I can neither confirm, nor deny...

[mugaliens]

How many of us have heard these words uttered by those in the know?

What is it, then, when we hear much the opposite uttered by someone who is undeniably in the know, former CIA Chief Michael Hayden, when he confirms interrogation limits in his statement, "What we have described for our enemies in the midst of a war are the outer limits that any American would ever go to in terms of interrogating an al Qaeda terrorist. That's very valuable information." - Source (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/19/cia.torture.chief/index.html)

What the heck?

This isn't about politics! It's about over-the-hill former government importants who think that just because they've "graduated" they can go on record with statements which explicitely (supposedly) confirm certain aspects of (supposedly) highly classified information.

I mean, it's one thing to say, "I can neither confirm nor deny..." It's quite another to confirm the limits of interrogation by commenting on the President's recent comments to the world.

Unless, by so doing one is actually masking the real limits of interrogation...

<forehead slap>

My advice would be to stop thinking you're so brilliant that you can mislead our enemies, and instead use the old fallback, "I can neither confirm nor deny..."

At least it kept our enemies guessing. As it is, your recent comments have them...

I can neither confirm nor deny...

[mike alexander]

"We're takin' the buggers apart piece by piece, with a knife... a RUSTY knife. Now, even though the Elizabethans coulda taught us a thing 'r two about, you know, TORTURE, the very IDEAS goin' through yer mind on how to HURT someone ain't even close to tha' CLAASSIFIED ways we done found to put a HURT on them animals, y'know? I mean, it's just TOP SECRET how to make someone SCREAM, Y'know? Coolassified, that's what it is. Tiptop, head of the class, dark matter CLASSIFIED! Not like them, you know, PRIMITIVE types could figger out how to put a HURT on someone. I mean, that's so-PHIS-ticated, modern stuff, and HIGHLY CLASSIFIED to boot."



It's hurting people to make them talk. Humans have been doing that for fun and profit for millenia. Pretending it has something to do with classified data is a poor joke.

[sarongsong]

...It's about over-the-hill former government importants who think that just because they've "graduated" they can go on record with statements which explicitely (supposedly) confirm certain aspects of (supposedly) highly classified information....Hayden said he called several senior White House officials to express his opposition before the president released the documents......and how would he know about this release? :)"..."What we have described for our enemies in the midst of a war are the outer limits that any American would ever go to in terms of interrogating an al Qaeda terrorist..." Hayden said during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday."...FOX maintains a refuge for "over-the-hill former government importants" with regular appearances.

[flynjack1]

Yep I follow you Mugs, Keep it simple stupid principle, and loose lips sink ships. The less one says the better and it has always been that the best pat answer to say is" I can neither confirm nor deny X".

[sarongsong]

Looks like an epidemic... :doh:February 16, 2009
When reporters asked President Franklin Roosevelt where Lt. Col. Jimmy Doolittle's raiders launched their daring 1942 raid on the Japanese mainland, he puckishly answered, “from our new secret base at Shangri-La.”
Contrast Roosevelt's slyness with Sen. Diane Feinstein's recent comment regarding the secret location of the launch sites for Predator hunter/killer drones — “As I understand it, these are flown out of a Pakistani base.”...
Washington Times (http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/16/did-blabbermouth-feinstein-spill-secrets/)

[novaderrik]

i could tell you all why people "in the know" do stuff like this, but then i'd have to kill you..

[korjik]

Have any of you actually read any of the documents that Michael Hayden was commenting on?

They were very explicit legal opinions by White House lawyers on what could and could not be done in 'harsh interrogation' situations to terrorists in US hands. They made very clear the limits that the Bush administration used in its policies.

That makes:"What we have described for our enemies in the midst of a war are the outer limits that any American would ever go to in terms of interrogating an al Qaeda terrorist. That's very valuable information."

A very true statement. Especially if you factor in the squeamishness of the current administration compared the last one, you have informed any terrorist, or even any hostile spy, exactly what they have to be able to resist to keep from giving up actionable intelligence.

So I would have to say that the 'over-the-hill former government importants' protested the making a political move, not made this politics by his comments.

[sarongsong]

Have any of you actually read any of the documents that Michael Hayden was commenting on?...Where and what are they?

Have you read:April 2009

INQUIRY INTO THE TREATMENT OF DETAINEES IN U.S. CUSTODY (http://armed-services.senate.gov/Publications/Detainee%20Report%20Final_April%2022%202009.pdf) (.pdf - 263 pages)

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE April 22, 2009
,,,As a newly released Senate Armed Services Committee report makes clear...techniques Rumsfeld approved for use at Guantánamo oozed into prisons in Afghanistan and Iraq, undermining decades of U.S. policy about humane treatment of detainees and leading to some of the worst outrages...
Salon (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/04/22/madden/)...So I would have to say that the 'over-the-hill former government importants' protested the making a political move, not made this politics by his comments.Does this sentence appear as intended?

[korjik]

Where and what are they?

Have you read:Does this sentence appear as intended?

Yeah, it does. Making intelligence gathering techniques public to make political points is a bad idea.

[geonuc]

Yeah, it does. Making intelligence gathering techniques public to make political points is a bad idea.
I think perhaps sarongsong was implying that the sentence itself doesn't make sense. I'm having a hard time with it myself.

[Moose]

I just want to remind folks that this thread is already treading very hard on the no-politics line. Please be careful to keep the "fact" to "value judgment" ratio nice and high.

[R.A.F.]

...this thread is already treading very hard on the no-politics line.

In my personal opinion it jumped way past the "line" once the word "torture" was uttered.

If speculating on why politicians "do what they do" isn't political, then I don't know what is...

[ToSeek]

In my personal opinion it jumped way past the "line" once the word "torture" was uttered.

If speculating on why politicians "do what they do" isn't political, then I don't know what is...

I have to agree and therefore am closing the thread.