NPR: Former President Clinton offered a different view in a conversation from New York. He was attending a meeting of corporate and government leaders called the Clinton Global Initiative. During an interview with NPR, the subject turned to terrorism. President Clinton is one of the few people who have viewed national security as it looks from the desk in the Oval Office.
Is it sometimes necessary to coerce or torture people in order to protect national security? to get information that you believe you really need?
Clinton: Well, I think as a policy it's in error. I think the Geneva Conventions are there for a reason. I think that, number 1, it's consistent with our values, and number 2, it's consistent with our interests. There have been repeated examples where a pattern or policy of torture produces... sometimes it'll get you something you don't know is worthwhile but more often than not it just gets people to lie to tell you whatever you want to hear to keep from beating the living daylights beaten out of them. And when you do it, you run the risk that your own people, if captured, will be tortured in return. That's the reason, apart from the humanitarian and moral reasons that the world has moved away from torture. That's the reason Senator McCain and others passed that prohibition. Now, the President says that he's just trying to get the rules clear about how far the CIA can go when they're whacking these people around in these secret prisons. Most Americans would probably think, Well, I'd be happy to have someone beat up if that would keep them from blowing up another bomb, another 9/11. I get that. But I think it's important to remember the reason that the entire military apparatus is opposed to torture.
