Haspel also later wrote, on the orders of a superior, the memo instructing staff at the black site to destroy tapes of the interrogations of al-Nashiri and Zubaydah.
I seem to remember an event in history wherein a bunch of scoundrels begged off on their responsibility for heinous acts, claiming they were merely following orders.
So Haspel made a statement of fact - using torture did damage the CIA. She is STILL however, hedging. âI would refuse to authorize any activity which is contrary to my moral valuesâ doesnât mean anything if she wonât say what she considers moral or immoral.
Translation: âGetting caught did damage to the CIA. Next time, if Iâm in charge, weâre keeping it even more secret.â
âI have noted the valuable intelligence collectedâ
Like the information, courtesy of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed during one of his 183 waterboardings, about the black Muslim jihadist recruits who have no-doubt by now overrun Montana?
Sorry, Bloody Gina. Torture does not now nor has it ever produced âvaluable intelligence.â
âWhile I wonât condemn those that made these hard calls, and I have noted the valuable intelligence collected
Right off the bat sheâs wrong. She should condemn them and they werenât hard calls, deciding to torture a human being is not a difficult decision, if it is then you lack the moral values to be in the position you were in. And what actionable and valuable intelligence was gained from torture?
âI would refuse to undertake any proposed activity that is contrary to my moral and ethical values.â
Thatâs an excuse to just change your moral and ethical âvaluesâ to fit the situation. This monster might be good for the job if one just looks at her resume, but sheâs completely morally and ethically lacking when it comes to overseeing one of our intelligence agencies.
Haspel needs to follow her instincts and withdraw her nomination.
This statement makes things worse because she still insists that the torture yielded valuable evidence. That basically concedes the point to Dick Cheney and to Trump who hate the constraints that law imposes and have no regard for moral norms and rules. The point is not only that torture is immoral, but that it is ineffective. The purpose of torture is to force confessions for fake cover stories to satisfy political narratives needed to justify aggressive action. Tying Saddam to 9/11 was a false narrative pushed by Cheney which kept the GOP coalition aligned with Bush for about 3-4 years while thousands died. Haspel opens the door here for Trump to do exactly as Cheney did. âWho cares if it violates law? I want to kill some bad guys.â
Politically, Haspel has been a win-win for the Dems. Kamala Harrisâ questioning has catapulted her into the top 3 contenders for the 2020 nomination and she is proving to be (along with Sherrod Brown) one of the most electorally viable candidates. She has been campaigning and supporting Dem candidates all through red and blue America, which is a reflection of the reality of Americaâs rapidly changing demographics. Some red state Dems are voting for her, but I donât think theyâll pay any price for doing so (much as Iâd like to see them vote no).
this is simple. if youâre going to lead the main intelligence agency for the worldâs greatest democracy, you should be able to state in clear terms your position on such a fundamental issue. the CIA can be cloak-and-dagger and full of all the secret handshakes it wants. but this agency still serves the american people. not the other way around. and we the people want a clear answer.
âShe still has not defined what those values areâ.
Yes, she did.
She showed her values when she did nothing to stop torture - and she had the power to stop it. She clearly showed her values when she participated in the cover-up of that torture. Weâve seen her values.
When someone shows you who they are, believe them.
Hind-sight ass-covering is insulting and hollow. Itâs always the same script: âAt the time, it seemed okayâ. Bullshit. It was illegal torture and she should be tried as a war criminal. Sheâs a sadist and a criminal whoâs brought all this on herself. All the crap about âpersonal responsibilityâ means exactly zero to conservatives. They constantly break the law, ethics and morals and then claim they couldnât help it, others made them do it or they had noble motives. Screw her. Sheâs a stone cold war criminal and has no business being in the CIA, she should be in shackles.
Now I understand, it wasnât a war crime, it was just bad PR.
Horrible, amoral person, not to be trusted by anyone. Forget about withdrawing, charges should be brought against you, you war criminal!
âWhile I wonât condemn those that made these hard calls, and I have noted the valuable intelligence collected, the program ultimately did damage to our officers and our standing in the world,â Haspel wrote in a letter to the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA). CNN obtained and published the letter.
She just won confirmation.
âAs Director,â she wrote in her letter to Warner on Monday, âI would refuse to undertake any proposed activity that is contrary to my moral and ethical values.â
I wish that she stop saying/typing this mantra.
What gets me is that sheâs saying this, as if Congress will never flip from red to blue and she wonât catch a perjury charge.
Frankly, her own moral values donât even enter into it.
Why canât she just uphold the Fifth Amendment, the Geneva Conventions, and federal law?
All of which explicitly outlaw torture.
And all of which she was â and is â sworn to enforce?
Did I mention that we hung six Japanese generals who authorized waterboarding?
True. But they were Japanese. Subhuman beings. So much so we nuked a couple hundred thousand of them. Women, children, aged and infirm.
Jesus F***, doesnât she even recognize that this is just making it worse?
Her only goal right now seems to be not to offend the torture-loving faction of the IC (and, of course, her prospective boss). And by doing so, she just sells herself even further down the river. (or is it up the river in this case?)
Without Calling It Immoral, Haspel Says Torture Program âDid Damageâ To CIA
Iâm guessing it did some damage to the torturees as well.
FIFY!
It was a massive failure on Obama and Holder not to prosecute these criminals.
Had she been prosecuted and found guilty, there would now be a strong legal precedent against using torture and for the prosecution of torturers. Instead, we have now have a President who advocates even more horrible torture methods than waterboarding, and a nominee to lead the CIA who clearly has no moral aversion to torture (or destroying evidence).
Massive unforgivable failure.