Washington Post intelligence reporter Dana Priest was online Thursday, June 9 at 11 a.m. ET, to discuss the latest developments in intelligence and national security.
The disclosure that the Justice Department advised the White House in 2002 that the torture of al Qaeda terrorist suspects might be legally defensible has focused new attention on the role President Bush played in setting the rules for interrogations in the war on terrorism.
Dana Priest
(The Washington Post)
|
|
Read the story:Memo on Torture Draws Focus to Bush (Post, June 9)
Dana Priest covers intelligence and recently wrote "The Mission: Waging War and Keeping Peace With America's Military" (W.W. Norton). The book chronicles the increasing frequency with which the military is called upon to solve political and economic problems.
A transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
________________________________________________
Dana Priest: Hi all,I'm here, a little late, but let's begin.
_______________________
Woodbridge, Va.:
I believe that you should look into the resignation of the two top CIA officials this week a little more closely. There is a lot more there than what the media is reporting. In fact, I am stunned at the simple assumption the media has jumped on that Tenet is a "fall guy" for the administration. There is a lot more there including the fact that both officials were Plame's bosses. I believe they can now testify since they are not part of the administration, can't they?
Dana Priest: I don't think he was a fall guy and we didn't report that. I think he was exhausted, wanted out for months, knew he would be facing nothing but bad news about him from Congress and others, found the right week, and left.
_______________________
Atlanta, Ga.:
Today, I have read various stories about U.S. soldiers torturing a U.S. soldier during interrogation training at Guantanamo, although I have not found one in the Post.
Here is the AP story ...
"Reversing itself, the Army said Tuesday that a G.I. was discharged partly because of a head injury he suffered while posing as an uncooperative detainee during a training exercise at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The Army had previously said Specialist Sean Baker's medical discharge in April was unrelated to the injury he received last year at the detention center, where the United States holds suspected terrorists.
Mr. Baker, 37, a former member of the 438th Military Police Company, said he played the role of an uncooperative prisoner and was beaten so badly by four American soldiers that he suffered a traumatic brain injury and seizures. He said the soldiers only stopped beating him when they realized he might be American."
Do you think this story will have an impact on Congress ability to obtain information about approved interrogation techniques and training from the administration, based on AG John Ashcroft's answers during yesterday's testimony?
Thanks.
Dana Priest: I don't think the story will change what they can get -- except that the discovery process could force some documents into the hands of his attorney. I do think Congress will continue to push themselves on these matters and that will be productive to a certain point.
_______________________
Norristown, Pa.:
Question on the recently leaked memo describing when torture is OK. Does that mean an interrogator could break a suspect's fingers, one by one, to demonstrate to that suspect what harm his refusal to talk would have on others? Also, does this memo prohibit the use of torture against internal criminals, such as an illegal immigrant that was suspected of being a member of a criminal organization?
Finally, has Bush said that this memo is bunk, and should be considered wrong?
Dana Priest: It doesn't address specific techniques. Rather, it defines physical torture narrowly ... "Must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death."
Doesn't speak to internal criminals, but is addressed to detainees held overseas. Bush hasn't said anything about the memo specifically.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Doesn't the U.S. govt. subcontract interrogations to nations like the Philippines, Egypt, etc., that have less savory human rights records? Secondly how are clandestine (NOC) CIA spies protected under international law? Are they protected by any means or is what we see in the movies essentially true, if caught they are executed and can often be tortured.
Dana Priest: Yes, in some cases. The CIA renders some suspected terrorists to places like Egypt, Jordan, Morocco for interrogation. NOCs, I believe, would be subject of same international laws as anyone else. However, because they are committing espionage and countries have criminal penalties for that, they could be executed or imprisoned if caught. Tortured? Not if the country has signed the Convention Against Torture.
_______________________
Stamping Ground, Ky.:
Dana, Yesterday's U.N. resolution is being lauded as a major diplomatic and political victory for the president. Does it, however, really change, or create a major opportunity for change in the situation on the ground in Iraq?
Dana Priest: Mainly it creates an opportunity for the political process to move forward, rather than being stuck in indecision. It is hopeful in that respect, but does not change anything yet on the ground in Iraq.
_______________________
Hamilton, Va.:
Are these memos for real? Does the administration believe that the president can just wave a wand and laws that interfere with his conduct of "war" just become moot?
Dana Priest: Apparently the Office of Legal Counsel attorney Jay S. Bybee, now a judge, believes the president could make the case that the torture statutes are unconstitutional because they interfere, in certain circumstances (e.g. counterterrorism ops against al Qaeda), with his ability to wage war because it takes away one of his weapons (harsh interrogations) My question to Bybee would be, well, what about US-signed treaties on the use of nuclear or chemical weapons. Those do too. Are they, too, unconstitutional if the president decides he wants to use them? In that case, what good are weapons treaties?
_______________________
Boston, Mass.:
Can you discuss the shadowy world of leaks a little bit and how it pertains to the new allegations of the Justice Department draft memo saying essentially that international treaties and laws are not applicable to Bush. If there are people that have access to this material that they are leaking to the press obviously with a purpose, why does the administration continue to just deny and act like they can suppress the info? It just doesn't seem to make sense. Now that Ashcroft said that the policy formulated from the draft is not going to be released to Congress, isn't it more likely that someone will leak it to the press? Basically is there any control over who leaks info to the press, and does the Plame investigation prevent a witch hunt within the administration for damaging leakers, because they would look blatantly bias if they did this while they ignored the Plame leak for months.
Dana Priest: I don't want to talk about so-called "leaks," which falls into the journalistic equivalent of "sources and methods." However, I would think that making these memos public in the press gives the administration less of a leg to stand on in their refusal to make the whole thing public. Essentially when you are dealing with unclassified information.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
More people use public transportation such as the subway than airplanes; why is it that our national security is so deplorable for our mass transit systems? I would imagine that after the Madrid bombings there would be a sense of urgency to increase security within our subways systems. How prepared is the United States for a major disruption of its bus and train systems or what is being done such that another tragedy does not occur?
Dana Priest: I agree that it seems not to have half as diligent as airport safety measure. Having asked the question many times, I've gotten no satisfactory answer. There are some new precautions though. You may have noticed some type of air detectors. Not sure what they do.
_______________________
Toronto, Ontario, Canada:
If the president of the United States can put himself above international law so too can other leaders -- carte blanche for anyone who proclaims themselves so. Even musing about it sets a dangerous and stupid precedent for not only the United States and its inhabitants but also the peoples of other countries who too often are crushed in the name of "national security" -- What in God's name is your country becoming?
Dana Priest: Your concern is shared by others in the military and within the U.S. government who see this interpretations of law to be far-reaching, inaccurate and ultimately dangerous to U.S. security.
_______________________
Brunswick, Maine:
Dana,
The prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib has ratcheted up again with the partial release of administration memos which attempt to create a legal rationale for the objectionable interrogation practices. One memo in particular, described earlier this week in the WSJ, referred to an "inherent" presidential authority to set aside laws.
What sort of response is this claim of presidential authority getting in Congress?
Dana Priest: Astonishment and concern among Democrats, and some Republicans.
_______________________
Ellicott City, Md.:
Why would Ashcroft have to be aware if Bush allowed the torture of prisoners in other countries. Why would such a decree go through his office?
Dana Priest: The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel is considered the real brain-power in the executive branch for legal questions within the government. It's memorandum on questions it is asked to address amount to legal advice to the president. The White House counsel role is more political, and advisory.
_______________________
Los Angeles, Calif.:
I am really confused here. Tenet struck me as part of the Powell-Clarke "Iraq is a bad idea" crew as opposed to the neocon cabal egging the president on. His speech at Georgetown certainly fit nicely into that categorization. But Woodward's book paints him as more of a hawk. Was Tenet for this war or not? Was he reluctantly dragged along by this president?
Dana Priest: Good question. Tenet seemed to play all sides. A great supporter of the war with the president, but his agency was more skeptical of the WMD claims behind the scenes.
_______________________
New York:
Dana, I've included the following excerpt from an article I read this morning:
"A draft of the commission's final report points to
communications breakdowns and intelligence failures by the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which may lead to the conclusion that the attacks in New York and Washington could have been prevented," AP said.
I also heard on the radio this morning that the Dept. of Homeland Security is complaining that they are understaffed. With all these threats of terror attacks this summer, it just seems that none of these agencies have got it together. And we're supposed to be "vigilant"? What is your outlook on our ability to ward off terrorist attacks in the future. Thanks.
Dana Priest: Well, better than it used to be, but not good enough. I sound like a politician! Eek! Both things are true. The agencies are cooperating much more, but there are still turf battles. It's hard to judge Homeland Security because they are so secretive and often when they make public statements about the threat, they are more confounding than clarifying. I still don't think the FBI and Homeland security have a good sense of the Al Qaeda here in U.S.
_______________________
Old Saybrook, Conn.:
Dana, I am concerned about the media's reluctance to delve into so many of the stories that seem to shed a negative light on the administration. The Valerie Plame story comes to mind immediately. Why do you think there has been so little made of it when we all know if it had been President Clinton the press would have been all over it. Can it be the "with us or against us" attitude that the administration has been using to keep us all in line?
Dana Priest: You've got to be kidding! That's all we're doing just about. I suggest reading The Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, LA Times.
_______________________
Silver Spring, Md.:
Regarding the "torture" memos: is it not acceptable for the administration to receive legal opinions, evaluate them, and then, in the end, reject those opinions? According to Ashcroft's testimony yesterday, that appears to be exactly what happened. Shouldn't the administration be judged on its official and enacted policies rather than on the opinions that were voiced as that policy was developed?
Dana Priest: Yes, and yes. While I think the Defense Department ultimately rejected applying the more lenient view of torture in its policies, I believe the CIA accepted it. Some of these distinctions are getting muddled in press accounts and on the hill.
_______________________
Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif.:
If Richard Clarke is right, then wouldn't it be in the long term interest of the CIA to have fought against the invasion of Iraq? How on earth is the CIA supposed to hunt down Qaeda, keep track of North Korea, watch Saudi Arabia, Iran, Yemen, Egypt, the U.A.E, Qatar, Morocco, and all the other hot spots while also trying to help stabilize (or de-stabilize depending on who you talk to) Iraq?
Dana Priest: I think this is a very, very interesting point. It is an awful lots to do and it is clearly overtaxing not just the CIA but the special military units used in these counterterrorism operations.
_______________________
Concord, N.H.:
Dana:
Thank you for your (and your colleagues) excellent work on the interrogation memoranda and reports. I have one question to put this in some context. Have you compared what these documents would authorize with the treatment U.S. POWs received in Vietnam?
Dana Priest: Very astute. In fact, I'm told that many of the harsh techniques originate with exactly that, the torture or U.S. POWs in Vietnam (and elsewhere).
_______________________
Dana Priest: Am sorry to report that I must sign off now. Hope to get to more questions next week. All the best, Dana
_______________________
