Robert: ... divulging certain information to Congress, let
alone to the public, would 'compromise national security' is
an assertion on the part of an Administration that I have no
reason to trust on any matter.
Whereas we can't totally trust the government, we can be
sure that terrorists will engage in all kinds of lies and
grandstanding to advance their cause.
John Wager, Judy, and you have raised many valid points. Yet
the situation is unprecedented. These are not mere murder or
espionage cases, nor do they implicate a dismantling of the
entire criminal justice system.
Consider this argument from Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu, a
former Army Green Beret lieutenant colonel. Comparing the
Moussaoui case to the McVey case, and noting the "rush to
execution" of McVey, he writes:
___________
One indisputable fact emerges from the hasty execution of
McVey: we lost forever the opportunity to interrogate him
properly. Did Iraqi, Philippine al Qaeda, or other global
terrorist connections play a part in the Murrah Building
bombing? Underappreciated, superb investigative journalist
Jayna Davis is convinced that she discovered these ties and
more. Unfortunately we shall never know, at least from
McVey. Does it make sense for long term U.S. security to let
vengeance take precedent over good intelligence information
collection?
Just as it would have made excellent sense to interrogate
McVey thoroughly, professionally, not by criminal
investigators but by skilled military interrogators, it
would make equal sense to do likewise with the current crop
of terrorists held in the criminal justice system. How much
help could we get in pursuing the war for the free world to
be able to extract key information that Moussaoui and the
two dozen or more terrorists hold close? We can’t do that
post-mortem. Nor are there provisions for proper military
interrogation in the Federal prison system.
The Federal prison system has a straightforward mission:
incarcerate. There are no interrogation requirements
needed, it being assumed that all the questioning necessary
for the prison sentence was accomplished at or prior to
trial. Conversely, the provisions for both incarceration and
interrogation exist and are fully functioning at Guantanamo
Bay. The unique detention/interrogation capabilities of
Joint Task Force – Guantanamo provide the environment for
secure detention of terrorists while being able to conduct
long term, through interrogation under humane conditions.
Despite contrary fever-swamp rhetoric, detainees at the
Guantanamo facility are treated exceedingly well.
Interrogations are conducted with a goal of establishing
rapport and mutual respect between the detainee and
questioner. There is no torture, no abuse, no humiliation,
and no coercion. Detainees are interrogated on a regular
basis and talk or not as they wish. Are they rewarded for
cooperation? Of course. And the system is positive:
cooperate with interrogators and be compliant with
regulations and you have more recreation time, live in a
communal environment in a minimum security block. Stubborn?
Then enjoy your time in your private cell with restricted
outside opportunities.
There are a lot of cases in Gitmo where some detainees who
have remained silent for years will suddenly speak. Others
are recklessly proud of what they have done and brag openly
about killing Americans and fellow Muslim “apostates” who do
not accede to the harsh Wahabbist ideology they espouse.
They talk freely and encourage fellow detainees to do the
same. Which category would Moussaoui and these other
terrorists fall into? We will never know as long as they
remain in Federal prison in America.
------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
