Norah O’Donnell Insists CIA Tortured Terrorists
On Wednesday, Michael Morrell, former Deputy Director of the CIA and current CBS News Senior Security Contributor, appeared on CBS This Morning to discuss the Democrat-led Senate Intelligence Committee report on the CIA’s use of enhanced interrogation techniques against suspected terrorists.
While the former CIA official vehemently rejected the contents of the report, co-host Norah O’Donnell did her best to discredit Morrell’s defense of the agency. O’Donnell proclaimed “to me the idea that someone could be waterboarded, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, 183 times and that's not torture, I just don't understand that definition.”
The segment began with Morrell offering a strong repudiation of the credibility of the so-called “torture” report:
This is a deeply flawed report and it's flawed in two ways. One is that many of its main conclusions are simply wrong. For example, program not effective, not true. CIA lied to Congress, lied to the White House, lied to the Department of Justice, simply not true.
As the discussion over the CIA’s enhanced interrogation tactics progressed, Charlie Rose attempted to get Morrell to concede “not whether it was legal then and whether you had authorization, when you look at what was done was it torture as we define torture today?”
For his part, the former Deputy Director of the CIA denounced Rose’s efforts to classify the agency’s actions as torture:
One of the reasons I react so strongly as does George Tenet to people calling it torture was that the Department of Justice told us at the time this is legal, this is not torture. So when people call it torture I react strongly because it says my officers tortured people. They did not torture anybody.
Rather than be objective, O’Donnell joined in on the criticism of Morrell and insisted that the agency engaged in torture:
And I react strongly, too, because to me the idea that someone could be waterboarded, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, 183 times and that's not torture, I just don't understand that definition. I don't understand how forced enemas on someone is not torture. I don't understand how leaving someone awake for 180 hours is not torture.
That’s where the disagreement I think is clearly and there’s a legal argument about that. I think one of the key questions has been given those techniques that were used that are now banned, did they accomplish anything? Did they lead to the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden? And that is still under debate.
The heated back-and-forth concluded with Morrell reiterating one final time that regardless of what the CBS hosts said the agency stood by its interrogation techniques as vital to defending America’s national security interests:
Norah, when I was acting director in early 2013, this report showed up on my desk and I was essentially a blank slate because I was not involved in the program early on. So I was reading the Senate report and I was looking at our response and I wanted to make sure that our response could stand up to scrutiny. I wanted to make sure that our response was right. So I pored over this program in early 2013 like I have never pored over anything before.
And when I walked away from studying the Senate report, and studying our response, talking to our officers, I became actually more convinced that this program was effective in getting information that lead to the capture of additional senior operatives that stopped plots that would have killed Americans. I have no doubt about that.
See relevant transcript below.
CBS This Morning
December 10, 2014
CHARLIE ROSE: CBS News Senior Security Contributor Mike Morrell served under [George] Tenet at the CIA. He was Deputy Director from 2010 until last year. He was also acting CIA Director when the agency prepared its response to the Senate committee’s report. Good morning.
MIKE MORRELL: Good morning.
ROSE: Lots of opinions about this report. Characterize the report from what you know inside the CIA and characterize what was done and why.
MORRELL: Charlie, this is a deeply flawed report and it's flawed in two ways. One is that many of its main conclusions are simply wrong. For example, program not effective, not true. CIA lied to Congress, lied to the White House, lied to the Department of Justice, simply not true. The Republicans agree with that.
NORAH O’DONNELL: Except John McCain and Lindsey Graham.
MORRELL: Correct, but the Republicans on the committee. Second, second is it leaves out much of the story. What part of the story does it leave out? It leaves out the extensive discussions that the CIA had with the executive branch and it leaves out the extensive discussions that CIA had with Congress at the time. And congressman who were briefed on this program in 2002, 2003, 2004, supported this program and some even thought that we did not go far enough.
ROSE: Not whether it was legal then and whether you had authorization, when you look at what was done was it torture as we define torture today?
MORRELL: One of the reasons I react so strongly as does George Tenet to people calling it torture was that the Department of Justice told us at the time this is legal, this is not torture. So when people call it torture I react strongly because it says my officers tortured people. They did not torture anybody.
O’DONNELL: And I react strongly, too, because to me the idea that someone could be waterboarded, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, 183 times and that's not torture, I just don't understand that definition. I don't understand how forced enemas on someone is not torture. I don't understand how leaving someone awake for 180 hours is not torture.
That’s where the disagreement I think is clearly and there’s a legal argument about that. I think one of the key questions has been given those techniques that were used that are now banned, did they accomplish anything? Did they lead to the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden? And that is still under debate.
MORRELL: Norah, when I was acting director in early 2013, this report showed up on my desk and I was essentially a blank slate because I was not involved in the program early on. So I was reading the Senate report and I was looking at our response and I wanted to make sure that our response could stand up to scrutiny. I wanted to make sure that our response was right.
So I pored over this program in early 2013 like I have never pored over anything before. And when I walked away from studying the Senate report, and studying our response, talking to our officers, I became actually more convinced that this program was effective in getting information that lead to the capture of additional senior operatives that stopped plots that would have killed Americans. I have no doubt about that.
GAYLE KING: I think everybody would expect you, Mike Morrell, to defend what the CIA did back then. But what do you say about people who are raising the issue of morality? This is shameful, this is disgraceful. We heard the president say this is not who we are.
MORRELL; Gayle, this is a great question and I think it’s actually the central question. I think this is what we should be debating as a society. Was this right or was this wrong? This report never takes that important question on. And it's a difficult question because on the one hand you can say what’s the morality of doing this to another human being.
I think that’s what you’re saying Norah. What's the morality of doing this to another human being? It's inconsistent with who we are as a country in terms of our stance on human dignity and human rights. But on the other hand, what's the morality of not doing this when you firmly believe that you need to do this in order to stop terrorist attacks and save lives?
ROSE: Mike, in terms of everything that has happened since then, if it was today and all that has happened in this report, would you authorize, would you ask to do the same thing today?
MORRELL: You have to put it, Charlie, in the context of the times and the times today are different, so I don't know. But the context of the times, I mean, just take George's [Tenet] discussion here a little further. 3,000 people had just been killed. We had credible intelligence reporting of a second wave attack. We had credible intelligence reporting that Osama Bin Laden was meeting with Pakistani nuclear scientists to acquire a nuclear weapon and we captured people who we believed had information on those plots and we were not learning anything from them.
O’DONNELL; And in 1989 the CIA itself had concluded that inhumane, physical and psychological techniques are counterproductive.
MORRELL: These were not counterproductive.
ROSE: Is there one way you can prove–go ahead.
O’DONNELL: If they were–if the CIA was open and transparent and briefed about this and was okay with it internally, which there are documents that show there were questions. I mean they were afraid to tell Colin Powell about this. Why wasn’t the President of the United States, President George W. Bush, fully briefed until 2006, years after three-dozen detainees had been subjected to these harsh techniques?
MORRELL: The President of the United States, George Bush, approved the program. And all you have to do is read his book where he says “I knew about this program and I approve of this program.”
O’DONNELL: He said he was uncomfortable and he said he was uncomfortable with two techniques but the record also shows he wasn't briefed by a CIA director about how those techniques were being carried out.
MORRELL: But he was briefed by the National Security Advisor.
KING: Are you concerned about retaliatory attacks?
ROSE: So he knew everything that was going on, George?
MORRELL: Yes.
ROSE: I mean Mike.
KING; Are you concerned about retaliatory attacks now against Americans with the release of this report?
MORRELL: Yes in fact the Taliban just this morning said that because of this report we’re going to increase our attacks in Afghanistan.
ROSE: Mike, thank you so much.
MORRELL: You're welcome.
— Jeffrey Meyer is a News Analyst at the Media Research Center. Follow Jeffrey Meyer on Twitter.
