Among the questions that should be asked of her is whether she supports the release of the complete 6,000 page Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture. So far only a highly redacted version of the Findings and Executive Summary have been declassified and released. Her answer to this question will reveal whether she truly believes that the enhanced interrogation techniques are torture and should never be used again by US personnel. Waffling should not be accepted.
3
If she had any sense of duty and self-respect, she would. Of course, that's why Trump, the man who wants to bring back waterboarding, which she 'supervised' at and legalize it, nominated her in the first place. She's certainly one of Trump's "best people". At least she's got 'experience'.
“He who is devoid of morality is immune to demoralization.”
~ CHARLES M. BLOW
THE NEW YORK TIMES
January 26. 2017
• Ms. Haspel briefly oversaw one of those prisons, in Thailand. The program, which has since been renounced by the C.I.A., included techniques like waterboarding, sleep deprivation, confinements in boxes and other interrogation techniques.
• “Think of that, in these very dangerous times, we have the most qualified person, a woman, who Democrats want OUT because she is too tough on terror,” Mr. Trump wrote in a tweet.
'Birds of a feather!'
3
"That woman" should never be appointed to any position in the CIA, nor to any governmental office. Just ask any current or former GI what they think of torture of POWs.......and SHE was a torturer, admittedly. The reasons for torture of POWs, given over many years, at Nuremburg and the other post WW2 trials, was always the same: "I was only following orders." That torture in which she ordered and participated in Iraq and at "black sites", will affect future American POWs into the foreseeable future. She should not be appointed......she should be ashamed and condemned or ignored completely. Or put on trial..........
6
@ PogoWasRight
'PUT ON TRIAL' ... with several others,... like in Nuremberg!
I envy your moniker:
Pogo Was Right: "We have seen the enemy and it is us!"
~ WALT KELLY
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/54/4a
/37/544a37057f1e4402e89f2ae21bf93d40.gif
(August 25, 1913 – October 18, 1973)
U.S. animator and cartoonist, best known for the comic strip Pogo. He began his animation career in 1936 at Walt Disney Studios, Pogo, first saw print in 1943 in Dell's Animal Comics.The Pogo comic strip was syndicated to newspapers for 26 years.
Thank you, 'Pogo'!
1
Democrats are opposed because the nominee is a woman. The only woman who the Democrats would support is the liar and expert at covering things up, Hillary Clinton. No other woman need apply for a high level position. The glass ceiling still exists.
1
"threatened to tarnish the agency"? How shameful and ridiculous. SHE did the TORTURING, America!
3
Two thoughts:
1. Regarding Ms. Haspel's chances of Senate confirmation, I continue to think that Senator Paul is the key. If he "sticks to his guns" in opposing her nomination, then I suspect that some other Republican Senators (McCain plus some combination of Murkowski, Collins and/or Flake) will also oppose and she will either be rejected or will withdraw to avoid a rejection. If, however, he changes his mind (as he did with the Pompeo nomination), then I suspect that some of the red-state Democratic Senators up for re-election this year will also support her and she will be confirmed with 54-55 votes.
2. Regarding the argument made by many that President Obama should have pushed the DOJ to prosecute GWB-era torture, the sentiment is understandable and at least one law (the Geneva Convention) was certainly broken, but such a move would have been political poison and President Obama knew it. It would have been viewed, and vehemently criticized, by many as nothing more than a divisive partisan attack on Republicans (even though many of them were career public servants under administrations of both parties) for what, at worst, was a "well-meaning" attempt to keep this country safe in the wake of the worst attack against it in modern times.
1
Just like Sen Paul "stuck to his guns" on.....well, let's see....tax cuts, spending bills, Pompeo as Sec State....
1
Once again she has demonstrated that she is good at following orders, whatever her personal views may be. That may or may not make her a war criminal, but it makes her a follower not a leader, and a follower isn't what the Trump CIA needs.
2
"If..."? The burden is on the side of torturers to demonstrate why this would *not* tarnish the reputation of the CIA (or any other organization that carries/d out similarly shameful behavior).
I think the country was in a dark place after 9/11.
I certainly do not approve of torture because it is inhumane and ineffective, however, the country was freaking out after the attack and the Bush Administration overreacted with the use of torture as well as the Iraq war.
To put this all on Gina Haspel is misguided.
I think she should be required to disavow the use of torture and to acknowledge that the use of torture is wrong. I believe she already has stated as much but she needs to emphatically state that during her confirmation hearing to the satisfaction of the Senate.
If her record is worthy of becoming the head of the CIA concerning all other issues, I think she should get a chance to lead.
1
A woman with the courage to do what most men won't, or are afraid to do, I say promote her!
She should withdraw! Overseeing a secret site where US tortured people is despicable and unforgivable! Her rationale is irrelevant!
1
She could find a position in North Korea, Egypt, Israel, Syria or a number of other torturing regimes.
For the slack-wit goon who is our president, torturer = patriot, but many of us feel that a regime which tortures has no moral claim to existence.
Imagine being strapped onto a table and seeing her enter the room, her eyes glistening.
Thugs are a dime a dozen, as we've seen in this repellent White House. Send her to a happy, pain-free retirement somewhere far away.
1
Thank you, to Gina Haspel. She really should withdraw, as her connections with burial interrogations do indeed disqualify her.
1
Like other CIA personnel who work "undercover," Ms. Haspel is a professional liar. She lies for a living.
I would humbly submit that the CIA should not / not be headed by someone who has spent their entire adult life lying.
The CIA rank-and-file need to be led by someone with integrity, a former federal judge, for example.
Possessing integrity, and being head of an agency dedicated to securing US interests around the world through less-than-savory means, are not mutually exclusive.
1
The nominee engaged in torture; refused to comply with Congressional subpoenas, participated in the destruction of government records sought by Congressional subpoenas, and promoted within the CIA.
Remember what Sen Rand Paul said "My opposition to her is over her direct participation in interrogation and her gleeful enjoyment of someone being tortured."
She should be in prison.......not promoted to head the CIA.
Haspel was involved, (to some degree) in two major crimes, torture, and evidence destruction. Any confirmation hearing that didn't look into her involvement would be negligent. Does she want a hearing without disclosure? Trump obviously by his own personal actions likes to pick and chose what acts are not criminal. Fortunately Trump doesn't have that full power yet, and the US is still, at times, a nation of laws.
The list of crimes that that Trump would like to decriminalize grows daily, and is very personal. Perhaps those two torture and obstruction, are on his wish list.
3
I would like to hear a dialogue between Senator McCain and Ms. Haspel about the value of torture.
6
As horrific and disqualifying her role was in the "interrogation" program, this is a time when the coverup really does speak louder than the act itself.
Why destroy the tapes? Because the waterboarding could not be justified and she recognized that and tried to hide it? Because the CIA didn't want future prisoners to know about procedures it might use again?
No rationale, however spun, is going to make the destruction of the tapes seem reasonable. Ms. Haspel has been endorsed by several former intelligence officials as someone who would stand up to the President when necessary. But rather than stand up to her superior when it mattered, she strongly supported his orders.
She may be the most experienced candidate, but leadership entails sound judgment and moral standing. In these she is sorely lacking.
27
Working under the Trump administration is punishment enough.
1
If Gina Haspel cares about her reputation she’s would withdraw from being considered for the CIA position. Look at what happened to Dr Jackson, his career has been seriously harmed.
4
It is outrageous that Ms. Haspel, who followed Jose Rodriguez Jr's order to destroy video evidence of torture, was not prosecuted along with Rodriguez and the CIA legal counsel. Her defense that she was "just following orders" was nullified by the war crimes trials against Japan and Germany after WWII.
If she is confirmed as CIA director, this would sanction further "just following orders" mentality both within the CIA and other US agencies. Shame.
29
Shame on her. Shame on us. Shame on America.
3
I don't blame her for considering to withdraw considering liberal democrats could careless who's lives they destroy.
look what they did to admiral Johnny Wolf and General Flynn
Are you seriously claiming that Wolf and Flynn are innocent?
2
does it matter to democrats?
Cast the CIA in a bad light? Tarnish the agency? According to any sensible formulation, the CIA is incapable of being brought down this way because its very existence is based on the fear-inducing premise that none can do worse.
The CIA stands on its record, this being the possessor of no due conscience. The "secret" agency makes no secret of this, so we shouldn't kid ourselves about it.
One does not need to say the words to still say she was too tough on the terrorists. The implication of the Senators opposed to her says it all. This , of course, does not mean that she was not too tough regardless of the words used against her.
1
And why didn't she? This is a big concern that she will be a lap dog of the dear leader.
6
Can't make this up.
Democrats are opposed because she would be too tough on terrorists.
3
Buh bye, torture lady.
5
I can't see even a whisper of integrity in the act of destroying tapes of those waterboarding sessions. To have performed this torture is perhaps explainable (not excusable) by the general terror following 9/11. We all felt panic: Where might the next deadly attack come from? When? How many thousands might die? But having tortured in the moments of panic is one thing. Not to say, afterwards, yes, we did this, and indeed to destroy evidence, speaks not just of criminality, but of a more deliberate dishonesty. This is the sign of a person whom power has corrupted absolutely. Not a rare thing, alas. Cover-up is deeply self-serving and cold-blooded.
14
Gina Haspel inflicted such pain on prisoners, that the records of those atrocities were destroyed.
How is this even a subject for discussion?
The name of the Central Intelligence Agency is not "the Central Torture & Cover-Up Agency."
She is right to withdraw. God will judger her, in due course. In the meantime, someone with expertise in intelligence -- not torture, humiliation, abuse & driving human beings out of their mind -- should be appointed.
5
The destruction of the torture tapes I think disqualifies her. It is a grave disservice to the attempts to "forge a more perfect Union" to actively blind ourselves to our past behavior. In the civilian world it is illegal to destroy evidence. In the realm of human growth, it is clear evidence of denying responsibility. We as a Nation at at a critical juncture to grow and learn from our past behavior. Gina Haspel herself, I think, understands the problem here, that we have not actually held ourselves accountable to our own criminal conduct overseas that has caused a generation of human beings to despise us. We should not be despised. We Americans are supposed to be a beacon for enlightened free enterprise with human rights and dignity for all. We are not there, and the nomination of Gina haspel would be a message to those we harmed that we are not taking our responsibilities seriously. Donald Trump's pathetic simplistic jingoism seriously needs to be contained, not enabled.
3
Sara Sanders sent out a tweet, that if you are a Democrat And you don't support Gina Haspel, then you are a hypocrite that doesn't support "Women's Empowerment."
That's a pretty rich statement coming from this administration. Here is a twist on this statment, using the "feminine angle" that the republicans could use:
"Gina Haspel will bring "a woman's touch" to CIA operations. Her administration would bring "kinder and gentler" torture methods to the agency."
4
Trump tweeted out that Torture was fine for interrogating possible terrorists. I wonder if he agrees that waterboarding would be effective for finding possible Russian spies too?
5
It's not torture if no one knows about it.
But, EVERYBODY knows about it, and she has admitted to it...........
The "awful truth" Haspel really faces is when Trump will tell her to 'hit the dirt' and fire her himself. Go ahead, Haspel, try your luck as CIA Director and then await "YOU'RE FIRED" from Trump. Retire, while you can.
1
I find it entertaining that a woman who oversaw the torture of prisoners can't face up to congressional interrogation. Does she think they might waterboard her?
12
it is kinda unfortunate that this lady is supposedly the best candidate for the position. given the right circumstances there is no doubt in my mind that she would revert back to her prior views and actions on treatment of prisoners. given another attack similar to 9/11 or even some type of major war in n. korea or iran that resulted in the c.i.a. detention camps and the need for info from detainees someone at the head of the c.i.a who supported torture in the past just might have a hard time not using it again.
Interesting title to the article. Gina Haspel is exactly the kind of person he wants to tarnish the agency.
If Trump approves of this candidate, we should not.
5
Conversely, if Trump *disapproves* of this candidate, you should not... Interesting...
1
I believe her apprehension from the "Trump taint" is warranted. Most career officials are facing dismissal and outright career disgrace under this Administration and Presidency!
1
"Ms. Haspel, serving as Mr. Rodriguez’s chief of staff, was a strong advocate for getting rid of the tapes, former C.I.A. officers said." - Reason enough to vote against her nomination.
As much as I respect President Obama, he decided not to push on this program when he came to office to reveal more details. Haspel's nomination is one outcome of his decision, I believe.
7
As it is in every occupation, career employees who disagree with policies mandated by upper management have but one choice if they cannot convince superiors otherwise. That choice is to resign, something most difficult to do in all circumstances. Ms. Haspel should face some tough questions about her role in this affair regardless of the bruising the agency will suffer. But she should also be confirmed.
6
If she was only following orders, she should have resigned. If she believed in torture, she has no place in running our country. We are better than that.
7
She could have gone on record as protesting the torture. She did not.
2
She and several thousands of our fellow Americans who served alongside her should be in prison and many of them including her on death row. They are traitors an cowards every one of them.
Trump defends torture because he doesn't understand nor respect that the USA is a country of LAWS.
39
You know your Administration stinks to the heavens when even an alleged water-boarder and evidence-destroyer is trying to get away before she gets tainted even further by association.
47
sounds like a typical republican cabinet candidate.
1
Being nominated and withdrawing when awful truths are disclosed about the nominee. Hopefully everyone sees a pattern here.
23
This is why Obama should have directed the justice department to prosecute those that managed and engaged in torture. Haspel couldn't be CIA Director if she was in prison.
Centrist Democrats let people get away with crimes because it is politically expedient, then Republicans use it to push the envelope ever further.
And Clinton lied under oath. The Democrats should have impeached him for that themselves. I don't care why he lied. He put himself in that position. Given a choice between lying under oath and protecting his own reputation the president of the Untied States chose lying.
By refusing to actively oppose bad policy, criminal behavior, and lying to the People, centrist Democrats made Trump possible.
21
Way to redirect responsibility away from Ms. Haspel. All those things may be true, but this is about her and her role.
She should not be CIA Director
2
Any person in a position of power who chooses or supports dehumanizing torture is not fit for public office whether it be state or federal government. Iowa congressional delegation, you are bound to uphold that truth.
31
She should have gone with her gut -- and withdrawn, particularly if she has any hopes of an ongoing career. (Who would brag on their resume about working in the Trump White House?) The fact that the WH minions had to beg her to reconsider tells you everything you need to know about this administration: they resorted to begging people to do what, in previous administrations, would have been considered a great honor. Perhaps she's afraid of her Senate confirmation hearings -- that they'll waterboard her?
13
One thing Mr. Trump tweeted is true, these are "very dangerous times". A president who treats the Constitution like recycling to be left at the curb, who has man-crushes on tyrants around the world, who encourages violence, gun lunacy and white nationalism, who attacks our intelligence community, law enforcement and judiciary when they dare suggest that he is not above the law, who has trashed civility and political debate in favor of bullying, and who is abetted in all of this by a myopic Congress that values wealth, party and power over truth and justice.
25
In a just world this woman would be in jail. She imprisoned and tortured suspects without any evidence or trial. Then she destroyed the records of these crimes. These are exactly the kind of evil acts we condemn totalitarian regimes like North Korea or Russia for committing. For this Trump wants to elevate her to the leader of the CIA. What are we telling the world?
64
If we had "lost" the Iraq war in the way that the Germans lost WWII she would definitely have been in jail or on the gallows.
if they do put her through confirmation hearings, i hope (democratic) questioners are prepared to delve into the bush-cheney waterboarding program. this may be the last best chance for a public accounting of our country's deliberate defiance of geneva conventions.
38
Unfortunately the Dems will self righteously speechify, vote unanimously against confirmation while the Repubs will vote unanimously for. I don't think there will ever be a full reckoning. Historians will write the full sordid story sometime in the distant future.
1
The blame belongs to George W. and we Americans, who were afraid to travel more than 2 miles from home.
5
It's the cruelty and abuse of prisoners that the president gets excited about. The suffering and torturers means nothing to him. He wants to show how tough and manly he is and rides roughshod over everybody, including his toadies, though they are oblivious to their own abasement.
The president knowingly highlighted his tweet about Ms. Haspel's sex because he wants to appeal to women as their champion and booster, which he is surely not. And he hopes to avoid another snub of an official backing away from his toxic administration.
He desperately wants to show that people are rushing in droves to serve him and be part of his administration. By stepping away firmly and emphatically, Ms. Haspel would have caused another embarrassment for the president.
12
CIA use of torture was short-lived and followed 9/11 directly. Those old enough to remember will remember that the fear in this country was all-pervasive at that time and many measures were taken to defend against terrorism which have now been soundly rejected.
I am sure Ms. Haspel thought she was acting in the best interests of the country when she engaged in torture. And I am sure that many, if not most, of the American people would have been behind her. Now that time has passed and we have come to rightly condemn torture, the question is whether Ms. Haspel's good faith but very serious error disqualifies her from the job she is otherwise highly qualified for.
Please note that Ms. Haspel is supported by most of her colleagues in order to assure that Trump doesn't replace her with a hack.
We all make mistakes that are associated with changing values and changing times. You can be strict and condemn those who made a misjudgment in a different time. Or you can forgive them for the fact that times change and so do values. She appears to be an ideal appointment but for what happened after 9/11. And she will likely be a responsible leader of the CIA. I'm 100% behind her appointment.
8
"Mistakes"? Advocating torture is unconscionable in any setting and at any time. It means your decisions can be bought off by loud flag waving and shouts of "Freedom Fries". In addition, some trump "hack" will not be approved by the Senate for this role.
There are plenty of good leaders out there, but none want to work with that horrible man in the Oval.
Gina should just withdraw her name from consideration.
5
"Your honor, I only robbed the bank because I'd lost my job and was afraid I couldn't provide for my children. If you could understand how scared I was you'd be okay with me robbing that bank. Oh, yeah, and winding that guard, too."
That's your logic, from where I stand. How can we be the Home of the Brave if our laws go down the drain when we get a little scared? Anyone can be tough when skies are blue.
5
@michjas: "We all make mistakes" is no defense for breaking international law. Prisoners were held without charge or trial and subjected to torture for years. Those subjected to such brutal treatment will often say anything to alleviate their suffering, even if they are innocent and have no information to give. There are no circumstances under which this is excusable.
13
Dozens of former intelligence, military, diplomacy and national security officials oppose her nomination as well as The Center for Victims of Torture, the premier expert on treatment, research and advocacy regarding torture and many other groups. She should not be confirmed. This is a defining moment.
79
Why would normalizing torture ever be considered a red flag?
2
Anyone with half a brain had appropriately learned that torture, as explained by Senator McCain, was ineffective, wrong, illegal and stupid. Further, smarter techniques were already in widespread use and unfettered waterboarding resulted in zilch. So, that's the rub with this appointment and Trump should have accepted her desire to duck the hearings and sent her a bottle of scotch.
4
Christopher, since you're writing from Florida, I cannot assume that you are kidding. I hope you are.