Facing the Senate Intelligence Committee and a lot of reservations on her own past involvement in CIA torture programs, CIA Director-nominee Gina Haspel is hoping to save her nomination with a combination of promises and secrecy about the specifics of what really happened in the past.
CIA records on Haspel’s past activity, which included running a black site in Thailand where detainees were tortured, will not be made public. The Senators are also being limited in what they can ask Haspel about.
This is keeping the messy details out of the public debate on Haspel. At the same time, she is offering promises to “absolutely not permit” any new torture program under her watch, nor anything else she thinks is “morally objectionable.”
Haspel’s involvement in the torture program, and the destruction of evidence of that torture program, raises a lot of concerns about how valuable her “strong moral compass” really is. This has a lot of Senators pushing for questions about her view on what happened in the past.
Haspel was dodging these questions pretty desperately, saying that the torture program was “technically legal.” She also refused to repudiate the past torture program, insisting it secured some valuable intelligence, and also that she wasn’t comfortable second-guessing CIA agents on what they’d done.
Her leadership ability, and the idea that her promise to disobey torture orders if Trump gives them, are both in serious doubt. This is why Haspel’s nomination is still in serious jeopardy, with expected votes split roughly down the middle, and heavily along party lines.
She doesn’t have to restart the program it never ended, the CIA continues to operate these sites and rendition is occurring today.
Notice she says she will not start a “new torture program”. She may allow torture, just not in a “new torture program”. What about the Old Torture Program? Is it still in effect? How would we know?
Another thing: She has tortured before, but says she will not start a “new torture program” now because she has a strong moral compass. I wonder when this change in her philosophy happened. Was the change recent? What exactly precipitated this change in her philosophy? Does she regret her earlier philosophy? Is she sorry?
Answers to your queries:
1. “We can’t talk about that…with you.”
2. “You don’t have a need to know.”
3. “You just have to trust me.”
4. “When I was nominated.”
5. “Youbetcha!”
6. “The chance to be Director.”
7. “Only that you found out about it.”
8. “Of course not…I’m a Patriot.”
The answer to all those 8 questions is, of course, a LIE, Haspel lied to the Senate in her confirmation hearing; thus, the Senate has the obligation to reject her nomination. She oversaw torture in the past and, most likely, participated in it most of the time. By the smug look on her face, that proves she enjoys torturing detainees, whether they’re guilty or innocent.
Torture is forbidden under both US and International law; the 8th Amendment to the US Constitution, as well as the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions, are crystal clear in their prohibition against torture. In addition, torture doesn’t work, it never produces good intelligence, period.
Barbarian: “Your honor, I promise to never rape, pillage, and murder again…you have my word”
Judge: “Case Dismissed”
“promises to “absolutely not permit” any new torture program under her watch, nor anything else she thinks is “morally objectionable.”””
And if her boss order her? She’s shown that she swears no allegiance to the Constitution but to whoever tells her what to do.
Someone should have asked her why she wouldn’t start up the torture program.
Words carefully chosen by her attorney to avoid any future prosecution. Of course she will simply continue the torture program that NEVER STOPPED.
This is the best our freedom and democracy loving Congress critters can do? Promising to not clone her global torture network sets a pretty low standard!
And at least 5 times Haspel refused to say whether torture is immoral. It’s gonna be the same old CIA, God Bless’em.