Posted on 04/21/2009 7:10:01 AM PDT by IrishMike
In releasing highly classified documents on the CIA interrogation program last week, President Obama declared that the techniques used to question captured terrorists "did not make us safer." This is patently false. The proof is in the memos Obama made public -- in sections that have gone virtually unreported in the media.
Consider the Justice Department memo of May 30, 2005. It notes that "the CIA believes 'the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.' . . . In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including [Khalid Sheik Mohammed] and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques." The memo continues: "Before the CIA used enhanced techniques . . . KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will find out.' " Once the techniques were applied, "interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding al Qaeda and its affiliates."
Specifically, interrogation with enhanced techniques "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." KSM later acknowledged before a military commission at Guantanamo Bay that the target was the Library Tower, the tallest building on the West Coast. The memo explains that "information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, a 17-member Jemmah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the 'Second Wave.' " In other words, without enhanced interrogations, there could be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
QUESTION: Why then attack the CIA's success ?
FACT: terrorist attacks were stopped by the CIA
QUESTION: Why then attack the CIA’s success ?
Because it was working...
FACT: terrorist attacks were stopped by the CIA
QUESTION: Why then attack the CIA’s success ?
ANSWER: terrorist attacks were stopped by the CIA
We need to be cut down to size to accept our place in the world of nations, not as an exceptional nation, but as one of equals, with no nation better than another, respecting all and therefore being respected by all.
B. 0bama
Because we’re just now beginning to understand Bambi’s real motivation.
Barack did not want his friends tortured.
Something to hide.
Why did the man who ran the company involved in the passport breaches of Zero, Clinton, and McCain become a national intell advisor?
BINGO!!
There’s some world-class chain-yanking going on. First, the CIA uses pleasure, not pain, to obtain their intel.
Second, the pain/torture claims stem from a CIA cover story.
Waterboarding someone 266 times? Never happened. As if after waterboarding someone 265 times without any intel, someone would say: “Hey, if we just try this same trick *one* more time...”
Read the comments from the article. Those libs have gone off the deep end. BDS is alive and well.
So, in opposition to declassified, official CIA documents, your opinion should matter... why again?
I'm afraid your "because I said so" doesn't carry any water here, FRiend.
Yes, the comments are sickening and real easy to say from the comfort of their safe places and knowing they won’t be killed by a terrorist today. If we were cannon fodder like the Israelis these same people would be squeeling like stick pigs for our government to protect their asses.
“QUESTION: Why then attack the CIA’s success ?”
....it’s just a reflexive action from the Left...they hate the CIA/FBI/NSA/Pentagon/Armed Forces/ROTC/Police ect...any organization that stands up for protecting our America.
Didn’t he KEEP rendition?
Isn’t rendition where the REAL torture happens?
BUSH: Made all tough decsions erring on the side of protecting American citizens from our enemies.
Obama: Erring on the side of protecting America’s enemies from day one.
What possibly can his teleprompter tell him to say to the American people after the next terror attack on our shores?
The extraordinary rendition program. Legal by all accounts, it began in 1995 with the forced transfer to Egypt of one Abu Talal al-Qasimi. Even though the United Nations Convention Against Torture prohibits transfer of prisoners to countries known to torture, the language is fairly ambiguous and gives executive branches wide berth. Hundreds of prisoners were rendered to other countries; many seem to have been brutally tortured in ways that even the Office of Legal Counsel wouldn’t sanction. The U.S. courts have been fairly clear: the executive branch is the only agent of government that can make the determination about whether other countries torture, so it’s going to be hard to for a prosecutor to make a case that any U.S. official knew about impending torture in, say, Morocco or Syria — that’s because the law, as it stands, does not allow the judicial branches to make fact-based judgments like whether another country tortures. Some other measure of bad faith would have to be disclosed...
I’m just saying... it’s kind of a “wink”, isn’t it?
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.