First, its claim that the CIA’s interrogation program was ineffective in producing intelligence that helped us disrupt, capture, or kill terrorists is just not accurate....
The second significant problem with the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report is its claim that the CIA routinely went beyond the interrogation techniques as authorized by the Justice Department. That claim is wrong....
Third, the report’s argument that the CIA misled the Justice Department, the White House, Congress, and the American people is also flat-out wrong....
Fourth, the majority left out something critical to understanding the program: context....
December 9, 2014
"The Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on Central Intelligence Agency detention and interrogation of terrorists, prepared only by the Democratic majority staff, is a missed opportunity..."
"... to deliver a serious and balanced study of an important public policy question. The committee has given us instead a one-sided study marred by errors of fact and interpretation—essentially a poorly done and partisan attack on the agency that has done the most to protect America after the 9/11 attacks," say former CIA Directors George J. Tenet, Porter J. Goss and Michael V. Hayden (a retired Air Force general), and former CIA Deputy Directors John E. McLaughlin, Albert M. Calland (a retired Navy vice admiral) and Stephen R. Kappes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
209 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 209 of 209Howard: " We might not have been Nazi's...."
LOL
Get back to us when you figure out whether or not we "might" have been Nazi's.
Howard - nonsense. Total war has existed since the Hittites and Egyptians did war on each other thousands of years ago.
Jeff @ 11:50
I think it's cute that think that war is somehow moral.
Morally bankrupt Bob beclowns himself again.
Once again, Rusty seems to be hallucinating.
Drago and Alex: You caught me! I'll revise and extend my remarks. The US brought back and perfected that ancient barbaric practice to modern warfare. Our honor is still clean!
So Drago, you have no problem with fire-bombing Dresden and Tokyo? Slaughter is slaughter and I understand that from 30,000-feet it seems cleaner to you flyboys.
If you had to burn those civilians alive face to face with a flamethrower, the result would be the same for the vics, but perhaps not the "perp".
The US has done a boatload of horrific nasty shit. For some of us, just not being as bad as Nazi's is not good enough.
Robert Cook said...
Once again, Rusty seems to be hallucinating.
The answer of one who has no reasoned argument based on fact.
No, it's absolutely, 100% accurate.
The idea that "national character" can be "irreparably damaged" by anything is silly.
Last month, I encountered a German tourist... looked to be about 60, vacationing here with his wife. I asked him where he was from and he said "Regensburg."
I said "Wow! Regensburg! My grandfather visited that city once. Except it was from 30,000 feet on August 17, 1943. he didn't land, thank goodness."
The German man said... "Wow. Thank you! I wish that your grandfather was still alive so I could thank him, because it had to be done. Because of men like him, my children got to grow up in freedom."
Nope. No problem whatsoever with firebombing Dresden and Tokyo, given the situation and technology available at the time.
I might reconsider trying to do do daylight precision bombing with the technology of the early 1940s, and instead simply obliterate entire cities at night, because the losses to our own aviators trying to fight through the German flak and fighters during the day and back were truly horrific.
As for their losses, well, they were free to surrender at any time. They should have.
Post a Comment