The Pointy Point: Investigate the CIA?

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Play/Download mp3 »

On this episode of The Pointy Point, host David Overbearing talks with a former CIA consultant about what an investigation into CIA interrogations might look like. Transcript below.

Transcript:

Overbearing: From The National Protrusion News Radio, this is ‘The Pointy Point’ with me, David Overbearing.

Last Monday Attorney General Eric Holder appointed a special prosecutor to investigate the harsh interrogations of prisoners by the CIA.

But what kind of investigation will it be? Who will it focus on? How far should it go?

I’m joined today by Howard Shurman, who is a former CIA consultant on interrogation procedure. Mr. Shurman, thank you for being on the program.

Shurman: Well, thank you for having me.

Overbearing: Let’s start with the Attorney General’s announcement. What might an investigation like the one he’s talking about focus on?

Shurman: Well, I think it will likely focus on the CIA interrogators themselves, uh, individuals who may have stepped over the line. Taken it too far.

Overbearing: Taken it too far in what way?

Shurman: Well, you know, the ones who may have poured more water down the nose and mouth of a detainee than the memos said they could.

Overbearing: You’re speaking of the Justice Department memos that outlined what they considered acceptable acts during interrogations?

Shurman: Yes. Or banged their heads against the wall five times instead of four.

Overbearing: That wasn’t okay. Five times.

Shurman: No. If the memo said four times, stick to four times. You can do a lot with four times. You don’t have to be excessive.

Overbearing: Right. Recently, a report was made public that showed that interrogators fired guns in the neighboring cell of a suspect to make the suspect think someone was killed. They threatened to harm their families. What about those instances? Should those interrogators be punished?

Shurman: Well, it depends. It depends on what they were told by the Justice Department lawyers.

Overbearing: So, just between you and me, let’s say, hypothetically, the lawyers said it was legal to threaten a suspect’s family with sexual assault or murder, you think that’s all right?

Shurman: It depends.

Overbearing: On what?

Shurman: On who’s being questioned. If it’s me, and they threaten my mother, I’ll kill them.

Overbearing: Well, I’m don’t know that you would be able to kill them. You’d probably be restrained or shackled in some way.

Shurman: It doesn’t matter. I can still kill them. I could kill you right now and you wouldn’t even know it.

Overbearing. Okay. You know, it’s also coming to light now that many of the people who were detained didn’t actually do anything wrong. That they were wrongly imprisoned. What about that?

Shurman: Well, the interrogators didn’t know they were innocent when they slammed their heads against the wall.

Overbearing: But isn’t that kind of part of the point? If we don’t slam people’s heads against the wall, if we treat them humanely, then if they’re innocent, if they haven’t done anything, they’re alive and well rather than dead or badly injured.

Shurman: But if they’re guilty, we haven’t slammed their heads against the wall when we could have.

Overbearing: Right. So kind of a missed opportunity there.

Shurman: Exactly.

Overbearing: Mr. Shurman, thank you very much.

Shurman: Oh, thank you.

Podcast: Download