Posted on 08/25/2009 6:54:55 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
ABC's Brian Ross and NBC's Andrea Mitchell on Tuesday night each listed some al Qaeda plots uncovered via CIA interrogations, but both balked when it came to vindicating former Vice President Dick Cheney on whether enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs) led to information which prevented attacks.
Nowhere in the reports...does the CIA ever draw a direct connection between the valuable information and the specific use of harsh tactics, Ross declared on World News in citing reports Cheney requested be released. NBC's Andrea Mitchell cited only Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and related how administration officials say there is no way to know whether the same information could have be obtained from him without waterboarding or whether he would have given it up sooner had he been handled differently.
On FNC, however, The Weekly Standard's Steve Hayes, quoting from the just-released 2004 report by CIA Inspector General John Helgerson, pointed out how even it noted regarding Abd al Rahim al Nashiri, the terrorist behind the USS Cole attack, following the use of EIT's, he provided information about his most current operational planning as opposed to the historical information he provided before the use of the EIT's. Hayes asserted: I mean, it doesn't get clearer than that. So we can debate the morality, we can debate whether this was torture. We can't debate any longer about whether this was effective.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Based on what?
Your posting history.
Indeed. It doesn’t affect me what the intelligence community does in foreign countries (hence the secret prisons in eastern bloc countries). That’s just me as an individual. But as far as policy goes, especially since it’s been exposed, you have to be positive the subject is someone with information. The whole thing makes me a bit uneasy, but at the time all bets were off. Basically, my view is keep the hoards out by any means but don’t be shocked in 10 years when the blowback happens.
Such as....?
“But as far as policy goes, especially since its been exposed, you have to be positive the subject is someone with information.”
I think the evidence has shown much professionalism and restraint. To my knowledge, there’s only been three people waterboarded: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.
That doesn’t make me uneasy.
Same here, it’s the possibilities for abuse that concern me. Imagine if the Patriot Act, MCA, ect were around after the OKC bombing. The Reno justice department would’ve been rounding up militia groups and gun clubs. Reactionary politics is never good for the free man. Thankfully, and much to their credit (and to my surprise), it seems that these things have been kept under control.
Brian Ross was on Bill O’Reilly about 2 years ago and showed a report he did for ABC which showed how important a tool waterboarding was in getting useful information....they said after not speaking for months on end kalid sheik mohhamed spoke after 30 seconds of waterboarding....Ross interviewed CIA operatives for his report....anyone have remember that video???
That’s what I thought too. His “High Moral Ground At Any Cost” is a dead give away.
What’s moral about letting dozens or thousands die because we can’t torture someone who could provide info enabling us to prevent the deaths?
You really have to be happier at DU, so why not go back ?
Your barking up the wrong tree. Read the post I replied to.
This forum has been around since 1997 at least...
Why did it take you so long to find your way here to post your infinite wisdom?
Now you’re concerned about shit that is history?
Where were you when Clinton sold vital top secret info to the chicoms?
Get your lazy ass off my computer!
I’ve been a lurker since about 03 or 04, but stayed away from posting. At the time, neoconservatism was the party line and needless to say FR was a hostile place for paleos. I fail to understand how being concerned with CIA tactics in 2002 excuses Clinton’s actions with the Chinese in the late 90s, or ECHELON, Waco, Kosovo, ect. It seems pretty obvious to me that most of Bush’s policy mistakes can be traced back to those of Clinton (many of which were worse but of course never talked about by the MSM).
It must have been the milk & cookies...
Just because you lurked doesn’t give you any credibility whatsoever!
Liberals Lurk here all the time, then jump in when they feel the time is right, causing massive harm.
If you believe neoconservatism was the party line, you found the wrong website to post your bullshit on! We believe in the CONSTITUTION as written, not some political slang written about in the MSM!
Latent tyrants (read: liberals) don't need enabling legislation. When Bill & Hillary wanted something done, they did it -- irrespective of their designated authority.
Had they ordered it, the Reno justice department would've happily rounded up militia groups and gun clubs -- and worried about the legal consequences later. A la Elian Gonzalez...
Laws are meant to be applied by and protect law-abiding people -- not criminals. Our only protection against lawless criminals is the ballot box.
...or the ammo box.
Credability doesn’t come with senority, and to be honest I could care less what you think of me unless it’s my political or philosophical viewpoints which I’d be more than happy to debate.
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.