Patterico's Pontifications

4/24/2009

Waterboarding Worked, Part 2: The Timing of the Library Tower Plots

Filed under: General,Judiciary,Obama,Terrorism — Patterico @ 7:33 am



As I discussed earlier this week, recently released memos confirm that waterboarding KSM resulted in the disruption of a plot to fly airplanes into the Library Tower in downtown Los Angeles. In other words, pouring water on this mass murderer’s face may have saved thousands of lives.

You might as well look at the memo for yourself, to see that it’s for reals. Here it is, and here is one of the key passages at page 10:


(Click to enlarge)

The memo elsewhere makes clear that we’re talking about waterboarding specifically.

Don’t let anyone tell you that the events described in the memo are fictional because of the timing. I told you the other day that the naysayers will tell you that the timing doesn’t work out, because the plot (they claim) was completely disrupted in 2002, before KSM’s arrest in 2003. I said: “I often hear that the plot was foiled before KSM was captured, but there were evidently two such plots.”

I think it’s time to flesh that out in detail. Because sure enough, after the recent release of these memos, Slate’s Tim Noah and others resumed pushing the claim that the timing couldn’t have worked out. This Daily Kos story was featured prominently on HuffPo last night, and the meme is spreading.

But it’s not true.

There was a second wave coming even after KSM’s arrest. That second wave was broken up. As a Los Angeles Times article reported in October 2005:

Federal counter-terrorism officials on Friday disclosed for the first time that during his interrogations, Mohammed said he hadn’t completely abandoned the prospect of a second wave of attacks, but had turned the idea over to a trusted aide named Hambali, the chief of operations for an Al Qaeda affiliate group in South Asia, Jemaah Islamiyah.

Hambali, also known as Riduan Isamuddin, in turn is believed to have chosen several men to launch the attacks, including a pilot, and had set aside some money to pay for them, according to one senior counter-terrorism official.

Those men were soon captured, however, and the plot never progressed past the planning stages, according to several counter-terrorism officials.

Now, it’s true that the leftist L.A. Times, in its zeal to prove that the plot was insubstantial, managed to find some anonyleaker (no doubt someone with a personal axe to grind, as these anonyleakers usually are) who says: “To take that and make it into a disrupted plot is just ludicrous.” But I think it’s ludicrous to dismiss it just because it was only in the planning stages. As Philip Klein observes:

[I]f we’re able to disrupt such plots in the early stages, isn’t that a good thing? Isn’t that precisely what successful counterterrorism looks like? Isn’t that the kind of detective work that we failed to do on Sept. 11? In the early stages, if you had read that a group of terrorists was planning on sending men to hijack airplanes with box-cutters and fly them into buildings, destroying the Twin Towers and damaging the Pentagon, and killing 3,000 people, it probably would have sounded far fetched to most people.

The unnamed FBI dude who sneers at the disrupted plot might have done the same if we had disrupted the September 11 plot. Until this clown puts his name on the record, I’m not taking his dismissal too seriously.

Leftists have to confront the facts: there is a very real possibility that, if we hadn’t waterboarded KSM, Al Qaeda would have had a repeat of 9/11, but this time in Los Angeles.

Which would you prefer? Pour some water on a mass murderer’s face, or allow thousands to die?

I’m proud of the Bush Administration for saving us from that. I’m glad that they did what needed to be done, and didn’t shrink from it.

And I’m ashamed that we’ve now elected a president who has made our tactics transparent to the enemy, who has talked about prosecuting officials for authorizing tactics that saved lives, and who has made it clear that he isn’t willing to do what’s necessary to protect the American people.

327 Responses to “Waterboarding Worked, Part 2: The Timing of the Library Tower Plots”

  1. I keep hearing the liberals answer “We are better than that” when questions of waterboarding arise. Try as they might, they can’t prove a negative. So they do the next best thing, they blame those who take a proactive approach in times of crisis for ignoring convenient cultural values in pursuit of our safety. Funny how questions of value only raise their ugly spectre when denouncing conservative survival instincts.

    Proving once again that tragedy is only a statistic until it happens to them, we wonder how they would react if it happened to them. Oh yeah, they would pull a “Kartrina” and say not enough was done to protect their hypocritical butts.

    David Hampton (9d1bb3)

  2. So Patterico maintains that torture did after all disrupted plots.
    But he is contradicted an FBI source quoted in the LA Times article he linked us to:

    “To take that and make it into a disrupted plot is just ludicrous,” said one senior FBI official…”

    Andrew (8e2134)

  3. And now Obama’s decided to release Gitmo pictures to the ACLU. Not even fighting it at the Supreme court.

    Whomever decided to destroy those 92 interrogation tapes must feel he did the entirely right thing about now.

    MayBee (c633c9)

  4. And now Obama’s decided to release Abu Gharib pictures to the ACLU. Not even fighting it at the Supreme court.

    Whomever decided to destroy those 92 interrogation tapes must feel he did the entirely right thing about now.

    MayBee (c633c9)

  5. Andrew – Had you read the post you would have seen where Patterico addressed that.

    I love how the Leftists always pull a source from another agency to criticize someone.

    JD (788853)

  6. But he is contradicted an FBI source quoted …

    following

    Until this clown puts his name on the record, I’m not taking his dismissal too seriously.

    WTFIIT lefties have the reading comprehension of an insect?

    I’m gonna go collect some caterpillars.

    Dumberer than a sack of.

    EW1(SG) (e27928)

  7. What I want to know is when did a simulated golden shower become torture or for that matter naked group pics?

    What is being labeled torture by Libs in one set of circumstances is considered fun and A-OK by those very same Libs when it involves gay men.

    HeavenSent (637168)

  8. Andrew is just citing the current left wing memo that noone can actually “prove” that waterboarding the guy gave up vital information. Which is just flatly stupid because we have reports of the guy breaking and spilling the beans on everything he knew. This is all about politics not about national security to them so what’s new. If this was Obama that had harshened up interrogation techniques post 911 they would be shouting how he saved us all from certain death.

    Mr. Pink (eae12c)

  9. Pouring water on a terrorists face in order to protect American lives=bad

    Soldiers shooting armed terrorists in Iraq=bad

    Navy SEAL snipers killing 4 pirates off the coast of Somalia=Obama saved the world look how huge his pecs are!!!!11!!!!

    Mr. Pink (eae12c)

  10. During World War II both Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, and the officers of the Gestapo, the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture. During the Japanese occupation of Singapore the Double Tenth Incident occurred. This included waterboarding, by the method of binding or holding down the victim on his back, placing a cloth over his mouth and nose, and pouring water onto the cloth.

    Chase J. Nielsen, one of the U.S. airmen who flew in the Doolittle raid following the attack on Pearl Harbor, was subjected to waterboarding by his Japanese captors. At their trial for war crimes following the war, he testified “Well, I was put on my back on the floor with my arms and legs stretched out, one guard holding each limb. The towel was wrapped around my face and put across my face and water poured on. They poured water on this towel until I was almost unconscious from strangulation, then they would let up until I’d get my breath, then they’d start over again… I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death.”

    It can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, lasting psychological damage or, ultimately, death. Adverse physical consequences can start manifesting months after the event; psychological effects can last for years.

    So history shows who’s side Republicans are on in the first paragraph. Congratulations.

    Mr. Pink = total idiot

    cologuy (c7fd4e)

  11. Far more important than these after-the-fact carpings is the fact that these techniques will now be banned and the next plot, probably using Pakistani nuclear devices, will gone on undisturbed by the sleeping Obama CIA. If I were a lefty, I would be thinking about where I lived and what targets might be nearby. They won’t because they assume this is all “a bumper sticker.”

    Mike K (2cf494)

  12. “cologuy,” does that name refer to the colon ?

    Mike K (2cf494)

  13. THis is a “dog didn’t bark” problem. If an attack is foiled, whether in the planning stages or just before it is launched, lives have been saved, but we don’t know whose lives have been saved. We cannot look at Bradley Fikes and say, “Mr Fikes is alive today because Plot X was foiled.” We can only say that some lives, of unspecified people, were saved; Patterico wasn’t a victim today, but we don’t know that he would have been a victim otherwise.

    This allows our friends on the left a (very slight) entré into the real world, because we cannot identify who was not a victim of a plot that was never completed. We can only identify, specifically, the people who were victims of plots nopt foiled, at which point they blame George Bush for not having foiled the plot.

    The realistic Dana (3e4784)

  14. This meme you speak of, comparing the use of waterboarding by intelligence officials in the US post 911 to the WW2 incidents, was already put out around 3 years ago. Why didn’t you just skip to the end of your argument and cite the guy that was put to death for “waterboarding”, and then leave out the fact he was also on trial for murder. Really you could save alot of time that way.

    PS if waterboarding is “torture” as it was practiced by US intelligence officials then please explain to me why people volunteer to undergoe it on video tape? Really please help me out here because I do not see people volunteering to have their hands broken or fingernails pulled out to find out if those activities are torture.

    Mr. Pink (eae12c)

  15. “So history shows who’s side Republicans are on in the first paragraph.”

    Democrats were for it too at the time dickwad. Probably so were you.

    Mr. Pink (eae12c)

  16. We cannot look at Bradley Fikes and say, “Mr Fikes is alive today because Plot X was foiled.”

    There was that wicked plot to spike my Patron tequila with water . . .

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., (83f220)

  17. What do you guys think by Dennis Blair’s comment that the costs of torture outweigh its benefits?

    Andrew (a5dc18)

  18. There was a second wave coming even after KSM’s arrest.

    Dude, call it a “third wave.”

    There, problem solved.

    SEK (072055)

  19. To be more specific and talk about baseball:

    The Mets load the bases and score two runs in the first. They took advantage of their first scoring opportunity.

    The Mets load the bases again in the fourth, but score no runs. They squandered their second scoring opportunity.

    The Mets get runners on first and third with no outs in the seventh, but score no runs. They squandered their third scoring opportunity.

    You could call it their second squandered scoring opportunity, but that’s a recipe for confusion.

    SEK (072055)

  20. #1’s comment reminds me of the controversy in NYC months after 9/11 regarding the random search of backpacks and such in the subway. The media interviewed a guy who, in whinny liberal fashion, said he’d rather take his chances than have his rights violated by cops looking in his knapsack. My first reaction was, ‘well you may see nothing wrong with putting YOUR children in jeopardy on the trains, but I don’t want MY children needlessly exposed to such a peril.’ I swear, some people are still stuck on stupid, even after 9/11 unfolded right before their eyes.

    sam (1a8310)

  21. Andrew – Blair also stated that we got high value information from him. He does not say what the “cost” was, but it pales in comarison to the cost of not getting the high value information discussed in this post, you know, the one that you did not read.

    JD (788853)

  22. Andrew, once again you call something it is not. No matter how you say it, waterboarding is not torture, period. Thats it and thats all. That is just like equating homosexual issues with racial issues. You cannot choose your race, however an inclination toward homosexuality does not mean one must behave in that manner Sexual preference is not equal to racial issues. It would be like me saying if you disagree with what I say, you must be and idiot. Just as soon as you disagree, you label yourself, if the definition is accepted. Except in this case where facts outweigh opinion.

    Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (57cae1)

  23. KSM was arrested before early March 2003, Hambali in late February 2004 — by . It seems unlikely that KSM would have had knowledge of Hambali’s whereabouts nearly a year after his arrest. That is, it is doubtful KSM provided any intel of tacticalvalue with regard to Hambali. I mean, these guys are wanted (see below) terrorists. I don’t think they stay in one place too long.

    So, okay, he provided strategic intel, as far was what Hambali was supposedly up to, namely the alleged ‘Library Tower” second wave. But Hambali was already wanted by just about every government in South East Asia — the Bali bombing, various crimes in the Philippines, a supposed plot against an upcoming APEC meeting. That is, everyone was looking for him, and he already had a rap sheet so long that supposed planning for ‘second wave’ attack of an attack that never took place would add zero as a practical matter to the brief against him.

    A more likely scenario. KSM gives up a name, Hambali, of a guy already identified by governments and media, well known in South/ South East Asia. Here for example, is an April 2002 Time story on the fellow, complete with picture.

    So your getting tortured, you know this guy Hambali is out there — you give him up, maybe even his last location known to you, which is probably stale already (and certainly by a year latter). Little harm to AQ, the HUMINT guys get a hard-on and blow their ‘find’ way out of proportion, leak it anonymously to the press. Bush die hards can feel happy about themselves years latter. Its a win-win-win.

    horace (411ef0)

  24. @zelsdorf:

    Funny. Boehner said the memos released by Obama outline torture.

    “Last week, they released these memos outlining torture techniques. That was clearly a political decision and ignored the advice of their Director of National Intelligence and their CIA director,”

    http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000003101751

    Andrew (d2f616)

  25. What is being labeled torture by Libs in one set of circumstances is considered fun and A-OK by those very same Libs when it involves gay men.

    Oh look, someone still hasn’t figured out the difference between rape and sex. I assume you are a Republican. The distinction seems to be hard for Republicans to figure out.

    My first reaction was, ‘well you may see nothing wrong with putting YOUR children in jeopardy on the trains, but I don’t want MY children needlessly exposed to such a peril.’

    So when the WTC station reopened, how often did you ride through it? I was going through it twice a day. How many terrorist plots were discovered by the random searches? Were you ever randomly searched? If it’s such a threat why aren’t there still random searches going on?

    Internet Tough Guy (22501b)

  26. Intellectually vapid from start to finish, Pat. You’re capable of better than this.

    Start by attempting to demonstrate that torturing the guy was the only way to get the information out of him. Continue by demonstrating that he was the only source of the information – pretty flipping unlikely, since the Phillipines was not exactly off our radar, and since we’d been rolling up agents in that area since the 90’s, back when none of this muck was an issue.

    Wait, you can’t demonstrate either of those things.

    We could also have defended the country from such plots by nuking the Phillipines. If we’d done that, the Second Wave plot would have been disrupted, and you could make the same flabby argument that therefore doing so was “neccessary” or “the only way”. Just because you accomplish a specific act via the nastiest possible method does not demonstrate that this is the only possible method.

    Until this clown puts his name on the record, I’m not taking his dismissal too seriously.

    How’s this for on the record?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/opinion/23soufan.html

    The senior FBI here in question personally testifies that the CIA lied to the DOJ regarding Abu Zubadiyah.

    (How many years have I listened to the conservasphere rant *endlessly* about the dishonest, manipulative, bush-hating CIA and their tendency for political warfare – and NOW you’re sure they’re telling the truth – rather than covering their a*ses frantically? How… convenient.)

    You’re way too certain of things you shouldn’t be. I can imagine that, beneath all the dishonest spin and CYA, some useful intel was got out of somebody, somewhere, at somepoint via these methods. That fact, by itself, is not even remotely related to an informed assessment that these techniques work “better” than the alternatives. It just proves that they did not universally suffer complete fail at every single point they were used.

    glasnost (af3e29)

  27. And I’m ashamed that we’ve now elected a president who has made our tactics transparent to the enemy, who has talked about prosecuting officials for authorizing tactics that saved lives, and who has made it clear that he isn’t willing to do what’s necessary to protect the American people.

    Seriously, can your sanctimonious bullsh*t until you start demonstrating, in order, that a) these disclosures contain anything remotely new or useful to terrorists, who have known about all this stuff from well into the Bush Admin, I’ll try and find the post I read from a military/intel source discussing how the bad guys have been prepping these methods for *years*-

    b) that this stuff wasn’t plainly illegal on the face of it, wacky DoJ a*s-covering memos aside,

    c) and returning to the first point, demonstrating that any of this was “neccessary”. For more on this, see Phillip Zeikow:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/opinion/24zelikow.html?ref=opinion

    More recent history is also revealing. America inadvertently carried out an experiment in how best to question Qaeda captives. On the one side there was the C.I.A. effort, while on the other there was the military-run program against Al Qaeda in Iraq. The Iraq program, organized by the Joint Special Operations Command, was reformed after the Abu Ghraib scandals. It respected basic international standards. It used teams made up of experts from the military, the C.I.A. and law enforcement. The F.B.I. did not have to stay away, as it did from the C.I.A.’s “enhanced” interrogations.

    Qaeda captives in Iraq were hard cases, often more seasoned in violence than captives taken elsewhere. Yet the program in Iraq was and remains highly successful. I was impressed when I observed it in 2005 as part of a wider look at our intelligence efforts. I know that Joint Special Operations Command leaders told the White House that they could interrogate captives effectively under the higher standards.

    Last, but not least, the memos were released on the last day of a court-mandated deadline in a suit brought by the ACLU. To not release the memos would have been, again, to defy the law, something which you seem rather hypocritical in your comfort with.

    glasnost (af3e29)

  28. So the torturers break KSM and get him to spill his guts about a guy we, and other countries, were already looking for? That’s some fine work, Lou.

    Next up: telling everyone how beating Maher Arar with shredded cables was effective at getting him to admit he trained with al Qaeda. See! Torture works!

    Internet Tough Guy (22501b)

  29. Waterboarding was the nastiest method possible, glasnost?

    JD (788853)

  30. Waterboarding was the nastiest method possible

    No, they could have wrapped him in a sleeping bag and beaten him to death. Of course KSM wasn’t a uniformed general, so who knows about any Geneva Convention status? It was just some guys blowing off steam.

    Internet Tough Guy (22501b)

  31. You know what I have changed my mind. In retrospect they should not have been waterboarded and LA should have been blown off the map. A couple million less idiots like glassnot and andrew and we all would be better off.

    Mr. Pink (eae12c)

  32. You know what I have changed my mind. In retrospect they should not have been waterboarded and LA should have been blown off the map. A couple million less idiots like glassnot and andrew and we all would be better off.

    Take that you silly liberals! If you want to follow the rule of law then you should die! That includes all of you pantywaist military, FBI and CIA guys that don’t want to use torture!

    Did anyone else actually read the article that Patterico linked to? The article that says:

    The White House said Thursday that U.S. authorities disrupted the so-called “West Coast Airliner Plot” in mid-2002, stopping terrorists from attacking “targets on the West Coast of the United States using hijacked airplanes. The plotters included at least one major operational planner involved in planning the events of 9/11.”

    So we are once again back to the time travel theory of water boarding. When we waterboarded KSM in 03/03 it allowed us to disrupt a mid-2002 plot.

    So how exactly does this new form of physics work? Is the length of time you can travel back based on the number of times you waterboard a person? If that’s the case I might change my mind on the subject. If we waterboarded KSM 366 times maybe we could have stopped 9/11. I think that’s a fair trade off.

    A couple questions though. Does the time travel only work when we waterboard KSM? Does it only effect plans that KSM was involved in? For instance, if we waterboarded KSM a couple thousand times could we stop Hitler?

    I smell a Nobel prize.

    Internet Tough Guy (22501b)

  33. “And I’m ashamed that we’ve now elected a president who has made our tactics transparent to the enemy…”

    Well, there’s nothing new about that. The Democrats have ALWAYS put their own interests ahead of the interests of the nation and the citizens of the nation.

    That’s kind of why we had a civil war in the 1860s.

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  34. Good on you for rising to the challenge and putting up some evidence.

    This is an interesting question–how much of the intel obtained by torture was good and how much was useless? While it does not change the mind of myself and many others who view these institutionalized tactics as inherently wrong, it is nonetheless important to know what the results were to have an intelligent debate.

    Cyrus Sanai (ada6da)

  35. glasnost whining about others’ being sanctimonious? Oh the irony.

    SPQR (72771e)

  36. The ratio of wheat to chaff is really just a red herring. By all honest accounts, actionable intelligence was obtained and used to stop the attacks in the planning stages.

    And stating that this was “institutionalized” ignores the fact that it was clearly viewed as being exceptional circumstances.

    JD (788853)

  37. Exactly, JD, because the intelligence business is all about separating unreliable information from the reliable. And getting utility out of relative reliability. That’s the core of the business.

    SPQR (72771e)

  38. Were the last two paragraphs supposed to read listeing to Lee Greenwood singing Proud to Be an American and imaging Pat in front of giant American flag, a la George C Scott?

    ‘Cause rousing calls to torture people in extra-legal manners are at best analogous to Belushi in Animal House. I can imagine Yoo and Bybee reading it and one turning to the other quizzically “Did he just say the means justify the ends?”

    “Leave him alone, he’s on a roll.”

    Wow, you people can justify anything a Republican does.

    timb (a83d56)

  39. “To not release the memos would have been, again, to defy the law, something which you seem rather hypocritical in your comfort with.”

    Personally, I’m totally comfortable with defying the law, if doing so impedes terrorists.

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  40. Here’s the link to that Time story on Hambali, from April 2002. Check out the photo. Getting this guy was not, repeat not, an intel coup.

    http://www.time.com/time/asia/features/malay_terror/hambali.html

    KSM ‘gave up’ a known name to make the torture waterboarding stop. Some GS-9 wrote it up in his daily summary. This becomes evidence to justify what is, after all, another government program. You think DOD bureaucrats are any different from the others?

    horace (411ef0)

  41. The ratio of wheat to chaff is really just a red herring.

    Indeed. When I think about interrogation I don’t really care the effectiveness of a given method. This also translates to other areas of my life. That’s why I still make my own shoes.

    By all honest accounts, actionable intelligence was obtained and used to stop the attacks in the planning stages.

    This really is the most fascinating part of the entire torture debate. I would like to run the theory by Michio Kaku. Theoretical physics isn’t an area I’m well versed in, but I know the broad concepts.

    I’m curious about how pouring water over someone can distort spacetime. Are people actually physically able to travel back in time using some sort of wormhole that occurs in proximity of the waterboarding or are the tortures able to send a message back in time only? Is the spacetime distortion local or can it span distance too? What does this do to string theory and/or M theory?

    If we change the events of the past does this branch off into a new timeline or does it actually alter our timeline?

    What does this mean for the grandfather paradox? What happens if you kill KSM’s grandfather? Will that make KSM disappear? Can you be held legally liable for torturing someone that never existed?

    I have to thank conservatives for discovering this new science. It opens up all sorts of avenues, both practical and philosophical.

    And stating that this was “institutionalized” ignores the fact that it was clearly viewed as being exceptional circumstances.

    Clearly having documentation discussing efficacy, durations, etc. shows that this was not “institutionalized.” Heck, the Bush administration didn’t even know what SERE was designed for! Silly libtards.

    Internet Tough Guy (22501b)

  42. I am sure that the Leftists would have been all fine and dandy had this plot not been discovered, and stopped, and LA hit. I am sure that they would have stood on the sidelines praising President Bush for having shown restraint and humanity.

    It is quite apparent that anything Bush did would never please the Left, and the fact that they are still fixated on Bush/Palin/Rush rather than Teh One’s complete ineptitude is quite telling.

    JD (788853)

  43. “You think DOD bureaucrats are any different from the others?”

    If you can’t get straight what branch of the government is being discussed, horace, don’t interject.

    SPQR (72771e)

  44. Personally, I’m totally comfortable with defying the law, if doing so impedes terrorists.

    Dave is nothing if not consistent. America is not a nation of laws; it’s a nation of the evil liberals versus the good conservatives.

    timb (a83d56)

  45. Why, that’s horrible timb. Dave has the mirror image of the cartoonish world view you project?

    Astonishing.

    SPQR (72771e)

  46. I am sure that the Leftists would have been all fine and dandy had this plot not been discovered, and stopped, and LA hit.

    You guys should break this to time travel waterboarding theory to Drudge. You can be rich! and famous! You might even get some spinning siren gifs on each side: DEVELOPING: CONSERVATIVES DISCOVER HOW TO TRAVEL THROUGH TIME BY TORTURING TERRORISTS!

    If you are really lucky he might even add font color=red.

    Internet Tough Guy (22501b)

  47. “…Wow, you people can justify anything a Republican does….

    The self-examined life is a good, good thing, timb.

    You might look at your previous posts, incidentally, and ask if you winced, even a little, when you wrote that.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  48. Hey timb,

    FDR is still a hero, no, THE hero, of the Democratic Party. He locked up innocent Americans for well over a year in barbed wire camps. He approved the firebombing of cities of dubious military value. He approved the development of the atomic bomb, that ultimately killed nearly 200,000, almost all innocents.

    Given that, you must think Bush didn’t go far enough. He never locked up muslims simply because they were muslims. He never hit an aspirin factory or the Chinese embassy or burned American children alive. And the weaponry developed during his watch has been about making it more accurate, minimizing innocent deaths. So I understand your dissapointment in Bush – just not bloodthirsty enough for the Democrats.

    EBJ (2fd7f7)

  49. I’m proud of the Bush Administration for saving us from that. I’m glad that they did what needed to be done, and didn’t shrink from it. This is a disturbing mindset for someone who participates in our legal system and is supposed to be a proponent of the rule of law.

    “24” is a TV show. Jack Bauer is fiction.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  50. Lordy. Look, I’ll settle this once and for all: if we’re talking about something that wouldn’t be out of place at your average fraternity hazing session, we’re not talking about torture. Period, full stop.

    Glad I could clear that up for everyone.

    Chris (6733a5)

  51. ACRAP: Where is that vid of that man and his 2-year-old kid (who should be in school) claiming Obama is a fascist?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  52. Nobody disputes ‘waterboarding’ produces information. The validity of that information in question on top on the legalities of how it was obtained. Apologists for the Cheney-Bush Administration can only say the ends justify the means. Which was the same rationale Republicans used during Watergate.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  53. ACRAP: Well, where is that vid of the man claiming Obama is a fascist?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  54. It seems unlikely that KSM would have had knowledge of Hambali’s whereabouts nearly a year after his arrest.

    Did Dean Acheson suddenly come onto the blog here? I mean, here’s an opinion based on absolutely no evidence, yet it’s still stated as a fact.

    That is, it is doubtful KSM provided any intel of tacticalvalue with regard to Hambali. I mean, these guys are wanted (see below) terrorists. I don’t think they stay in one place too long.

    Again with the opinion masquerading as a fact.

    Here’s the link to that Time story on Hambali,

    …which is the same source that got the Koran flushing incident at GITMO completely wrong. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  55. “America is not a nation of laws”

    Sure it is. We have more laws than you can shake a stick it. We used to have laws that allowed one man to own another man, laws that forced black people to ride in the back of the bus, laws that let LIBERAL turds like FDR put Japanese-American children into concentration camps (as EBJ mentioned).

    You can respect those laws, and other bad laws, if you want to…but, I choose to defy them.

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  56. Check out the photo.

    Wow, I’m convinced – JUST LOOK AT THAT PHOTO! Case closed.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  57. DCSCA #44, someone as ignorant of the actions of Democratic presidents throughout history as you are should not be writing silly comments like that one.

    Ah, but why stop now, eh?

    SPQR (72771e)

  58. DGGCRP, how ’bout that vid? Let’s see it, all of it.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  59. “Apologists for the Cheney-Bush Administration can only say the ends justify the means.”

    Who’s apologiizing?

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  60. Mr Sanai wrote:

    This is an interesting question–how much of the intel obtained by torture was good and how much was useless? While it does not change the mind of myself and many others who view these institutionalized tactics as inherently wrong, it is nonetheless important to know what the results were to have an intelligent debate.

    No, I don’t think so. THis is a formula for setting the validity of the questioning method upon the certainty that the answers will be useful; you would have to know, in advance, that the prisoner had actionable information and that he would disclose it.

    We know, after the fact, that some of the information obtained was useful and saved lives; your formulation would require foreknowledge of that result before starting the interrogation.

    Let’s assume that Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and Abu Z never provided useful information, regardless of the method of inquisition, yet tomorrow we captured a high-level al Qaeda operative we were very sure had actionable information. Would the fact that we obtained nothing of use from previous interrogations mean that using harsh interrogation against the next captive was completely unjustified? I don’t think it would mean that at all.

    The realistic Dana (3e4784)

  61. Dave, just so you know, an apologist and an apologizer are two different things.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  62. Regarding things like the reputed gitmo koran flushing incident, you gives a rat’s asp if someone did offend the ROP’s religious ensibilities? These corksuckers blow up people and cut off heads. Waterboarding is bad despite all those GIs volunteering for it? I’d be down with CIA actually drowning the vermin. Hell, close Gotmo and just shoot the offal on the battlefield or drop them out of planes sans cchutes. I’m sure the Mighty Allah will protect them or at least give them their 72 virgins who look like Jeananne Garofolo and Yassir Arafish. Ok, so don’t kill them, wrap them up like mummies with rags dipped in bacon grease. Yeah, they are so oppressed and repulsed by western values. That’s why some the 911 crew sampled the local skanky ho’s here in S. Fl. I am sure I sat across from one of those murderous cretins one day in May 2001 at the Delray Beach library. Big difference between mostly innocuous looking Haitians and a middle-easterner glaring at you. Been around many actual nuts and he would have passed for a sociopathic fanatic.
    Can you libtards tell me why you are such pussies when it comes to coping with US enemies? I see it in libs all the time- compassion for Palis and far left values. If Canada and Cuba are soo great why then don’t filthy swine like Ollie Stone and Mikey Moore move there? I bet Andy Sullivan dreams of taking it anal from all the tinhorn dictators of the world. Oh yeah, Moore was right, why attack NYC on 911 when the bleeding hearts embrace your cause??

    aoibhneas (0c6cfc)

  63. #55

    I was just being a smartass.

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  64. #20- Woooo! A six mile wide asteroid slamming into the Earth would wipe out most of civilization and life on this planet! Wath the skies! Watch the skies! Are you scared yet?

    This message courtesy of the conservative wing of the Republican Party.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  65. DCSCA, you do realize that there is a Sky Watch program don’t you?

    Sheesh, you are an ignorant little loon.

    SPQR (72771e)

  66. Haha! Check out this libtard talking about the problems with torture:

    NPR: And these harsh interrogation methods had been used by the Soviets and the Chinese to get people to say things that weren’t true?

    Kleinman:That’s true. And it’s not just harsh physically, but I think the element that was more persuasive was their ability to induce what is known as debility, depression and dread through emotional and psychological techniques that profoundly altered somebody’s ability to answer questions truthfully even if they wanted to. It truly undermined their ability to recall, so therefore it would call into question its efficacy in an intelligence-based interrogation.

    What kind of liberal pansy worries about stuff like efficacy? And like aoibhneas, I often wonder about what goes in Andy Sullyman’s butt. Stupid liberals.

    Internet Tough Guy (22501b)

  67. KSM was arrested before early March 2003, Hambali in late February 2004

    Where are you getting this?

    Hambali was arrested in August, the year before.

    He may or may not have been working to resurrect a plan to bomb the Library Tower in Los Angeles.

    Last month, U.S. officials said Hambali was part of a botched plan that sought to crash an airplane into the tallest building in Los Angeles. The plot was set in motion in late 2001 but arrests of involved parties in 2002 and 2003 thwarted it, according to intelligence sources.

    The only thing the recently-released memos reveal is that Hambali’s arrest can be credited to KSM’s waterboarding.

    I personally think that settles the risk-reward enigma.

    steve (7b4a6a)

  68. […] 3: Patterico links to an LA Times article talking about KSM’s second plot. Possibly related posts: […]

    Waterboarding: What Would You Do? « Nuke Riding Cowboy (4797e5)

  69. I found that the cells involved in the two plots were a different size. There were only four people in the cell tasked with carrying out the 2002 attack. However, there were 17 people in the cell tasked with Second Wave that’s referenced in the Justice Department memo.

    I wrote about it here in my blog: http://nukeridingcowboy.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/waterboarding-what-would-you-do/

    NukeRidingCowboy (441afc)

  70. 56 my bad/typo..I meant who not you. Perhaps the libtards who worry about the religion of peace will be happy having released choir boys for islam in their neighborhoods, drawing welafre, health benefits and plotting at the local mosques?

    Quid pro quo, if Saudi Arabia allows no churches or Temples in SA, why the heck do we let them build mosques here and practice their jihad-talk ways?
    Lib saint FDR had no problems rounding up innocent Japanese-Americans and incarcerating them in concentration camps, so pray tell me why today’s libtwats are so righteous about muslim pricks caught on the actual battlefields and sent to prison, treated quite well, proper Islam diets, ass-kissing of their “religious” beliefs, etc.??

    aoibhneas (0c6cfc)

  71. Here’s that loony liberal leftist Robert Mueller on whether torture worked:

    I ask Mueller: So far as he is aware, have any attacks on America been disrupted thanks to intelligence obtained through what the administration still calls “enhanced techniques”?

    “I’m really reluctant to answer that,” Mueller says. He pauses, looks at an aide, and then says quietly, declining to elaborate: “I don’t believe that has been the case.”

    Internets bloggers: 1, FBI: 0

    Take that libtards!

    Internet Tough Guy (22501b)

  72. #57, DCSCA — So you think the chances of a nuclear device being used against the Port of L.A. are so miniscule that those who worry about it are nothing but Chicken Littles? Is that what you’re saying?

    danebramage (700c93)

  73. You guys are gonna love this one: A new memo from the military in 2002 was unearthed today by the Washington Post. It says,

    “In essence, physical and/or psychological duress are viewed as an alternative to the more time-consuming conventional interrogation process. The error inherent in this line of thinking is the assumption that, through torture, the interrogator can extract reliable and accurate information. History and a consideration of human behavior would appear to refute this assumption.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/24/AR2009042403171_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2009042403231

    Andrew (eb353f)

  74. Your comprehension skills are abysmal to the point of parody – wow, ONE MEMO! Then the words we’ve all been waiting for- “would appear?” Yeah, that seals it, no question.

    LOOK AT THE PHOTO! SEE THE BEARDED LADY! WRAAACK!

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  75. #58- Charter member, eh spork?

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  76. ACRAP: Show me the video of that man and his child calling Obama a fascist.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  77. Andrew – You keenly ignore Þhe fact that in this case it absolutely worked.

    JD (10c938)

  78. KSM was arrested before early March 2003, Hambali in late February 2004 — by . It seems unlikely that KSM would have had knowledge of Hambali’s whereabouts nearly a year after his arrest. That is, it is doubtful KSM provided any intel of tacticalvalue with regard to Hambali.

    For the rest of the class, I’m calling only on people who HAVE read the linked memo.

    Horace, you get an “F” for today. Complete the reading assignment and try again tomorrow.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  79. I’m proud of the Bush Administration for saving us from that. I’m glad that they did what needed to be done, and didn’t shrink from it. This is a disturbing mindset for someone who participates in our legal system and is supposed to be a proponent of the rule of law.

    First and last warning: leave my job out of your criticisms of me. Period, end of story.

    You want to criticize my opinions, fine. We will retort by noting your lies about the man in the Chicago Tea Party video.

    If you want to be banned, tie your criticism of me to my job again. Just one more time, even in a subtle way. I don’t permit it.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  80. The self-examined life is a good, good thing, timb.
    You might look at your previous posts, incidentally, and ask if you winced, even a little, when you wrote that.
    Comment by Eric Blair — 4/24/2009

    Hey, faux Orwell, you’re writing that to me with THAT screen name on a post defending torture!?! You know, “blair,” you remind me of Kevin Kline in A Fish Called Wanda stating the central tenet of Buddhism was “every man for himself.” Your understanding is just that deep.

    Nonetheless, since you’re so persuasive, I went back to the thread where I claimed Obama was a dick for using state secrets doctrine. Here’s an interesting thing: you defend torture, because of the Republican president. I gave up a day’s pay and contributed to the Obama campaign, yet I have no problem criticizing him when he’s wrong. He’s wrong to oppose prosecutions; he’s wrong to oppose a truth commission, he’s wrong to keep bailing out Goldman Sachs through AIG, he’s wrong to oppose caps on executive compensation for companies taking TARP money, and he was wrong to use State secrets in an attempt to stop people from suing telecoms.

    You could try it some time. Or, you could stand here, claiming the screen name of a freedom loving man and tell me America should torture people because the government said so.

    timb (8f04c0)

  81. O’Dumbo is a member of the party directly responsible for millions of deaths in Southeast Asia. Why would anyone think the democrat party cares if they add a few more thousand, or a million to their death totals. They kill millions of babies each year, they’re just expanding their blood quest to grownups. From all appearances from the likes of Peeloshi and gang they could care less about the lives of their own family members. Politics and power overide all other things. They show off their grandchildren when needed for politics and throw them to the wolves the next day. That is today’s democrat.

    Scrapiron (996c34)

  82. Hey, faux Orwell, you’re writing that to me with THAT screen name on a post defending torture!?!

    Tim, I would suggest you avoid challenging people who are clearly your mental superior. Good luck getting into law school but you will need to work on that logical thinking stuff.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  83. #83- Tim, I would suggest you avoid challenging people who are clearly your mental superior. Hasn’t stopped you, Mickey.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  84. Let’s hear what this former intelligence officer has to say:
    Op-Ed Contributor
    My Tortured Decision

    ALI SOUFAN
    Ali Soufan was an F.B.I. supervisory special agent from 1997 to 2005
    .
    Published: April 22, 2009
    FOR seven years I have remained silent about the false claims magnifying the effectiveness of the so-called enhanced interrogation techniques like waterboarding. I have spoken only in closed government hearings, as these matters were classified. But the release last week of four Justice Department memos on interrogations allows me to shed light on the story, and on some of the lessons to be learned.

    Skip to next paragraph
    Enlarge This Image

    Wesley Bedrosian

    Related
    Editorial: In the Spirit of Openness (April 23, 2009)
    Times Topics: Abu ZubaydahOne of the most striking parts of the memos is the false premises on which they are based. The first, dated August 2002, grants authorization to use harsh interrogation techniques on a high-ranking terrorist, Abu Zubaydah, on the grounds that previous methods hadn’t been working. The next three memos cite the successes of those methods as a justification for their continued use.

    It is inaccurate, however, to say that Abu Zubaydah had been uncooperative. Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned him from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence.

    We discovered, for example, that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Abu Zubaydah also told us about Jose Padilla, the so-called dirty bomber. This experience fit what I had found throughout my counterterrorism career: traditional interrogation techniques are successful in identifying operatives, uncovering plots and saving lives.

    There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics. In addition, I saw that using these alternative methods on other terrorists backfired on more than a few occasions — all of which are still classified. The short sightedness behind the use of these techniques ignored the unreliability of the methods, the nature of the threat, the mentality and modus operandi of the terrorists, and due process.

    Defenders of these techniques have claimed that they got Abu Zubaydah to give up information leading to the capture of Ramzi bin al-Shibh, a top aide to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Mr. Padilla. This is false. The information that led to Mr. Shibh’s capture came primarily from a different terrorist operative who was interviewed using traditional methods. As for Mr. Padilla, the dates just don’t add up: the harsh techniques were approved in the memo of August 2002, Mr. Padilla had been arrested that May.

    One of the worst consequences of the use of these harsh techniques was that it reintroduced the so-called Chinese wall between the C.I.A. and F.B.I., similar to the communications obstacles that prevented us from working together to stop the 9/11 attacks. Because the bureau would not employ these problematic techniques, our agents who knew the most about the terrorists could have no part in the investigation. An F.B.I. colleague of mine who knew more about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed than anyone in the government was not allowed to speak to him.

    It was the right decision to release these memos, as we need the truth to come out. This should not be a partisan matter, because it is in our national security interest to regain our position as the world’s foremost defenders of human rights. Just as important, releasing these memos enables us to begin the tricky process of finally bringing these terrorists to justice.

    The debate after the release of these memos has centered on whether C.I.A. officials should be prosecuted for their role in harsh interrogation techniques. That would be a mistake. Almost all the agency officials I worked with on these issues were good people who felt as I did about the use of enhanced techniques: it is un-American, ineffective and harmful to our national security.

    Fortunately for me, after I objected to the enhanced techniques, the message came through from Pat D’Amuro, an F.B.I. assistant director, that “we don’t do that,” and I was pulled out of the interrogations by the F.B.I. director, Robert Mueller (this was documented in the report released last year by the Justice Department’s inspector general).

    My C.I.A. colleagues who balked at the techniques, on the other hand, were instructed to continue. (It’s worth noting that when reading between the lines of the newly released memos, it seems clear that it was contractors, not C.I.A. officers, who requested the use of these techniques.)

    As we move forward, it’s important to not allow the torture issue to harm the reputation, and thus the effectiveness, of the C.I.A. The agency is essential to our national security. We must ensure that the mistakes behind the use of these techniques are never repeated. We’re making a good start: President Obama has limited interrogation techniques to the guidelines set in the Army Field Manual, and Leon Panetta, the C.I.A. director, says he has banned the use of contractors and secret overseas prisons for terrorism suspects (the so-called black sites). Just as important, we need to ensure that no new mistakes are made in the process of moving forward — a real danger right now.

    Ali Soufan was an F.B.I. supervisory special agent from 1997 to 2005.
    24 April 2009, 3:00 pm

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  85. 40- Personally, I’m totally comfortable with defying the law, if doing so impedes terrorists. Yes, well it’s not illegal if the president does it, eh… that has Watergate jowel prints all over it. No doubt you cheer for the traffic cops when you watch ‘Magnum Force.’

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  86. Wow, timb. Maybe you should calm down a little. First Peter goes crazy, and now you. I hope it isn’t a trend.

    Why so hostile? I mean, you won. Hope and Change, right?

    From what I hear, you are quite the angry person. I have been reading your posts for a long, long time…and you certainly hold your own beliefs to quite different standards than you do to evil people like me.

    Which was my point, and I think you understood that. Which may be why you are, again, so angry.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  87. Hi, blu. Have you found the government people who felled the twin towers yet?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  88. John Hitchcock, can you read?

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  89. Oh, and on that subject, timb, when you wrote

    “…claiming the screen name…”

    I had to smile. I am quite sure you have used more than one screen name, yourself.

    Again, the self-examined life is fruitful.

    Just keep on insulting people. It works so well, and is quite mature. Heck, it might even get one of your fellow trolls banned!

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  90. Pour some water on a mass murderer’s face, or allow thousands to die?

    It remains to be demonstrated that this was the choice. Do you have any evidence that less objectionable techniques would have failed to obtain the same information? Or are you saying that as long as we got the info, you don’t care how we got it?

    kenB (88b394)

  91. Eric Blair,
    Our Obamites have a severe case of the sore winner syndrome.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407)

  92. Again, why is it seemingly impossible for some people to discuss this topic without arguing with imaginary caricatures in their head?

    JD (b9ec92)

  93. Do you have any evidence that less objectionable techniques would have failed to obtain the same information?

    Yes.

    EW1(SG) (e27928)

  94. Honestly, JD, I think it comes from wearing all the socks.

    Bradley, it is interesting, isn’t it? I mean, they should be like Kumar and go help the new administration do great things instead of picking fights here.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  95. DCSCA #86, still ignoring how Democratic presidents pioneered that argument, I see. Your ignorance of what Woodrow Wilson and FDR did continues.

    Although at this point, that it is no longer wilful ignorance but intentional dishonesty is becoming obvious.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  96. Andrew – You keenly ignore Þhe fact that in this case it absolutely worked.

    JD, you ignore the fact that I didn’t ignore the fact you claim I ignored. See comment #2, written by me. It addressed this allegation.

    Andrew (eb353f)

  97. Eric, they can’t stand to leave any pockets of resistance to assimilation by The Precious.

    The Obamessiah is not mocked!

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407)

  98. Post #85 answered your question as to whether or not the actual certifiable torture (waterboarding included as part of it) worked or not.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  99. Ali Soufan is a unique person. I believe he is the agent who, by debating verses of Quran with the leader of Cole bombers, convinced him that he was wrong and that Islam did not support what he had done. Had the FBI and CIA been filled with people with equivalent language skills, we might have prevented 9/11. The fact remains, however, that he was a rare individual and we were reduced to learning what we could under desperate circumstances.

    That has little to do with the issue of water boarding, however. We were facing a crisis created by the fecklessness of the Clinton Administration and a CIA that focused on newspaper reading analysts and lacked language skills. Read Martin Kramer’s book Ivory Towers on Sand to learn another reason why we were so unprepared for the war that was declared on us by radical Islam.

    If we had a thousand agents like Ali Soufan, we might not need water boarding for those few major figures although I suspect KSM would have been far more resistant to the techniques used on the Cole bomber.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  100. No, bluebonnet, I don’t believe it does. Ali Soufan did not deal with KSM.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  101. Andrew – Simply claiming that water is not wet does not make it so.

    JD (b9ec92)

  102. Thanks, Dr. K., for more to think about and read.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  103. Blogged by Coleen Rowley on 4/24/2009 11:09AM
    Real World Facts, Real World Understanding Needed on Torture Issue
    The harsh realities of torture and following orders are quite different from the fictional world of Hollywood’s anti-terror warriors, says a noted former FBI Special Agent and 9/11 whistleblower…
    Guest Blogged by Coleen Rowley, FBI whistleblower, TIME’s 2002 ‘Person of the Year’

    Back in December 2007, when I wrote “Torture is Wrong, Illegal and It Doesn’t Work”, I mentioned that “the FBI agent who reportedly had the best chance of foiling the 9/11 plot, Ali Soufan, the only Arabic-speaking agent in New York and one of only eight in the country, and who has since resigned from the FBI, could and should tell people the truth of how the CIA’s tactics were counterproductive.”

    Well guess what?! HE FINALLY DID SO ON WEDNESDAY! The points Soufan makes are very instructive as our country begins to unravel the differences between the fictional world of Hollywood’s “Jack Bauer”, and the real world dilemmas and questions of morality and legality as faced by actual intelligence and law enforcement officers.

    “My Tortured Decision” is how former FBI Agent Soufan titled his New York Times op-ed, speaking out to specifically refute a number of Dick Cheney’s lies about how torture “worked”. The truth, according to Soufan, is quite the opposite from how Cheney continues to paint it…

    My Tortured Decision
    By ALI SOUFAN

    FOR seven years I have remained silent about the false claims magnifying the effectiveness of the so-called enhanced interrogation techniques like waterboarding. I have spoken only in closed government hearings, as these matters were classified. But the release last week of four Justice Department memos on interrogations allows me to shed light on the story, and on some of the lessons to be learned.

    One of the most striking parts of the memos is the false premises on which they are based. The first, dated August 2002, grants authorization to use harsh interrogation techniques on a high-ranking terrorist, Abu Zubaydah, on the grounds that previous methods hadn’t been working. The next three memos cite the successes of those methods as a justification for their continued use.

    It is inaccurate, however, to say that Abu Zubaydah had been uncooperative. Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned him from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence.

    We discovered, for example, that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Abu Zubaydah also told us about Jose Padilla, the so-called dirty bomber. This experience fit what I had found throughout my counterterrorism career: traditional interrogation techniques are successful in identifying operatives, uncovering plots and saving lives.

    There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics. In addition, I saw that using these alternative methods on other terrorists backfired on more than a few occasions — all of which are still classified. The short sightedness behind the use of these techniques ignored the unreliability of the methods, the nature of the threat, the mentality and modus operandi of the terrorists, and due process.

    Defenders of these techniques have claimed that they got Abu Zubaydah to give up information leading to the capture of Ramzi bin al-Shibh, a top aide to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Mr. Padilla. This is false. The information that led to Mr. Shibh’s capture came primarily from a different terrorist operative who was interviewed using traditional methods. As for Mr. Padilla, the dates just don’t add up: the harsh techniques were approved in the memo of August 2002, Mr. Padilla had been arrested that May.

    One of the worst consequences of the use of these harsh techniques was that it reintroduced the so-called Chinese wall between the C.I.A. and F.B.I., similar to the communications obstacles that prevented us from working together to stop the 9/11 attacks. Because the bureau would not employ these problematic techniques, our agents who knew the most about the terrorists could have no part in the investigation. An F.B.I. colleague of mine who knew more about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed than anyone in the government was not allowed to speak to him.

    It was the right decision to release these memos, as we need the truth to come out. This should not be a partisan matter, because it is in our national security interest to regain our position as the world’s foremost defenders of human rights. Just as important, releasing these memos enables us to begin the tricky process of finally bringing these terrorists to justice.

    The debate after the release of these memos has centered on whether C.I.A. officials should be prosecuted for their role in harsh interrogation techniques. That would be a mistake. Almost all the agency officials I worked with on these issues were good people who felt as I did about the use of enhanced techniques: it is un-American, ineffective and harmful to our national security.

    Fortunately for me, after I objected to the enhanced techniques, the message came through from Pat D’Amuro, an F.B.I. assistant director, that “we don’t do that,” and I was pulled out of the interrogations by the F.B.I. director, Robert Mueller (this was documented in the report released last year by the Justice Department’s inspector general).

    My C.I.A. colleagues who balked at the techniques, on the other hand, were instructed to continue. (It’s worth noting that when reading between the lines of the newly released memos, it seems clear that it was contractors, not C.I.A. officers, who requested the use of these techniques.)

    As we move forward, it’s important to not allow the torture issue to harm the reputation, and thus the effectiveness, of the C.I.A. The agency is essential to our national security. We must ensure that the mistakes behind the use of these techniques are never repeated. We’re making a good start: President Obama has limited interrogation techniques to the guidelines set in the Army Field Manual, and Leon Panetta, the C.I.A. director, says he has banned the use of contractors and secret overseas prisons for terrorism suspects (the so-called black sites). Just as important, we need to ensure that no new mistakes are made in the process of moving forward — a real danger right now.

    Ali Soufan was an F.B.I. supervisory special agent from 1997 to 2005.

    Former Agent Soufan is to be applauded for speaking out after seven years, something even FBI Director Mueller has not really found the courage to do (although Mueller was forced recently to truthfully admit that no attack on America has been disrupted as a result of intelligence obtained through “enhanced techniques”).

    I agree with almost everything Soufan writes except his wish that no agency officials at the CIA be prosecuted because almost all of them were “good people who felt as I did about the use of enhanced techniques: it is un-American, ineffective and harmful to our national security”. But he says (implying, whether he realizes it or not, the Nuremberg Defense), they simply had to follow orders.

    No disagreement exists on how difficult–literally between a rock and a hard place, any government employee finds him or herself when given illegal and wrongful orders. When the “green light” was turned on to torture, it was akin to the terrible situation that helicopter pilot Hugh Thompson Jr. found himself in when he looked down from his helicopter to see Lt. William Calley and his men massacring Vietnamese villagers at My Lai. It was similar to the horrible situation that Daniel Ellsberg found himself in when he realized what was in the Pentagon Papers undercut several presidential administrations’ lies in launching and keeping the Vietnam War going. There is presently no protection whatsoever for government whistleblowers who find themselves in these situations, especially those who work in intelligence. As it stands now, if you follow your conscience and speak out internally, you will, at the very least, be retaliated against, possibly fired and at worst, if you speak out publicly as DOJ Attorney Thomas Tamm did about Bush’s illegal warrantless monitoring, you will subject yourself to criminal prosecution as a “leaker”. So its quite understandable how former Agent Soufan sees the choice as going along with the illegal orders or resigning to avoid personal direct involvement but maintaining silent complicity.

    As I wrote three days ago in my own NY Times op-ed: “It’s true, and proved repeatedly in social psychology experiments, that otherwise good people will tend to conform to authority. It’s true that people, under such circumstances, often fail to listen to their consciences. But don’t conflate this obedience factor with not being able to appreciate the wrongfulness.”

    On my own personal note, the final thing I did the day I retired from the FBI (in December, 2004) was e-mail my last mini-legal lecture to every employee in the entire Minneapolis FBI office warning my former colleagues how the “green light” would inevitably go out, and when that happens, it always leaves the little guys holding the bag. Nearly all the little guys in government knew, by that time, about the green-but-evil light that had been turned on. And even though the FBI was not going along with the torture tactics, it was going overboard in other areas involving massive data collection on American citizens. Because I was already persona non grata in the FBI for having spoken out about wrongful over-reactions and counterproductive responses after 9/11, I would only catch others’ hushed whispers about the “green light” stuff, but I think nearly everyone was well aware. That last warning was the least I could do as I walked out the door but in all probability, many who got my goodbye e-mail immediately deleted it as they dreaded any reminder about “green lights” that always go out.

    In the criminal justice system, the mitigating circumstances of such difficult, untenable situations and choices of subordinate government employees are not irrelevant and would be evaluated. In the course of criminal investigation, it’s common to give immunity to underlings who, it is found, had little or no choice but to follow orders and are therefore not as culpable as those in power giving the orders. Additionally, once the truth of the facts is ascertained, there’s room for all kinds of humanitarian arguments as to what, if any, are proper “punishments”. With respect to those on the receiving end of illegal orders, I’d volunteer to help explain how absolutely difficult their situation is. I’d even help the defense find a social psychologist or two who can demonstrate what all the experiments on “group think” and “obedience to authority” have proven with regard to human behavior. But this would go to evaluating relative responsibility and mitigating punishments and should not be used as a reason to jump over the most crucial first phase of the criminal justice process: the fact-finding ascertainment of truth.

    We’ve already heard enough from fictional characters like Jack Bauer. It’s time to hear from real agents who operated in the real world like Ali Soufan. After we hear the facts, then let’s also hear the mitigating circumstances of how difficult, how very difficult it is not to follow a President’s orders in the real world.

    ===

    Coleen Rowley worked as an FBI Special Agent and legal counsel for more than 20 years until retiring in 2004. Following 9/11, after blowing the whistle on failures at the FBI which led up to the attacks, she testified to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee about endemic problems facing the both the agency and the intelligence community. In 2002 she was one of three whistleblowers named TIME magazine’s “Persons of the Year”.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  104. The copy and paste wall o’text. That is new … this week.

    JD (b9ec92)

  105. Naomi Wolf’s 10 steps to fascism.

    1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy
    2. Create a gulag
    3. Develop a thug caste
    4. Set up an internal surveillance system
    5. Harass citizens’ groups
    6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release
    7. Target key individuals
    8. Control the press
    9. Dissent equals treason
    10. Suspend the rule of law

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  106. […] waterboarding DID stop a terror attack on LA Patterico has two oustanding posts up that totally destroy any and all of the arguments and spin the Left is using to use […]

    YES, waterboarding DID stop a terror attack on LA « The Daley Gator (2b7e85)

  107. Naomi Wolf ? How many on that list can we say that Barcky has already done? A quick glance puts it at a minmum of 5 …Good start.

    JD (b9ec92)

  108. Sigh. Naomi Wolf is many things, but a student of history is not one of them. She has variable definitions for each of those phrases, and her definitions all revolve around her hatred of the previous administration.

    I could go right down the line and find ways to make them apply to the current administration. “Dissent equals treason” for example, as several talking heads said about the TEA parties. Not to mention “Harass citizen groups.” Or “Control the press.” Or “Target key individuals.” Or “Set up an internal surveillance system.” I won’t even get started on a “thug class”—some people like “The View.”

    You, of course, would say that the situations are completely different, and only eeevvviiiilllll Rethuglicans are meeting Wolf’s silly list.

    Sigh.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  109. Naomi Wolf Rahm Emanuel’s 10 steps to fascism.

    FTFY.

    EW1(SG) (e27928)

  110. blubonnet – Your posts 85 and 104 do not establish that enhanced interrogation techniques did not work or that they constitute torture. Repeating the claim does not make them more true.

    Do you have any specific evidence to support the claims that the enhanced interrogation techniques did not yield high value intelligence. Ali Soufan’s accounts are at odds with other contemporaneous accounts of the interrogation of Zubaydah and by his own admission he left the scene months before the interrogations were over. How can he contradict the people claiming the interrogations yielded results when he wasn’t there? If you also read his soul dump carefully, which you did not, he does not say enhanced interrogation will not yield results, only that the results could have been obtained by other means.

    Nice try numbnuts. Thanks for playing.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  111. “Naomi Wolf is many things”

    She was a great dresser for Alpha Male Al Gore.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  112. Yeah, daley. I would add step #11 to Naomi Wolf’s “Rough Guide to the Establishment of Fascist States”:

    Actually have a culture where a man can be told that wearing earth tones makes him more suitable to be President.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  113. “Let’s hear what this former intelligence officer has to say:”

    The guy is totally clueless.

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  114. “The guy is totally clueless.”

    Dave – You meant blubonnet, right?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  115. #116

    Him too.

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  116. That’s alright, blu’s a 9/11 truther.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  117. #105- Why dont you insist blubonnet produce it as book for you… then you can confiscate it to toss into the bonfire to burn.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  118. #104- Superb read. Cheney’s been wrong for years. His latest tip, “=quack= Buy GM.”

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  119. DSCA, It’s refreshing to encounter some intelligent, analytical thought.

    John Hitchcock is trying to discredit me, by linking me to the 911 truth movemnt,and he might to some, but his perspective is not science based, and mine is.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  120. “#104- Superb read.”

    Yeah, I’m sure it’s impressive to someone who thinks Hawaii wasn’t American soil in 1941.

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  121. Naomi Wolfe’s work is based on studying history’s many fascist regimes. It is not something she baked up, unlike many of you all here, Seems you’re doing all you can also to discredit the laws of the United States and international law as well.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  122. If you want to be banned, tie your criticism of me to my job again. Just one more time, even in a subtle way. I don’t permit it.

    I, for one, Pat, politely fail to understand exactly why it is less than an entirely logical and reasonable reaction to be particularly offended by disregard for breaking the law, when it is perceived to be coming from someone whose job is to enforce the law.

    This seems directly comparable to your professed above-average offense recently when John Ziegler was arrested for (obnoxious, disruptive, etc) acts of journalism outside of a journalism school.

    If you want to ban me for asking a straightforward philosophical question, it’s your tea party, but it’s not clear exactly why the rest of the world’s opinions get judged in the context of what they do for a living, but you personally get a pass. You essentially end up banning application of the universal principle of hypocrisy to you personally.

    glasnost (af3e29)

  123. blubonnet said
    2009/04/19 at 21:09 e

    You right wingers prefer funding killing people in wars, than educating people. So, as long as the education is limited the signing up for the military is an option for many that have lacked proper education, excellent for the military industrial complex, so warned of by Dwight Eisenhower.

    Does that discredit you better?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  124. #120- Science based. Not credible to this 6,000 year old earth crowd. Remember, they’ve created a universe of thought that believes men and dinosaurs existed together and 1+1 = 11, not 2. Pierce that dream with reality and all hell breaks loose. They’re living in Pleasantville.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  125. I just figured it out. The voices in DCSCA’s head are all Southern-accented Baptist preachers. That must make it difficult to comment intelligently to what is actually posted here on this site.

    carlitos (f022c4)

  126. Yeah, DCSCA apparently laws and science are those “dirty hippie things”.

    Funny, John Hitchcock, how using the warnings of Dwight Eisenhower, the Republican’s perspective, which I am trying to remind you of, makes me so “outrageous”.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  127. Why not just cut through the B.S.

    This whole argument about torture is nothing more than someway to prosecute the Bush administration.

    It really doesn’t matter what they did, or did not do.

    The angry left is still angry, and will ever be, about 2000 and 2004. And they will continue to be angry until they get their retribution.

    They really don’t care two whits about interrogations, the people involved and what it means going forward.

    The only thing that matters is the “frog-march” to get their opponents put away so there is no longer any opposition and they have their way.

    And, I believe, they will ultimately succeed.

    They will sow the seeds of the aftermath and reap the consequences.

    Ag80 (b19e67)

  128. unlike many of you all here, Seems you’re doing all you can also to discredit the laws of the United States and international law as well.

    Do what?

    Wolfe’s observations are not unique. Many recent codifications of “international law” have been to address the horrors perpetrated by “liberal” or “progressive” regimes in the last century. That the Democratic Party’s modus operandi has become dominated by such practices is no surprise either.

    What is surprising is how many useful idiots here in this country find such practices not only tolerable, but project such behavior onto their enemies.

    Oh, and for glasnost, Goodbye!

    EW1(SG) (e27928)

  129. …for many that have lacked proper education

    Of course they’ve lacked proper education. The left has run the public school system for years.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  130. Why didn’t Eisenhower create a commission to look into the question of whether the advice given to Truman to drop nukes on Japan civilians was a war crime?

    WLS Shipwrecked (53653f)

  131. “If you want to ban me for asking a straightforward philosophical question, it’s your tea party, but it’s not clear exactly why the rest of the world’s opinions get judged in the context of what they do for a living, but you personally get a pass. You essentially end up banning application of the universal principle of hypocrisy to you personally.”

    Looks like a “I dare you” kind of thing. All I can say is that it is Patterico’s blog. He gets to make the rules. And it would seem that, if his rules are so awful, the energy spent in complaining would be better spent…on creating a blog of your own.

    Then you will get to deal with trolls and such. And perhaps you would do a fine job. Why not give it a try…rather than continue to insult (as you did, in your response to a statement by Patterico that was not directed at you)?

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  132. “Seems you’re doing all you can also to discredit the laws of the United States and international law as well.”

    blubonnet – Hardly. It is you who are trying to invent law out of whole cloth in your comments. You have not made any case for law breaking, domestic or international, as I pointed out above. The progressive fondness for repetition really does not make it any more true. Trust me on this.

    Yours is certainly not a scientific approach. Propaganda is typically far from scientific.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  133. “You right wingers prefer funding killing people in wars”

    No, actually it’s left wingers who prefer that (Wilson, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson to name the worst offenders).

    Dave Surls (03a6c1)

  134. #80- Patterico, it’s your privilege to ban anyone, any time, for any reason you want. Life goes on.

    See the real time broadcast tape. If he’s the one off camera left, which I and other viewers can be led to believe by virtue of the framing, I’m correct. If that wasn’t him shouting before he was in frame, I stand corrected. But it’s not in the net clip. And it’s old news.

    How you amend your personal opinion on the rule of law against your professional position in our legal system is purely your concern and I wont mention it again.

    Waterboarding doesnt work. It produces unreliable information.

    If anything, I’ve helped drive traffic up on your site for a few days. Have a good weekend and check into that soda problem. Heard a news report today regarding a problem with Pepsi bottling contamination.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  135. Well, gee, why are we pissed, we here on the Left? Well, the AP came out today with the factual data that well over a million Iraqis have been killed. I can assure you that very few of them were terrorists, and we did 90% of the killing, because we have the power militarily.

    Of course over 4000 of our troops have been killed, believing that Bushco was telling them the truth. We all know now that he and his boys all knew WMDs were the myth that worked to sell the war.

    Our Bill of Rights has been shot full of holes.

    Our honor internationally (we do need other nations for more than having a beer with, ya know) has been disgraced, and spoken of with great revulsion these days. The “hope” thing with Obama, the international community is waiting for it.

    Yeah, we are pissed, and Bush is an international war criminal along with the rest of his gangster defense industry cohorts.

    You claim to love our country, but what do you love about it? You should love all of its standards, its honor, and its people.

    And Apogee, Education suffers when Republicans have the majority of control over government.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  136. Ag80 – The angry left is still angry, and will ever be, about 2000 and 2004. And they will continue to be angry until they get their retribution.

    I disagree. The anger is manufactured. It’s affect versus effect.

    When an intelligent adult is angry about something, it is because there is a specific event or group of events that is effecting that adult. Real anger occurs from a specific source, which leads those effected to define what it is that is angers them. Once identified, they attempt to change it or fix it, so as to reduce the effect, and subsequently, the anger.

    But what would explain unending anger?

    The anger you see isn’t due to an external effect. If it was, then the effect would be defined and acted upon. The anger is eternal because it is a social bonding tool. It can’t end, because there’s nothing specific causing the anger.

    It is a business.

    Anger is the consumerism of the left.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  137. #127- Remind them that the tax rate on the top 1% in the Eisenhower years was 91% and they’ll go ballistic as well. You remember the Ozzie and Harriet days, when budgets balanced, black didnt vote and what was good for GM was good for the nation. Wonder how they’ll react when GM goes bankrupt.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  138. You should love all of its standards, its honor, and its people.

    Try it for yourself sometime. You’ll be amazed at how much better your life is.

    You’ll actually be able to wake up and like yourself in the morning, instead of spouting bilious lies and crap like your screed just above.

    EW1(SG) (e27928)

  139. #137- Anger is the consumerism of the left.

    Apparently the vast majority of Americans, left, left center, center and center right… are angry and only the shrinking conservative right is happy. When the new Buckley emerges and purges the nuts from the last century, you may just survive. Meaghan McCain is right.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  140. “Waterboarding doesnt work. It produces unreliable information.”

    ASCRAP – A complete asspull. Any evidence you care to provide in support of you asspull?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  141. blubonnet said:

    Well, gee, why are we pissed, we here on the Left? Well, the AP came out today with the factual data that well over a million Iraqis have been killed. I can assure you that very few of them were terrorists, and we did 90% of the killing, because we have the power militarily.

    Of course over 4000 of our troops have been killed, believing that Bushco was telling them the truth. We all know now that he and his boys all knew WMDs were the myth that worked to sell the war.

    Our Bill of Rights has been shot full of holes.

    Our honor internationally (we do need other nations for more than having a beer with, ya know) has been disgraced, and spoken of with great revulsion these days. The “hope” thing with Obama, the international community is waiting for it.

    Yeah, we are pissed, and Bush is an international war criminal along with the rest of his gangster defense industry cohorts.

    You claim to love our country, but what do you love about it? You should love all of its standards, its honor, and its people.

    And Apogee, Education suffers when Republicans have the majority of control over government.

    How can you argue with ignorance — or at least — willful disregard of the facts?

    What’s left to say, except, and I’ve probably said it before: “Jesus wept.”

    Ag80 (b19e67)

  142. See the real time broadcast tape. If he’s the one off camera left, which I and other viewers can be led to believe by virtue of the framing, I’m correct. If that wasn’t him shouting before he was in frame, I stand corrected. But it’s not in the net clip. And it’s old news.

    The whole clip has been on the Internet. There was another guy calling him a fascist and Roesgen interviewed him at length, because she was very concerned to have that guy be the face of the movement.

    It’s not old news because it goes to your credibility. You made an assertion and have made no effort to back it up. We’ll continue to note it until you a) retract your false assertion or b) back it up. Forgive us if we don’t simply take your word for it without evidence.

    How you amend your personal opinion on the rule of law against your professional position in our legal system is purely your concern and I wont mention it again.

    Please don’t.

    Waterboarding doesnt work. It produces unreliable information.

    That could be, but the memo I linked says otherwise. And Dick Cheney is seeking to have other memos declassified that apparently bolster the case that it did produce reliable information.

    My guess is that you will be able to snidely dismiss any evidence placed in front of you. I believe I have pointed out before that you can’t persuade someone who refuses to be persuaded. But let’s not pretend the evidence doesn’t exist, mmmmkay?

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  143. “Well, the AP came out today with the factual data that well over a million Iraqis have been killed.”

    blubonnet – Do you have a citation for that? A fidure I saw today was 103,000, which would make the monthly death toll way less than during Saddam’s rule or during the period of Clinton’s sanctions.

    Where do you get your garbage stats? I thought the Lancet already repudiate that study they published.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  144. They will sow the seeds of the aftermath and reap the consequences.

    Unfortunately we too will reap the consequences of their sowing.

    Comment by Ag80 — 4/24/2009 @ 10:28 pm

    I’m not sure there could be a more appropriate response. Well said.

    Dana (d08a3a)

  145. Education suffers when Republicans have the majority of control over government.

    No, education does not suffer. The students do, and they suffer because leftists have infiltrated the public school system, its administrators and its unions, all to drain the funds away from the work of actually teaching children, a fact represented by falling graduation and test scores – despite large increases in spending.

    Test scores have fallen regardless of the party in power, but the political affiliation of the teachers unions hasn’t changed at all during this time. Even Bill Maher agrees with that one (except that now his leftist friends are upset that someone is rocking the boat) They spent 150 million to defeat education reform in California.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  146. Apogee:

    You may be right. Their only satisfaction is decrying the past. But, they have the future in their hands. It’s too bad they can’t let the past go.

    What is that Web site? Moveon.org, or something like it?

    Ag80 (b19e67)

  147. #128- In all candor, there is a lot of truth to that from the left, but there are also those on all sides who still believe in the rule of law, and the struggles to preserve it in our history… especially if you supported Richard Nixon and experienced the painful period of Watergate.

    At this typing I’m watching Ted Turner’s magnificent telefilm, ‘Gettysburg’, which as a native Pennsylvanian has special significance for me, having family who fought to preseve the Union and family who fought against it, running the Confederate hospital in Richmond. I’m reminded how this nation, conservative and liberal, was torn apart over right, wrong and the rule of law in that terrible Civil War. Whenever the verbal hostility rises, I’m reminded of this magnificent film and that terrible war.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  148. Here’s a link to that AP story blubonnet was talking about. Why is the number only 10% of what he said? SHOCKA!

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090424/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq_death_toll

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  149. DCSCA – Whenever your verbosity rises, I’m reminded of my most magnificent bowel movements.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  150. Cheney lies. Most everyone knows that. How can you continue to let his words hold any weight with you? The “memos released” remark made is to be considered doubtful as to him actually making it happen, but just a momentary attempt to add credibility to his otherwise fragmented into worthlessness reputation. The theatrics used by Cheney and gang have been exposed many times. Many people don’t even realize the many other theatrical operations they’ve used. Look it up if you doubt me.

    Even if torture did work a time or two, what about all the times innocent people were tortured and had nothing to say, and were forced to say SOMETHING, so then it’s NOT credible. And that happened MOST of the time. MOST of the people tortured were innocent. You don’t care about that here on the Conservative side, though do you? I mean, that innocent people were tortured and about a good many were killed from it.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  151. “Even if torture did work a time or two, what about all the times innocent people were tortured and had nothing to say”

    blubonnet – What people are you talking about and what incidents are you talking about. Be specific.

    Also acknowledge your wild exaggeration on the Iraqi death claims above.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  152. “well over a million Iraqis have been killed.”

    ROTFL

    Dave Surls (587595)

  153. daley rocks. We both made mistakes. My mistake was that I read the 110,600 number as over a million (my mistake). Your mistake was that the number you offered was the number killed only since 2005.

    However, I’ve read other reports stating that over a million Iraqis have been killed.

    Thank you for bringing a mistake to focus. It’s important to do that.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  154. “the figures show that more than 110,600 Iraqis have died in violence since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.”

    That’s a little more like it. And, most of those deaths aren’t from fighting, but from executions and terror attacks.

    It’s a lead pipe cinch that many times more people were killed at Hiroshima than have been killed by U.S./Allied forces in all the years we’ve been fighting in Iraq.

    One thing you have to say for liberal Democrats, they’re much better at slaughtering folks than the soft-hearted Republicans.

    Dave Surls (587595)

  155. blubonnet said:

    Cheney lies. Most everyone knows that. How can you continue to let his words hold any weight with you? The “memos released” remark made is to be considered doubtful as to him actually making it happen, but just a momentary attempt to add credibility to his otherwise fragmented into worthlessness reputation. The theatrics used by Cheney and gang have been exposed many times. Many people don’t even realize the many other theatrical operations they’ve used. Look it up if you doubt me.

    Even if torture did work a time or two, what about all the times innocent people were tortured and had nothing to say, and were forced to say SOMETHING, so then it’s NOT credible. And that happened MOST of the time. MOST of the people tortured were innocent. You don’t care about that here on the Conservative side, though do you? I mean, that innocent people were tortured and about a good many were killed from it.

    Cheney lies? Maybe. He might have had an affair that he didn’t tell his wife about. I doubt it, though. We’ll see what other “stories” he might have told with the “truth commissions” (I hope Pelosi’s ready).

    I think, sincerely, that you write words that you don’t know what they mean, such as SOMETHING, MOST and NOT.

    And, can you “look it up” for me? I’m not convinced,

    Ag80 (b19e67)

  156. “Your mistake was that the number you offered was the number killed only since 2005.”

    blubonnet – I didn’t claim anything since 2003 and I didn’t write the post at Gateway Pundit, but nice try. If you actually took the time to read the AP article which is linked in the Gateway Pundit piece, you’ll see that iy’s stats are not just limited to 2005 and forward.

    Next visit bring a game with you. You’ve been pathetic.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  157. well over a million Iraqis have been killed.

    Well over? Can’t be more than 22 million, remember, because that’s all the Iraqis.

    For those ‘caring’ so much about the poor Iraqis, it certainly seems strange that the death tolls are wildly inflated for the Iraq war, while simultaneously underestimated regarding the actions of the Hussein regime.

    Also, the Iraq war is waning, which means that the Iraqis will at least be in charge of their own fate. Leaving the Hussein regime in power would have insured that the killing would continue. Why no concern for the Iraqi people in that scenario?

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  158. I, for one, Pat, politely fail to understand exactly why it is less than an entirely logical and reasonable reaction to be particularly offended by disregard for breaking the law, when it is perceived to be coming from someone whose job is to enforce the law.

    “glasnost” (if that IS your real name):

    I don’t accept the premise, but lets place that to one side for the moment.

    This is the one area where my autocratic side comes out. I just don’t permit it, period. It’s my site, and I choose to keep the site and the job separate in some ways. One of the key ways is that I don’t permit people to insinsuate that I am bad at my job because of what I write here. Why the hell would I permit people to do that on a site I pay for?

    You can take on my writing and my opinions all you like. Just don’t attack my fitness for my job. Simple.

    We can also discuss whether the law was broken, all you like. I don’t think it was. That’s a legitimate discussion.

    If you want to fight me on this, step one is to detail: 1) your full name, 2) your city, and 3) your employer, complete with contact information.

    Not willing to do that? Then you and I aren’t playing on an even field, and you have no standing whatsoever to complain about my rule.

    You want to provide that information, then AND ONLY THEN do you have standing even to raise an objection to my admittedly dictatorial rule.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  159. It remains to be demonstrated that this was the choice. Do you have any evidence that less objectionable techniques would have failed to obtain the same information?

    Did you read the memo I linked?

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  160. We could also have defended the country from such plots by nuking the Phillipines. If we’d done that, the Second Wave plot would have been disrupted, and you could make the same flabby argument that therefore doing so was “neccessary” or “the only way”. Just because you accomplish a specific act via the nastiest possible method does not demonstrate that this is the only possible method.

    glasnost,

    First, the concept that waterboarding was “the nastiest possible method” is laughable.

    Second, the memo indicates that waterboarding was necessary. Did you read it?

    Your position appears to be that, well, it’s the CIA, so they must be lying. Well, if “glasnost” says so, it must be true! Why should I pay greater attention to someone who actually knows what he’s talking about?

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  161. #143- Whether you ‘believe me’ or not is irrelevant, especially to me as I have little time to waste making things up. You choose to reference a clip on the web, I choose to view the real time feed taped as it happened, which has been a hobby of mine for decades. I confess to being more comfortable in the video age. As I’ve stated to you ‘repeatedly’ if I am in error mixing up people and crossing comment, fine, I stand corrected. It’s old news and really unimportant. I’m not obsessed over it and those who are betray much, much deeper anxieties. Whether ‘we’ need convincing is irrelevant. I’m not trying to convice conservatives of anything. That’s impossible, especially to a reactionary mind. They will come to the truth themselves, be it in one year or twenty. In my universe 1+1=2. In the conservative universe for too long, 1+1= 11 and to defy that logic is heresy.

    Dick ‘we’ll be welcomed as liberators’ Cheney has not been right yet and repeatedly discredited every time he tries to link 9/11 to Iraq. Hardly a popular spokesperson to use as a source to shake out a position, too, on waterboarding. The technique has been discredited as not a relable source of accurate information and that has been documented by those who use it. It is true you can get information. Whether it’s useful or not is debatable.

    Cheney is scared. Scooter, a published author, might just write that book after all. More curious in this is the silence of the former president. He could do a lot to clear up this mess. It is a mess that will muddy many people on both sides, but more on the right than the left, to be sure.

    But if you wanna listen to Dick, great. By all means, keep him out front and center as a glaring reminder of why the GOP and Republicans were rejected. What a gift.

    It’s a new world and it is conservatives who need convincing of it. Liberals wont be able to. The change will come from within.

    But all we’ve heard from Boss Limbaugh and the Dittoheads are never ending hits like “The Parkinson’s Jig’, ‘The 100 Days Rag’ ‘Fail to the Chief’ and ‘I’m Carrying a Torture For You’.

    Meaghan McCain is right. She wants moderate and indies back. Conservatives don’t. There is your real battle.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  162. #157- The only voice of reason you’ve heard is Meaghan McCain. I recently read some of FDR’s ‘Public Papers’ from the autumn of 1941. Twain said history doesnt repeat itself but it often rhymes and President Obama is in virtutally the same mindset as FDR was and the conservatives are virtually in the same anti-everything, party of no mode they were in 1940. Just amazing. Even the same verbage and methods in use. Of course the American people soundly rejected the right for years and it was only when they changed leadership and cleaned up their act they ascended to power. They need another Buckley. and it ain’t Master Newt, dat’s fer sure.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  163. “President Obama is in virtutally the same mindset as FDR was”

    Great.

    Guess that means we can look forward to years of economic depression, millions of people drafted into the military, a bloody war that costs hundreds of thousands of American lives, the sinking of half our Pacific fleet, concentration camps for innocent citizens, government imposed rationing of everything from meat to rubber to gasoline, and all kinds of other fun stuff.

    I can hardly wait.

    Dave Surls (587595)

  164. I was just looking up how many sorties occurred. There were 20,700 aerial bombings. How many innocent civillians were killed in those? It’s bad enough to think that all those innocent people were killed, but it’s even worse to discover that they knew, the administration, that is from numerous reports, that the WMDs were a myth. That is horrific. Of course our own soldiers dying in the thousands now, not to mention the horrors of their injuries, it’s tragic beyond words.

    I can’t help but think, you all Righties would definitely be supporting Hitler if you wer living in Germany during his time. He “justified” all he did too. I know, we haven’t done EVERYthing he’s done, but enough, including concentrations camps (ours are detention camps) now torture, and invading innocent countries on false premises.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  165. Right, Patterico, as bad as waterboarding is, it isn’t the worst. There’s lots of memos that were destroyed, you know.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  166. Blu, you didn’t bother watching that vid I posted over on adj-laden Dana’s site, did you?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  167. “…invading innocent countries on false premises.”

    And, the river of nonsense keeps on flowing.

    Dave Surls (587595)

  168. By the way, I should remind you that aerial bombings were not the only source we had of killing people. Missles were fired into directions many miles ahead. Of course, some “terrorists” were killed, but lots more civillians, and big surprise (sarcasm) lots of people after losing family and friends wanted to kill the invading (us) forces. That would be causing terrorist activity. But, we weren’t necessarily creating “terrorists” just people that wanted us to stop killing their countrymen. Of course they started fighting back. It doesn’t take a someone with a doctorate in sociology to see that would happen. And our government isn’t that stupid. They knew the results. But, most of them were making money in the defense industry. That is why I always have to go back to this guy:General Smedley Butler
    http://www.warisaracket.com

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  169. David, you seriously still believe that the Bushies were honest? You must get laughed out of the room, anywhere you dare make such a statement. Too bad it isn’t really funny.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  170. Well, when the person write

    “..I can’t help but think, you all Righties would definitely be supporting Hitler if you wer living in Germany during his time…”

    I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at the rest of it. But it was a swift journey to Godwin’s Law.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  171. There were 20,700 aerial bombings.

    All aimed at orphanages and hospitals, of course.

    Again, not much concern that the Hussein regime killed hundreds of thousands, and used gas and chemical munitions against whole communities while holding the entire country hostage using a secret police network. Your implication that the US Air Force deliberately targeted civilians, while simultaneously failing to mention the crimes of the Hussein regime is obscene and shows your ‘concern’ for the people of Iraq to be non-existent.

    Also, you seem to have a problem with the concept of backing up your assertions, along with huge gaps in logical thought. You’ve been asked to cite the source for the ‘proof’ of the Bush Administration’s knowledge of the non-existence of WMD’s prior to the onset of OIF. You cannot, because it is impossible to prove the lack of existence of anything. At best, you could only assert that Bush ‘thought’ that there may not be weapons, but decided to engage anyway.

    But that position doesn’t jibe with the actions of the Hussein regime in restricting access of the inspectors, the stated opinion of the world intelligence agencies at the time, and the prior documented use (and therefore possession) of the WMD’s by the Hussein regime.

    It is exactly this type of emotional and illogical thought process, ungrounded completely from any sense of consistency, which allowed Hitler to assume power in the 1930’s. You should be careful of your analogies. I don’t trust politicians – of any party – and you won’t find me eating off of any plates festooned with their pictures.

    Only emotional fanatics who don’t pay attention do that.

    For example: Your logic, if projected onto a prosecutor, would have him accuse the defendant of a crime, with the proof being an assertion that the evidence proving his guilt was destroyed. That you cannot fathom that ‘destroyed’ evidence is impossible to use as proof of anything is astounding.

    Specifically, ‘destroyed’ evidence, without any copies, means it is no longer in existence, which also means that it is impossible to prove that it ever existed. So its use as ‘proof’ of anything is nonsensical. Yet you throw it out there to ‘back up’ your assertion of torture.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  172. #172- Well, when the person write

    “..I can’t help but think, you all Righties would definitely be supporting Hitler if you wer living in Germany during his time…”

    Actually, this is true. Conservatives in the Germany government made a deal with Hitler allowing him to assume power, thinking they could control him. Surprise. even back then, conservatives were tragically wrong.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  173. Cheney lies. Most everyone knows that. The theatrics used by Cheney and gang have been exposed many times. Many people don’t even realize the many other theatrical operations they’ve used. Look it up if you doubt me.

    See the real time broadcast tape. If he’s the one off camera left, which I and other viewers can be led to believe by virtue of the framing, I’m correct.

    Why do liberals deliberately post something as ‘facts’ and then expect the blog audience to search the internet for the proof of their ‘facts’?

    liontooth (c6d5a7)

  174. #165– My, my, my. What a wicked witch he was.

    I’ll get you my pretty… and your little dog, Fala, too! Bet you cringe every time you spend a Roosevelt dime, too. I’ve got some Reagan wooden nickels I’ll trade for them.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  175. liontooth – 12:52am

    This one’s a proven liar. Don’t waste your time.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  176. Tomorrow morning, I will enjoy reading the reactions of folks who know history to some of the last five or ten posts. Also, even after Patterico tried to calm people down, the “high spirits” of calling opponents Nazis continues.

    PWI?

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  177. liontooth – Meaning the subject of your post, not you.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  178. #151- Revealing hobby. You keep a photo album of those treasured memories, no doubt, as well.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  179. Eric, you have to understand. The twin towers collapsed due to a government conspiracy and if you deny that, you’re mistaken or complicit. And Bush knew there were no WMDs (despite Clinton saying there were some). And right-wingers have destroyed the education system to keep people poorly educated so the military would be the only job available to them.

    (According to blu)

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  180. Apogee, I wasn’t trying to debate their comments. It was an observation of these liberals that they believe that whatever fact they claim, it is the responsibility of the skeptical readers to find it.

    Who goes to a blog where 90%+ don’t agree with his/her view, post something as a ‘fact’ with no evidence, then has an attitude because nobody agrees with it? If I’m going to bring up something to a hostile audience, I’m not going to expect them to search the internet to find my own point. There seems to be an entitlement mentality, and I’ve noticed this on other non-liberal blogs where liberals do the same thing.

    Does this come from overindulgent parents that gave little junior EVERYTHING, and the little darling never heard the word ‘No’?

    liontooth (c6d5a7)

  181. “#165– My, my, my. What a wicked witch he was.”

    Pretty much.

    http://www.strike-the-root.com/4/powers/powers1.html

    “It was not official policy of the internment camps to slaughter their prisoners. Although a handful of internees were killed by their brutish captors, most of the deaths in these camps were due to natural causes.”

    The mark of a “good” liberal president. Only a handful of innocent American citizens were shot down like dogs when they resisted being forced into concentration camps.

    Well, at least they didn’t waterboard them first.

    Dave Surls (587595)

  182. Waterboarding = Torture. No matter how you try and justify it, this is fact. How the United States as a country can presume to hold the moral ‘high ground’ while sinking to the most despicable lows of those it would vilify is beyond my mental powers to comprehend, and apparently (thakfully) beyond those of our President as well.

    The whole “pour some water on the face of a mass murderer or kill a thousand innocents” argument is utterly stupid. By that logic, we should be skinning them alive and ripping their toenails off right off the bat, skipping over that pansy waterboarding crap. How many plots have gone unfoiled over the past 8 years because all we did was give someone a nice gentle facial rinse in lieu of more extreme tortures like John McCain loved to remind us he endured?

    Justifying waterboarding as necessary sets a very, very scary precedent. The fact that it (and much more heinous forms of torture, in CIA sponsored foreign prisons) has been going on for the past 8 years, or longer, behind the back of the American people, is sickening.

    I am glad to be able to keep a straight face now when I say that our country is at least leaning towards morality.

    Here’s hoping all you waterboarding advocates get to endure it at some point in your lifetime. Remember, walk *towards* the light…

    Nim Bus (ae2965)

  183. @ #182
    The only “little junior” as you reference in your post who has any pertinence to this discussion is George W., who was given everything by his parents, and never wanted for anything.

    Incidentally, *this* “little darling who had never heard the word ‘No'”, as you put it, ignored the UN (totally undermining its credibility in the process) when they told him “NO, there is not a justifiable reason to invade Iraq”, and did it anyway, probably on a tip spit out by a prisoner saying anything and everything to get the torture to stop.

    Go figure

    Nim Bus (ae2965)

  184. No matter how you try and justify it, this is fact

    Given the lack of any evidence on your post regarding this issue, I guess we’ll just have to take your word on it, yes?

    would vilify is beyond my mental powers to comprehend,

    You’re assuming you have any mental powers to being with – as further exemplified by this additional “factual” statement:

    is utterly stupid.

    …and you are an edumacated person!

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  185. Incidentally, *this* “little darling who had never heard the word ‘No’”, as you put it, ignored the UN (totally undermining its credibility in the process

    Please indicate (by objective sourcing) where the UN (and solely the UN) has succeeded in achieving the following:

    – preventing war from breaking out between two countries over the past 30 years;

    – preventing widespread genocide anywhere on the earth over the past 30 years;

    – preventing widespread starvation and famine over the past 30 years.

    Don’t know much about history, do you?

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  186. In my universe 1+1=2.

    In your universe, a US territory isn’t US soil, you think a man says things he actually didn’t, it’s scandalous that a two-year-old child isn’t in school, and you can claim all sorts of things without ever backing your words up.

    I’ll stay in reality, thank you.

    Steverino (1b3695)

  187. Ali Soufan.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/opinion/23soufan.html?_r=3&partner=rss&emc=rss

    There, an FBI agent who has identified himself, who has first-hand experience with waterboarding, says it doesn’t work.

    Not so easy to dismiss. Good luck with your refutation.

    Handsome Pete (488c1d)

  188. Wow, ONE FBI AGENT disputes the procedure of waterboarding. Meanwhile, here are the ones who feel quite strongly in the opposite direction:

    – every past living CIA Director
    – former VP Cheney

    I’ll see your three of hearts and throw down two Jacks. Got anything else?

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  189. While we’re on the subject, Pete – here’s a few follow – up questions for you:

    – why did all the past (and current) CIA Directors argue vociferously against the Obama administration’s leaking of the memos last week?

    – why has Speaker Pelosi suddenly changed her stance 180 degrees regarding the proposed “truth commission” hearings on this vitally important issue? Has she experienced some kind of epiphany on the matter, or is there any other salient reason behind her abrupt turnaround here?

    – why has the Obama administration refused to release ALL of the memos that former VP Cheney alluded to? Have they suddenly experienced an epiphany as well?

    Do tell.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  190. “There, an FBI agent who has identified himself, who has first-hand experience with waterboarding, says it doesn’t work.”

    Handsome Pete – Why can’t you fucking progtards read? Soufan does not say waterboarding does not work as I described above. From the link you provided:

    “There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics.”

    He’s making guesses because he wasn’t there when Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded and can’t predict what would have happened in a normal interrogation process in any event. That is completely different than saying waterboarding did not work.

    He goes on to say:

    “In addition, I saw that using these alternative methods on other terrorists backfired on more than a few occasions — all of which are still classified.”

    Soufan, however, can’t elaborate on the above but he is not talking about Abu Zubaydah. It is clear he is not suggesting that Zubaydah turned into a gibbering vegetable as some of the more rabid BDS addled progtard commentators out there have.

    Next time I suggest you check your links to make sure they actually say what you claim they say.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  191. “Waterboarding = Torture. No matter how you try and justify it, this is fact. How the United States as a country can presume to hold the moral ‘high ground’ while sinking to the most despicable lows of those it would vilify is beyond my mental powers to comprehend, and apparently (thakfully) beyond those of our President as well.”

    Liberals killed around a million innocent civilians with high explosives, napalm and atomic bombs in WWII (not to mention what they did in Korea, and Vietnam), the guys who ordered it are (according to them) great presidents…and now they’re freaking out because some captured terrorists ghot leaned on during interrogation sessions.

    You couldn’t make this stuff up.

    And…waterboarding isn’t torture.

    Dave Surls (d105db)

  192. Did you read the memo I linked?

    Comment by Patterico — 4/24/2009 @ 11:12 pm

    Are you kidding? Glasnost doesn’t read his own links, much less anyone else’s.

    blubonnet:

    Even if torture did work a time or two, what about all the times innocent people were tortured and had nothing to say

    Name any of the supposedly innocent people tortured by the US.

    Steverino (69d941)

  193. Meanwhile, here are the ones who feel quite strongly in the opposite direction:
    – every past living CIA Director
    – former VP Cheney

    Where is it reported that “every past living CIA Director” believes “quite strongly” in waterboarding’s use or effectiveness?

    They all opposed release of the torture memos and wrote the White House to that effect.

    steve (a3f11e)

  194. steve – I don’t know whether all living CIA heads have said that, but can you name one who has not?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  195. Further, there’s no reporting that George H.W. Bush, James Woolsley and Robert Gates joined that call. Nor ever indicated that they believe “quite strongly” in the technique.

    steve (a3f11e)

  196. You sadistic bedwetting candyass twinks tell yourself whatever you want to believe to sleep through the night. Fact is, any keyboard jockey tough guy here who says waterboarding isn’t torture would admit Obama is a capitalist christian born in the U.S., and you wear a pink thong to feel pretty, to stop somebody from waterboarding you inside 5 minutes. You may not believe any of that, but you would say it, and none of you twinks, like Hannity, have the stones to actually do it, because you know it’s true. And that’s why it doesn’t work, because you can’t tell what’s true and what was following the torturer’s narrative, what was said just to make the waterboarding stop. It’s unreliable, unless you want a false confession.

    Handsome Pete (488c1d)

  197. As of today, we know of four former directors of the CIA opposed the release of the memos:

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jE5iJQobx6q1nypm9I4woOiNOlZwD97KGGB00

    Regarding George H. W. Bush, are you seriously contending that he didn’t disagree with the memo release? And if the others not named agreed with the Obama administration’s actions, do you also seriously expect us to believe that the rabid dogs of the media haven’t already contacted them for their views on the matter – and if their views were contrary to the other directors that we’d be hearing about it 24/7?

    If you believe that, that you’d believe anything.

    One more question – why did Obama’s own CIA chief strongly disagree with this action? He’s Obama’s own hand – picked guy, and yet he goes against this decision, along with the others? Care to speculate on why that happened?

    Steve? Are you there? Bueller?

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  198. That’s another thing. Do any on the left know the difference between confessions and information? The enhanced interrogation was not for confessions but for information.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  199. Has there been a single Leftist that has engaged in honest debate on this thread? This demonstrates quite nicely Eric Blair’s theory of the Eternal Liberal Conceit.

    JD (3ff035)

  200. Fact is, any keyboard jockey tough guy here who says waterboarding isn’t torture

    It’s not just us who are saying it, but the armed services personnel who have voluntarily undergone the treatment as part of their training. Are you claiming that we intentionally torture our soldiers, Petey?

    You sadistic bedwetting candyass twinks

    Careful Petey, your projection is showing. But I think they have some drugs that may help you with your nighttime emissions problem.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  201. Funniest part of Petey’s line is where he accuses us here of keyboard jockey tough guy, then continues on and engages in further personal attacks within the same thread. Isn’t Spring Break over by now in most of the country?

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  202. Incidentally, *this* “little darling who had never heard the word ‘No’”, as you put it, ignored the UN (totally undermining its credibility in the process) when they told him “NO, there is not a justifiable reason to invade Iraq”

    Another assertion that the readers are supposed to blindly assume as fact. Your claim is completely false, Hans Blix final speech before the war JUSTIFIED the coalition action because Hussein had NOT complied with resolution. Blix’s March 2003 report: (my highlights)

    Against this background, the question is now asked whether Iraq has cooperated “immediately, unconditionally and actively” with UNMOVIC, as required under paragraph 9 of resolution 1441 (2002). The answers can be seen from the factual descriptions I have provided. However, if more direct answers are desired, I would say the following:
    “It is obvious that, while the numerous initiatives, which are now taken by the Iraqi side with a view to resolving some long-standing open disarmament issues, can be seen as “active”, or even “proactive”, these initiatives 3-4 months into the new resolution cannot be said to constitute “immediate” cooperation. “

    liontooth (c6d5a7)

  203. “It’s unreliable”

    Of course, it’s unreliable. All interrogation methods are unreliable if the guy being interrogated doesn’t want to tell the truth.

    Dave Surls (d105db)

  204. Careful, Handsome Pete just “knows” stuff. He can’t back it up, but he just “knows” it.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  205. ‘For the rest of the class, I’m calling only on people who HAVE read the linked memo.

    Horace, you get an “F” for today. Complete the reading assignment and try again tomorrow.’

    Patterico, I have read the linked memo. I’ve read through all the memos, which is why I think the focus on waterboarding is more than a little disingenuous on your part.

    Regarding the ‘led to the capture’ bit, in this third hand account (written up as intel, then summarized in the ‘justificiation’ memo sent to Justice, and then ‘reflected’ back to us in this memo), I simply don’t believe that year old info can be of tactical value — and ‘led to the capture’ is pretty vague in itself. Every government agency tries to justify itself and its actions.

    Look, if all the info is released — at this point I don’t see way it isn’t, because ‘sources and methods’ are the most sensitive and that is all blown now — and some report says KSM gave specific details as the the whereabouts of Hambali, or in some other way actually made it easier to get him, great. A third-hand, vague ‘led to the capture’ in a memo trying to justify a government program, doesn’t cut it given the timeline.

    horace (37aec4)

  206. As of today, we know of four former directors of the CIA opposed the release of the memos.

    Already noted.

    You said “every past living CIA Director” believes “quite strongly in the opposite direction” of an FBI agent whose says his first-hand experience is that waterboarding doesn’t work.

    Wrong on both counts.

    steve (1d99db)

  207. Sources for proof of that statement, please.

    Next time try to stick around, rather than run away immediately.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  208. #183- And yet he was re-elected over and over and over and over… It must be comforting for conservaties to know the majority of Americans were wickedly electing a wicked soul between 1933 and 1945.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  209. Again, Dmac, to be serious: some of these folks don’t want to deal with a nasty world that really exists. Hence this business of waterboarding being awful, while jihadis cut off the heads of prisoners.

    Asymmetry.

    Feelings, I guess. And it isn’t new. Did Frank Church help our hurt our intelligence gathering, and thus our safety? Or was he right? The world isn’t as simple as partisans would wish.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  210. A third-hand, vague ‘led to the capture’ in a memo trying to justify a government program, doesn’t cut it given the timeline.

    Horace,

    The specifics of how KSM’s interrogation “led to” the capture of Hambali are set forth in the memo that you claim to have read. Care to address those specifics?

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  211. Good luck on that Patterico. I really do think that this is all a psychological issue: how things should be as opposed to how they are.

    Too far the other way is just as bad. But folks should read and think about the genuine situation: the choices between good and bad doesn’t exist much of the time…instead it is between bad and “less bad.”

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  212. “FBI agent whose says his first-hand experience is that waterboarding doesn’t work”

    steve – Can you point out exactly where that FBI agent says that waterboarding doesn’t work?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  213. “And yet he was re-elected over and over and over and over…”

    “No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”–Mencken

    Dave Surls (e3df5f)

  214. Steve says that the FBI agent stated that conclusively in the article – thus, no further proof is needed. Steve also has the ability to read other people’s minds and thoughts, which is why he’s also certain that the other past CIA Directors explicitly agreed with the Obama administration’s leaking of the memo. Case closed.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  215. Sources for proof of that statement, please.

    #190 lacks any foundation.

    You wrote it.

    The letter in question opposed the release of torture memos. You freelanced that the four also believe “quite strongly” in “the opposite direction” of an ex-FBI supervisor with first-hand experience who questions waterboarding’s effectiveness.

    steve (584a64)

  216. Steve likes to compare apples and dinosaurs, or conflate them. We do not know if GHWB1 opposed releasing the memos, so we cannot say that all living thought it was a horrific idea. But we know that 4, including Barcky’s, thought it was a horrific idea. I susect he has not voiced his opinion as unlike the current former Dem Presidents, he has way too much class to snipe from the sidelines. I suspect his son will be the same way.

    In this instance, it is beyond dispute that this method worked. To deny it is to prove yourself dishonest, unless you plan on proving that all of the people that have confirmed its efficacy were involved in some grand conspiracy to lie about it.

    JD (c0224a)

  217. You freelanced that the four also believe “quite strongly” in “the opposite direction” of

    Just as you “freelanced” that the remaining directors must’ve been for the leaked memo despite any evidence, Poindexter. See how that works? So I guess you feel that Bush’s own father would be for the memos? Please.Take.Your.Head.Out.Of.Your.Arsehole.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  218. “an ex-FBI supervisor with first-hand experience who questions waterboarding’s effectiveness.”

    Yeah, well I don’t see the FBI capturing and killing a whole of terrorists over the last few decades. They usually show up after the damage is done, just to clean up the mess.

    Dave Surls (cde488)

  219. steve – Can you point out exactly where that FBI agent says that waterboarding doesn’t work?

    For some reason Steve completely ignored this question – wonder why?

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  220. The other living ex-directors aren’t the issue.

    Available evidence doesn’t support a claim that these letter-writers took ANY view on waterboarding’s effectiveness.

    steve (c9db27)

  221. DCSCA #210, your comment remains as substanceless as has been your habit on this topic. You have no command of the facts, no command of any lucid argument and so you keep repeating these little vapid fartings.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  222. See, steve is just being a little less than honest. First, it write a post about the living CIA directors AND the effectiveness of waterboarding. Then, when people refute on aspect, he simply points to the other, ignoring the refutations.

    JD (c0224a)

  223. “The other living ex-directors aren’t the issue.”

    steve – Correct. Because the living Ex-Directors who have taken a position on the issue claim that enhanced interrogation methods are effective and have provided high value intelligence.

    What are you actually arguing about?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  224. I’ll grant that the daisy-chaining laid out in the memo makes the timeline somewhat more plausible, that KSM supplied info might have led, at third remove, to tactical info which helped effect the arrest of Hambali. Its pretty garbled though, strangely so. I’d like dates, I’d like locations, I’d like to know who this unidentified ‘Khan’ is — the name is pretty much equivalent to ‘Smith’ in South Asia. He is the first guy in this supposed chain. I’d like to see some corroboration from the Thai officials — who after all where the ones who arrested Hambali. Bottom line, I don’t trust anything originating in the Bush admin’s intel apparatus without a lot of separately confirmable details. Try googling “curveball” and “iraq” to understand why.

    hortense (I like that!) (dcc326)

  225. I’d like dates

    Comment by hortense (I like that!) — 4/25/2009 @ 8:31 pm

    I bet you would.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  226. “I don’t trust anything originating in the Bush admin’s intel apparatus without a lot of separately confirmable details. Try googling “curveball” and “iraq” to understand why.

    Nice job of showing you don’t know what you are talking about, hortense, as Curveball originated through German intelligence. Maybe you should follow your own advice and try googling “curveball”.

    Sheesh.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  227. “Try googling “curveball” and “iraq” to understand why”

    hortense – Try googling “Tyler Lardass Drumstick” and “I’ve got a book to sell on the Iraq War” ’cause they didn’t pay me shit at the CIA.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  228. Why is it that when you merely don’t know things, things you find troubling, you all on the Right, you claim we are lying on the Left? Here is a start to try and understand things the mainstream media don’t cover. This guy was in Iraq as an independent reporter. He actually did report of the ambulances, hospital being directly bombed. Alot more besides. HE HAS BROUGHT MUCH PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE TO HIS STATEMENTS.
    http://dahrjamailiraq.com/

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  229. Hey, blubonnet, I’m still waiting for the list of innocent people the US supposedly tortured.

    Steverino (1b3695)

  230. blubonnet, maybe because we’ve seen so much faked reporting heralded by the left. Jamail was part of the propaganda about Fallujah that was debunked. Perhaps it is you who “don’t know things”.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  231. An example of Jamail’s false propaganda – claiming the US used “poison gas” in Fallujah. So we see what kind of lies blubonnet believes.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  232. “Why is it that when you merely don’t know things, things you find troubling, you all on the Right, you claim we are lying on the Left?”

    blubonnet – That’s a mischaracterization. The simple truth is you, as exemplified by your comments in this thread, when you have doubts about things, deny that they can by true even in the face of evidence which gives no reason to doubt that they are and with no evidence on your side to support your doubts. It’s just that simple. You’ve demonstrated that behavior a number of times in this thread alone.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  233. Still, daleyrocks, blubonnet’s idea of a truth teller is a man who claimed that the US was using poison gas.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  234. “Why is it you…claim we are lying on the Left?”

    We saw your lips moving.

    Dave Surls (cde488)

  235. “He actually did report of the ambulances, hospital being directly bombed.”

    blubonnet – Is there a point you are trying to make? If ambulances or hospitals were in fact attacked had they become legitimate targets at they time of attack. Surely you are familiar with the laws of war and how the insurgents used religious and humanitarian insitutions and human shields to prevent retaliation in violation of those laws. Hamas and Hezbollah do the same thing. Surely you are not too dumb to understand their tactics.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  236. “Still, daleyrocks, blubonnet’s idea of a truth teller is a man who claimed that the US was using poison gas.”

    SPQR – Incendiary devices too, probably. The left loved those white phosphorous war crimes claims. They got resurrected in Israel’s invasion of Gaza.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  237. daleyrocks, you cheated and read the link.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  238. Yep, another example, Dana. This is who blubonnet finds more credible than us “on the Right”.

    blubonnet wonders why we think that he and his leftist friends are lying so much … and then cites a well documented liar.

    Brilliant work. Evidently Sith Lord Cheney’s mind tricks have worked on blubonnet to enable such self-beclowning.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  239. Artful Dana knows about blu and comments like:

    blubonnet:

    I could find the link, if you want. It just so happens that a fellow from NIST has acknowledged, and stated, that NIST has been used as a political operative. Anyone with any common sense could see the absurdity of the government/911 Commission “explanations” if you see the case against them, unless denial overshadows one’s honest objectivity.

    Why is it that the Hearst owned Popular Mechanics (see other investments of Hearst) which has been proven wrong, was the one attempting to “discount” the evidence of the Truth movement? Why not Popular Science magazine? As I’ve done so many times before, I’ll leave my favorite link/site of the dozens out there on the factual presentations from highly credible professionals of every relevant sort, including Republican civillian government officials in the intelligence community, as well as military personnel. It really is time that we have to think the unthinkable.

    http://patriotsquestion911.com
    25 April 2009, 8:40 pm

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  240. “blubonnet wonders why we think that he and his leftist friends are lying so much”

    It’s not working out too well for he and his friends in this thread.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  241. John – You know it’s bad when even mental midgets and adolescents like Bill Maher kick Truthers out of their audiences.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  242. Can you point out exactly where that FBI agent says that waterboarding doesn’t work?

    An ex-FBI supervisor with first-hand experience questions “false claims magnifying the effectiveness of the so-called enhanced interrogation techniques like waterboarding.”

    Ali Soufan laments that “the short sightedness behind the use of these techniques ignored the unreliability of the methods…”

    He is careful not to say whether actionable intelligence resulted from enhanced methods used on KSM. He may have no first-hand knowledge.

    I believe the techniques were of proven value.

    There remains no factual basis to claim past CIA directors believe “quite strongly” in “the opposite direction” of ex-FBI supervisor Ali Soufan (#189, #190). Reports that four of them opposed releasing torture memos do not provide such basis.

    steve (647b4f)

  243. “The left loved those white phosphorous war crimes claims.”

    The usual story. The left (FDR et al) pioneered the use of William Peter in WWII, used it extensively in Korea and Vietnam, and then, when a Republican president is in office, the liberals start moaning that it oughta be a warcrime to use W.P. rounds.

    Same old, same old.

    Dave Surls (cde488)

  244. “Reports that four of them opposed releasing torture memos do not provide such basis.”

    steve – Now your quibbling over the words of ywo differewnt commenters. Read the rationale of why the four different Directors opposed the release of the memos and then revisit your comment.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  245. Hey, blubonnet, I’m still waiting for the list of innocent people the US supposedly tortured.

    Comment by Steverino — 4/25/2009 @ 9:53 pm

    You aren’t even embarassed by your ignorance, Stevernino?

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  246. Actually, your sources for “truth” tend to be those like Limbaugh, Hannity, who time and time again have been proven to lie.

    The Left uses sources who are professionals in the appropriate field to make their case. There is that thing again, facts, proven or not. You always tend to go the route of rhetoric over provable factual statements. It’s amazing, really to witness, blatent disregard for evidence, because it is displeasing. Who here had the guts to look at links provided by contrary opinion?

    By the way, thank you John Hitchcock (post #241) for dropping in the link to the statements of the multitude of statements from:
    various military intelligence,
    structural
    engineers,
    architects,
    former CIA,
    former FBI director,
    pilots,
    firefighters,
    Pentagon officials,
    military analysts,
    NORAD officials,
    physicists,
    Congress men and women,
    911 survivors,
    reporters from major publications.

    It’s rivetting stuff for those with the objectivity, curiosity, and emotional fortitude to acknowledge this unsettling reality, which is science based. Who has it in them? Or who is going to scream “HELL NO” and cover their eyes? It takes some guts to be honest with yourself, like the aforementioned HUNDREDS from above list.

    The list just keeps growing and the 911 Truth movement just keeps growing internationally, other governments around the world have been observing the absurdity of the the US government/911 Commission.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  247. Hey, blu. Tell these guys over here that you are not a “he” but very much a girl woman.

    Guys, be nice to blubonnet. She is no L___ J____ or DCSCA.

    nk (4b5c8a)

  248. And even though blu claims that this lady is not she, by reason, inter alia, of being much better endowed, I only need the flimsiest of excuses to link a picture of a pretty girl. (Reasonably safe for work.)

    nk (4b5c8a)

  249. Truther loons.

    Yawn.

    Dave Surls (cde488)

  250. #248- Blu, any word yet on Hannity keeping his word and being waterboarded for charity as he said he’d do last week? Olberman has a standing offer of $1000 for every second Sean lasts, the money to be donated to charity for military families.

    Hannity’s silence is deafening.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  251. Waterboarding is not a joke. It can kill you. That’s why it works.

    Hannity should not have said what he said but that does make Olberman any less of a pickle-biter.

    nk (4b5c8a)

  252. does *not* make Olberman

    nk (4b5c8a)

  253. nk, you have excellent recall for ‘protest babes’ – did you originally find that on zombietime?

    But, with all due respect, I’ll be pointing and laughing at any “Truth” – movement posters here.

    carlitos (f022c4)

  254. Ace of Spades, I think, and then I uploaded it to Blogger.

    blubonnet used to visit here more often. She can be fun to tease, but in a polite and light-hearted way, please.

    nk (4b5c8a)

  255. Sorry, nk, but blubonnet is disturbed if she is repeating 911 Truther BS, and does not understand why her Jamail is a fraud.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  256. You aren’t even embarassed by your ignorance, Stevernino?

    I’m not at all ignorant, blu. I’m asking you to back up your claim. You said, “Even if waterboarding worked a couple of times, what about all the innocent people who were tortured who had nothing to say?” (Or words to that effect, I apologize if the quote isn’t precise.)

    You made the claim that innocents were tortured, it’s up to you to provide evidence.

    BTW, the question of ignorance coming from a 9/11 truther is wonderfully ironic.

    Steverino (69d941)

  257. He is careful not to say whether actionable intelligence resulted from enhanced methods used on KSM. He may have no first-hand knowledge.

    That’s an awesome refutation of my argument, Steve – “this guy could have, may have, who knows really, but he possibly could have…” Jeebus.

    There remains no factual basis to claim past CIA directors believe “quite strongly” in “the directionopposite ”

    Thank you, Bill Clinton.

    What are you actually arguing about?

    Steve’s arguing with the voices in his head.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  258. Not willing to do that? Then you and I aren’t playing on an even field, and you have no standing whatsoever to complain about my rule.

    I suppose I see your point. Someday, perhaps. Most folks in the areas of my interests who are a) prominent and b) blogging under their real names have already come out of government and into a media quasi-career.

    Your position appears to be that, well, it’s the CIA, so they must be lying. Well, if “glasnost” says so, it must be true! Why should I pay greater attention to someone who actually knows what he’s talking about?

    Come on, this is cr*p. A straight appeal to authority argument. My opinion about the whole topic in general, and the effectiveness subset as well as on this incident, is based, in part, on testimony from high-level Bush-era guys who didn’t agree with the call, including Phil Zeikow on Rice’s team, –

    for example, see here –

    http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/04/23/the_interrogation_programs_were_wrong_but_did_they_work

    Soufan states, accurately, that some of the CIA claims reprinted in the Justice opinions (and recently repeated in the media) are demonstrably false or overstated. Some of the very claims that Soufan describes were also used, while I was in government, in CIA memos defending the program that were submitted to the White House. Therefore, the declassification of those memos, as Vice President Cheney and others have called for, would only raise questions that would have to be answered with still more disclosures. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence appears to be trying to sort this out.

    various FBI whistleblowers who were involved, SERE instructors, respected folks in the military, – see here:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/JPRA-Memo_042409.pdf

    etc, etc. Not only that, there have been repeated reports about low-level CIA guys themselves disagreeing with some of this and being shut up. All this against – not even “the CIA”. against some memos written by high-level folks with every motive in the world to vindicate their controversial choices, and 10-20 Bush-era partisan intel flacks.

    Furthermore – have you, or have you not, repeatedly accused the CIA of misrepresenting the truth to save their own a*ses on this website, relating to other issues? Must I do an archive search? Are they infallible or not?

    You don’t have any idea what happened, either. Your expertise comes from the same place as mine does – open source intel. Other than that, you don’t know jack.

    And that open source intel points in a variety of different directions. We don’t really know what happened – one reason being that the the CIA illegally destroyed the tapes in question.

    Tell me, Pat. In your line of work, does that sort of action speak of confidence in one’s prior behavior?

    What most irritating about this argument is that it is a sideshow. Regardless of the effetiveness argument, it was wrong and illegal. But you’re not even making a good effectiveness argument, nor do you show signs of doing so.

    In order to make an effectiveness argument, you can’t just demonstrate that we at some point got some kind of intel from someone we did this crap to.

    You have to demonstrate that KSM wouldn’t have given up this info using other methods. You have to demonstrate that the info wasn’t available from someone else. And you have to demonstrate that the plot couldn’t have been stopped without that info. Considering that we’ve broken up several major attacks on the US and in other countries, including quite a few in Europe, WITHOUT resorting to this sort of barbarism, I’d say the overall evidence is pretty strongly against the unique effectiveness of torture.

    Even if you at any point manage to make a case that there’s a unique opportunity to gain intel from this, you have to weigh it against the high level of false positives and the enormous amount of wasted effort and time on them – which essentially everyone concedes.

    And even once you’ve done that, you have to demonstrate that the unique benefits outweigh the unique costs of permanently surrending the moral high ground in the eyes of the world – essentially the opposite of the Dave Petraeus strategy. Which are very high indeed.

    And even then, it’s still wrong, and more to the point, illegal. (Do you have some sort of case that it’s *not* illegal? Keeping in mind that the DOJ has disavowed its own memos on the topic – during the *Bush* admin? Because I haven’t heard any conservatives making the case that this was legal recently. You could really carve out some new ground there. Lots of consequentialist arguments about what might happen to the poor CIA, but nothing about how this is legal that I’ve seen. Not from Volokh, not from Tom Maguire, not from nobody. The memos were a joke. No one defends them.

    You want some more?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22detain.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp

    A little research on the origin of those methods would have given reason for doubt. Government studies in the 1950s found that Chinese Communist interrogators had produced false confessions from captured American pilots not with some kind of sinister “brainwashing” but with crude tactics: shackling the Americans to force them to stand for hours, keeping them in cold cells, disrupting their sleep and limiting access to food and hygiene.

    “The Communists do not look upon these assaults as ‘torture,’ ” one 1956 study concluded. “But all of them produce great discomfort, and lead to serious disturbances of many bodily processes; there is no reason to differentiate them from any other form of torture.”

    Worse, the study found that under such abusive treatment, a prisoner became “malleable and suggestible, and in some instances he may confabulate.”

    In late 2001, about a half-dozen SERE trainers, according to a report released Tuesday night by the Senate Armed Services Committee, began raising stark warning about plans by both the military and the C.I.A. to use the SERE methods in interrogations.

    In December 2001, Lt. Col. Daniel J. Baumgartner of the Air Force, who oversaw SERE training, cautioned in one memo that physical pressure was “less reliable” than other interrogation methods, could backfire by increasing a prisoner’s resistance and would have an “intolerable public and political backlash when discovered.” But his memo went to the Defense Department, not the C.I.A.

    Lastly, you should frankly be ashamed that you’re not reading the people making the opposite case against your point of view. That’s no way to develop an informed opinion on anything. And your opinion appears to be informed only in a very narrow manner. If you had even a clue about the extraordinary variety of people – not liberal hippies, but professionals (amazingly, there were a few) inside the Bush Administration – who appear to have thought this was a bad idea at the time, you’d stop treating this as an open and shut case.

    glasnost (af3e29)

  259. Hey, Pat. Since you love hating on LAT, I’m sure you’ll be all over this article, right? Or at least read it?

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-interrogate26-2009apr26,0,5771981.story?page=2

    The Defense Department, Justice Department and CIA “all insisted on sticking with their original policies and were not open to revisiting them, even as the damage of these policies became apparent,” said John B. Bellinger III, who was legal advisor to former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, referring to burgeoning international outrage.

    White House National Security Council officials who saw the inspector general’s report became concerned with its conclusions, current and former officials said. Stephen Hadley, then the deputy national security advisor, was particularly persistent on pushing the CIA director to follow up on the inspector general’s recommendation.

    “Certainly you got additional considerable volume of reporting when you started up with anything enhanced,” the U.S. intelligence official said. “But nobody went back to say exactly what were the conditions under which we learned that which was the most useful.”

    In fact, Helgerson’s team had steered away from that question by design, the official said, hoping that agency leaders would turn to interrogation experts for a thorough study on which methods were working and which should be discarded.

    White House National Security Council officials who saw the inspector general’s report became concerned with its conclusions, current and former officials said. Stephen Hadley, then the deputy national security advisor, was particularly persistent on pushing the CIA director to follow up on the inspector general’s recommendation.

    Goss, who had taken the helm at the CIA four months after the inspector general’s report was filed, eventually complied. But Helgerson had envisioned a group of experts, perhaps including specialists from the FBI; Goss turned instead to two former government officials with little background in interrogation

    Gardner Peckham, a national security advisor to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, produced the approximately 10-page document that praised the program. It concluded that the program was “very structured and very disciplined,” said a former official familiar with its contents, but did not assess the effectiveness of various methods

    So now we have Bellinger and, by implication, Steven Hadley as highly doubtful, vs… “unnamed CIA officials” and Goss’ favorite trick, former right-wing congressional amateur hacks. Porter Goss, as CIA director, was a total f*cking disaster. He was the Alberto Gonzales of the CIA.

    glasnost (af3e29)

  260. As long as there is another unknown and not in custody person in the world that may or may not have actionable intelligence that may or may not give up that information because we must never offend the delicate sensibilities of a terrorist so therfore waterboarding is illegal a warcrime and torture. Because glasnost says so. Anyone that disagrees with his brilliance is a mouth breathing knuckle dragging bloodlusting warmongering torture lover.

    JD (72cf0d)

  261. Tell me, Pat. In your line of work, does that sort of action speak of confidence in one’s prior behavior?

    And what, pray tell, is your line of work, sir? Care to divulge any relevant details? How ’bout it? Let’s hear it – all of it.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  262. Tell me, Pat. In your line of work, does that sort of action speak of confidence in one’s prior behavior?

    Comment by glasnost — 4/26/2009 @ 7:50 am

    Patterico already said to keep his job out of this.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  263. I can also tell that you’re really, really good at cutting and pasting enormous volumes of text, rather than just offering links and thereby allowing the rest of us to choose whether or not to clog up our screens with more wastage of bandwith. Do you harbor some kind of insecurity as to the relative merit of your arguments, and that perhpas you feel you must post the entirety of your sources in order to make yourself heard?

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  264. Dmac – Anytime someone uses large walls o’text as opposed to providing the link, it usually turns out that what they chose to not quote is really the interesting information.

    JD (72cf0d)

  265. Steve’s arguing with the voices in his head.

    Just you, actually.

    steve (a3f11e)

  266. Remember, Steve – you’re never alone when you’re a schizophrenic.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  267. Dmac – Anytime someone uses large walls o’text as opposed to providing the link,

    I am providing links. And, yes, I’m citing what makes my case the most strongly. Feel free to devastatingly undercut me with the glaring contradictions I must be leaving out. (/sarc)

    and that perhpas you feel you must post the entirety of your sources in order to make yourself heard?

    I’m not posting the entireties, but yes, I’m pasting large text blocks under the assumption that much of the audience is not predisposed to click on the links. You don’t want to hear it. Leaving it as links makes it easier to avoid.

    Piling on:

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/66895.html

    WASHINGTON — The CIA inspector general in 2004 found that there was no conclusive proof that waterboarding or other harsh interrogation techniques helped the Bush administration thwart any “specific imminent attacks,” according to recently declassified Justice Department memos.

    “It is difficult to quantify with confidence and precision the effectiveness of the program,” Steven G. Bradbury, then the Justice Department’s principal deputy assistant attorney general, wrote in a May 30, 2005, memo to CIA General Counsel John Rizzo, one of four released last week by the Obama administration.

    “As the IG Report notes, it is difficult to determine conclusively whether interrogations provided information critical to interdicting specific imminent attacks. And because the CIA has used enhanced techniques sparingly, ‘there is limited data on which to assess their individual effectiveness’,” Bradbury wrote, quoting the IG report.

    Why are you more sure about this than the OLC flack writing a report specifically designed to counter the CIA inspector general – who disagreed with you – Pat?

    glasnost (af3e29)

  268. #190 was a textbook example of that.

    steve (a3f11e)

  269. Comrade Andropov, quit climbing out of your coffin.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  270. That “there was no specific proof” harsh techniques thwarted an imminent attack is not an inconvenient truth.

    KSM resisted giving operational details of future attacks except to say, “Soon you’ll find out.” His interrogation led to the discovery of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemmah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the ‘Second Wave’ and Hambali’s arrest.

    Others read “imminent attack” into these events. I think it’s an open question.

    steve (a3f11e)

  271. Other than the fact that the people involved stated it was effective with KSM, Blair confirmed same, etc… So, if you ignore all actual evidence to the contrary, glasnost’s position is incredibly reasonable.

    JD (72cf0d)

  272. So now the Leftists want to debate what constitutes imminent again ?!

    JD (72cf0d)

  273. “you have to weigh it against the high level of false positives and the enormous amount of wasted effort and time on them – which essentially everyone concedes.”

    glasnost – Do you have some kind of evidence of the amount of wasted time spent on false positives and the like from the enhanced interrogation program since you claim everyone concedes it is a problem. Surely to make that claim it must be documented somewhere rather than as a shoot from the hip throw away comment by uninvolved analysts, right? You do have something, don’t you?

    Since there is documentary evidence of the success of the program which you are doing you very best to minimize or make seem to be part of some vast conspiracy, surely you have something to back up some of your claims other than “I don’t trust these guys” so what they say must be false and everybody I know and trust says torture doesn’t work or is flawed in spite of what those freaking memos say and you can’t convince me otherwise. I have no idea why we want to keep those techniques in our inventory or why Israel does if they are ineffective. Somebody must be wrong and I know it is not me. Heh!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  274. glasnost – Clearly you have no experience reading Audit or Inspector General type reports. Did the report say the program was ineffective? No. Did the report say in failed to thwart any attacts? No. All it said was that was that there was a limited sample upon which to base conclusions.

    Keep trying.

    Your standard of proof that you erected is also ridiculous. Try a controlled experiment with KSM or another terrorist to prove that he wouldn’t divulvge the information in any other manner than through enhanced interrogation? Say what? Prove that you absolutely needed the information obtained through the enhanced interrogation to foil the plot? Say what?

    How do you go about proving that moronic set of standards you pulled out of your ass glasnost? Is that even something you would expect to see presented in a courtroom? Did Marcy Wheeler or Jane Hamster make that shit up? Scott Horton the conspiracy machine?

    You are definitely many sandwiches short of picnic my friend.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  275. Others read “imminent attack” into these events. I think it’s an open question.

    Steve needs to see him some lots of dead bodies before he’s convinced.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  276. #33 “So we are once again back to the time travel theory of water boarding.”

    Good god, The name “Lib-tard” really fits – a guy who hasn’t bother to read the actual posting at the top of the page that explicitly refuted the pont made there. Jeeez.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  277. 10 step to the ObamaNation:
    1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy – Global Warming, Rush Limbaugh and TEA Partiers
    2. Create a gulag – still to come
    3. Develop a thug caste – ThinkProgress, MSNBC, and Waxman’s committee; expanded AMeriCorps
    4. Set up an internal surveillance system – DHS report on ‘right-wing extremists’
    5. Harass citizens’ groups – DHS report on ‘right-wing extremists’
    6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release – The plans to use IRS to collect extra $300 billion will give plenty of opportunity for selective/abusive prosecutions/audit/harrassments
    7. Target key individuals –
    8. Control the press – Gibbs give WH Press Corps high marks “Well done … good doggies”
    9. Dissent equals treason – stated already against those who ‘want Obama to fail’, they are ‘traitors’
    10. Suspend the rule of law – Wait and see

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  278. “Well, gee, why are we pissed, we here on the Left? Well, the AP came out today with the factual data that well over a million Iraqis have been killed. I can assure you that very few of them were terrorists, and we did 90% of the killing, because we have the power militarily.”

    blubonnet,Leave aside the suspect numbers, you are a dirty liar who has smeared the US military. The vast majority of the deaths in Iraq were at the hands of terrorists and our enemies in Iraq, plus those who died in factional violence that some called civil war.

    Do you shower after you post your lies?

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  279. Let me say this…I’ve got to eat a little crow but its okay when your anonymous on the internet… I misread the date on Hambali’s arrest, and yes patterico has a point that if it played out like the CIA said it did, it is possible that KSM’s intel was good for tactical intel– and that was the only real reason info on Hambali could be important, he was well known in South Asia long before his arrest, indeed long before Sept 11, 01

    On curveball, wiki says that he German intel warned us that the guy was not reliable.

    What is really funny is now, somehow, the CIA is this gold standard intel operation, incapable of making a mistake or misleading the public, when looking back a year or two the neocon wing was all over the CIA as ‘being at war with the Bush administration’. I don’t know it this is patterico’s take, but it certainly was NRO’s, because they didn’t agree with Bush’s take on Iraq. For example here is ‘CIA Run Amok’.

    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjJlY2ZhNzZkNThhODg0YTVjNTk0MzkxMWU5ZDQ2YjE=

    hortense (aka horace) (dcc326)

  280. “However, I’ve read other reports stating that over a million Iraqis have been killed.”

    Most reports that are reliable say about 100,000. The one report that went much higher was a lie based on very suspect methodology and ‘ax to grind’ motivation.
    The Lancet/Johns Hopkins study was a garbage study that use the same author who concluded that sanctions under Clinton in Iraq killed over a million:
    http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2009/02/public-opinion-researchers-society-rebukes-johns-hopkins-for-its-unethical-unsupported-2006-iraq-war-death-study.html

    So what we really have is 110,000 killed. Most were NOT killed by US military contrary to your smear lies. More importantly, the death toll would have been much much lower if Al Qaeda in Iraq and other terrorists didnt decide to fight us there.

    Iraq is now a democratic state instead of dictatorship. Lesson learned: Freedom isnt free.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  281. “… the neocon wing…”

    Gosh, I wonder what that means?

    Eric Blair (57b266)

  282. “Since you love hating on LAT”

    Glasnost, you jerk. Patterico loves the LAT more than the biased editors and low-quality-standards publishers who let garbage get published under its masthead. Patterico is correcting the errors of LAT like a loving mentor would do to a wayward, D- level student.

    If LATimes had any sense they’d make him their ombudsman. but they dont, which is why this blog is so necessary.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  283. “What is really funny is now, somehow, the CIA is this gold standard intel operation, incapable of making a mistake or misleading the public, when looking back a year or two the neocon wing was all over the CIA as ‘being at war with the Bush administration’.”

    Hortense – I can imagine you have difficulty seeong the difference between the intelligence upon which the WMD assessments were based and with which every other major allied intelligence organization agreed (why does the left keep forgetting that fact) and the intelligence obtained from DIRECTLY interrogating prisoners.

    Keep trying.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  284. hortense, if you can’t tell the difference between intelligence operations and political leaking, you are just a clown.

    Well, hell, you are a clown even if you know the difference.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  285. “The left loved those white phosphorous war crimes claims.”

    The usual story. The left (FDR et al) pioneered the use of William Peter in WWII, used it extensively in Korea and Vietnam, and then, when a Republican president is in office, the liberals start moaning that it oughta be a warcrime to use W.P. rounds.

    Same old, same old.”

    Ah yes, the same FDR who
    – lied to Congress and the US people about rules of engagement and support for Britian in 1940/1941
    – allowed high-level Soviet spies to penetrate his administration, ignoring warnings about spies like Alger Hiss, Harry Hopkines, etc.
    – interned tens of thousands of US citizens of Japanese heritage, in the most massive wartime violation of civil rights in our history

    Yes, the usual story. Of course, FDR and Obama are simpatico on that lovin-the-commie-dictator stuff:

    “I may say that I got along fine with Marshall Stalin. He is a man who combines a tremendous relentless determination with a stalwart good humor. I believe he is truly representative of the heart and soul of Russia; and I believe that we are going to get along very well with him and the Russian people – very well indeed.” –FDR after Teheran Conference.

    http://www.davidstuff.com/incorrect/buchanan3.htm
    http://www.geocities.com/mark_willey/fdr.html
    http://sigcarlfred.blogspot.com/2008/05/fdr-george-bush-and-scott-mcclellan.html

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  286. Travis, what exactly was it that we went to Iraq for? There were everchanging reasons, you know. You know that ample evidence exists proving we were lied to intentionally, for the start up to the war. I’m not blaming our military. I’m defending our military’s honor and mentally, only wish I could defend their well being. They do not deserve to be lied to. They do not deserve to be shot at, or have to shoot someone on the basis of lies. The Iraqi people do not deserve to be killed, or have their family and friends when the terrorist threat never was in Iraq in early 2003. They did not deserve to be killed anyway.

    I’m not a liar, Travis Monitor. You may not choose to look into things I say, to see I’m bringing credible journalists, with credible, relevant guests. And video documentation is available for most of what I say. I’ve gotten complaints from opponents of debate, because I usually bring a source to every post. For some reason, he said I was being unfair. But, I digress, all I’m saying is take a moment to google up something you question.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  287. Travis, what exactly was it that we went to Iraq for? There were everchanging reasons, you know.

    The reasons weren’t “everchanging”, as you allege. They were all laid out to Congress in October, 2002, with the Authorization for the Use of Military Force in Iraq.

    ALL of the reasons in the AUMF were what we went to Iraq for.

    Steverino (1b3695)

  288. Yep, Stevernino, Congress bought it hook, line and sinker too, and I’m betting that there were many in on it too in Congress, the lie. I could easily go out and dig up some sources, but I suggest you do. You can use a few different sources, all of which can be scrutinized, if you wish.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  289. US administration saying Iraq had WMDs, in agreement with international community.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  290. “There were everchanging reasons, you know.”

    A lie.

    “You know that ample evidence exists proving we were lied to intentionally, for the start up to the war.”

    A variation on the oft told leftoid lie that George Bush lied us into war. An amazing assertion, seeing as how Bill Clinton was bombing Iraq on a regular basis right up ’til the day he left office. IOW, a lie.

    “when the terrorist threat never was in Iraq in early 2003.”

    A variation on the “there were no terrorists in Iraq” lie. There were. Another lie.

    “I’m not a liar”

    Four strikes and…you’re out.

    Dave Surls (88dab7)

  291. Teverninio, I suggest looking up:

    *Downing Street memo,
    *What Joe Wilson knew,
    *weapons inpectors; findings,
    *Condaleeza Rice “mushroom cloud”,
    *Curveball (who they hung their hat on)
    *Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski + Rumsfield + Iraq,

    That’s all I can think of at the moment, but if I gave it a little more time, I could probably think of more sources, but, I’ll leave it at that.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  292. “I’m defending our military’s honor”

    Could well qualify for the “Biggest Whopper of the Century” award.

    Dave Surls (88dab7)

  293. Dave Surls, how is it that you make these claims, discounting what I say, yet you have NOTHING to back up what you are saying?

    Yes, Bill Clinton was bombing Iraq, and with sanctions, causing dysentary, killing thousands and mostly children whose digestive systems are not as fully developed. They were quite a weakened country. It was horrid. I don’t accept Clinton’s doing that either.

    Then, there was Bush, we started hitting them with a total onslaught. A governement source I came across recently said the military carried out over 20 thousand sorties. I don’t know how many bombs each sortie dropped.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  294. Harry Potter to house elf: Stop helping me.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  295. “Yes, Bill Clinton was bombing Iraq”

    Yup. And, that’s why it’s impossible for Bush II to have lied us into a war…because we were already at war.

    “You know that ample evidence exists proving we were lied to intentionally, for the start up to the war.”

    And that statement is a big, fat LIE. A variation on the “Bush lied us into war” claptrap constantly being spewed forth by left wing loons.

    Dave Surls (88dab7)

  296. And, Dave Surls, you do know, don’t you, that there were no WMDs found, don’t you?

    You do know, don’t you that US diplomatJoe Wilson went to Niger, came back and stated that GW Bush and gang claiming that Sadaam Hussain sought yellow cake, was false, don’t you? (then his actual CIA wife was outed, by come to find out, originatating out of Cheney’s office the Whitehouse, for God’s sake, all of which has been confirmed by multiple CIA agents).

    You do know, don’t you, that the aluminum tubes that they claimed to the American public to be used in making some awful, lethal, anti-Geneva Convention weapon, that too was said to be false, by those in the defense department.

    You do know, don’t you, that when George W. Bush met with Tony Blair oat Downing Street, the one taking notes for the meeting exposed, the words of George W. Bush having said exactly: “We’re going to fix the facts around this to sell the war”.

    Did you know that Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, who worked in the Pentagon, Rumsfield came into her office and declared immediately after 911, to tie it to Iraq, and basically, to make something up.

    You can easily look any of those things up and see that they are true, but I bet you won’t, because your ideology is more important to you than the truth.

    But, apparently that’s okay with you. Our troops can go ahead and lose body parts and even their own lives, so I guess I shouldn’t care…?????

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  297. “when the terrorist threat never was in Iraq in early 2003.”–Untruth teller

    WASHINGTON (CNN) — Abu Abbas, a convicted Palestinian terrorist who masterminded the 1985 hijacking of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro on which a wheelchair-bound American was killed, was captured by U.S. Special Forces in the outskirts of Baghdad, U.S. Central Command said Tuesday.”–CNN

    http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/15/sprj.irq.abbas.arrested/

    You lie. End of story.

    Dave Surls (88dab7)

  298. “And, Dave Surls, you do know, don’t you, that there were no WMDs found, don’t you?”

    And, the lies keep on a-coming.

    “We have now commenced the process of destroying approximately 50 litres of mustard gas declared by Iraq that was being kept under UNMOVIC seal at the Muthanna site. One-third of the quantity has already been destroyed. The laboratory quantity of thiodiglycol, a mustard gas precursor, which we found at another site, has also been destroyed.”–Hans Blix

    http://www.mideastnews.com/blix140203.html

    You lie.

    Dave Surls (88dab7)

  299. Sheesh. Somebody needs to up their dose of Dogmatil.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)


  300. “..because your ideology is more important to you than the truth..”

    Wow. I have never seen a better example of sheer projection.

    Blubonnet, be well. Get some help. I don’t think that anyone arguing with you will help anything.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  301. I read the piece you left the link for, and, themn I looke dsome more. It turns out that Cheney was threatening Blix and his colleagues to come up with something for their jobs were tto be jeapordized. Then, I read a few more things confirming that he too…Hans Blix was not really standing by Bush and Cheney, except that he had to. Rather cowardly, considering many lives were at stake. He must have had alot of trouble sleeping. Anyway, here is an interview with Hans Blix:
    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/international/jan-june04/blix_3-17.html

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  302. PWI….

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  303. “You do know, don’t you, that the aluminum tubes that they claimed to the American public to be used in making some awful, lethal, anti-Geneva Convention weapon, that too was said to be false, by those in the defense department.”

    You do know that Iraq wasn’t allowed to have those tubes FOR ANY PURPOSE, don’t you? And, that their importation and possession of said tubes was a violation of the 1991 ceasefire agreement?

    No?

    “In 2000, Iraq ordered, via a company in Jordan, 60,000 high-strength aluminum tubes manufactured from 7075-T4 aluminum with an outer diameter of 81 mm, and an inner diameter of 74.4 mm, a wall thickness of 3.3 mm and a length of 900 mm, to be manufactured in China. These tubes were classified as controlled items by the United Nations and Iraq was not permitted to import them…”–wiki

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_aluminum_tubes

    Now, you know.

    P.S. Let me know when you get tired of speewing lies and making asinine statements.

    Dave Surls (88dab7)

  304. Incidentally, do you know how much Bush and Cheney used Psy-ops? Do you know what that is? Look it up, if you don’t.

    Also, all manner of theatrics has been used to sell this war. The gal that was woulded and superhero stories were being told about her, and she finally denounced the stories. Poor thing. She should be applauded for just being brave enough to go, but then she ends up having to tell the world that she wasn’t held captive, but was in an Iraqi hospital being cared for, and she didn’t shoot a dozen “terrorists” during it all. She had to say: “Look, I’m not going to abide by the lie being sold by the networks, by the Pentagon.” She was a hero for telling the truth, exposing the lies, as well as just being there and enduring the misery. THAT was just a story that was exposed regarding the Pentagon/media collusion/psy-ops.

    FORMER CIA DIRECTOR WILLIAM COLBY said: “The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.”

    Real facts have to be found in the non-corporate media sources like Democracy Now for example. You won’t hear everything that you would like to believe, but it will make you aware.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  305. Well, whatever, about the aluminum tubes, they were not what the US said they were for. Even if they weren’t supposed to get a hold of them.

    Hans Blix, your source even spoke of it. On my side, by the way.

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  306. Numerous links to documents can be found showing the deception leading up to the war.
    http://downingstreetmemo.com/

    blubonnet (ae1d2a)

  307. “Real facts”

    are items with which you’re obviously totally unfamiliar.

    Dave Surls (88dab7)

  308. ‘You do know, don’t you, that when George W. Bush met with Tony Blair oat Downing Street, the one taking notes for the meeting exposed, the words of George W. Bush having said exactly: “We’re going to fix the facts around this to sell the war”.’–Teller of Many Lies

    Oh, I very much doubt that George Bush said exactly that, but I’m willing to be convinced.

    Prove it.

    Dave Surls (88dab7)

  309. Surls, let me get this straight: you’re claiming from your militia bunker, that the US found terrorism links to Al Queda and WMD in Iraq?!?!?!

    Seriously, I know keeping that cache of food in the bunker takes a lot of time and you never know when the UN helicopters are coming, but that is some dead-end wingnutter bs c. 2005. I’m guessing you don’t out much.

    PS Blair, at least you finally understood the hypocrisy of claiming a great man’s name and then defending the very things he fought against. I don’t expect faux academics to snap out of wingnuttia in one day, but by realizing you can’t claim Orwell’s name and defend torture….well, I think you’re on the road to recovery.

    PPS Congrats, daley, on finding a monkey to dance for you.

    timb (a83d56)

  310. Ansar Al-Islam. Abu Nidal. Terrorist training camps. Not evidence.

    JD (6ef9a2)

  311. God, between the times you don’t know anything and the times you don’t know the things you think are true are not, I have trouble estimating the level of your stupid versus the level of your ignorance.

    Here, we’ll side with ignorance: those people are not, were not, and never were Al Quesa. Learn to read: there were no operational links between Al queda and Saddam.

    Oh, and before you bitch about about that statement like…well, like a douche who lives in an echo chamber, blame the fricking US Senate and not me.

    Why don’t you read the dang news once in awhile and not just right wing blogs?

    Still, you and Surls are perfect for each other. Surls blames today’s Dems for the Trail of Tears, defends Wounded Knee because it happened during a Republican administration, and thinks he has a point, and you don’t care about knowing anything, except which team you’re supposed to root for.

    JD motto: Facts be damned, there’s partisanship afoot

    Oh, and you creepy little man, …blah blah, whatever boiler plate you type after that.

    PS Do you ever get tired of getting pwned by people?

    timb (a83d56)

  312. timb just hit what we used to call a Pollock home run (we were so politically incorrect back then): over the fence behind the plate.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  313. Wow. The P.S. says it all. It’s like a straight line given to the people who don’t agree with you, isn’t it?

    Maybe the earlier insults you tried to deal me are still with you:

    “..I don’t expect faux academics to snap out of wingnuttia in one day…”

    You don’t even know me. You seem to be reflecting all the things that irritate you about your opponents. I am an academic, though. Are you? Not that being an academic means a person is correct about anything. Trust me on that.

    Getting back to your post, it’s too early in the day for you to be drinking. Or maybe it was lunch time with the “Al Quesa” comment. Isn’t that part of having nachos? No, that is “queso.” “Quesa” is a pretty cool 3D graphic library.

    Seriously, why so angry? And remember, as you start to bring Truth to Power to me (!), that you are the one doing the yelling.

    Isn’t a calm demeanor, civil manner, and statement of facts a good approach for a budding lawyer? And if people call you names, why, your own approach will win you more respect and attention than flinging metaphorical poo around.

    Take a break, dude. I think you are stressing out.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  314. John, I think he is gearing up for the “I work here is done” competition.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  315. Yes, typos are indicative of insanity, not bad typing. Between the times you tell me to relax and the times you’re upset because psychoanalyzing people isn’t going well, you create a faux picture of me.

    Look, Eric, I wouldn’t hang out here if I weren’t entertained by the inanity of most commenters. Dr. Mike, you, even Daley and a few others don’t express the same inanity one finds by other posters. So, color me surprised when you defend torture. Nonetheless, it you took my smack down of you as angry, then you misread it. Go back and read it as someone slowly shaking his head at lost potential.

    PS on the larger issue, yes, I’m angry my country tortured people, since I read that as an essential violation of America as I know it. If you feel that anger was directed at you, then fundamentally you were mistaken. No commenter here makes me angry.

    timb (a83d56)

  316. Um. Review your second sentence, please. Who is creating a false image? And who is insulting others with some regularity?

    The latter doesn’t help your case.

    And telling me that I “defend torture” doesn’t make me feel that you are clear-thinking at all. But you see, you think that you get to define the term, and then apply it how you wish.

    Which is ironic, since you detest it when other people…wait for it…do the same thing to you.

    And when people disagree with you, how do you respond? Differently than the “wingnuts”? Or pretty much the same?

    Hmmm?

    Take a stress pill.

    Eric Blair (33cc23)

  317. Zarq was not AQ, Eric. Ansar Al-Islam was not AQ, Eric. Remember, they add “operational” so they can make their claims with a straight face.

    Does p3wned mean slaughtering strawmen, or arguing with positions not held?

    Feelings, nothing more than feelings …

    JD (6ef9a2)

  318. “Surls, let me get this straight: you’re claiming from your militia bunker, that the US found terrorism links to Al Queda and WMD in Iraq?!?!?!”

    WMD were found.

    I didn’t say one word about Al Qaida links to the Baathists. Nice attempt at a strawman argument, though.

    Dave Surls (da5013)

  319. “Surls blames today’s Dems for the Trail of Tears, defends Wounded Knee because it happened during a Republican administration…”–Another Lefty liar

    That’s funny, I don’t remember doing either of those things.

    Probably because I didn’t.

    Dave Surls (da5013)

  320. “…I’m angry my country tortured people…”

    Who was tortured in violation of the laws written by The Congress of the United States?
    Unless, and until Congress defines waterboarding as torture, it is not torture under the laws of the United States, and so, no-one can be defined as having been “tortured”, and therefore, no torture occurred.

    AD (087ff1)

  321. DCSCA: #65

    #20 Woooo! A six mile wide asteroid slamming into the Earth would wipe out most of civilization and life on this planet! Wath (sic) the skies! Watch the skies! Are you scared yet?

    A strike of 6-mi-diam. asteroid on Earth (the last millions of years ago), like a M7-8.3 earthquake on the San Andreas Fault, or a caldera collapse at Yellowstone or Mammoth Mt. are unpreventable acts of the natural world, while a 10 (or whatever) KT explosion of a nuclear weapon in LA or any other American urban center, like hijackers flying fuel-laden airplanes into highrises, is a preventable act of war. If you don’t see the difference, I doubt your opinions carry much weight with the majority of the population, who generally want the government to protect them and their children and elders from such attacks. I don’t like waterboarding any more than anyone else, but I generally trust our people to make a judgment call as to when it might be necessary.

    MikeHu (4a6076)

  322. “…I’m angry my country tortured people…”

    Who was tortured in violation of the laws written by The Congress of the United States?
    Unless, and until Congress defines waterboarding as torture, it is not torture under the laws of the United States, and so, no-one can be defined as having been “tortured”, and therefore, no torture occurred.

    Comment by AD — 4/27/2009

    Fundamental misunderstanding of one’s own governing document: the United States is signatory to the Geneva Conventions and a UN treaty regarding torture (signed by Reagan). Treaties, according to the Constitution, AD, are laws of the land.

    You can look it up.

    timb (8f04c0)

  323. […] as I argued in this post, the timing does indeed work, because according to the memo that makes the claim, even after the […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Waterboarding Worked, Part 3: The WaPo Falls for the Lazy Argument on the Timing Issue of the Library Tower Attack (e4ab32)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.6112 secs.