A Wrap-up with the Anti-Che

Felix Rodriguez


Editor’s Note: In the August 5 National Review, we published Jay Nordlinger’s piece “The Anti-Che: Felix Rodriguez, freedom fighter and patriot.” For that piece, go here. Yesterday, Nordlinger had a column of notes supplementary to the piece: here. Today, we publish a concluding such column.

In 1976, Felix Rodriguez left the CIA for several reasons. (Readers of my magazine piece will recall this.) One of those reasons was security. His cover was blown; he was receiving death threats.

The Agency offered to give Rodriguez and his family new identities and move them to a different state. Rodriguez decided against. It would be too disruptive, too upsetting to the family, he determined.

So, the Agency took some steps to afford him some security. They outfitted his home in various ways. They bullet-proofed his car, at Langley. They gave him a mobile phone — “something very rare at the time,” says Rodriguez. When he called a seller of such phones, he was told that the waiting list was ten years. Then Langley made a call. And Rodriguez got the phone in two days.

There were some other arrangements as well, and the Rodriguezes forged ahead.

Rodriguez is not very interested in money, and he has lived frugally. “I am very organized with my finances. I have never had a penny of interest on my credit card. If I don’t have the money, I don’t buy whatever it is.” He bought his house in 1969, for $29,800. “We borrowed 8,000 for the down payment.”

This seems a classic American story, old-school.

About Jimmy Carter, Rodriguez has very little good to say. “The worst president we ever had, though he’s being challenged by Obama.” He faults Carter for selling the Panama Canal; for undercutting Somoza, leading to the Sandinistas; for undercutting the shah, leading to Khomeini and the Islamists. He faults him for gutting special operations in the CIA and for diminishing our “human intelligence.”

He has chapter and verse. And he believes that what Carter did with the CIA has negative repercussions even today.

Here is a very modern concern: If there is a lie on the Internet, does it live forever, to be called up by generation after generation?

In the 1980s, a convicted money launderer for the Medellín cartel accused Rodriguez of soliciting drug money for the Contras. This accusation was leaked by “unnamed congressional sources,” in the time-honored expression of news reports. It wasn’t very hard to figure out who those sources were: the Kerry Committee, chaired by the man who is now secretary of state (much to Rodriguez’s disgust).

This accusation was a lie, and Kerry eventually apologized, after his fashion, for what he or his people had subjected Rodriguez to. But the lie, about drug money, lives forever, through the Internet. It is refreshed, retold, with some regularity. This sticks in Rodriguez’s craw.

There is a touching passage in his memoir (published in 1989, remember). He explains that there is something called Nexis, a database from which journalists pull. They may pull true things and untrue things.

We had seen nothing yet!

In the course of our interview, Rodriguez talks about today’s CIA: It is overly lawyered, he says, and overly cautious. Everyone is concerned about his backside, trying not to rock the boat until retirement. This is not very good for effectiveness, or for the success of missions. Intelligence work requires some boldness now and then. Other intelligence services have an advantage over us: They don’t hamstring themselves, as we do.

I ask Rodriguez what advice he would offer to those responsible for interrogating jihadists. He has much experience in interrogation, gained in Bolivia, Vietnam, and surely other places. He demurs. He says he dealt with different breeds, not with “the fanatics that you find in the jihad.” These jihadists are in a category of their own.

Waterboarding can obviously be abused, Rodriguez says — abused by the individual agent. This is to be guarded against. But if a prisoner had information about the impending murder of innocents, Rodriguez himself would do whatever it took to prevent this massacre. And he would sleep well.

He says something that almost makes me laugh out loud. In fact, I think I do. He says that some people paint the Batista dictatorship in Cuba as the ultimate in brutality. If this were so, he says, “we wouldn’t be here,” meaning, the exiles would not be in Florida. Because the government in pre-Castro days pardoned Castro and his fellow revolutionaries. Treated them with great leniency. “That doesn’t happen with Fidel, let me assure you. And Raúl executed his own uncle.”

I know just what Rodriguez means. A few years ago, I wrote a piece called “Death by Hunger Strike.” This was after a Cuban political prisoner, Orlando Zapata Tamayo, starved himself to death. He had endured the most heinous things; he felt he had no other recourse.

For years, they had been torturing him in the usual ways. When he was on hunger strike, they denied him water for 18 days (which is what they do to people on hunger strike — deny them water). He got kidney failure. Then they held him over a powerful air conditioner, which gave him pneumonia. Etc., etc. The details are ghastly.


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

NRO Polls on LockerDome

Subscribe to National Review