Not surprisingly, this order and the one closing the detention center at Guantanamo within a year are being hailed internationally and by human rights organizations here in the United States. As someone who worked vociferously to block the nomination of Alberto Gonzales four years ago, based on his authorship of rules loosening our compliance with the Geneva conventions when interrogating suspects, I am delighted and relieved that our new President wasted no time in righting these wrongs. I am especially happy with the unequivocal language of the order, and its application across all branches of government and the military.
It will be interesting to watch reaction in the coming days and weeks from those in the CIA and the military who are or were most impacted by such policies. The outgoing CIA chief, Michael Hayden, defends the now banned procedures, and the outgoing Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Michael McConnell, has repeatedly claimed that enhanced interrogation was critical in obtaining needed intelligence over the past six years. These men, however were Bush appointees. The story changes it seems when talking to career CIA agents who are more closely involved with interrogation.
Dan Froomkin in his most recentWashington Post column quotes an experienced interrogator of terrorists
"'It [Obama's order] is a significant step toward saving American lives,' said Air Force Reserve Maj. Matthew Alexander - the lead interrogator of terrorists who betrayed Al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi before his 2006 killing.
"'When I was in Iraq, the No. 1 reason foreign fighters said they were coming into the country to fight was Abu Ghraib,' said Alexander, author of 'How To Break A Terrorist.'"
Retired CIA officer, John Kiriakou, has an even more sweeping positive reaction to Obama's executive order:
Kiriakou said that the reaction to Obama’s harmonization of interrogations policy would get “a very positive reaction” inside the CIA. “There are people at CIA who engaged in what were certified as enhanced [interrogation] techniques, but were never supportive of it,” he said. “This should make people very happy. No one wants to be in harm’s way [legally]. Despite what the Bush White House and Bush Justice Department said was legal, I think people at the CIA understood that this was not legal and [the techniques] were torture.”
Tyler Drumheller, a former chief of CIA operations in Europe during the Bush administration’s first term, agreed. “These people aren’t monsters,” Drumheller said. “They were doing what they were told, and what was the policy of the [Bush] administration.”
Though apologists for the "enhanced interrogation techniques" championed by the Bush Administration will fret aboutimagined lost intelligence resulting from limiting interrogation to humane techniques, they do not do justice to the success of many perfectly legal interrogations, or wish to acknowledge the real harm done to our national interest, our international reputation, or the interrogators themselves when limits are not uniformly enforced and understood. They scoff at a desire to "curry world favor", as if we are not harmed by failing to so, but instead are greatly helped when we lead by example, and generate global good will rather than hatred and animosity.
Human Rights First offers this contrast of reality vs. portrayal of interrogation on TV. Watchblog's own Stephen Daugherty competently debunked the effectiveness of enhanced interrogation techniques in a December article.
The task force that Obama created did leave the door open for future creation of a separate set of guidelines for CIA interrogation of high risk detainees, so that high level terrorist operatives cannot use the Army Field Manual as a blueprint for preparing themselves for resisting interrogation. Obama did not equivocate, however, in asserting that no US operative, employee, or agent would engage in torture, humiliation, or degradation in their treatment of our prisoners.
With the stroke of a pen, the most grievous policy of our recent past has been reversed, and we have returned to the principles on which we were founded.
8 comments:
The effects of this decision are yet to be determined. We know that the (so called) torture yielded information that prevented another terrorist attack and I'm sure that Obama realizes the huge gamble that he's taking. We right wingers are fighting the decision because we don't want innocent Americans to be killed because of this political posturing. I am very patient, I'm also optimistic, I think that my brothers and sisters who protect this nation are up to the challenge of winning with their hands tied behind their backs.
I only wish that the upcoming terrorist attempt would only affect those who supported the guy that opened the door for those who will hurt us.
For more right wing perspective go to FREEDOMFRONT.BLOGSPOT.COM
seeing is believing...
http://theproofisinthepicture.blogspot.com/
Sad to see you go. Anyway. Torture has gone on since the beginning of time. We can't stop using it because they enemy will think we are weak.
Two Voices | Two Guys
Obama's Sotomayor - Supremely Ignorant and a Supreme Criminal
Online book details the ignorance and outright criminal behavior of Barak Obama's First appointment to the Supreme Court. An appointee that will impact Americans for decades.
Details at:
www.HowardDeanVermont.com
Especially chapters 9, 11 and 12 although the entire book details evidence presented to Sotomayor of massive corruption and crime in Howard Dean's Vermont that she chose to endorse. Her behavior is criminal and violates the ethical rules governing the conduct of both judges and attorneys.
Sotomayor should be impeached.
Still hoping for peace and for the war to end.
yarı manuel istif makinası
akülü istif makinesi
zincirli caraskal
zincirli vinç
monoray halatlı vinç
Thanks for sharing this..
pes university admission
direct admission in ms ramaiah institute of technology
direct admission in bms college of engineering
rv college of engineering admission through management quota
According to Stanford Medical, It's indeed the one and ONLY reason this country's women get to live 10 years longer and weigh on average 42 pounds less than we do.
(And really, it has NOTHING to do with genetics or some secret-exercise and EVERYTHING around "HOW" they are eating.)
P.S, I said "HOW", and not "WHAT"...
Click this link to determine if this short quiz can help you unlock your true weight loss possibilities
Post a Comment