Emanuel To Critics Of Torture Memo Release: "Go Get The New York Review of Books"

Rahm Emanuel had a message to critics of the administration's decision to release torture memos: the information is already out there, read the New York Review of Books.

The brash White House chief of staff, appearing on ABC's This Week, pushed back hard at those individuals -- notably former CIA chief Mike Hayden -- who insist that the release of documents pertaining to the treatment of detainees was a security threat.

"We've banned these techniques and practices," said Emanuel. "Banned them. Because we didn't think they were consistent with America's security... Second is, we've enhanced America's image abroad. These were tools used by terrorists, propaganda tools to recruit new terrorists. And the fact is having changed America's image does have an impact on our security and safety and makes us stronger."

Pressed a bit further about the security implications of such disclosures -- the notion being that terrorists were somehow now briefed on the intricacies of American interrogation policy -- Emanuel reminded the detractors that much of the info was already public knowledge.

"One of the reasons the president was willing to let this information out [was that] the information was out," he said. "So if they're saying you basically have exposed something, it's been written. Go get the New York Review of Books. It is there. So the notion that somehow we're exposing something -- it's already been out. In fact, President Bush...allowed a lot of this information out. So the notion that somehow this all of a sudden is a game changer doesn't take cognizance of the fact it's in the system and in the public domain. Therefore, it's not new... Number two: it's one of the key tools al Qaeda has used for recruitment. There has been a net cost to America by changing the way America is seen in the world, which means banning this technique and practice, we have actually stopped them and prevented them from using it as a rallying cry."

Become a fan of HuffPost Politics on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Comments

[SlashPrower]

08:48 AM on 04/22/2009

There's no reason for Republicans to freak out over this except for the fact that the people from their party looked over it.

Rahm's doing a damn good job- he's honest, which might be why so many conservatives are freaking out.

[partyofone]

05:09 AM on 04/22/2009

Rahm Emanuel is a problem, not a solution. President Obama would seem wisest to cut his losses, send Emanuel back to Chicago, and get a Chief of Staff skillful at implementing the Obama agenda persuasively with increasing bipartisan support.

[danke fuer nichts]

11:17 AM on 04/20/2009

"We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants today is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well."

Robert H. Jackson
Chief of Counsel for the United States
Nuremberg, Germany
November 21, 1945

Today is tomorrow, Americans.

[SlashPrower]

08:45 AM on 04/22/2009

I like your tinfoil hat. Very stylish.

[lesterbud]

09:37 AM on 04/20/2009

Improving our security by actively reducing the number of people around the world with cause to hate us, with the added bonuses of increased trade and more diplomatic influence - I can see where the RushpublicanTs would be very afraid of that concept.

A bit different than the willy-nilly, knees-bent, running about, sky-is-falling, we're all dead, fear-and-loathing, close-the-borders, shoot-first-then-shoot-again, how-do-we-profit-from-this mentality of the previous regime.

[BabblingBrooks]

09:10 AM on 04/20/2009

Perhaps Rahm would like to "take on" Jack Bauer...

[Telemachus]

12:13 PM on 04/20/2009

Perhaps our foreign policy should be based on something besides fictional TV shows.

[ProfessorDuh]

09:06 AM on 04/20/2009

You go to love "conservatives" who maintain that the law of the land in a democratic republic should remain SECRET.
That's "conservative," as in "radical totalitarian."

[eugenegerard]

09:20 AM on 04/20/2009

Fascisist

[ProfessorDuh]

09:23 AM on 04/20/2009

They seem to disallow that word you mean here, though it certainly applies.

[ProfessorDuh]

09:26 AM on 04/20/2009

That would be difficult, what with one of them being juvenile fictional nonsense.

[JackND]

09:03 AM on 04/20/2009

I'm so glad we got a pragmatic Democrat in the White House rather than an idealistic one.

Prosecuting CIA agents for doing what they considered their job (and who knows what the Bush admin would do if they refused) would be the surest way to empty out the profession, both present and future.

The repercussions of that are uinimaginable.

[jdw1981]

09:10 AM on 04/20/2009

You are operating under a false assumption: that people who work for the CIA are in the military.

They are CIVILIAN employees who don't have to "take orders" as military personnel do. They can refuse to carry out orders or resign at any time, if they choose to do so.

[JackND]

09:22 AM on 04/20/2009

Um...no I'm not. I know they're civilians. That's why I called it a "profession" and why there is the risk of it emptying out and not attracting new people if what they thought was legal today makes them a criminal tomorrow.

[Tyler-Durden]

09:27 AM on 04/20/2009

EXACTLY.

ADDITIONALLY, there are ALWAYS new candidates for ANY job. There is always someone willing to do the job CORRECTLY. Let the people without morals quit.

TORTURE IS UNAMERICAN. BOTTOM LINE. There is never an excuse, and there is always a better method.

[Telemachus]

12:14 PM on 04/20/2009

You mean, not enough criminals would enter public service?

[felisa11]

09:01 AM on 04/20/2009

just got finished watching Standard Operating Procedures on cable. This is a detailed documentary
on the atrocities at Ab ghraib. They show the pictures and tell exactly how the torture was conducted and how long. Bush Administration ordered these soliders to do this. The soliders are victims as well. They either cooperated and committed torture or they went to jail for disobeying orders.

Nothing the Pres. released put this country at risk. All the infor is out there, unless of couse you think they made this documentary last Thursday.

[PatrickforO]

08:57 AM on 04/20/2009

After reading all the negative articles today, I confess to some dismay. The right wing noise machine is not dead yet and we have not yet won the culture wars. Let us keep speaking truth, as Emmanuel did here. For the first time in 24 of the last 28 years, this nation is on track to be the best it can be. I guess some cannot stand the idea.

[ManwithaParachute]

08:48 AM on 04/20/2009

OBUSHMA War Crimes Conspirator After the Fact and POTUS.

[lily]

08:52 AM on 04/20/2009

I've been calling him Obummer but I like Obushma better.

They are getting harder and harder to tell apart.

[Tyler-Durden]

09:28 AM on 04/20/2009

You both need to grow up.

[SlashPrower]

08:46 AM on 04/22/2009

Yeah, because that's not an ignorant, baseless accusation.

[Doofus]

08:40 AM on 04/20/2009

Is it so surprising that one presidency will weasel out of
prosecuting the previous incumbent? It's just something
that they always seem to do, regardless of party. BUT...
the door is left open for Congress to do its thing. Go &
get 'em, guys & gals! Make US proud, why don't you.

[JestMe]

07:53 AM on 04/20/2009

Rahm is playing the honesty card. Totally foriegn to the GOP.

[partyofone]

05:15 AM on 04/22/2009

Rahm is playing the same Washington spin game, he just spins in a direction you like.

[Oblique]

07:22 AM on 04/20/2009

Now the Obama administration has to release the assessment done by the CIA after Valerie Plame was outed. Were any of her contacts killed?????

[vippy]

07:40 AM on 04/20/2009

We shall never find out. That move was TREASON on Bush's part but he had nothing to fear.

[MerhabaAbi]

09:13 AM on 04/20/2009

No accountability, it's too bad. If the powerful know they are untouchable, they don't rein in their aggression.

[jjasonham]

06:46 AM on 04/20/2009

sarabono defending the indefensible i see...:

"It’s a clear-cut case: Waterboarding can without any reservation be labeled as torture. It fulfils all of the four central criteria that according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture. First, when water is forced into your lungs in this fashion, in addition to the pain you are likely to experience an immediate and extreme fear of death. You may even suffer a heart attack from the stress or damage to the lungs and brain from inhalation of water and oxygen deprivation. In other words there is no doubt that waterboarding causes severe physical and/or mental suffering – one central element in the UNCAT’s definition of torture. In addition the CIA’s waterboarding clearly fulfills the three additional definition criteria stated in the Convention for a deed to be labeled torture, since it is 1) done intentionally, 2) for a specific purpose and 3) by a representative of a state – in this case the US."

Bent Sørensen, Senior Medical Consultant to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims and former member of the United Nations Committee Against Torture

[Chocolate2008]

05:24 AM on 04/20/2009

Go Gettum Rahm !