"The Death of Epistemology"
***
The longest section of Rodriguez' Wikipedia page is dedicated to his destruction of torture session videotapes so that others cannot even see the evidence.
Controversy over destruction of interrogation videotapes[edit]
In the campaign against al-Qaeda, several senior leaders in the organization were captured by the CIA in 2002. They were subjected to what has been described as torture or enhanced interrogation techniques, according to the US government. The interrogations of two of the key leaders were videotaped. In 2005, while head of the Clandestine Service, Rodriguez ordered that video tape recordings of two 2002 CIA interrogations be destroyed.[28] CIA officials initially stated that the recordings were destroyed to protect the identity of the interrogators, after they were no longer of intelligence value to any investigations.[29] "He would always say, 'I'm not going to let my people get nailed for something they were ordered to do,' " said Robert Richer, Rodriguez's deputy recalling conversations with his boss about the tapes.[30] It was later revealed that the deputy to Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, then Executive Director of the CIA, wrote in an e-mail that Rodriguez thought "the heat from destroying is nothing compared to what it would be if the tapes ever got into public domain – he said that out of context they would make us look terrible; it would be 'devastating' to us."[31] The tapes reportedly showed two men held in CIA custody, Abu Zubaida and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri,[32] being subjected to a program of 'enhanced' interrogation techniques which included a procedure called "waterboarding". Critics allege these methods amount to torture and the tapes were evidence both protected by court order and the 9/11 Commission.[33][34] Although Rodriguez's record has come under scrutiny after it was reported that the destruction of the videotapes was allegedly in defiance of orders from then-CIA Director Porter Goss.[35] Summoned by congressional subpoena, he was excused from a January 16, 2008 House Intelligence Committee hearing on a request from his lawyer Robert S. Bennett.[36] Rodriguez has requested immunity in exchange for his testimony on the tape recordings.[37] Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA analyst familiar with Rodriguez and the tapes, commented in a December 23, 2007 Sunday Times story that "it looks increasingly as though the decision was made by the White House." He also alleged it is "highly likely" that President George W. Bush saw one of the videos.[15] After an exhaustive three-year investigation into the destruction of the video tapes of the interrogations (including pictures of the interrogators), the Justice Department announced in November 2010 it would not pursue any charges against Jose Rodriguez.[38] As the Washington Post reported, "Robert S. Bennett, an attorney for Rodriguez, said he is 'pleased that the Justice Department has decided not to go forward against Mr. Rodriguez. This is the right decision because of the facts and the law.'"[39] Commentator Glenn Greenwald described the decision as just another in a long line of instances of the Obama White House granting legal immunity to Bush-era crimes.[40]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_Rodriguez_(intelligence_officer)
***
I ran the CIA interrogation program. No matter what the Senate report says, I know it worked.
Alan: And Jenny McCarthy knows that vaccination causes autism.
Jose A. Rodriguez Jr. is the former head of the CIA’s National Clandestine Service and the author of “Hard Measures: How Aggressive CIA Actions After 9/11 Saved American Lives.”
People might think it is wrong for me to condemn a report I haven’t read. But since the report condemns a program I ran, I think I have justification.
On Thursday, the Senate Intelligence Committee voted to declassify and release hundreds of pages of its report on U.S. terrorist interrogation practices. Certain senators have proclaimed how devastating the findings are, saying the CIA’s program was unproductive, badly managed and misleadingly sold. Unlike the committee’s staff, I don’t have to examine the program through a rearview mirror. I was responsible for administering it, and I know that it produced critical intelligence that helped decimate al-Qaeda and save American lives.
The committee’s staff members started with a conclusion in 2009 and have chased supportive evidence ever since. They never spoke to me or other top CIA leaders involved in the program, or let us see the report. Without reviewing it, I cannot offer a detailed rebuttal. But there are things the public should consider.
The first is context. The detention and interrogation program was not built in a vacuum. It was created in the months after Sept. 11, 2001, when nearly 3,000 men, women and children were murdered. It was constructed shortly after Richard Reid narrowly missed bringing down an airliner with explosives hidden in his shoes. It continued while U.S. intelligence learned that rogue Pakistani scientists had met with Osama bin Laden to discuss the possibility of creating crude nuclear devices.
When we captured high-ranking al-Qaeda operative Abu Zubaida in 2002, we knew he could help us track down other terrorists and might provide information to allow us to stop another attack. Those who suggest we should have questioned him more gently have never felt the burden of protecting innocent lives.
Second is effectiveness. I don’t know what the committee thinks it found in the files, but I know what I saw in real time: a program that provided critical information about the operations and leadership of al-Qaeda. Intelligence work is like doing a thousand-piece jigsaw puzzle without the picture on the box top and with millions of extra pieces. The committee staff started with the box top, the pieces in place, and pronounced the puzzle a snap.
The interrogation program was not flawless. But we identified and rectified our mistakes and, where appropriate, reported suspected wrongdoing to the Justice Department.
Third is authority. This program was approved at the highest levels of the government, judged legal by the Justice Department and regularly briefed to the leaders of our congressional oversight committees. There was never any effort to mislead the administration or Congress about the program. In 2006, then-CIA Director Michael Hayden expanded those fully briefed on the program to include all members of the intelligence oversight committees. It is a travesty that these efforts at transparency are now branded insufficient and misleading.
When portions of the report are released, I hope the CIA’s response, pointing out its flawed analysis, is also made public. But before anything is released, authorities must ensure that we don’t make the job of my successors, who are trying to prevent future terrorist attacks, any harder.
No comments:
Post a Comment