Academic

POWER LINE: The CIA Report: What Does It Say? ?Having read the CIA report in its entirety, I am st?

By Glenn Reynolds

POWER LINE: The CIA Report: What Does It Say? “Having read the CIA report in its entirety, I am struck once again by how humane our treatment of captured terrorists was intended to be, and generally was. The handful of incidents highlighted by press accounts of the report came to light precisely because they were reported as deviations from the treatment of detainees that had been authorized by DOJ lawyers. As a threshold matter, it is important to note that the allegations that have been reported in the press are just that–allegations, sometimes based on hearsay. The CIA’s Inspector General singled out two incidents for special investigation, both of which involved the same debriefer–not a trained interrogator. . . . One aspect of the IG’s report that has been absent from most press accounts is its account of the effectiveness of these early interrogations by the CIA. . . . The report also notes that six years ago, the incidents it describes were referred to the Department of Justice for possible prosecution, and DOJ determined that there was nothing there that merited prosecution. For Barack Obama and Eric Holder to reverse that decision six years later, in hopes of political gain, is deeply contemptible.”

UPDATE: ABC News: CIA Releases Documents Fmr. Vice President Cheney Requested Be Made Public. “The documents back up the Bush administration’s claims that intelligence gleaned from captured terror suspects had thwarted terrorist attacks, but the visible portions of the heavily redacted reports do not indicate whether such information was obtained as a result of controversial interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding. “

Full post as published by Instapundit.com on August 24, 2009 (boomark / email).