Waterboarding prevented 9/11 style attack in L.A!

[Calabrio]

CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief


Khalid Sheik Mohammad, a top al Qaeda leader who divulged information -- after being waterboarded -- that allowed the U.S. government to stop a planned terrorist attack on Los Angeles.

(CNSNews.com) - The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) -- including the use of waterboarding -- caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.

Before he was waterboarded, when KSM was asked about planned attacks on the United States, he ominously told his CIA interrogators, “Soon, you will know.”

According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack -- which KSM called the “Second Wave”-- planned “ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles.”

KSM was the mastermind of the first “hijacked-airliner” attacks on the United States, which struck the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Northern Virginia on Sept. 11, 2001.

After KSM was captured by the United States, he was not initially cooperative with CIA interrogators. Nor was another top al Qaeda leader named Zubaydah. KSM, Zubaydah, and a third terrorist named Nashiri were the only three persons ever subjected to waterboarding by the CIA. (Additional terrorist detainees were subjected to other “enhanced techniques” that included slapping, sleep deprivation, dietary limitations, and temporary confinement to small spaces -- but not to water-boarding.)

This was because the CIA imposed very tight restrictions on the use of waterboarding. “The ‘waterboard,’ which is the most intense of the CIA interrogation techniques, is subject to additional limits,” explained the May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo. “It may be used on a High Value Detainee only if the CIA has ‘credible intelligence that a terrorist attack is imminent’; ‘substantial and credible indicators that the subject has actionable intelligence that can prevent, disrupt or deny this attack’; and ‘[o]ther interrogation methods have failed to elicit this information within the perceived time limit for preventing the attack.’”

The quotations in this part of the Justice memo were taken from an Aug. 2, 2004 letter that CIA Acting General Counsel John A. Rizzo sent to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

Before they were subjected to “enhanced techniques” of interrogation that included waterboarding, KSM and Zubaydah were not only uncooperative but also appeared contemptuous of the will of the American people to defend themselves.

“In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including KSM and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques,” says the Justice Department memo. “Both KSM and Zubaydah had ‘expressed their belief that the general US population was ‘weak,’ lacked resilience, and would be unable to ‘do what was necessary’ to prevent the terrorists from succeeding in their goals.’ Indeed, before the CIA used enhanced techniques in its interrogation of KSM, KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, ‘Soon you will know.’”

After he was subjected to the “waterboard” technique, KSM became cooperative, providing intelligence that led to the capture of key al Qaeda allies and, eventually, the closing down of an East Asian terrorist cell that had been tasked with carrying out the 9/11-style attack on Los Angeles.

The May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that details what happened in this regard was written by then-Principal Deputy Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury to John A. Rizzo, the senior deputy general counsel for the CIA.

“You have informed us that the interrogation of KSM—once enhanced techniques were employed—led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the ‘Second Wave,’ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles,” says the memo.

“You have informed us that information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discover of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemaah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the ‘Second Wave,’” reads the memo. “More specifically, we understand that KSM admitted that he had [redaction] large sum of money to an al Qaeda associate [redaction] … Khan subsequently identified the associate (Zubair), who was then captured. Zubair, in turn, provided information that led to the arrest of Hambali. The information acquired from these captures allowed CIA interrogators to pose more specific questions to KSM, which led the CIA to Hambali’s brother, al Hadi. Using information obtained from multiple sources, al-Hadi was captured, and he subsequently identified the Garuba cell. With the aid of this additional information, interrogations of Hambali confirmed much of what was learned from KSM.”

A CIA spokesman confirmed to CNSNews.com today that the CIA stands by the factual assertions made here.

In the memo itself, the Justice Department’s Bradbury told the CIA’s Rossi: “Your office has informed us that the CIA believes that ‘the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qa’ida has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.”

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

 

[hrmwrm]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- CIA interrogators used waterboarding at least 266 times on two top al Qaeda suspects, according to a Bush-era Justice Department memo released by the Obama administration.

The controversial technique that simulates drowning -- and which President Obama calls torture -- was used at least 83 times in August 2002 on suspected al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah, according to the memo.

Interrogators also waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 183 times in March 2003. Mohammed is believed to be the mastermind behind the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States.

Obama released the memo Thursday, saying that "exceptional circumstances surround these memos and require their release."
The memo, dated May 30, 2005, was from then-Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury to John Rizzo, who was acting general counsel for the CIA.

It paints a different picture from the one described by former CIA officer John Kiriakou. In a December 2007 interview with CNN, Kiriakou said Zubaydah had been waterboarded for "about 30 seconds, 35 seconds" and agreed to cooperate with interrogators the following day.
In an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Michael Hayden, who directed the CIA from 2006 to 2009, was asked about the number of times Mohammed was waterboarded.

Hayden denounced the release of the memos and did not comment on the number, saying it was his understanding that the frequency of waterboarding was among the operational details that had not been declassified.

The 2005 memo refers to a letter that had contained the numbers as well. Part of the reference to the letter was redacted in the released memo.

Waterboarding is among the interrogation tactics that Obama has prohibited through an executive order.

The CIA also has admitted waterboarding Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the first person charged in the United States for the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen that killed 17 U.S. sailors.

Obama said last week he felt comfortable releasing the classified memos because the Bush administration acknowledged using some of the practices associated with the memos, and the interrogation techniques were widely reported and have since been banned.

Withholding these memos would only serve to deny facts that have been in the public domain for some time," Obama said in a statement. "This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States."

The president applauded the work of the U.S. intelligence community and said no one who "carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice" would be prosecuted.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/20/cia.waterboarding/index.html

 

[Calabrio]

Was that supposed to be a response?
What was your point?

Even if pouring water up someone's nose 83 times with medical staff in the room would have prevented 9/11/2001, you'd oppose it?

 

[shagdrum]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- CIA interrogators used waterboarding at least 266 times on two top al Qaeda suspects, according to a Bush-era Justice Department memo released by the Obama administration.

The controversial technique that simulates drowning -- and which President Obama calls torture -- was used at least 83 times in August 2002 on suspected al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah, according to the memo.

Interrogators also waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 183 times in March 2003. Mohammed is believed to be the mastermind behind the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States.

Obama released the memo Thursday, saying that "exceptional circumstances surround these memos and require their release."
The memo, dated May 30, 2005, was from then-Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury to John Rizzo, who was acting general counsel for the CIA.

It paints a different picture from the one described by former CIA officer John Kiriakou. In a December 2007 interview with CNN, Kiriakou said Zubaydah had been waterboarded for "about 30 seconds, 35 seconds" and agreed to cooperate with interrogators the following day.
In an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Michael Hayden, who directed the CIA from 2006 to 2009, was asked about the number of times Mohammed was waterboarded.

Hayden denounced the release of the memos and did not comment on the number, saying it was his understanding that the frequency of waterboarding was among the operational details that had not been declassified.

The 2005 memo refers to a letter that had contained the numbers as well. Part of the reference to the letter was redacted in the released memo.

Waterboarding is among the interrogation tactics that Obama has prohibited through an executive order.

The CIA also has admitted waterboarding Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the first person charged in the United States for the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen that killed 17 U.S. sailors.

Obama said last week he felt comfortable releasing the classified memos because the Bush administration acknowledged using some of the practices associated with the memos, and the interrogation techniques were widely reported and have since been banned.

Withholding these memos would only serve to deny facts that have been in the public domain for some time," Obama said in a statement. "This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States."

The president applauded the work of the U.S. intelligence community and said no one who "carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice" would be prosecuted.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/20/cia.waterboarding/index.html

This story ultimately stems from liberal bloggers. As a line from the NYT's coverage of the same event shows:

The new information on the number of waterboarding episodes came out over the weekend when a number of bloggers, including Marcy Wheeler of the blog emptywheel, discovered it in the May 30, 2005, memo.

The sentences in the memo containing that information appear to have been redacted from some copies but are visible in others. Initial news reports about the memos in The New York Times and other publications did not include the numbers.​

While CNN's article doesn't state where the original story came from, the NYT's does, and reads very similar to the CNN piece. Both stories are likely from an AP release stemming from these blogger sources; sources not normally considered credible in journalism.

Seems to be advocacy journalism mascarading under the false pretense of objective and unbiased journalism.

Before I accept this report as fact, I would like to see the actual memos (direct sources) instead of secondary sources with a track record of biased distortion in the past and what appears to be distortion and misinformation now.

 

[lincolnx2]

Was that supposed to be a response?
What was your point?

Even if pouring water up someone's nose 83 times with medical staff in the room would have prevented 9/11/2001, you'd oppose it?

Cal, remember when I made the comment everything is bias these days, No one reports what really happens, this is an prime example. I order the book "diplomamcy" I only paid $4.68 off amazon, i will send you the bill. J/K

 

[Mavrick]

My Tortured Decision

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

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
My Tortured Decision
By ALI SOUFAN
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.

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.

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

 

[Mr Wiggl3s]

So the ends justify the means? But, who cares. This is obviously propaganda. If you're not taking all this BS with a grain of salt, sir...

 

[Mr Wiggl3s]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/29/politics/main3554687.shtml

Republican presidential candidate John McCain reminded people Thursday that some Japanese were tried and hanged for torturing American prisoners during World War II with techniques that included waterboarding.

"There should be little doubt from American history that we consider that as torture otherwise we wouldn't have tried and convicted Japanese for doing that same thing to Americans," McCain said during a news conference.

He said he forgot to mention that piece of history during Wednesday night's Republican debate, during which he criticized former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney after Romney declined to publicly say what interrogation techniques he would rule out.

"I would also hope that he would not want to be associated with a technique which was invented in the Spanish Inquisition, was used by Pol Pot in one of the great eras of genocide in history and is being used on Burmese monks as we speak," the Arizona senator said. "America is a better nation than that."

Waterboarding generally makes breathing difficult and can cause the subject to think he's drowning. It's banned by domestic law and international treaties, but those policies don't cover CIA personnel and President Bush's administration won't say whether it has been allowed against terrorism detainees.

McCain was a prisoner of war for more than five years during the Vietnam War. He was tortured during that time, but said he wasn't subjected to waterboarding.

"If the United States was in another conflict, which could easily happen, with another country, and we have allowed that kind of torture to be inflicted on people we hold captive, then there's nothing to prevent that enemy from also torturing American prisoners," McCain said.

McCain also said the presidential primary process needs to be straightened out, and if the political parties can't, Congress should.

"The people deserve a longer process of scrutiny of the candidates and they're not getting it. It is a little bizarre for us to be having a primary on Jan. 3," said McCain, referring to the Iowa caucus.

Florida moved up its primary election to Jan. 29, and Michigan later set a Jan. 15 date, moves that set off a scramble that resulted in Iowa's caucus and the New Hampshire's primary moving up to preserve their early voting status. New Hampshire will vote Jan. 8.

New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina should still be allowed to pick their candidates ahead of the rest of the country, but the country should then be divided into four sections with voting in each on a schedule that allows candidates time to campaign in each region before moving to the next, McCain said.

 

[fossten]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/29/politics/main3554687.shtml

LOL...welcome to 2 years ago...

I guarantee you this...if Obama has a terrorist in custody who knows something about an imminent attack, he'll tell them to slap the info out of the guy. If he doesn't, and we're hit, he's finished politically.

Also, McCain is against going after the policy writers for waterboarding...see here...

Try and keep up.

 

[Mavrick]

Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

Sorry, I can’t find the link to this story. It was on the New York Times site a day or two ago. This is the full text of the story. This one has a little bit for everyone.

Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

By PETER BAKER
Published: April 21, 2009

WASHINGTON – President Obama’s national intelligence director told colleagues in a private memo last week that the harsh interrogation techniques banned by the White House did produce significant information that helped the nation in its struggle with terrorists.

“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country,” Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the intelligence director, wrote in a memo to his staff last Thursday.

Admiral Blair sent his memo on the same day the administration publicly released secret Bush administration legal memos authorizing the use of interrogation methods that the Obama White House has deemed to be illegal torture. Among other things, the Bush administration memos revealed that two captured Qaeda operatives were subjected to a form of near-drowning known as waterboarding a total of 266 times.

Admiral Blair’s assessment that the interrogation methods did produce important information was deleted from a condensed version of his memo released to the media last Thursday. Also deleted was a line in which he empathized with his predecessors who originally approved some of the harsh tactics after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

“I like to think I would not have approved those methods in the past,” he wrote, “but I do not fault those who made the decisions at that time, and I will absolutely defend those who carried out the interrogations within the orders they were given.”

A spokeswoman for Admiral Blair said the lines were cut in the normal editing process of shortening an internal memo into a media statement emphasizing his concern that the public understand the context of the decisions made in the past and the fact that they followed legal orders.

“The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means,” Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night. “The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
Admiral Blair’s private memo was provided by a critic of Mr. Obama’s policy. His assessment could bolster Bush administration veterans who argue that the interrogations were an important tool in the battle against al Qaeda.

Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency under Mr. Bush, said on Fox News Sunday last weekend that “the use of these techniques against these terrorists made us safer. It really did work.” Former Vice President Dick Cheney, in a separate interview with Fox, endorsed that conclusion and said he has asked the C.I.A. to declassify memos detailing the gains from the harsh interrogations.

Several news accounts, including one in the New York Times last week, have quoted former intelligence officials saying the harsh interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, a Qaeda operative who was waterboarded 83 times, did not produce information that foiled terror plots. The Bush administration has long argued that harsh questioning of Qaeda operatives like Zubaydah helped prevent a planned attack on Los Angeles and cited passages in the memos released last week to bolster that conclusion.

The White House would not address the question of whether the tactics have been effective on Tuesday but fired back at Mr. Cheney. “We’ve had an at least two-year policy disagreement with the vice president of the United States,” Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary. “That policy disagreement is whether or not you can uphold the values in which this country was founded at the same time that you protect the citizens that live in that country.”

Mr. Obama’s team has cast doubt on the effectiveness of the harsh interrogations, but in a visit to the C.I.A. this week, the president did not directly question that. Instead, he said, any disadvantage imposed by banning those tactics was worth it.

“I’m sure that sometimes it seems as if that means we’re operating with one hand tied behind our back or that those who would argue for a higher standard are naïve,” he said. “I understand that. You know, I watch the cable shows once in a while.”

But he added: “What makes the United States special, and what makes you special, is precisely the fact that we are willing to uphold our values and our ideals even when it’s hard, not just when it’s easy.”
The assessment by Admiral Blair represents a shift for him since he took office. When he was nominated for the position and appeared before the Senate intelligence committee on Jan. 22, he said: “I believe strongly that torture is not moral, legal or effective.” But he declined to assess whether the interrogation program under Mr. Bush had worked.

“Do you believe the C.I.A.’s interrogation detention program has been effective?” Senator Christopher Bond, a Missouri Republican, asked him.

“I’ll have to look into that more closely before I can give you a good answer on that one,” Admiral Blair answered.



My personal view is that no way in hell should we have gotten involved in this. This is the line we never should have crossed. Period.

 

[Mavrick]

While CNN's article doesn't state where the original story came from, the NYT's does, and reads very similar to the CNN piece. Both stories are likely from an AP release stemming from these blogger sources; sources not normally considered credible in journalism.

Seems to be advocacy journalism mascarading under the false pretense of objective and unbiased journalism.

Before I accept this report as fact, I would like to see the actual memos (direct sources) instead of secondary sources with a track record of biased distortion in the past and what appears to be distortion and misinformation now.

Shagdrum,
Just out of curiosity are you more comfortable with the source of the story that started this thread? CNSNews.com whose motto is “The Right News. Right Now. Gee, I wonder why they use the word “RIGHT” twice in five words. I would love to see one other source for that one as well.

 

[fossten]

Shagdrum,
Just out of curiosity are you more comfortable with the source of the story that started this thread? CNSNews.com whose motto is “The Right News. Right Now. Gee, I wonder why they use the word “RIGHT” twice in five words. I would love to see one other source for that one as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4JgXShjeo4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n4g1bGITLc

 

[foxpaws]

Mavrick...
CNSNews is an arm of Media Research Center... I am not quite sure why they don't just use the MRC name. MRC sponsors many different media arms, once again, I am not quite sure why they all don't just claim to be MRC.

From MRCs "About MRC"

The mission of the Media Research Center is to bring balance to the news media. Leaders of America's conservative movement have long believed that within the national news media a strident liberal bias existed that influenced the public's understanding of critical issues. On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove — through sound scientific research — that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene. What they launched that fall is the now acclaimed — Media Research Center (MRC).

 

[Calabrio]

From the CNS website "about us" section, located on the top of the page:

The Cybercast News Service (CNS) was launched on June 16, 1998 as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin and seek news that’s ignored or under-reported as a result of media bias by omission.

Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes "news."

In response to these shortcomings, MRC Chairman L. Brent Bozell III founded CNSNews.com in an effort to provide an alternative news source that would cover stories that are subject to the bias of omission and report on other news subject to bias by commission.

CNSNews.com endeavors to fairly present all legitimate sides of a story and debunk popular, albeit incorrect, myths about cultural and policy issues.

CNSNews.com has a full staff of credentialed journalists at its world headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, staffs full time news bureaus in Jerusalem and the Pacific Rim, and works with credentialed correspondents in London, Paris, Moscow and Nairobi. In addition to news, CNSNews.com is proud to present a full slate of commentaries by some of the brightest minds and sharpest wits in the nation, and a full stable of cartoonists to provide you with a morning political chuckle.

CNSNews.com is a division of the Media Research Center, a not-for-profit 501 (c)(3) organization. Like National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting System, CNSNews.com is able to provide its services and information to the public at no cost, thanks to the generous support of our thousands of donors and their tax-deductible contributions. However, unlike NPR or PBS, CNSNews.com does not accept any federal tax money for its operations.

...................

Fact of the matter is, the current administration has released cherry picked, classified information for political reasons. At best they give an incomplete picture of what happened.

Since they've already released the most operationally damaging classified information, Vice President Cheney has publicly called for all of the memos to be released, so that the results would be known.

But more importantly, NO TORTURE TOOK PLACE. In the mind of any rational person, discomfort isn't torture. Having medical staff in the room to make sure that no soft tissue damage or injuries take place IS NOT TORTURE.

The only "damage to our reputation" came about through the efforts of self-hating American liberals who have exploited this story for political and social motivations. They have launched a PR war against our country, and if anything hurts our image, it's the effective marketing from those groups.

Equating torture with Abu Ghraib with Guantanamo to pouring some water into the nose of a guy responsible for killing THREE THOUSAND OF US IN ONE MORNING is an outrage!

It's also so nice to sit here in 2009 and have these discussion. Since it's been nearly eight years since the last domestic attack, it's sure easy to condemn the decisions made in the past.

Interestingly enough, the same kooks who think it's inhumane to make a person stand up all night would rather see us launch predator attacks on the Pakistani border - merely blowing them up, or igniting a bomb so big outside the cave entrance that it sucks all the air out and the people inside (who weren't incinerated) suffocate and their lungs seared or collapse.

 

[foxpaws]

Cal, since the United States convicted Japanese soldiers for waterboarding Americans and US courts have convicted US law officers for waterboarding US citizens, what will happen if the rest of the world has a tribunal and names Bush/Cheney as defendants? It would be 'de rigour' for the US to defend our citizens in court, whether or not we believe them to be innocent. It will be difficult to defend them regarding actions that we have condemned and tried, even US citizens for, in the past.

 

[shagdrum]

Shagdrum,
Just out of curiosity are you more comfortable with the source of the story that started this thread? CNSNews.com whose motto is “The Right News. Right Now. Gee, I wonder why they use the word “RIGHT” twice in five words. I would love to see one other source for that one as well.

CNSNews doesn't have a history of dishonesty and deceptiveness, as far as I know. Still, the big red flag is the lowering of journalistic standards by the NYT and CNN. I am not discounting the claim just yet, but I am not accepting the claim unless and until I see the actual memos with the lines that indicate these claims are true. I am withholding judgment.

You question implies a regard for the particular bias of the organization. As to their credibility, I have no regard for that, either way. What matters is if the bias is demonstratively distorting the truth in the reporting, or if the organization has a history of that. Just because an organization has a bias doesn't mean that they are not being reasonable and objective. When they start being dishonest, deceptive, etc. Then their credibility comes into play and the trust in what they are reporting drops. Both the NYT and CNN have a history of distortion leaning left. Blogs alone are not usually considered credible sources and to use them as a source for a story in the manner they did is to lower journalistic standards.

Can you point to CNSNews as having the same track record of dishonesty and deception? All that has been pointed out is that they lean right. To use that fact as a way to disregard them is a dishonest ad hominem circumstantial argument.

 

[shagdrum]

Cal, since the United States convicted Japanese soldiers for waterboarding Americans and US courts have convicted US law officers for waterboarding US citizens, what will happen if the rest of the world has a tribunal and names Bush/Cheney as defendants? It would be 'de rigour' for the US to defend our citizens in court, whether or not we believe them to be innocent. It will be difficult to defend them regarding actions that we have condemned and tried, even US citizens for, in the past.

Japanese soldiers and US citizens. Terrorists don't generally fall into either group. You are comparing apples to oranges.

US citizens are protected by the Constitution. Soldiers are governed by various international laws/agreements. Terrorists are a different category that usually fall outside both the Constitution and international laws/agreements covering treatment of enemy soldiers.

Also, we haven't traditionally recognized the authority of foreign/international courts over us in this manner. Obama would be a naive fool to start now (which is entirely possible).

 

[shagdrum]

McCain: Obama starting 'witch hunt'
By ANDY BARR

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) warned Thursday that any attempt by the Obama administration to prosecute the Bush-era lawyers who wrote memos signing off on waterboarding would start a “witch hunt.”

“If you criminalize legal advice, which is basically what they're going to do, then it has a terribly chilling effect on any kind of advice and counsel that the president might receive,” McCain said during an interview on CBS’s “Early Show.”

The former GOP presidential nominee and POW supported Obama’s decision to end the use of waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation” techniques but insisted that those who gave legal advice should not be prosecuted because they were “sworn to do their duty to the best of their ability.”

“Look, I didn't agree, as you said, with the techniques — and I'd be glad to continue that debate with people. But to criminalize their legal counsel, unless you can prove that they intentionally violated existing laws or ethics, then this is going to turn into a witch hunt,” he said.

McCain compared the potential prosecutions with the actions of “banana republics” that “prosecute people for actions they didn't agree with under previous administrations.”

“To go back on a witch hunt that could last for a year or so, frankly, is going to be bad for the country, bad for future presidents — precedents that may be set by this, and certainly nonproductive in trying to pursue the challenges we face,” he said.

 

[lincolnx2]

Japanese soldiers and US citizens. Terrorists don't generally fall into either group. You are comparing apples to oranges.

US citizens are protected by the Constitution. Soldiers are governed by various international laws/agreements. Terrorists are a different category that usually fall outside both the Constitution and international laws/agreements covering treatment of enemy soldiers.

Also, we haven't traditionally recognized the authority of foreign/international courts over us in this manner. Obama would be a naive fool to start now (which is entirely possible).

Soldiers are governed by the Uniform Code of Military justice which was estabilished by congress in 1952

 

[Calabrio]

Soldiers are governed by the Uniform Code of Military justice which was estabilished by congress in 1952

Give these Progressives in power a little more time, if up to him and those around him, you'll be subject to the laws of a World Court...

And, Foxpaws, the method of "water boarding" that the Japanese used was VASTLY different than the controlled method used by the CIA. Any attempt to associate the two is only done to confuse the issue and draw some dishonest moral parallel that doesn't exist. The Japanese (and Germans) would put a cloth over the face and mouth of the prisoner and pour water over it. They would interrogate the priosner while BEATING them. When the prisoner attempted to answer a question or simply breath during this prolonged torture, they'd be forced to ingest water. Once the person's stomach was distended from having swallowed so much water, they would jump on the prisoner's stomach or beat on it.

Are you saying that's what the CIA did? Because if you're not, then what you're doing is, either deliberately or naively, perpetuating a damaging lie.

The purpose of the CIA waterboarding was to simply give the terrorist the perception of powerlessness and induce panic, and it was done with medical supervision. I have friends that were "U.S. water boarded" and worse during their SERE training. I bet we have a member of the board who's even been U.S. waterboarded.

And note, this "torture" debate isn't simply about waterboarding. The charge of torture has been applied to playing "Barney".

 

[shagdrum]

Soldiers are governed by the Uniform Code of Military justice which was estabilished by congress in 1952

We are talking more about the treatment of soldiers as POW's. But thanks for the info.

 

[foxpaws]

Japanese soldiers and US citizens. Terrorists don't generally fall into either group. You are comparing apples to oranges.

US citizens are protected by the Constitution. Soldiers are governed by various international laws/agreements. Terrorists are a different category that usually fall outside both the Constitution and international laws/agreements covering treatment of enemy soldiers.

Also, we haven't traditionally recognized the authority of foreign/international courts over us in this manner. Obama would be a naive fool to start now (which is entirely possible).

But, Shag - we convicted soldiers for doing this to our soldiers. We view Al Quida as terrorists, but others view them as soldiers. Our soldiers have done this to 'soldiers' (depending on the POV).

And, we use international courts to try war crimes when we have to deal with other countries. It would seem odd that we wouldn't recognize international courts when the 'tables were turned'.

 

[Calabrio]

Cal, since the United States convicted Japanese soldiers for waterboarding Americans

Did you even read the link you sourced in that post?
Because, if you did, then I'm left to conclude that you are KNOWINGLY perpetuating this lie:

A towel was fixed under the chin and down over the face. Then many buckets of water were poured into the towel so that the water gradually reached the mouth and rising further eventually also the nostrils, which resulted in his becoming unconscious and collapsing like a person drowned. This procedure was sometimes repeated 5-6 times in succession.

You know full well that IS NOT what the CIA was doing. In all of the partial accounts mentioned in the article you posted to, the soldiers were drowned until unconsciousness repeatedly.

what will happen if the rest of the world has a tribunal and names Bush/Cheney as defendants? It would be 'de rigour' for the US to defend our citizens in court, whether or not we believe them to be innocent. It will be difficult to defend them regarding actions that we have condemned and tried, even US citizens for, in the past.

American citizens don't answer to the world or to a world court.
Where's your allegiance to?

 

[foxpaws]

Did you even read the link you sourced in that post?
Because, if you did, then I'm left to conclude that you are KNOWINGLY perpetuating this lie:

You know full well that IS NOT what the CIA was doing. In all of the partial accounts mentioned in the article you posted to, the soldiers were drowned until unconsciousness repeatedly.

No, I don't know what the CIA was doing - first they said that the waterboarding of our prisoners was done only a few times, now we find out some prisoners were waterboarded 183 times... it looks like they lied. I am not sure, but it looks that way.

And they could have been doing it many times in succession - once again - I don't know, we obviously have been told a white-washed version of US waterboarding in the past.

I read the article - there was nothing in there, or in any of the other articles I have read about how different the Japanese waterboarding techniques were than ours, with the beatings, etc. that you mentioned in post 20. The articles I have read could be all using the same source material, and I haven't been exposed to the same source material as you Cal.

American citizens don't answer to the world or to a world court.
Where's your allegiance to?

My allegiance is only to the USA.

However we expect other nation's citizens to answer to world courts, how do we explain it if we are reluctant to answer to the same courts we expect the rest of the world to answer to?

 

[Mavrick]

I checked out The Cybercast News Service (CNS) web site after I read the story at the start of this thread and I checked out the “about us” section at that time. I especially enjoyed the in depth reporting they did in reporting Cher’s extreme disdain for Bush and great affection for Obama in her own incoherent way. Like any of us should give a damn.

I’m sure they are “RIGHT” on top of a number of issues and a couple of the stories did give me something else to think about. Sorry Calabrio, but three or four days later and I haven’t run across this one anywhere else. Maybe it is correct. I don’t know. At this time I doubt it. I don’t think I’ll be adding this site to my favorites list.

As far as the question of what is TORTURE the only scale I use is this. My son has been serving in the armed forces for the last three years. If he or the others he is serving with were to be treated this way would I consider it TORTURE? Without question I would say YES, THIS IS TORTURE. Foxpaws has a better chance of convincing MonsterMark to join the “Reelect Obama” in 2012 campaign than anyone has of convincing me otherwise.

I just wish some of you would use a little of that intellectual honesty that I have read here before and just come out and say “I support TORTURE against those who would attack our country in is way” instead of playing the spin game.

It’s my opinion that if you can honestly say that if this was your friend or love one being subjected to these “extreme integration techniques” you would not consider it torture your intellectual honesty is still intact. If you think that it would be torture if it was your friend or loved one then you have fallen off the intellectual honesty wagon.