One-on-One with Talent on Terror Tactics

One day after the first U.S. Senate debate, Sen. Jim Talent was back in the Ozarks Saturday with a campaign swing through Springfield and Joplin.

We got to talk with him about a brewing national issue dividing the Republican party.

What rights do captured terrorists have and how should we conduct our interrogations of the enemy?

Here's the Washington Post's take on the issue.

Here's my conversation with Sen. Talent Saturday afternoon:

Catanese - Who do you side with in this debate over interrogation techniques, President Bush or Senator John McCain and Lindsey Graham?
Talent - No, I voted against their (the Senators) bill. I'm going to always err on the side of protecting the American people. In any reasonable close call, I'm going to err on the side of giving interrogators the authority to use the tactics that will get the intelligence that we need. One of my concerns about the bill is I believe it limits them more than is necessary. We have a situation now where a lot of the CIA's foreign interrogators have been more or less shut down because they're concerned about being sued. Some of the agents are buying liability insurance.

Catanese - What are those tactics? Shouldn't the American people have a right to know what we're allowed to do?
Talent - Yeah, and I've suggested in the committee that we give them a list of things they can do. But basically anything short of what we would think of as torture or inhumane treatment, which is basically the infliction of severe physical pain.

Catanese - What about water-boarding?
Talent - Something that inflicts pain over time, severe physical stress or that sort of thing, that's tactics that are not within our traditions to use. But what we're talking about are things like, and I had this in the committee, varying when they get meals, playing loud music to them, the old third-degree shining a light into their face. You know, these are people who cut our heads off. I mean, my concern is the freedom of and security of the American people, not in particular the terrorists.

Catanese - What about stripping them down, shaving their beards? People have said that's offensive to Muslims. Is that acceptable?
Talent - I'm willing to authorize the interrogator to use tactics that some people would consider offensive. Yeah, I'm offended by the idea the American people are threatened.

Catanese - With what happened at Haditha and Abu Grab, do you think we're losing the moral high ground in the world?
Talent - To the terrorists?
Catanese - No, no, no.
Talent - I don't think we're losing the moral high ground to the terrorists, Dave.
Catanese - Not to the terrorists, but to other countries in the world that are supposed to our allies?
Talent - I think this. I think the key issue, the key necessary quality for people in free societies is moral clarity and the ability to make certain basic distinctions, like between the terrorists and free people who live in a democracy. Churchill said one time, "I decline to be neutral between the fire brigade and the fire." And you know whatever our differences between the Europeans, whatever people's disputes with George Bush, I mean we are talking about a transnational army of really evil people who are out to destroy us.

Catanese - So you don't think they have Geneva Convention rights?
Talent - Well, the Supreme Court said they have common Article 3 Geneva Convention rights, but I think we have the right to define what that means to give the leeway that our interrogators need to get the intelligence.