Keep CIA Black Sites Black
Quite a piece of investigative reporting in WaPo today ... obviously a lot of hours booked on this one. Yet all reporter Dana Priest has to show for his efforts is an old story: The CIA has special places outside the US for special terrorist prisoners, and we don't really know what's going on there.
Priest started well, using "terrorist" when referring to the prisoners, but after a while, he slipped to "detainee;" probably nothing more than a journalist's penchant to vary his words.
The most interesting part of the story is the part that completely justifies these highly secret black sites: They only hold 100 prisoners.
Consider all the thousands of prisoners we've taken since 2001, and of all these, just 100 are sent to one of these prisons. To me, that says the CIA is using the facilities sparingly and intelligently.
This is an unconventional war against an unconventional enemy. We need places to put the worst of the worst, and while WaPo set out to embarass the CIA, it did just the opposite -- it showed the agency is using these facilities as they should use them. Not too often, but when it's right.
As for what goes on in there, I trust the CIA to know more about what works and what doesn't work in the intelligence-gathering world than I trust WaPo, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the ACLU. I just can't work up a lot of compassion for the top dogs of Islamic terror.
Priest started well, using "terrorist" when referring to the prisoners, but after a while, he slipped to "detainee;" probably nothing more than a journalist's penchant to vary his words.
The most interesting part of the story is the part that completely justifies these highly secret black sites: They only hold 100 prisoners.
Consider all the thousands of prisoners we've taken since 2001, and of all these, just 100 are sent to one of these prisons. To me, that says the CIA is using the facilities sparingly and intelligently.
This is an unconventional war against an unconventional enemy. We need places to put the worst of the worst, and while WaPo set out to embarass the CIA, it did just the opposite -- it showed the agency is using these facilities as they should use them. Not too often, but when it's right.
As for what goes on in there, I trust the CIA to know more about what works and what doesn't work in the intelligence-gathering world than I trust WaPo, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the ACLU. I just can't work up a lot of compassion for the top dogs of Islamic terror.
posted by Laer at 6:47 AM
<< Home