Ex-Attorney General Gonzales backs CIA prison abuse probe
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has been under fire in some circles for naming a special prosecutor to investigate alleged abuses of prisoners by CIA interrogators or contractors, but on Tuesday he got some unexpected support from a former Bush administration official.
Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales who oversaw the Justice Department or was White House counsel during the period when some of the controversial interrogation techniques were authorized — such as lengthy sleep deprivation and repeated waterboarding – in a radio interview backed Holder’s decision to review the cases that went outside the limits set.
“We worked very hard to establish ground rules and parameters about how to deal with terrorists,” Gonzales said in an interview with The Washington Times’ “America’s Morning News” radio show.
“And if people go beyond that, I think it is legitimate to question and examine that conduct to ensure people are held accountable for their actions, even if it’s action in prosecuting the war on terror.”
In new details released last week from a CIA inspector general report, among the most controversial interrogation methods were brandishing a gun in front of a prisoner, using a power drill to intimidate a blindfolded prisoner, and threatening to hurt their families.
Gonzales said that despite the potential “chilling effect” the probe could have on CIA officers seeking intelligence during interrogations, those who went beyond permitted interrogation techniques should be investigated.
He also said that he believed that Holder was only concerned about those who went beyond approved techniques.
Cheney touches a nerve at the White House
Well there he goes again. Former Vice President Dick Cheney has got ‘em all riled up again at the Obama White House over his Fox News Sunday interview.
Cheney feels strongly that the tough interrogation techniques employed against terrorism suspects by the Bush administration worked, in spite of the complaints about human rights.
He went on Fox to sharply criticize Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to launch an investigation into the alleged abuse of prisoners held by the CIA during the Bush administration.
Cheney cried foul at what he called an “intensely partisan, politicized look back at the prior administration.”
So it came up at Monday’s White House news briefing, and Obama’s press secretary Robert Gibbs was armed with a response.
“This is the same song and dance we’ve heard since literally the first day of our administration. So I don’t have … a lot to say. I think the vice president, if you watched some of his interview, was clearly — clearly had his facts on a number of things wrong,” Gibbs said.
Like what, for instance?
getplaning. Here’s the deal with your “quote”. Most congressional democrats, both Clintons, PM Blair, President Putin…you get the point…all agreed and gave speeches (which are on the record) saying Saddam Hussein had WMDs and that he needed to be dealt with. Iraq was supported by both parties in congress and the American people. So, please stop with your half truth (I have no faith in your ability to do so…) it doesn’t tell the whole story.
Also, I believe Cheney and already stated the Bush administration has kept us safe, so that is proof enough for me. We haven’t been attacked…It is your job to prove he is wrong, but you wont’ be able to…Just like this adminstration isn’t able to prove anything and story keeps dying…They and you have nothing…nothing at all!
Just remember, over 3000 American “civilians” died in a few hours by being attacked on 9/11. That has never happened in our country before. It hasn’t happened again because of the policies of the Bush administration.
If you don’t want to see the truth, then that’s fine. But you can only respond with half truths…No problem, you left wingers are all alike…
Well, yesterday, Gonzalez was for an investigation. I guess he got a fish in his mailbox this morning. Today, he says that just because he thinks it’s “legitimate to question and examine” the interrogators’ conduct, he doesn’t endorse an investigation:
Sept 3, (Washington Times)–”I don’t support the investigation by the department because this is a matter that has already been reviewed thoroughly and because I believe that another investigation is going to harm our intelligence gathering capabilities and that’s a concern that’s shared by career intelligence officials and so for those reasons I respectfully disagree with the decision.”