More Fox figures pick up tenuous claim that harsh interrogations thwarted L.A. plot
SUMMARY: Neil Cavuto, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Catherine Herridge joined other Fox News figures in advancing Marc Thiessen's claim that the use of harsh interrogations techniques on Khalid Shaikh Mohammed "stopped an attack on the Library Tower." But the Bush administration has said that the attack was thwarted more than a year before Mohammed was captured.
On April 22, Fox News hosts Neil Cavuto, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity, and Fox News homeland security correspondent Catherine Herridge joined several other Fox News hosts and contributors in advancing former Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen's claim that the use of harsh interrogation techniques -- including waterboarding -- on Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM) "stopped an attack on the Library Tower in Los Angeles." However, the claim conflicts with the chronology of events put forth on multiple occasions by the Bush administration, as Slate.com's Timothy Noah has noted. Indeed, the Bush administration said that the Library Tower attack was thwarted in February 2002 -- more than a year before Mohammed was captured in March 2003.
On the April 17 edition of Fox News' The Live Desk, Thiessen asserted that the Bush administration's "program" of harsh interrogation "stopped an attack on the Library Towers in Los Angeles," and later added: "The interrogation of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed ... led to the capture of a cell of Jemaah Islamiyah terrorists who were planning to hijack a plane and fly it into the Library Tower in Los Angeles. And if it had not been for this program, there would be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York City." Thiessen further detailed these claims in an April 21 Washington Post op-ed.
However, as Noah noted in response to Thiessen's op-ed, the "chronology" of events presented by the Bush administration contradicts the claim that the harsh interrogation of Mohammed was responsible for thwarting the Library Tower plot. Noah explained:
What clinches the falsity of Thiessen's claim, however (and that of the memo he cites, and that of an unnamed Central Intelligence Agency spokesman who today seconded Thessen's argument), is chronology. In a White House press briefing, Bush's counterterrorism chief, Frances Fragos Townsend, told reporters that the cell leader was arrested in February 2002, and "at that point, the other members of the cell" (later arrested) "believed that the West Coast plot has been canceled, was not going forward" [italics mine]. A subsequent fact sheet released by the Bush White House states, "In 2002, we broke up [italics mine] a plot by KSM to hijack an airplane and fly it into the tallest building on the West Coast." These two statements make clear that however far the plot to attack the Library Tower ever got -- an unnamed senior FBI official would later tell the Los Angeles Times that Bush's characterization of it as a "disrupted plot" was "ludicrous" -- that plot was foiled in 2002. But Sheikh Mohammed wasn't captured until March 2003.
How could Sheikh Mohammed's water-boarded confession have prevented the Library Tower attack if the Bush administration "broke up" that attack during the previous year? It couldn't, of course. Conceivably the Bush administration, or at least parts of the Bush administration, didn't realize until Sheikh Mohammed confessed under torture that it had already broken up a plot to blow up the Library Tower about which it knew nothing. Stranger things have happened. But the plot was already a dead letter. If foiling the Library Tower plot was the reason to water-board Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, then that water-boarding was more than cruel and unjust. It was a waste of water.
In addition to the senior FBI official Noah mentioned, several other U.S. counterterrorism officials also reportedly expressed doubts that the Library Tower plot ever advanced beyond the initial planning stages and ever posed a serious threat, as Media Matters for America documented in February 2006.
Joining Fox News contributor Mort Kondracke and Fox & Friends co-hosts Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy, the following Fox News hosts and contributors advanced Thiessen's claim that the use of harsh interrogation techniques on Mohammed yielded information intelligence officials used to foil the Library Tower plot:
- On the April 22 edition of Your World, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) said: "[L]ook, we have a document right here, a story that came out yesterday, about how this -- this waterboarding of Shaikh -- Khalid Shaikh Mohammed actually gave us the information to thwart a terrorist plot that was under way that would have resulted in planes flying into buildings, 9-11-style, in Los Angeles. We saved thousands of lives." Cavuto responded: "And waterboarding stopped it."
- During the April 22 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck, Beck said, "Let's not forget that even after deciding that waterboard was legal, they only did it to three high-value suspects -- one, whose information actually helped stop a massive airline attack on the Library Tower in Los Angeles."
- As Media Matters noted, on the April 22 edition of his show, Hannity said, "Here we discover that these enhanced interrogation techniques -- all right -- that they save lives, that we saved an American city, Los Angeles. You have a lot of friends. You've been in a lot of movies. I've seen your movies. And it saved lives." Hannity then repeated the claim three more times during the show's "Great American Panel" segment, including alleging at one point that upon being subjected to these techniques, "Khalid Shaikh Mohammed gave up that there was a terror cell in this country, that the city of Los Angeles was about to be hit in a second-wave attack."
Additionally, during a report on the April 22 edition of Fox News' Special Report, Herridge said, "U.S. officials are also standing behind claims made in this Justice Department memo of May 2005 that the program uncovered another KSM plot, the second wave to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into Los Angeles." Herridge did not mention that the Bush administration said that the plot had been thwarted a year before Mohammed was captured.
From the April 22 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:
CAVUTO: All right. Well, good luck coming out of your shell, Congressman. It does appear to be working. Look --
ROHRABACHER: Well, let me just -- can I say one thing before you go?
CAVUTO: Go ahead, please, real quickly.
ROHRABACHER: Look -- look -- look, we have a document right here, a story that came out yesterday, about how this -- this waterboarding of Shaikh -- Khalid Shaikh Mohammed actually gave us the information to thwart a terrorist plot that was under way that would have resulted in planes flying into buildings, 9-11-style, in Los Angeles. We saved thousands of lives --
CAVUTO: And waterboarding stopped it.
ROHRABACHER: -- in southern --
ROHRABACHER: And waterboarding stopped it.
From the April 22 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: Back in September 2002, the CIA demonstrated waterboarding and some other harsh techniques to a bipartisan group of politicians. Who was there? Oh, nobody except -- oh, the current speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. Yeah, she was there.
We didn't see a single one of these weasels in Washington, anyone in Congress go on the record after 9-11 when these decisions were being made and saying, "I don't care if we vaporize the entire city of New York, I am opposed to torture and will not do it under any circumstance." No, they didn't. You know why? Because you didn't care at the time how we got the information. I didn't care either. We said, "Keep our cities safe."
In fact, some of the most outspoken people on the issue -- like John McCain, suspiciously a Republican -- didn't make a peep about waterboarding until 2004, 2005. Even worse, none of the lawmakers bothered to clarify the torture statute. Oh, they could do -- they could do that. Yeah, all they have to do -- and I know it's very complicated to write legalese, you know, things like, "waterboarding is torture."
But, now, these people, they were too spineless to define it, they want to go back in time and punish the Bush administration for making agonizing decisions and complex legal interpretations in a time of war. Let's not forget that even after deciding that waterboard was legal, they only did it to three high-value suspects -- one, whose information actually helped stop a massive airline attack on the Library Tower in Los Angeles.
From the April 22 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier:
[begin video clip]
HERRIDGE: The Justice Department memos released last week as well as the Bush administration's speech and documents released when the 14 high-value detainees were transferred from the CIA secret prisons to Guantánamo Bay provide a snapshot of the intelligence U.S. officials claim was gleaned from the enhanced interrogation program.
Abu Zubaydah was the first big catch. Captured March 2002 in Faisalabad, Pakistan, Zubaydah ran Osama bin Laden's training camps, where at least three of the hijackers prepared for the 9-11 strikes.
According to U.S. officials, Zubaydah -- one of three operatives to be waterboarded -- provided the most valuable information after the enhanced interrogation techniques were applied, information they say that led to the 2002 capture of Ramzi bin al-Shibh in Karachi, Pakistan.
Bin al-Shibh was part of the Hamburg cell, where the 9-11 hijackers, including Mohamed Atta, finalized their plans. And according to these documents, released when bin al-Shibh was transferred to Guantánamo Bay, he was a lead operative in a post 9-11 plot to hijack aircraft and crash them into Heathrow Airport.
Bin al-Shibh was also subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques, and in March 2003, information gleaned from him and Zubaydah led to the capture of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
Once in custody, U.S. officials say, those same techniques prompted KSM to provide information that eventually led to the operative behind this attack on a Bali nightclub a year earlier, which killed or injured 400. Hambali [Riduan Isamuddin] was the leader of Al Qaeda's Southeast Asia affiliate, Jemaah Islamiyah.
U.S. officials are also standing behind claims made in this Justice Department memo of May 2005 that the program uncovered another KSM plot, the second wave to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into Los Angeles.
Some U.S. officials denied that the techniques yielded any useful information, and a lawyer for the 9-11 conspirators is angry that any evidence about whether the methods were effective is gone.
EDWARD MacMAHON JR (defense attorney): There once were tapes of this stuff which the CIA elected to destroy, which could have answered a lot of these questions.
[end video clip]
HERRIDGE: Former CIA Director Michael Hayden told me before he left the agency that 60 percent of what the U.S. intelligence community knew in the first five years after 9-11 about Al Qaeda's leadership, its structure, and its operations came from the enhanced interrogation program. It now seems clear that this claim will be put to the test through a series of probes -- Bret.
From the April 22 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
HANNITY: Let me ask you a serious question -- and then you can mess around all you want. Here we discover that these enhanced interrogation techniques -- all right -- that they save lives, that we saved an American city, Los Angeles. You have a lot of friends. You've been in a lot of movies. I've seen your movies. And it saved lives.
Are you against that? Do you think that's a good thing?
[...]
HANNITY: All right. Let's start with interrogation. All right, now, first of all, the Obama administration is talking about prosecuting people that were involved in the legal decision that this was acceptable behavior.
We've learned a couple of things: It has saved America. We found terror cells in America. We had 6,000 terrorist reports. We saved the city of Los Angeles from getting hit.
Why -- you are against -- you're against enhanced interrogations. Why?
CAROLINE HELDMAN (Occidental College assistant politics professor): Well waterboarding is torture. High-ranking public officials from the Bush administration have come out and said that -- Armitage, as well as others. And secondly --
HANNITY: Armitage has no credibility, in my view. Richard Armitage, who sat back there, knowing that he was the leaker in the Valerie Plame case, and he didn't have the moral courage to come forward.
HELDMAN: Well, that's -- that's an ad hominem attack, Sean.
HANNITY: I don't really care anything about Richard Armitage.
HELDMAN: But the fact of the matter is waterboarding is torture. It is not simulated --
HELDMAN: It's not simulated drowning. According to me and lots of research and many experts on the topic, it doesn't simulate drowning. It is slow drowning that is controlled --
HANNITY: It's not drown -- it's not drowning.
HELDMAN: It causes your bodily organs to shut down, Sean.
HANNITY: It makes it -- Khalid --
HELDMAN: It's torture.
HANNITY: Khalid Shaikh Mohammed gave up that there was a terror cell in this country, that the city of Los Angeles was about to be hit in a second-wave attack, Ralph.
RALPH REED (Republican strategist): Sean, it's not -- it's not torture when the duration is no more than 20 to 40 seconds --
HANNITY: Right.
REED: -- which is what the memos indicate. In fact, I urge every one of your viewers to go online and read these memos.
We're talking about 20 to 40 seconds that they were underwater. We're talking about three detainees only out of the 250 most hardened that are at Abu Ghraib.
HELDMAN: So they only tortured three?
REED: No. And we're talking about the fact that medical personnel was on hand to make sure that there was no physical or bodily harm. Now, folks, I don't care what your definition of torture is. That's not what the North Vietnamese did to our servicemen and women. That's not what the Koreans did.
HANNITY: Ask John McCain.
REED: That's exactly right.
HANNITY: Yeah. Ask Daniel Pearl.
REED: They broke bones.
HANNITY: Ask his wife.
REED: They didn't give them medical treatment. That's torture.
HELDMAN: John McCain --
REED: This was enhanced interrogation --
HELDMAN: John McCain would be opposed to waterboarding.
REED: -- that saved American lives, which Dennis Blair, the director of --
HANNITY: All right. So --
REED: -- National Intelligence under Obama, says -- told us about Al Qaeda.
HANNITY: If we -- if we follow what you're saying, then that means the city of Los Angeles may have been hit. That means this terror cell may have --
HELDMAN: Sean, I disagree with your --
HANNITY: No, no, no, no, no, no. It's not an assumption.
HELDMAN: -- assumptions that we couldn't have gotten this information from other --
HANNITY: Hang on a second.
HELDMAN: You have no evidence that we couldn't have gotten this --
HANNITY: How would you -- well, if you read the report --
HELDMAN: -- information from other interrogation techniques.
You want to know what torture is. Torture is losing three of your best friends that were guilty of nothing but going to earn a living on the morning of Sept. 11th 2001. Torture is fleeing from the diner you stopped at to have breakfast in, only to find yourself disorientated and frightened in a cloud of poisonous dust that came from the tower you would have been working in 30 minutes later. Torture is not being able to find, and get in touch with your loved one who was working just 200 yards from the World trade center and failed to respond to your phone calls. Torture is having 35,000 dollars worth of assets buried under the rubble of 2 world trade center. Torture is finally getting home and finding out another one of your friends and his fire company may be missing after responding to the same disaster. That’s torture! And that is just one story, which happens to be mine. Its disgraceful to me that anyone could aid and comfort the waste of human flesh that purport rated the single worst attack on American soil, killing 3000 innocent AMERICANS! Never again should anyone experience the horror that was 9/11. As far as I’m concerned, I have no doubt that what President Bush, and others who swore to protect every citizen, (regardless of party affiliation) did to extract and secure the information needed to keep my family safe was the correct decision. You might not value your family, but I can assure you, I value mine. Getting a little water down their pathetic airways was being too nice. The people who are responsible for 9/11 would have no problem slitting your pathetic politically motivated anti-American throat. You talk about restoring America’s image. Your image of America is warped and distorted and borders on delusional.
Except we waterboarded those who had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact, we may have waterboarded people who's only crime was being around when some warlord wanted to sell a "terrorist" to the US military.
Your image of America is distorted by your pain. What you want is vengeance. What our country is supposed to demand is justice. Someone who has lost someone in something like the 9/11 attacks is justified in asking for the former. We as a people must insist that we get the latter.
Don't pretend to know me and my family and I won't pretend to know yours. You don't know my story anymore than I know yours. Thank you.
You need to look up torture and get a definition. What the prisoners are being tortured for has nothing to do with us allowing and advocating torture as a society. Neither torture nor anything else will ever guarantee that we will never be attacked again. In fact, someday we will be attacked somehow, somewhere again. Liberty is not always easy. Freedom is a scary thing. In America, we make that choice. We are better than most.
Its disgraceful to me that anyone could aid and comfort the waste of human flesh that purport rated the single worst attack on American soil, killing 3000 innocent AMERICANS!
Aside from the approximately 2,669, United States casualties, 329 foreign nationals (excluding the nineteen perpetrators) also perished in the attacks.
Not all the people who died on 9/11 were Americans, but they all were HUMANS!!!!! So STOP using "Americans" as YOUR excuse to torture.
This country has a long history of principals and standards that should not be ignored because a fear.
Bad things happen to innocent people every day, but fear should never be an excuse to lose your morals and standards.
As far as I’m concerned, I have no doubt that what President Bush, and others who swore to protect every citizen, (regardless of party affiliation) did to extract and secure the information needed to keep my family safe was the correct decision.
Tell that bull sh*t to the families of over 4,000 DEAD AMERICAN soldiers who died in Iraq because Bush LIED, saying Iraq was connected to 9/11!!!!! Tell that crap to the countless number of innocent Iraqis who DIED because Bush LIED!!!
Your image of America is warped and distorted and borders on delusional.
YOU need a lesson from President Washington:
Washington issued an order to his troops regarding prisoners of war:
“‘Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren who have fallen into their hands,’ he wrote.
Through this approach, Washington sought to shame his British adversaries, and to demonstrate the moral superiority of the American cause.
Allow me to debunk Slate's Noah and Media Matters right now.
A plot to attack L.A. was still alive in 2003. From the Los Angeles Times, 8 October 2005:
In other words, there is - and never has been - any "timeline problem." Read more at Patterico.
Slate's Noah, Daily Kos, and MM are totally debunked.
Got it?
**
Just thought I'd post the quote from the same article that comes immediately after what shoes posted, just to prove how ludicrous he is, according to an FBI official. Here's another quote from the article shoes cited:
The rest of the article has the same tone.
Shoes, you're a joke and a waste of space.
Anybody who defends torture is part of the problem, not part of the solution. It's absolutely immoral, it's illegal, and not only does it not work, it is counterproductive because the information we get is suspect. It also is used as a recruiting tool AGAINST us. Apologists for torture are disgusting.
It also guarantees we can't prosecute them, as any information obtained through coercion is inadmissible in Court. We're handing the bad guys a mistrial, and we have to break other laws to hold them without charging them.
What a mess Bush left us.
"What a mess Bush left us." You are much more polite than I am.
How do you defend that crap, Shoes? Did you not think we would read the article? The article you try to use for your support makes you look like a damn fool. And it proves that torture did not work. You post an article that actually refutes your argument. Are you that stupid?
Shoes and everyone else who defends these torture techniques, read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/opinion/23soufan.html?_r=3&partner=rss&emc=rss
The author is a former FBI agent who questioned Abu Zubaydah:
"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. "
"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."
"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."
I eagerly anticipate your responses.
Go ahead - Ignore the evidence and quote a single FBI officer about one terrorist.
You're ignoring the fact that GEORGE TENET, head of the CIA (and appointed under President Clinton), has firmly declared that enhanced interrogation techniques DID foil plots. (Tenet on "60 Mins": "I know that this program has saved lives. I know we've disrupted plots.")
Do you really want to call Clinton's CIA guy a liar?
Really?
I'll take the words of the FBI officer from your article, the interrogator in mine, and all of those who have studied torture and put them up against George "slam dunk" Tenet.
The interrogator in my article said there were many instances where the technique backfired as well.
Of course I would call Tenet a liar. I dont care WHO appointed him. The guy told lies about Iraq and he hasnt got any credibility to speak of. Well more than you of course but a cigarette butt makes more sense than you do most of the time.
We all KNOW Tenet has no credibility. I don't care if you appointed him. It is actually a historical FACT that he has no credibility. Is that the best you can do? And you still need to explain to us why the article you try to use for proof actually refutes your argument. Unless you can explain that I think we will all just assume you lack the ability to comprehend what you read or you're just a fool.
Technically it is possible for Tenet and the FBI officer to be telling the truth. Sure torture provided actionable intelligence, but "[t]here 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." This suggests there was some actionable intelligence gained, but torture was simply unnecessary in order to get it.
It is therefore conceivable that Tenet received actionable intelligence. When he asked how it was obtained, the answer would be "torture, sir". Tenet then believes torture had some value. It is conceivable that what Tenet doesn't know is that the information did not need to be tortured out of the detainee. In order to know that, he would have to talk directly to interrogators - which there is no evidence of that I have seen.
Am I right? Of course, what this means is that even though Tenet thought torture seemed to work, it was unnecessary in reality. The right is arguing torture was absolutely necessary in that case which seems to be untrue or at least insupportable if you consider both statements by Tenet and the FBI agent to be truthful as they saw it.
Sorry. I should have said the only way Tenet could have known that the same intelligence could have been gained without torture would be to talk to the FBI questioners. Considering complaints in the FBI's article about communication between CIA and FBI I would consider such an interaction unlikely.
This would be funny if it weren't so pathetic. It's such an obvious lie to anyone who bothers to check. FOX is demonstrating just how much contempt they have for their viewers.
These lying jackasses are cynically getting rich off the ignorance of the 25% who still think Saddam Hussein planned 9/11, and that we really did find those WMD in Iraq.
I just watched FOX and really was under the impression Saddam planned 9/11, that is not true? I thought that was why we invaded Iraq.
LOL
Not only that, but his sons had remote control airplanes that they were going to use to spray Anthrax over Manhattan.
This is the reason I feel all Americans should never forget the name Saddam Hussein, hence my username. Stupid people out there still feel Saddam was behing 9/11 and 99.9% of them are loyal FOX viewers. Americans must educate these dumbAs*Es so we never again invade a nation based on lies.
That is not the America I know and love. That was Bush and his evil America.
Thank you for your service. The More You Know is celebrating its 20th anniversary. Perhaps your username can do a spot.
Could not agree with you more Saddam. The sad thing was that that type of ignorance lead to the initial popularity of Bush after his illegal invasion of Iraq. The Amercan people were duped. We have sure paid a price for the lies.
FOX told us that Saddam was behind the Anthrax. Remember Dr Germ??
Oh God, Dr Germ.
http://origin.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,84359,00.html
Those would be the same people who think the rightwing extremism report targets everyday conservatives, right?
One or two instances from one media head is funny, but to have an entire network jump on board without so much as one person questioning the vailidity or bothering to look up the facts is downright pathetic.
So the CIA says it is true, but MMFA says it is a lie, hhmmmm wonder whom to beleive -
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 initially resisted all other interrogation procedures, right up to the waterboard. He insisted that Americans did not have the necessary resolve to get information out of him, and that we would only know about the next plot when it killed hundreds, if not thousands again.
Link please?
Would you mind explaining then how they were able to warp time and space to thwart the attack that was supposed to occur a year before they extracted this info from him? Can't you Konservatives understand that torture is wrong regardless of your justification. And that we have won many wars, fought many enemies and defeated gretaer threats to our country without stooping to the use of toture. Tactics that four out of five Latin American Dictators with mirrored sunglasses recommend!
Finally, this episode of "24" was brought to us today by "Markbfoot and Comapy" a Division of FoxNews - where news is whatever we say it is, facts be damned!
markbfoot's "source" is a moron he heard on CSPAN this morning who bleated the same lame "we stopped an attack in LA, we have the memos which show this blah blah blah" crap there that mark is blathering here.
Another brain-dead right winger who is totally incapable of thinking or speaking for himself.
He watched a movie when he was done watching "24". That's what convinced him.
"the delta force" with chuck norris isn't what I would call factual info! ;)
So, how do we explain the time travel?
By the way... you think the CIA never lies? A former CIA operative has been on several shows stating that waterboarding never produced any valuable information. Joe Scarborough called him a liar this morning. What are we to believe?
And MMFA didn'y SAY it is a lie, they showed it was a lie with things called facts which are included. Really, they are, go see. Go.
CNSN? Conservative news service? Please. You have to be kidding they are a joke and a propaganda outfit. There is no evidence there was EVER a second attack planned. Did anyone cough up who was arrested to foil this plot? I never heard about it. Unless you can do that its selfserving BS.
"KSM initially resisted all other interrogation procedures, right up to the waterboard. He insisted that Americans did not have the necessary resolve to get information out of him, and that we would only know about the next plot when it killed hundreds, if not thousands again."--markbfoot199
------------------------------------------------------------
So which waterboard did the trick? If you have to waterboard someone over 150 times, when do you get the idea "Hey, this is really working out well!"
This is beyond reprehensible!!
The likelyhood of any form of torture would give any information that would thwart an impending attack... is a sick joke at best and inhuman sleeze at worst!
I'm so sick and tired of these right-wing tough guys that act as if torture of any kind is okay for America to perpetuate! Sean Hannity offered himself up to be waterboarded... okay.. have at it hoss... lets see if you don't admit your a terrorist within three seconds...
It also undermines America's ability to tell the world that everything our Constitution stands for is what we follow here...
This entire line of ideological rhetoric in trying to moralize any form of torture proves beyond doubt that all of these defenders of illegal activity have no love of America and no concept to what the Rule of Law and the Bill of Rights are all about!
I dare anyone to prove me wrong on this!!
Torture in any form... DOES NOT WORK!!!!
Speaking of Right Wing tough guys... remember a few years ago when one of our soldiers was caught on video tape shooting an injured and apparently helpless Iraqi? I don't remember the outcome of the case, but the Troglodyte blowhards were raising hell, insisting that we shouldn't even investigate the matter. According to them, the soldier had done nothing wrong, even if he did shoot an unarmed, wounded prisoner.
This was when the war was at its peak, as was Jingoism among Republicans. it was a scary, disgusting time.
Last night on Maddow COL Steven Kleinman, who actually is an expert on interrogations and the tactics which are, by the way, far and away more effective than torture. He stated that you are likely to get some truthful information with torture, but since the totured individual has probably been screaming all kinds of lies and distortions both before and after the "truth" that you would never know which thing they said was true. How is it that we would believe what he said on the 183rd time we waterboarded him and not the 182nd time. Or do you think he may have talked about this "plot" (knowing it had already been foiled) as another desperate chance to stop the torture. Then, the Bush Administration, in its attempt to justify the unjustifiable, simply pointed to "confession number say, 99, where KSM actually told the truth, but at the time, we didn't even know it was truth or knew at the time that the plot had already been foiled.
Torture doesn't work. It is wrong no matter what "24" senario you present. It is WRONG, period.
Torture in any form... DOES NOT WORK!!!!
It's not enough to say it doesn't work. Heck, I'm a wimp. I'd give up my bank card PIN code in a heartbeat if they waterboarded me.
But it doesn't matter. Whether it works or not, it's wrong. I've said it before and I'll repeat it now: WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS. We Do Not Torture.
You'd think that flag-waving, red-white-and-blue patriots like conservatives would embrace this fact. Instead, they want us to wallow in the moral muck like the worst despostisms in history.
Unfortunately, this is reminiscent of the way we were sold the Iraq War.
Overpaid Media bobbleheads repeat talking points AS FACT, without bothering to check their validity. We know why FOX is still doing it... we can only hope the other networks learned a lesson from the Iraq mistake and will at least bother to check this one out.
It probably qualifies as a bald faced lie. But, coming from FOX, what's new?
If being married to Dick isn't torture, I don't know what is. She's probably the most well-informed expert the Right has.
Well thats his daughter,but maybe in that family it may be like a marriage.LOL!!
This is gonna make you just sick (at least it did that for me) :
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/washington/03web-intel.html
Exactly. As soon as these "enhanced" techniques are shown for what they really are (torture), the apologists will dry up and blow away. But they have to be shown on the teevee for that to happen.
No they arent. Where are these guys? When is their trial? What evidence do we have about this second attack? Cough up the details or I flat out DONT BELIEVE YOU.
Fisher,
What's preventing someone being tortured from making something up until he or she is let go?
most of you would sacrifice your citizens and a city rather than pour water on someones face?
First you trivialize the issue by framing it as a simple choice (torture or die) and then you trivialize the torture procedure itself.
How about pretending that you have a conscience, or give a crap about our Constitution, our international reputation, and the safety of our citizens and military personell before posting at all?
Lotsa Jack Bauer lovers coming out of the woodwork to defend an illegal act.
Got that fishergirl? IT'S ILLEGAL. It's sad and un-American that you will rationalize a lawyer (Bibey) hired by a politician (Bush) to write a memo that supersedes established laws against torture. Doesn't that seem kinda unconstitutional to ya?
Oh my the ticking bomb scenario. Has this EVER happened in the history of the REAL WORLD? You watch a lot of 24 that is fine. It is time for you to learn a lesson most children learn at six. This is reality THAT IS TV.
As for Pelosi if what she knew was classified then she couldnt disclose it anyway so what is the point of this Limoborg oldie but goodie? I have heard it repeated so many times that now I just keep hearing the SSKKWWWAAAAKKK polly want a talking point SKWWAAAAAAKK right after it. We get that Rush does your thinking for you. Thanks for the free clown show. I always appreciate the laugh.
And the problem with the ticking time bomb scenario is what if you pick up a guy who wants to be martyred anyway? Think he would stop because of torture when he doesn't mind finding his virgins in heaven? Doubtful.
That is one problem. Another is that there is hardly anything in the world you cannot justify by coming up with some outlandish, hypothetical scenario that has little to do with why it is actually wrong and only posits a connection to a LARGER wrong, and often little to do with reality.
Don't bring my family into it, please. You don't know me.
And, yes, I am an adult and understand that we will never be completely safe in a free society. And, yes, I might die because of that. The ideas that America represents in the world are bigger than me. And, if I have to die to keep the ideas of liberty and freedom as the leading thoughts in civilized society throughout the world, then so be it.
I will be dead someday. I can only hope that the ideas that America is built on are not killed because too many of us, like yourself, choose cowardice and torture - the easy way out in order to get some false sense of security, rather than standing up for their principles when we are tested.
Our enemy waits. They will wait decades, not an email. The world travels on the road of time. You want yours now, they will get there later. Hey, pssst, pssst, the world does not wait on you. Excuses are a clue, facts bare truth. If they have nothing to hide, why lie? The media puppets need to live, eat, and prosper. The hand that signs the check is the evildoer. See the pawns, seek the king, in the game. They gave us something to nibble, while they laugh.
(Ring Annouceer) Ladies...and Gentlemen... tonights folly welcomes; Juvenile Antics, versus the Bullyhaters. Brought to you by: The few that make you fools, and you know who to blame. Enjoy the fight, SUCKERS!