Former CIA and National Security Agency director Michael Hayden has long been the face and voice of the growing security state within the United States. While many of his representations have been challenged, he continues (like Dick Cheney) to create his own reality to justify powers viewed as authoritarian and unlawful. Now, with the approaching release of a comprehensive report on the torture program, Hayden is out in the press denying the findings of the report that torture did not result in any meaningful new intelligence and that the CIA tortured people who were already cooperating with conventional (and legal) interrogations. Hayden took to the airways to champion torture by attacking the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D, Cal.) and said that she was just being “emotional” and should not be involved in such a serious debate.
On “Fox News Sunday,” Hayden cited comments Feinstein made last month that the report would “ensure that an un-American, brutal program of detention and interrogation will never again be considered or permitted.” That was just Feinstein being “emotional” Hayden insisted: “That sentence — that motivation for the report — may show deep, emotional feeling on the part of the senator, but I don’t think it leads you to an objective report.”
It was an ironic moment since Feinstein has been widely denounced by civil libertarians for her blind support for the intelligence community, including her campaign against Edward Snowden and her defense of massive surveillance programs targeting the entire population in meta data collection. When she was granting the security agencies their every wish, she was pragmatic and powerful. However, once she allowed an investigation into torture, she became emotional and incompetent. Of course, under Hayden’s approach, the United Nations, various countries, numerous human rights organizations, and former government officials are equally blinded by their emotions in denouncing the torture program — and our failure to prosecute former Bush officials.
It is equally telling that Hayden views the condemnation of torture to be a purely emotional response. Torture is a war crime as well as a domestic crime. It is like saying that a prosecutor is a bit too emotional in denouncing murder. Normal people tend to have a certain emotion over torture. We had some pretty powerful emotions when we tried Japanese officers for water boarding our POWs. Hayden made his career by dismissing questions of illegality as emotional tripe.
Ironically, Hayden is my neighbor down the street from my house. The few houses that separate us are nothing like the “emotional” divide over war crimes. I still strongly oppose the record of Feinstein in the expansion of national security powers in this country. However, having Michael Hayden as a critic on the subject of torture is a good step toward redemption.
Source: Washington Post
I now return you to the regularly scheduled FAUXNation invasion . . .
Rights come with reciprocal duties and exist in the context of other rights.
Rights are not absolute, even at law.
Maximal liberty has always been the goal.
Maximum liberty?
Is anarchy.
Cause.
Effect.
How about a request for people not to attack posters, eh?
That would eliminate the necessity of self-defense.
See the problem yet?
Deletion Notice: I have deleted three comments by Gene Howington and one by Dredd. In Gene H’s case, this is now the fifth or sixth such deletion in roughly 24 hours. Despite my request for posters to end the personal exchanges and digs on this blog, they have continued with a bizarre a tit-for-tat over being banned on another blog site. To come to this site to taunt or mock others borders on a form of Internet graffiti. We want to discuss the important issues surrounding torture in this thread and yet we have returned again to issue of banning people (in this case on an entirely different blog). I have not deleted comments that simply criticize me or the policies on this blog. However, most of us want to discuss serious subjects and not engage in juvenile taunting or personal digs. There is a universe of blogs out there. Many such sites ban posters with great frequency than I do. Others allow and even invite personal digs and fights. This just does not happen to be one. I try to delete comments that violate our policies while encouraging posters to comply. Many have complied and continued to contribute to our discussion. While I have occasionally banned posters, I view such an act as highly problematic for a blog committed to free speech. Some sites have entirely done away with comments rather than deal with such issues. I want to preserve the comment section as a place for adults to have a mature conversation about issues. Please comply with our policies or simply move on to another site. Thank you.
Justice Robert H. Jackson, closing argument… 1946
Annie
“Just how big will this political prison need to be?”
I hear there’s open spaces at Gitmo…
rafflaw
“If the CIA is so confident that they are within the rule of law, man up and release the report.”
EXACTLY!!!
And now, they get to pick through and edit… er… redact the names of the guilty so as to protect their crime.
Q U E S T I O N
Will DiFi ever get to the people who were MURDERED through torture?
Have you called your House Representative on this matter?
Actively participate in your Government…
In 2008…
Jill
“Everyone is entitled to a fair trial, even people who have openly admitted to war crimes under US law.”
Federal Judge last week ruled you incorrect…
… Son’s of American terrorists do NOT get ANY trial before the president has them killed.
However, if you are the son-in-law of Bin Laden…
… Then a full Federal trial is warranted to determine your level of guilt.
See how that works?
Paul Schulte
Dredd – somebody banned you. How awful. You are the last person I would have thought of being banned from a site.
===========
Much analysis for several years reveals that it is a sign of association with Oil-Qaeda in some way.
Annie
Dredd, I absolutely loved that, hope that doesn’t make me a sicko and my paws are clean.
==========
They are from Iceland.
Just for you:
Dredd, I absolutely loved that, hope that doesn’t make me a sicko and my paws are clean.
Nick Spinelli
Let’s stay focused on the issue, gents. The discussion of other blogs and intramural squabbles is counterproductive. We have here a serious issue on this post that has generated many good points. Let’s keep our comments on that out of respect for this blog. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.
===========
Such dirty paws.
The rules of Hayden are amusing but they also very, very sick.
Whitney Harris was one of the prosecutors at Nuremberg. He lived in Saint Louis after the Nuremberg trials and lived a long life. He wrote a book called Tyranny On Trial. It is a very good book and covers many issues which we have today. I hope that Hayden and Cheney have their day in court and that the trials are held in Nuremberg. When Hayden and Cheney die they will be down in Hell with the Nazi war criminals playing checkers.
Say it ain’t so Gene!
bfm/raff,
It’s funny you should mention Nuremberg. I had that same conversation about victor’s justice or a standard with an Korean War vet just last week. His take – which he admitted was heavily influenced by his WW-II vet brother’s rather cynical take on that war – was victor’s justice and theater from the American perspective. He said he always thought the Germans, English and French took it much more seriously and to heart. Much like raff, I grew up viewing Nuremberg as a landmark highpoint in not just jurisprudence, but history. Given the events of the last ten years? I’m inclined to think my coffee shop conversationalist might have had the right take.