ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
It is clear now, if it wasn't before, that the CIA's questioning of KSM saved numerous lives, both here and abroad. The inspector general found that KSM "provided
information that helped lead to the arrests of terrorists including Saifullah Paracha and his son Uzair Paracha, businessmen whom [KSM] planned to use to smuggle explosives into the United States." His "information also led to the investigation and prosecution of Iyman Faris." KSM would become the "most prolific" detainee in the CIA's custody, giving up fellow terrorists and the details of plots around the globe.
Even the NYT and WaPo have admitted that the Interrogations of KSM and other Hi Value captive saved lives.
BTW none of the captives were physically harmed, the left has said that pyschological torture is just as bad and and scar a person for life , if that is the case Holder should be arrested, see he was the trigger man behind this bit of terror:
See the little child in the picture looks terrified as an armed man screaming , pointing an assult rifle at him and siezing him away from realtives and kipnapping him.
This looks traumatic to mee or is it only mass murderers we should care about?
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
The primary focus of analysis is the first sentence. Justin Elliott thinks it represents something of a walk-back by the former vice-president, specifically in the phrasing “individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques.”
The key here is Cheney’s failure to connect the use of the so-called EITs to the extraction of the “bulk of intelligence.” The distinction amounts to a walk back of Cheney’s position all along — that interrogators culled valuable intel using the techniques. That the detainees in question provided intelligence is not in dispute.
Cheney is not claiming a causal relationship between torture and the intelligence gleaned from interrogations. Rather, he’s saying that the same individuals who were tortured also happened to yield the most important evidence about Al Qaeda. He’s not saying that the docs proved torture was responsible for producing that info.
At Time, Michael Scherer says it’s “surprising” that “Cheney does not mention the claim, which he has made elsewhere, that the use of enhanced interrogation techniques produced information that saved lives.”
Rather, he claims only that “individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda.” This statement is neither in dispute, nor much of a revelation. The enhanced techniques, when they were used as designed and not by rogue agents without proper supervision, were employed on a select few detainees who knew a lot about al Qaeda. The outstanding question is whether the enhanced techniques were necessary to produce the information, and on that score the memos continue to paint a muddy picture.
In addition, Scherer also finds it surprising that Cheney does not “directly address two other memos” — the ones he requested by in April, the ones that “became a cause celeb for conservatives, who accused the Obama Administration of withholding key evidence showing the effectiveness of harsh interrogation.”
Now that the memos have been released—with redactions—they provide no clarity to the question Cheney claimed they would answer: Did the enhanced techniques produce results? Rather the two memos describe the value of information provided by Al Qaeda detainees, which one memo calls a “crucial pillar of counterterrorism efforts.” The memos, as redacted, are silent on the role of harsh interrogation in producing that information. One memo describes another effective technique—dubbed the “building block” process—that did produce significant information. This process is an standard technique, of confronting one detainee with information from another detainee to produce more information. It does not involve any physical coercion. Does Cheney want other parts of the same memo, which were redacted in the latest release, made public? It is unclear.
At the Washington Independent, Spencer Ackerman provides a close reading of the two documents themselves and finds little corroboration for Cheney: “Strikingly, [the C.I.A. reports] provide little evidence for Cheney’s claims that the ‘enhanced interrogation’ program run by the CIA provided valuable information.”
In fact, throughout both documents, many passages — though several are incomplete and circumstantial, actually suggest the opposite of Cheney’s contention: that non-abusive techniques actually helped elicit some of the most important information the documents cite in defending the value of the CIA’s interrogations.
From the first report, which concerns the interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ackerman says we “learn . . . that not only did [KSM] largely provide intelligence about ‘historical plots’ pulled off from al-Qaeda, a fair amount of the knowledge he imparted to his interrogators came from his ‘rolodex’ — that is, what intelligence experts call ‘pocket litter,’ or the telling documentation found on someone’s person when captured.”
The second, says Ackerman, is even more “caveated”:
The second newly released document — a June 2005 overview of information extracted from detainees — is, if anything, more caveated. In making a case that “detainee reporting” was “pivotal for the war against [al-Qaeda],” it says that “detainee reporting is often incomplete or too general to lead directly to arrests; instead, detainees provide critical pieces to the puzzle, which, when combined with other reporting, have helped direct an investigation’s focus and led to the capture of terrorists.”
In conclusion, Ackerman ends up in a similar place as Scherer: “Perhaps the blacked-out lines of the memos specifically claim and document that torture and only torture yielded this information. But what’s released within them does not remotely make that case.”
Again, Cheney’s public account of these documents have conflated the difference between information acquired from detainees, which the documents present, and information acquired from detainees through the enhanced interrogation program, which they don’t.
Which brings us back to the the first sentence of Cheney’s statement.
At Politico, Ben Smith ran Elliott’s version of textual analysis past “a person close to Cheney,” who denied there was any importance to the phrasing.
“As the vice president has said repeatedly, the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided critical intelligence that saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks. The documents released yesterday demonstrate that conclusively. Anyone who doubts that hasn’t read the documents,” said the Cheney source.
In response, Justin Elliott says, “Cheney doesn’t seem like the type to put out a carelessly crafted statement. We’ll be interested to hear if he has anything else to say on the matter.”
“We’re in Orwell country now,” says Adam Serwer.
There’s no “demonstration” of the sort Cheney was referring to in his April statement. The only people who are saying the documents “demonstrate conclusively” that Cheney’s claims are true haven’t read them, or are anonymous Cheney aides.
Re: Newly released Documents vindicate Cheney & CIA
Obama himself left wiggle room in his executive order. The torture laws on the books at the time left too much up to interpretation. diane Feinstein has even suggested a single law, single definition etched in stone that no future administration(s) could change.
These torture cases are so open to interpretation that the guilty could well be dead by the time these cases reach their end. I understand what Obama and the democrats want to achieve but the practicality of it all says they are wasting their time.
A better plan might be some sort of amnesty program where lawyers, interrogators could profess some type of guilt without any direct punishment ... some type of arrangement so that we can legally move on, admit some guilt and concentrate on matters more important to the everday solving of our current problems. Reward victims of torture with settlements - would be cheaper in the long run than the money lawyers will make from this at $200 - $500 an hour fees.
Re: Newly released Documents vindicate Cheney & CIA
Even CNN's Jonathan Mann had the Ragin' Cajun, James Carville on saying that he thought Holder's ploy of throwing red meat to the rabid wing of the Left Dem party was "a bad political move".
Give it up, tin foilers!! You go after the CIA and you hand the country over to China, lock, stock and barrel. Fidel will be sleeping in the Lincoln Bedroom -- hell, he'll insist on re-naming it the "Che Bedroom".
Uh-ah. Never going to happen.
"All that is required for evil to triumph is for good to do nothing."