home

Romney Campaign Memo Urging Return to Use of Enhanced Interrogation

By Jeralyn, Section War on Terror
Posted on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 07:37:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A few days ago, the New York Times reported that Mitt Romney would overturn Obama's position barring the used of enhanced interrogation techniques.

There are 18 lawyers, most of whom were part of the Bush Administation, on Romney's National Security team.

Here's the memo they wrote.

In related news, Romney and Ryan are now getting security briefings from the Obama administration.

< Sunday Night TV and Open Thread | Monday Morning Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Romney Campaign Memo Urging Return to Use of Enhanced Interrogation | 40 comments (40 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Well, if that's what it takes... (5.00 / 6) (#1)
    by unitron on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 12:50:51 AM EST

    "Romney Campaign Memo Urging Return to Use of Enhanced Interrogation"

    Well, if that's what it takes to get him to release all of his tax returns...

    Ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

    In the (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:29:17 AM EST
    unlikely event that Romney should win, I think they should establish a new cabinet post and name Cheney as Secretary of Enhanced Interrogation.

    What the memo drives home - at least (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 11:16:50 AM EST
    to me - is that the utmost vigilance is required in order to hold the forces of authoritarianism in check; every time we turn around, there is a push to limit freedom, exert power, impose punishment that infringes on basic human rights.

    And if we do nothing, if we say nothing, that's what takes root and takes over.  

    The argument can - and no doubt, will - be made, that Obama is the one who outlawed torture, but the reason a memo like the one cited can be written and entertained as credible is because no one has been held accountable for the torture policy Obama's executive order eliminated.  So, now we see the same members of that cabal making the same fear-based arguments to the Romney campaign.

    And why shouldn't they?  No one got punished, no one paid any kind of price.

    Which is a recurring theme in many areas of our world today - Wall Street, the banksters, financial and foreclosure fraud - and we're seeing a return of the arrogance and ego that took us down some rather perilous paths.

    In my opinion, if Obama thinks he can stand on moral high ground, he should understand that that ground is the bunny slope - he's in favor of and has defended so many things that I believe undermine our democracy and our basic freedoms that the most he can say is, "at least" he banned torture.

    We should expect more - but we're not going to get it.


    How about (1.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 07:37:29 AM EST
    .

    How about a return to interrogation techniques period.  Perhaps if there had been more interrogation of Al Qaeda members rather than blowing them up in drone strikes, then the plot to kill the ambassador in Libya may have been detected before the first mortar rounds fell.  

    .

    So stupid (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 08:50:20 AM EST
    Like crazy stupid.  Obama got Osama bin Laden without being stupid and without compromising his soul and the soul of the nation.

    Obama method:  Proven to work, giant successes coming from the fact that we were actually going to have to do honest work for honest intel.

    Torture Inc. method:  Caused the Iraq mission to FAIL enormously until David Petraeus had to save the torturing Repubs from what their methods bought us and buy us all in the real world.

    Obama method:  Decimated Al Qaeda

    Torture Inc method:  Caused "Conservative" leaders to become so engrossed with and addicted to torturing people that they forgot who our enemy was and just tortured anybody for fun who had some oil.

    Parent

    I know (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:25:23 AM EST
    that I am way in the minority in thinking this, but to me Osama was not the problem. The alienation of the Muslim world was, and is the problem.

    Parent
    Who alienated the Muslim world? (none / 0) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:27:35 AM EST
    It seems to me that fundy Muslims are alienating themselves because the rest of us are filthy to them.  The mullahs and clerics preach to hate us because we are not Muslim.

    Parent
    alienating themselves? (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by sj on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:37:31 AM EST
    I would probably be alienating myself, too, if my hometown was being reduced to rubble and drones -- with or without bombs -- were a regular feature of my skyscape.

    I realize that you restrict your comments to "fundy" Muslims, but the alienated Muslim world is a just a bit larger than that.

    Parent

    Much of what has changed (none / 0) (#8)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:47:53 AM EST
    Changed long before any of that though.  I await the delivery of Rushdie's new book.  I was too little to have ever visited the Middle East when it contained some of the most open and cosmopolitan cities in the world.  But Rushdie and many others were there and they remember the transition.  Even in the work 'My Trip to Al Qaeda', Lawrence Wright who taught in Egypt documents a cultural shift to fundamentalism.

    Parent
    The situation is way too complicated for (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by sj on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:21:44 AM EST
    a soundbite like that and I am so not going to drawn into a conversation about Middle Eastern history.  I'm in no way competent to discuss it that way.  

    I'm just going to say that having my hometown reduced to rubble and bomb-laden drones as part of my skyscape might just make a zealot out of me.

    Parent

    It certainly had an effect on New Yorkers (2.50 / 2) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:49:48 AM EST


    Parent
    You're speaking (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by sj on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 11:00:24 AM EST
    for all New Yorkers now?  And deciding that a one-time event -- horrible and awful and traumatic as it was -- is the same thing as day-in/day-out conditions of war?

    I don't know which types of your comments on the ME trouble me more.  The one-liners that probably represent more than one logical fallacy, or the detailed ones where members of the military walk about with a nimbus clearly highlighting their nobility.

    So I guess I'm done here.  See you next time you talk about dogs, or movies, or books or your incredible son.

    Parent

    You know what? (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 11:08:48 AM EST
    There was a diary at DailyKos that was written by someone I know who is young, and he is sick of the 9/11 hoopla.  People who participate daily at Orange though still have PTSD over what happened that day and they were deeply offended and said so.

    I agreed with you that having your city reduced to rubble can create zealots, just because I've pointed out that your equations are a bit factually skewed I trouble you?

    First you tell me that you don't know much about M.E. history in our lifetimes and you also tell me that you don't want to know either, and then you tell me that my comments trouble you.  What facts or study is your "troubled" based on?

    Am I supposed to be ashamed that I don't buy your simple answer that if stay away from "them" everything will magically be healed and world peace will follow?  And the fact that there is a culture clash is all our fault?

    Parent

    Speaking for myself only..... (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by vml68 on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 11:37:51 AM EST
    I was raised in the middle-east. My immediate and extended family have lived there (in various middle-eastern countries) for the past sixty years and I find most of your comments about the middle-east, muslims and Islam, ignorant, condescending and higly insulting.

    As for your one-liner about New Yorkers and 9/11, the company my husband works for lost everyone one of their employees that was at work in the North Tower that day and his boss and colleagues that were in the South Tower escaped. He works with these people every day and not once has he heard anyone make the claim you do. So I am not sure how you became an authority on how they feel.

    I know you made your comment to Sj and not me. I usually avoid your comments on this subject for the above reasons and now will go back to doing so again.

    Parent

    What claim that I made are speaking of? (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 12:01:44 PM EST


    Parent
    And I'm Buddhist and people say all sorts of (none / 0) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 12:05:14 PM EST
    things about that too, but it is my faith for me and not for anyone else. And I live in a country that observes freedom of speech and freedom of religion.  I am going to hear many things about my faith that I may not like, but feeling insulted by others about our faith is sort of the American way.  All faiths are open to public critique in America, and tada....culture clash

    Parent
    Okay, maybe I'm not done (none / 0) (#30)
    by sj on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 12:19:15 PM EST
    Show me exactly where I said that
    stay away from "them" everything will magically be healed and world peace will follow?  
    Show me where I even implied it.  You get like this whenever the Middle East is discussed.  Thrashing about from one thing to the next.  Taking one out-of-context thing and conflating it with another out-of-context thing.

    In my very humble opinion, when you get like this your comments should be allowed to drop silently -- and with more dignity than they deserve -- into the Bit Bucket.

    Now I'm done.  No matter how provocative you continue to be.

    Parent

    You offer no solutions (none / 0) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 12:57:07 PM EST
    Just dissing the people who do what they can.  I care enough to desire to fully understand everything that the culture clash entails.  I wonder why I care?  Oh yeah, because I have lived a portion of the argument that tends to lead me to want to fully understand and not just blow it all off.

    But a faith that has some members placing fatwas on artists, and authors who themselves were born Muslim gets an ethical pass?  Humanists are not allowed to say anything about any of it?  Or we are supposed to alter our Constitution to accomodate a specific religion, make it illegal to discuss it so that they don't upset and issue fatwas?

    Parent

    Imagine America.... (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by Dadler on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:35:18 AM EST
    ...had we the history of foreign meddling and occupation that the middle east has.  Then try to imagine when we finally got free, that those outside powers STILL wouldn't leave us alone.

    It seems even the best and brightest of us are irreversibly stuck in our powerful and and deadly paradigms (earth to Hillary Clinton, how could you possibly be surprised at the Libyan Ambassadors assasination???). At some point, you have to simply leave people alone.  And we seem pathologically incapable of it.  So...we'll die as a nation. That's it. No other route in history.  And now I have to see ads designed to get employers to hire veterans. Do you know how deadly that is? It sets the military up as a Pretorian guard, separate from the people, and more deserving of jobs that people who didn't simply march in a straight line without thinking when they were told to. So great, now that regular Americans can't get jobs, lets pit other Americans against them. We are a cruel, stupid, inexcusable joke, pissing into the wind and wondering why our eyes are burning.


    Parent

    geez....hate the military much (none / 0) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:48:51 AM EST
    What a bunch of hooey Dadler.  Most of these VETS are not like my husband. They are not career.  They went, they served, they've come home.  They are young men and women, very young some of them.  They have their whole life ahead of them and B.S. like this makes it even harder for them to get a job.  Everyone who serves their country is not the devil.  And if you want to honestly help those who come home disturbed we better get employment rolling and mainstreet rolling, we have bills to pay!

    Parent
    Ridiculous (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by sj on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:52:31 AM EST
    Only someone starting out defensive would read that as a "hate the military" rant, as opposed to an "our society is very, very broken" rant.

    Parent
    Oh yeah...sure...the Praetorian Guard (none / 0) (#21)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:54:41 AM EST
    I'm just defensive, nothing wildly disgusting and vile was said or implied.

    Parent
    As if your comments have (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by sj on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 11:01:13 AM EST
    never, ever been hyperbolic.  Get hold of yourself.

    Parent
    When discussing issues (none / 0) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 11:10:07 AM EST
    I thought we were to stick to the issue at hand.  That is like discussion and debate 101 when seeking truth and solutions.

    Parent
    It was dismissive of the military (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by MKS on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 01:22:14 PM EST
    My Dad was a lifer, as was his dad.  

    When I grew up, all of my male relatives had served....Again, that was a different time I suppose....

    But the idea that the military is somehow unthinking was the gist of the comment and is wrong.

    Parent

    I am at times concerned about (none / 0) (#33)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 01:51:53 PM EST
    worship of the military.  At this time though military vets, young vets, have very very high unemployment rates.  It is higher than the average.  They didn't get any goodies either.  They have no retirement coming to them.  They went and served when their nation was in crisis, no matter how you feel about where they were sent and why.  So encouraging employment of our young vets and getting them working and intergrated back into stateside society seems like a very important issue to me at this time.  And when they work, they have money to spend and that creates more demand and more jobs.  If an incentive causes someone to take an extra employee that under no incentive circumstances they might not do, I think it is a good thing for the economy.

    Parent
    Praetorian Guard.. (none / 0) (#38)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 01:13:02 PM EST
    I usually describe them as sacred bulls from the Temple of Shiva. And any questioning of their beyond-criticism status in the U.S becomes "hate" -- spitting on the graves of The Greatest Generation. Excuse me but, Bullsh*t.

    There are many, many ways to "serve" your country and your fellow man.

    Parent

    Agree with everything except Petraeus (none / 0) (#13)
    by Dadler on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:17:52 AM EST
    IMO, cutting up and walling off parts of Baghdad and bribing people and then claiming it's some brilliant stroke of action, IMO, is a delusion. And that this run-of-the-mill dude, who has spent his ENTIRE career in the single most anti-imaginative institution in the history of the U.S., that he now runs the almost just as useless CIA, please, Pirandello couldn't write a comedy so absurd. It's like the NFL recycling the same coaches. Idiots like Petraeus (sorry, I just don't consider him any mold-breaker, his mental retardation is simply slightly more functional than the others) sent my brother back to have his life ruined. The only good thing DP and the rest of those 2, 3, and 4-star General motherphucking morons will do for his country is swallow come cyanide. Phuck them all.  

    Parent
    I did not want to imply (none / 0) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:45:08 AM EST
    That the surge was a praiseworthy success. It was a last ditch effort and it stabilized Baghdad enough that we could credibly leave.  If we had left Iraq in civil war....well, it wasn't going to happen if we could prevent it.

    It was costly in lives and treasure just to find a way to leave that wouldn't destroy whoever was President and their party in this country and the newborn Iraqi government.

    Anything that causes America to choose the new Republicans scares me to death because things are even more doomed if they run anything at this point.  They are all nuts.  My husband said we had a moral obligation to leave Iraq in some kind of order that its new government stood a chance of surviving too, and I think he has a point there no matter how much I hated living it.

    The surge was not David Petraeus'first time in Iraq though.  His first stint was Mosul and he treated the civilians there like human beings and was stumping for money in D.C. to employ the Iraqis of his area.  He was unconventional, and other Generals hated him for it because when he and his troops left Mosul it was peaceful.  But he did not treat people disrespectfully and his sector of Iraq did not try to burn itself down and he was hated for that.  Mosul later did go to hell under someone else's conventional military leadership after Petraeus went home.  He was also hated by his peers  because of his skills as a politician.  He rubbed certain people in D.C. and his policies were "allowed" in Mosul and he made bang bang shoot em up Cowboys look like $hitheels.

    After he left Mosul and several higher ups tried to destroy his career he ended up at Ft Campbell and the School of Advanced Military Studies.  Instead of crying into porridge, he continued to study how we could build alliances with moderate Muslims while going after our enemy. And there is a real enemy out there and they don't get a pass for killing innocent people any more than anyone else.  They are responsible for who they are and what they do.

    If you don't like David Petraeus that's fine, but he is not a simpleton and he is not conventional army in any sense of the word other than he wore a conventional uniform.  Hate him, like him, he is different and continues to find ways to understand who the real enemy is and how to build allies and he has more success at that on the ground in dangerous places than either you or I have ever had.

    I promise you that David Petraeus knows more facts about Islam and its history than either you or I do as well.

    Parent

    Decimated Al Qaeda (none / 0) (#34)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 02:17:04 PM EST

    Does "decimated" mean they now have the strength, followers, and intel to murder ambassadors and capture intel assets?  They seem to be pretty functional for being decimated.

    The fact we apparently had no good intel on this assault makes the claim of decimation rather flimsy.  How much more do they have that drone strikes don't tell us about?
     

    Parent

    Al Qaeda affiliated (none / 0) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 02:31:34 PM EST
    Anybody can claim Al Qaeda affiliated.  Hey, I'm Al Qaeda affiliated.  I'll wait to learn more.  And it is disturbing that the ambassador was where he was with very little protection.  But this does not bring Osama bin Laden and those close to him back.

    I suppose this argument will bring into play BTD's stance on Libya, that we did not understand enough of the power players to make the commitment that was made and involve ourselves.

    I have a feeling that the ambassador was where he was and trying to be quiet about it because they were beginning to look for those surface to air missiles that are missing.  The family of one of the SEALs let it slip that that was what he was doing in Libya.

    Parent

    Al Qaeda (none / 0) (#37)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 09:20:03 AM EST
    Al Qaeda is nothing but a loose organization of affiliates.  Claims matter less than what the actual affiliations are.  

    Eli Lake let loose a bombshell yesterday: "Within 24 hours of the 9-11 anniversary attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies had strong indications al Qaeda-affiliated operatives were behind the attack..."


    Parent
    How affiliated though? (none / 0) (#39)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 08:57:34 PM EST
    They are going to drone them, so the Obama administration may be using the classification of Al Qaeda affiliated in order to head off any drone anger from his base at the pass.  Special Operations is there though gathering intel right now, and the word at Orange is that this successful mission will be a political win for Obama.

    That Al Qaeda spin thing, it can be spun many ways and not necessarily only a good conservative talking point hinting at Obama being a military failure.  Are those responsible Salafi? Which is what I figured, but the Salafi have denied Al Qaeda affiliation while at times claiming to be sympathizers.  Knowledge of exactly how affiliated the attackers are may only be something known by the little people after the fact.  Just sayin

    Parent

    At the same time though (none / 0) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 08:59:36 PM EST
    and without seeing it for ourselves, it was reported that Amb Stevens used the words Al Qaeda in his journal.  So maybe it is a very clear Al Qaeda affiliation.

    Parent
    Let's have a return to Bush policies (none / 0) (#9)
    by observed on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:51:35 AM EST
    and have another 9/11 in one year!!

    Parent
    Probably several all over the world (none / 0) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:57:41 AM EST
    Our NATO allies would get it too.

    Parent
    Seriously though (none / 0) (#11)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:58:47 AM EST
    Who gives a $hit about inferior Old Europe?

    Parent
    T & T (none / 0) (#12)
    by MKS on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:05:35 AM EST
    Torture and tax cuts will solve any problem, foreign or domestic.....

    Parent
    Not a Good Memo (none / 0) (#15)
    by RickyJim on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:34:27 AM EST
    The extent to which the enhanced interrogation techniques were valuable in generating
    intelligence has, of course, been hotly debated.

    Then it adds nothing to the debate but repeat some lame talking points claiming that EI is good.  I wonder if Obama and Romney will take the issue on in their upcoming debates or punt because of National Security concerns.  If you want to see some of the real debate, look up reviews of Jose Rodriguez's "Hard Measures" and Ali Soufan's "The Black Banners".

    How complicated is it? (none / 0) (#36)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:34:21 PM EST
    The Eighth Amendment is one sentence.  It says that the government can't torture people.

    Romney Campaign Memo Urging Return to Use of Enhanced Interrogation | 40 comments (40 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment