Posted on 02/26/2005 9:32:00 PM PST by FairOpinion
NEW YORK (Reuters) - CIA officers are increasingly concerned they might be prosecuted or punished for their conduct during interrogations and detention of terrorism suspects, the New York Times reported in Sunday editions. Citing current and former government officials, the newspaper said the spy agency's inspector general was now reviewing at least half a dozen cases in connection with the treatment of prisoners.
This is in addition to at least two other CIA cases being investigated by the Justice Department -- one stemming from a death in Afghanistan in 2003 and the other from Iraq.
"There's a lot more out there than has generally been recognized, and people at the agency are worried," one government official told the Times.
According to the newspaper, the CIA was especially worried that officers using interrogation techniques the government ruled as acceptable after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks might now be punishable.
Concern within ranks had increased since December, 2003, when the agency removed its station chief in Baghdad, in part due to the deaths of two Iraqis who had been questioned by the CIA officers, officials said.
The removal of the chief, who is not under any kind of criminal scrutiny, occurred nearly four months before the abuse at Abu Ghraib prison became public, reported the newspaper.
Officials told the Times that some of the cases under review have never been publicly disclosed, but they would not give any more details including whether they were limited to incidents in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Justice Department officials said only that several cases involving civilian employees of the government had been referred to the department, the paper said.
In testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee earlier this month, CIA director Porter Goss declined to say how many reviews of possible misconduct involving prisoners were under way.
He said that while one case had been made public, "a bunch of other cases" were now under review by the inspector general.
So far, prosecutions related to the abuse of prisoners in Iraq have been limited to U.S. military personnel.
Its not like these guys firebombed a Texas compound killing 83 men, women and children.
This is not a matter of the Left being against the troops or the war or for the troops and the war.It all comes down to one thing: An irrational fear by the Left of Bush being successful. The Left feels so powerless that every Bush success is another shot to their solar plexus. And the media is more symbolic of that than anyone.That's why the MSM will use every opportunity, whether its Abu Ghraib, alleged violations by the CIA, or our "difficulties" in Iraq
to cast a negative light on, and make it THE BIG STORY; it's all about taking down Bush.
" it's all about taking down Bush."
I agree completely -- but they are even willing to help the terrorists to destroy the county, their own country, to achieve this. What does this make them?
That was Janet Reno.
Notice the same liberals did not demand accounting from her for that.
It makes them deserving of being charged with treason. They feel so powerless that to them it makes little difference if we win or the terrorists win. Their allegiance is to their own power and influence and they see that diminishing every day.
What every Bush success means to them is that all their doom and gloom forecasts have been dead wrong, and the man who they've trashed for the past 4 years is proving to be right. And their frustration just builds and builds. And the more it builds, the more trash they will write.
< /anger >
< /sarcasm >
That was my point. That incident got her the nick name shake-n-bake. But other than that, she didn't even get a slap on the wrist. She stood in front of a microphone, and pronounced it was her responsibility. Yet, nothing was done.
Amen...
How much longer are we going to permit the anti-America ACLU to dictate law enforcement AND national security policy to the U.S. Armed Forces and CIA?
This is ridiculous.
Agreed.
It's bad enough that they shakle our soldiers fighting the war.
I don't think some people understand just how dangerous a CIA officer's job is. Especially some of the operations teams.
The last thing they need is people putting heat on them to protect the rights of TERRORISTS.
JUST WATCH- They will make political heat and charge some of these guys....and other CIA officers will have to worry about what they can do the get info that stops the KILLING OF 1000s of Americans.
AND THEN CONGRESS WILL BLAME THE CIA FOR NOT STOPPING THE NEXT ATTACK.
IF anybody wants to blame somebody for 9/11.
Blame those folks on the hill in DC. Because they are the ones who hamstring the folks charged with the job of National Security.
It is what liberals/and most of the democrat party are about Teach.
They have some jacked up view of a World Govt.
They would give away our Sovereign rights if they could.
They are too stupid to realize all the liberties to do the idiotic stuff they do in the process.
They just don't get it!
We have GI's in prison for doing much less than these folks did. Where is the balance point of the scales?
You know this thought just came to me...we should pick out some mid level scum bag in the ACLU and do a hatchet job on him/her...expose everything about him/her to the public..dig deep into their closet...show those liberal scum bags just what they are.....and all done under the protection of free speech and the First Amendment that they so furiously defend....
I can see it now...we're going to outsource our intelligence efforts to India or China.
CURRENT CIA officers aren't worried about this at all. There has been no 'torture' of suspects, regardless of the b.s. the Slimes wants to spew. If they have it, they can show it.
What this is is soon-to-be former and former CIA officers and the Slimes spreading what they can before Porter Goss shuts their leaking traps.
Well, you can't have it both ways. If you shakle the intel officers, they won't be able to extract information, that we may need to foil an attack,then when we have a devastating attack, everyone will blame the CIA, for not finding out about it and preventing it.
And it will get harder and harder to get people to work for the CIA (or any other agency) as an interrogator (or maybe as anything).
"We need to decide: are the rights of terrorists more important, than the right to live for thousands of innocent people? You can't coddle terrorists and still expect to be able to obtain vital info, that we need to foil attacks."
The extent of liberal naivete never ceases to amaze me. The NY Times has been in an all-out campaign to undermine the War on Terror. There's a child-like yearning for some perfect utopian world that can persist through almost anything. I was struck by how many liberals in Manhattan, in the months after 9/11, soon reverted to the most mindless liberal cliches, bashing President Bush, etc., even though they'd had the most stark reminder possible that they live at "ground zero" in the list of terrorist targets.
That will come back to haunt us, IMHO. Reenlistment in the Guard and Reserve this time next year will be abysmal.
Does Al Qaida or Hezbollah or other such organizations concern itself with the treatment of their prisoners? Reading articles such as this one must surely lead to pessimism regarding America's war on terror. We must be the good guys in the white trunks that won't "hit below the belt," while our enemies will break off a beer bottle and go right at our face with it. Are we so self-righteous to think that we must show "love" to these barbarians to win their hearts?
Let the military do their job and stay out of their way.
LOL, BUMP for what you said!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
