The title of a recently released ABC News article is "Report: CIA Used Power Drills, Guns (and) Threats Against Children" when interrogating alleged terror suspects which is very disturbing. Again, this can be traced back to the Bush administration.

The first sentence is "CIA officials used power drills, mock executions and threats against children in a futile attempt to break high-value al-Qaeda targets, according to portions of a 2004 report by the CIA inspector-general made public today". The most significant phrase in this statement is obviously "to break" by using brute force. This is clearly abuse.

According to Richard Clarke, a former national security official who is now a consultant for ABC, "We now have a document that the world can read that shows in excruciating and disgusting detail THAT THE UNITED STATES VIOLATED ITS OWN BELIEFS AND TURNED TO THE DARK SIDE WHEN IT DIDN'T HAVE TO". The most dramatic/compelling words are obviously "excruciating" and "disgusting". The most important idea is that "the United States violated its own beliefs". This idea is simple and can be applied to other countries where human rights, dare we say it, may not even exist (e.g. Iran, North Korea, Cuba and China, although perhaps/maybe to a lesser degree): practice what you preach. "disgusting" is also appropriate because when a detainee's family is threatened, the interrogation methods have gone too far because most of these family members have done nothing wrong. This should remind us of Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq where (among other tactics), dogs were used to scare or even BITE prisoners and prisoners had to endure death threats and were also often sexually abused. These kinds of actions are indeed "disgusting".

According to CIA Director Leon Panetta, the CIA "made no excuses, however rare, that went beyond the formal guidelines on counter-terrorism". So, the big question is: who is more credible? Clarke or Panetta?

In order to find the answer to that question, we need another opinion to break this deadlock. According to Jameel Jafar, an American Civil Liberties Union director who leads the National Security program denounced the interrogation techniques saying "It is a violation of the US law to cary out mock execution". OK, they've denounced the techniques. Now the million-dollar question, again, is: what will anyone in Washington do to stop these types of interrogations from being implemented/utilized in the future?

Jafar continued: "It's important that this investigation can be broad enough TO ENCOMPASS NOT JUST THE INTERROGATORS WHO EXCEEDED AUTHORITY, BUT (also) THE SENIOR OFFICIALS WHO ORGANIZED THE TORTURE AND THE LAWYERS WHO FACILITATED IT. We don't ant an investigation that begins and ends with so-called rogue interrogators". Wow. Jafar is calling for some tough action.

According to Robert Grenier, a former counteterrorism chief who oversaw the interrogation program from late 2004 until early 2006, "Here the CIA has done this report a number of years ago". Well, if they knew about this "a number of years ago", why didn't Congress act/do something about this "a number of years ago"? "It's a very thorough report. IN FACT, IT WAS DONE BY PEOPLE WHO WERE NOT VERY SUPPORTIVE OF IT TO BEGIN WITH". Are these people trying to imitate Donald Tsang who worked as Hong Kong's Financial Secretary during the colonial (British) period (1995-1997), even though he loathes the international community? "It was very thorough. Any and all abuses were brought to light". This is clearly a lie. We can tell that this is a former BUSH administration oficial. "Many of those abuses were then referred to the Department of Justice". Former attorney general John Ashcroft didn't do a very good job and only time will tell how incumbent Eric Holder will fare. "It seems to me that the CIA did everything it was supposed to have done AND YET NOW, BOTH THE ORGANIZATION AND THE INDIVIDUALS CONCERNED ARE SUBJECT TO DOUBLE JEOPARDY". This is just another ex-Bush administration official playing partisan politics. "You can't have people who are freelancing. Unfortunately, I think (that) IN THEIR EARLY DAYS, a lot of freelancing took place". Surely, Grenier is referring to the shorcomings of the Bush administration again here because he talks about "the early days" and Obama hasn't been in office long enough for people to talk about his "early days" yet, or at least not as much as the Bush "early days". "IT TAKES TIME TO DEVELOP A DISCIPLINED, PROFESSIONAL PROGRAM". CIA officials under Bush weren't "disciplined" and "professional" at the beginning and they weren't much better by the end of the Bush tenure either. "Part of the problem now was that the CIA got into this business AND WAS TRYING TO CONSTRUCT A LOCOMOTIVE AS IT WAS GOING 60 MILES DOWN THE TRACK". Hang on. Republicans should be advocating LESS governance, but this seems to be pretty AGGRESSIVE action.  If the CIA under Bush were to blame, the blame would fall on former CIA director George Tenet.