South Carolina Florida Florida Radio Network Transcript |
News Clips - Retired Military Leaders Speak Out Against Torture in South Carolina and Florida
<<Back to Human Rights First
GUEST: Lieutenant General Ret. Harry E. Soyster
DATE: January 23, 2008, 2PM
HOST: Carole Nelson
HOST: A lot of people are coming here to our state for the
HS: Thank you very much Carole, pleasure to be here.
HOST: I gather that we are talking about some things like waterboarding and some other forms of torture that have been bandied about as something that might be needed in order to get some information from terrorists. Is that the sort of thing that we are talking about, the waterboarding?
HS: Yes it is, that is one specific, which certainly come up very often in this debate. So I certainly can address that. But we are, and you mentioned, what we’ve done is this group of about 40 retired Admirals and Generals that consist of doctors, psychiatrists, combate veterans, intelligence officers and lawyers have met with seven of the candidates, I think that’s the number, with the idea of educating them giving them our views on this subject, with an effort to raise the debate, instead of quick sound bites, to do a debate on this very important national security issue.
HOST: And I understand that there are three things that you think are crucial to this particular issue one of them being that it puts- I have an officer son who is in the Middle East right now so it’s a very important topic for me- that it puts military personnel at an increased risk. Can you expand on that.
HS: Surely, we think that first of all, if we maintain the high values that we’ve always had as Americans, while we can’t guarantee in any way that the enemy will do the same, but at least we will have those standards set so if there is later any international implications to this that we’ve set the highest standard and we’ve not regressed to the low level of our enemies.
HOST: We’re taking the moral high ground.
HS: Taking the moral high ground, exactly. And we think in the long run that will pay off to protect our soldiers. Because the incidents like Abu Ghraib or whatever when they occur, they become a very good recruiting tool for our enemy.
HOST: I see. Ok, so now I understand that. What about undermining the
HS: That’s correct, and they are laid out in US codes as well, with the reality that torture, and there is always a definition question, but that torture is illegal and those who do it can be held accountable in a criminal court. So we think it is wrong that ours is a moral high ground, the values of this country, and this group of Admirals and Generals has fought to defend those, we think that should be the standard. We also think- and you asked me a question in terms of the impact on intelligence- we think that these enhanced techniques, which are a form of torture as we see them, are not effective. In that if you use them the information that you get, to determine its reliability is very difficult. You want reliable information that you can convert to actionable intelligence.
HOST: Because during torture they may say anything to stop the torture.
HS: Exactly, and we have the classic example of Al Libby, who was taken to Egypt so that he might be tortured, he gave us all this information about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And Colon Powell went to the UN with bad information and later he recanted and said ‘I gave this information because I didn’t want to be tortured’. The information was wrong and we don’t think its effective and good interrogation techniques short of that will give us the information so it’s not necessary.
HOST: You are also concerned about the reputation of the
HS: It has because of the fact that these techniques were used and put us in a very bad light, both with our allies and confirms the thoughts of our enemy and so we want to make sure that a standard is set.
HOST: Now, I know that you’re not endorsing any candidates but as you talk to the candidates- Democratic and Republican- what kind of feedback are you getting because I know that you want more specific things, as you said, than sound bites. What do you get from the candidates in terms of what is acceptable in their terms for their platform.
HS: Well, we have been very pleased. And the scenario in which we do this is there are about fifteen of us who have traveled to New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina and now in Florida, hoping to do this or do these radio shows or forums. The candidates have been very receptive to our ideas during the discussions they have asked good questions, they have really listened to us and they have referred to us as influencing their view on this. From our standpoint at this time we are very pleased with this.
HOST: Have they actually come short of condemning it? In other words, instead of saying we’re against this they’ve been open to what you have to say, but has anyone- I am trying to think about John McCain, it seems to me that he came out against it.
HS: Oh yes. In fact the group was first gathered together to support some legislation that he brought fourth and of course he has been very strong on not using these techniques. He is against torture, he has some experience in this area.
HOST: Has any other candidate actually come out and said ‘I’m against it’ or have they simply been receptive to listening to you?
HS: Their stance has basically been against it. Now let me give you an example because it’s public. We talked to Governor Huckabee and his previous position has been ‘This is an issue on which I defer to my opponent Senator McCain’ and so he walked out of discussing the subject. The press was there in large numbers because he had risen to the top of the poles and he was asked this question “You just met with this group of Admirals and Generals, where do you stand on this?’ and he said ‘Well as I’ve stated I defer to Senator McCain on this but let me tell you why’. And he went down the strong points that we had made against it. So we feel that’s an example.
HOST: Pretty much on the Democratic side do you think that there is a lot of support for this?
HS: I think that the Democratic candidates that we have talked to are basically against torture. We have a specific issue which is now before our legislators and that is whether the CIA should have additional authorities beyond what the military has as defined in our updated Field Manual defining how we treat detainees.
HOST: God Bless
HS: The House has approved it, to put everybody on the same standards, and its now before the Senate. A group of us are in fact going to talk with a group of Senators early next week.
HOST: Now, I’m not clear. Does this mean that they would endorse some things that would go beyond what we usually think of as interrogating?
HS: They would not. The legislation approved by the House makes one standard for all. Because the CIA, who wants these enhanced techniques, they are Americans. So anything that would happen, like in Abu Ghraib or whatever when they use this, will have the same impact and will impact on our soldiers while they are fighting there.
HOST: So I guess you are saying that you favor this legislation then because it’s more likely to pull back from those adverse torture methods?
HS: Yes, we want legislation to make it very clear. And it’s also very important of course that the Commander in Chief, because of the impact he has on soldiers, that we have one standard that applies for all Americans and those standards are the highest values which this country has always stood for.
HOST: The President said that he would veto it?
HS: I don’t- I can’t say.
HOST: I’m going to ask you one last question and it may be
something that your group doesn’t address but in
HS: We have not because we have not been asked to address that issue. What we do know in regard to our effort is that General Petraeus has sent a letter out to the troops and has clearly stated that there is one standard and it’s the army field manual. It is a very good letter stating his position as the military commander, in terms of this particular issue.
HOST: Ok, I thank you very much. I assume that there are a lot of people in
HS: We have not met with all of them, we have certainly
invited them and of course there is always a scheduling problem and so
fourth. So we are having things like
this radio discussion, which you have been kind enough to have. We just had a wonderful session at
HOST: Of course we hear a lot of people who are against it but when we hear it
from retired military especially of your rank, and that of the others who join
you the retired officers and Admirals and know that they are behind it that is
very heartwarming. Thank you so much Lieutenant
General Harry Soyster, thank you for being on the Carroll
Nelson Show I appreciate it.
HS: Thanks, Carole.