Apparently, the Attorney General, Eric Holder, is going to assign a Special Prosecutor to investigate alleged CIA abuse of terror suspects shortly after the 911 attack. This is on the heels of a report released that CIA interrogators used unauthorized and abusive tactics to compel and force terror suspects to provide information crucial in the thwarting of and intelligence gathering on Al Qaeda and other terrorists, post World Trade Center bombing.

Having both worked in intelligence and having been an instructor in resistance to interrogation methods, I recognize the thin balance between our moral obligation to adhere to the rules and procedures of interrogation and intelligence gathering, and the critical need to acquire real-time vital information that could lead to the apprehension of bad guy operators and the stopping of further terror attacks against our citizens, for which we are sworn to defend.  This is a real conundrum, and can be debated well after Mr. Holder is out of office. Politicians, Law Enforcement practitioners, and legal analysts will no doubt argue that we, as the leader of the free world, need to be above this type of abuse and it is ultimately in our national interest to ensure we do not utilize methods and procedures that diminish and erode our moral high standing.

From a comfortable chair, over looking the Potomac, sipping my Half–Caff Latte with Light Foam, I can certainly appreciate the desire and necessity for the US and our defense and intelligence practitioners to color within the lines. This is a slippery slope, and can open up, as witnessed by the Special Prosecutor, a very ugly can of worms. Yet, as the proverbial time bomb ticks, and you are thinking about your fellow citizens, and even your own family, being exposed and possibly injured or killed by the “next” attack as you have the potential of gathering crucial information and thwarting their nefarious activities, “morality” in a strictly academic sense is a luxury and even a burden to the Real Politicks of hard core and “play for keeps” operations against those dedicated to kill us. Playing by the rules is what Americans do…and it is precisely that mentality that the Terrorists are counting on.

Of course, we can not simply pick and choose which rules we like and those we don’t to either cover our administrative derrières, for political expediency, or perceived operational necessity. The CIA will no doubt argue, and there are officers and documents that support, the intelligence gathered as a result of their interrogations, some including questionable and clearly unauthorized methods, was “top drawer” information that led to stopping and further apprehension and disruption of terrorist networks. It is quite easy to lose the focus that we are at war with the most insidious of enemies as prosecutors, other bureaucrats and “experts” analyze the “post game” films and begin to hand out indictments and other legal “French Kisses” to the operators. If…IF…there was criminal activity, then there needs to be repercussions for that behavior and it needs to be addressed. That is clear.  However, if we discover that the tactics, though on the surface appear brutal and cruel, did provide key intelligence indicators about future terror activities then our concern shifts from the “criminal” concerns to how the terrorist “felt”, and did we “scare them”…and were their feelings hurt.

Each time certain information is released about our methods and procedures for interrogation, the terrorists adapt and overcome through training and experience how to defeat our intelligence gathering and interrogation methods. Guile, and scaring the urine out of those that are determined to kill as many of us as possible are not reasons to prosecute. If there is reason to believe the methods were physically fatal or life threatening (in their execution, not in their perception), then their needs to be a classified investigation as is standard within sensitive organizations, and even outside oversight. If Mr. Holder chooses to “open this up” and expose methodologies that are not criminal, but still effective, then we are aiding the enemy in his ability to resist our increasingly vanilla options. As with any organization, there needs to be procedures to police and observe its own personnel and if necessary from those outside. However, Mr. Holder also swore an Oath to support and defend against all enemies.

There are organizations that have those within it slipping out of bounds all the time. Professional football teams have extremely well paid athletes that commit personal fouls all the time…even criminal activity off the field. They fail to stop touchdowns, they fail to score touchdowns, and they fumble and miss read defenses every Sunday. However, the Owner doesn’t assign the Team Lawyer to investigate the defensive back coach each time the secondary commits a penalty against the opposing team. The coach either gets a hold of the problem, or he, or the players, is replaced. But in the world of US Government football, we put the problem of the defensive backs under the purview of the Special Teams coach, with oversight from the Team Lawyer and the assistant General Manager. This is evident of a new “group” to be managed by the FBI (which really means, Failure to Become Integrated) and under the auspices of the National Security Council called the High Value Target Interrogation Group. So, instead of having our first string field intelligence interrogators in the CIA and DIA, we are going to hand the authority over to the FBI, who as a law enforcement organization, is more concerned about case-making, than they are about enemy–breaking. So, the Defensive Backs at the CIA are now going to be replaced by the Offensive linemen at FBI, under the watchful eye of the management department under the General Manager, provided by information from the owner’s lawyer.  How long would the NFL last with this kind of logic?