … Computer users can attempt to conceal data within computer equipment and storage devices through a number of methods, including the use of innocuous or misleading filenames and extensions. For example, files with the extension ‘.jpg’ often are image files; however, a user can easily change the extension to ‘.txt’ to conceal the image and make it appear that the file contains text. Computer userscan also attempt to conceal data by using encryption, which means that a password or device, such as a ‘dongle’ or ‘keycard’, is necessary to decrypt the data into readable form. In addition, computer users can conceal data within
another seemingly unrelated and innocuous file in a process called ‘steganography’. For example, by using steganography a computer user can conceal text in an image file which cannot be viewed when the image file is opened. Therefore, a substantial amount of time is necessary to extract and sort through data that is concealed or encrypted to determine whether it is evidence,contraband or instrumentalities of a crime”.
Newsweek, the Los Angeles Times, and the International Herald Tribune are among the media which have covered these accusations.
Newsweek reported at the end of January that “Andrew Warren is a 6-foot-4 African-American schooled in the martial arts. Steeped in Middle Eastern history, he is a convert to Islam who speaks six Arabic dialects … Though the CIA won’t confirm it, numerous U.S. government officials acknowledged to NEWSWEEK the revelation, first reported by ABC News correspondent Brian Ross, that Warren was serving in Algiers as CIA station chief … Speaking anonymously in order to be candid, one of Warren’s former instructors at the ‘Farm’, where spies are trained, told NEWSWEEK that Warren was ‘a loose cannon’ whose confidence ‘bordered on narcissism’.” This article can be read in full here.
Six months after the charges were formulated (and many months after the alleged events). this 41-year-old ex-CIA agent was indicted just hours ago on 30 June in Washington DC for sexual assault, as reported by the Washington Post, here
After the indictment, the Washington Post adds, Warren “was released on personal recognizance after a brief appearance yesterday in the District’s federal court. The sexual-abuse charge carries a maximum sentence of life in prison”.
On top of all the unanswered questions in this case, there are these: Is it normal to indict someone six months after the accusations are formalized? Is it normal to release someone “on personal recognizance” who is facing life in prison?
The NY Times is reporting an interesting skirmish in a UN General Assembly Committee vote — was it the Sixth (or Legal) committee?
The U.S. sponsored what it thought was a self-evident text, and was mystified when other delegates didn’t agree.
The NYT writes that today “A UN committee has watered down a U.S. draft resolution on rape that will now go to the full UN General Assembly for approval. South Africa’s ambassador, Dumisani Kumalo, defended the revised measure. ‘The original U.S. draft appeared to concentrate on condemning rape when perpetrated for political and military purposes only’, he said. ‘We felt strongly that this would have created two categories of rape, that is, [1] rape by military and militia groups and [2] rape by civilians’. Mr. Kumalo said that the Africans had insisted on the changes ‘to balance the text by making certain that there was no politicization of rape’. [!] Grover Joseph Rees 3rd, an American ambassador with responsibilities for human rights, protested that ‘contrary to what some have suggested, this resolution never said there were ‘two kinds of rape’. He said the original language had been aimed at ‘the particularly outrageous situation in which a state condones the use of systematic mass rape by its own forces or surrogate militias in order to advance their military or political objectives’. While he said the Unites States welcomed the final agreement by consensus, he added, ‘is no secret that we would have strongly preferred the final wording to place stronger emphasis on the use of rape to attain political and military objectives’. Kristen Silverberg, the [U.S.] assistant secretary of state for international organization affairs, said Friday: ‘We are very disappointed that we could not secure stronger language condemning government-sponsored rape. We would not have imagined that language along those lines would provoke controversy‘.” The NYTimes account of a UN GA Committee negotiation on a U.S. draft resolution on state-sponsored or military rape is here.