Democrats who opposed Gina Haspel as CIA director were guilty of political posturing
Our moral betters told us that Gina Haspel, a 33-year veteran of the CIA nominated by President Donald Trump to direct the agency, should not have been confirmed by the US Senate because she once ran a rendition site where suspected al-Qaeda operatives were subjected to enhanced interrogation (“CIA nominee Gina Haspel approved by Senate panel despite links to torture”, May 16).
At that time, these interrogation techniques were legal under American law, they were the same techniques American special forces were exposed to as part of their training and, we are informed by operatives, yielded actionable intelligence.
In considering the moral objection, we must recognise that many of the same Democratic senators who castigated her for following procedures that were legal back then had voted to confirm John Brennan, former president Barack Obama’s nominee to be CIA director, despite his being senior to Ms Haspel in the CIA back when these procedures were followed.
In other words, morality is malleable and varies with the political identification of the president who makes the nomination. This is not morality at all. It is political posturing.
Paul Bloustein, Ohio