It ain’t “24.” it ain’t Jack Bauer. It’s just real.
Ali Soufan, a former FBI investigator and interrogator who at one point in his career went undercover as an al Qaida operative, testifies to the Senate Judiciary Committee today from behind a screen, where he cannot be seen or photographed.
The subject is torture.
In his prepared testimony, Soufan lays out an impressive list of accomplishments:
“In my capacity as a FBI Agent, I investigated and supervised highly sensitive and complex international terrorism cases, including the East Africa bombings, the USS Cole bombing, and the events surrounding the attacks of 9/11. I also coordinated both domestic and international counter-terrorism operations on the Joint Terrorist Task Force, FBI New York Office.
I personally interrogated many terrorists we have in our custody and elsewhere, and gained confessions, identified terror operatives, their funding, details of potential plots, and information on how al Qaeda operates, along with other actionable intelligence. Because of these successes, I was the government’s main witness in both of the trials we have had so far in Guantanamo Bay – the trial of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a driver and bodyguard for Osama Bin Laden, and Ali Hamza Al Bahlul, Bin Laden’s propagandist. In addition I am currently helping the prosecution prepare for upcoming trials of other detainees held in Guantanamo Bay.”
More importantly, Soufan led the initial interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, al Qaida’s “fixer.” In his prepared remarks, he describes what he was able to achieve, what information he was able to draw from Zubaydah very quickly, and what happened when high-level officials in Washington — officials untrained and inexperienced in interrogation — overrode Soufan’s recommendations and insisted that more brutal methods, up to and including waterboarding, be applied to Zubaydah.
“The new techniques did not produce results as Abu Zubaydah shut down and stopped talking. At that time nudity and low-level sleep deprivation (between 24 and 48 hours) was being used. After a few days of getting no information, and after repeated inquiries from DC asking why all of sudden no information was being transmitted (when before there had been a steady stream), we again were given control of the interrogation.
We then returned to using the Informed Interrogation Approach. Within a few hours, Abu Zubaydah again started talking and gave us important actionable intelligence.
This included the details of Jose Padilla, the so-called “dirty bomber.” To remind you of how important this information was viewed at the time, the then-Attorney General, John Ashcroft, held a press conference from Moscow to discuss the news. Other important actionable intelligence was also gained that remains classified.
After a few days, the contractor attempted to once again try his untested theory and he started to re-implementing the harsh techniques. He moved this time further along the force continuum, introducing loud noise and then temperature manipulation.
Throughout this time, my fellow FBI agent and I, along with a top CIA interrogator who was working with us, protested, but we were overruled. I should also note that another colleague, an operational psychologist for the CIA, had left the location because he objected to what was being done.
Again, however, the technique wasn’t working and Abu Zubaydah wasn’t revealing any information, so we were once again brought back in to interrogate him. We found it harder to reengage him this time, because of how the techniques had affected him, but eventually, we succeeded, and he re-engaged again.
Once again the contractor insisted on stepping up the notches of his experiment, and this time he requested the authorization to place Abu Zubaydah in a confinement box, as the next stage in the force continuum. While everything I saw to this point were nowhere near the severity later listed in the memos, the evolution of the contractor’s theory, along with what I had seen till then, struck me as “borderline torture.”
As the Department of Justice IG report released last year states, I protested to my superiors in the FBI and refused to be a part of what was happening. The Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, a man I deeply respect, agreed passing the message that “we don’t do that,” and I was pulled out.
As you can see from this timeline, many of the claims made in the memos about the success of the enhanced techniques are inaccurate. For example, it is untrue to claim Abu Zubaydah wasn’t cooperating before August 1, 2002. The truth is that we got actionable intelligence from him in the first hour of interrogating him.
In addition, simply by putting together dates cited in the memos with claims made, falsehoods are obvious. For example, it has been claimed that waterboarding got Abu Zubaydah to give up information leading to the capture of Jose Padilla. But that doesn’t add up: Waterboarding wasn’t approved until 1 August 2002 (verbally it was authorized around mid July 2002), and Padilla was arrested in May 2002.
The same goes for KSM’s involvement in 9/11: That was discovered in April 2002, while waterboarding was not introduced until almost three months later. It speaks volumes that the quoted instances of harsh interrogation methods being a success are false.”
Every American interested in the question of torture should read Soufan’s testimony. This is not the macho bluster of a talk show host, or the tortuous rhetoric of an unethical lawyer trying to make the law say something it does not. It is not the self-justifying preening of a former vice president. This is a somber, first-hand, eyewitness account by a man who put his life on the line for his country, a man who knows his business, and a man who was deeply offended as a professional and as an American by what took place. Here is how he closes his remarks:
“In summary, the Informed Interrogation Approach outlined in the Army Field Manual is the most effective, reliable, and speedy approach we have for interrogating terrorists. It is legal and has worked time and again.
It was a mistake to abandon it in favor of harsh interrogation methods that are harmful, shameful, slower, unreliable, ineffective, and play directly into the enemy’s handbook. It was a mistake to abandon an approach that was working and naively replace it with an untested method. It was a mistake to abandon an approach that is based on the cumulative wisdom and successful tradition of our military, intelligence, and law enforcement community, in favor of techniques advocated by contractors with no relevant experience.
The mistake was so costly precisely because the situation was, and remains, too risky to allow someone to experiment with amateurish, Hollywood style interrogation methods- that in reality- taints sources, risks outcomes, ignores the end game, and diminishes our moral high ground in a battle that is impossible to win without first capturing the hearts and minds around the world. It was one of the worst and most harmful decisions made in our efforts against al Qaeda.
For the last seven years, it was not easy objecting to these methods when they had powerful backers. I stood up then for the same reason I’m willing to take on critics now, because I took an oath swearing to protect this great nation. I could not stand by quietly while our country’s safety was endangered and our moral standing damaged.”
Go read it. It ain’t “24;” it ain’t Jack Bauer. This is real life.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
164 comments Add your comment
I Report/ You Whine
May 13th, 2009
12:15 pm
So why not release the rest of the memos?
Hmmmmm?
DB, Gwinnettian
May 13th, 2009
12:21 pm
Because the last gang of screwups don’t run things any more, Andy.
any other stupid questions?
md
May 13th, 2009
12:29 pm
I believe it was Obama that made the promise to the people that everything would be transparent. Last I checked, “partial” did not equal “everything”.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 13th, 2009
12:30 pm
Jay, my apologies for the off-topic nature of my first post. (obviously, Andy’s was off-topic–he never read your post, obviously, and he’ll never bother to read the linked piece.)
Anyway, if you do read the linked piece, and to anticipate the usual complaining from the pro-torture crowd, you’ll see this interrogator also concisely detailed what actually works when dealing with detainees.
The Informed Interrogation Approach is based on leveraging our knowledge of the detainee’s culture and mindset, together with using information we already know about him.
The interrogator knows that there are three primary points of influence on the detainee:
First, there is the fear that the detainee feels as a result of his capture and isolation from his support base. People crave human contact, and this is especially true in some cultures more than others. The interrogator turns this knowledge into an advantage by becoming the one person the detainee can talk to and who listens to what he has to say, and uses this to encourage the detainee to open up. In addition, acting in a non-threatening way isn’t how the detainee is trained to expect a U.S. interrogator to act. This adds to the detainee’s confusion and makes him more likely to cooperate.
Second, and connected, there is the need the detainee feels to sustain a position of respect and value to interrogator. As the interrogator is the one person speaking to and listening to the detainee, a relationship is built – and the detainee doesn’t want to jeopardize it. The interrogator capitalizes on this and compels the detainee to give up more information.
And third, there is the impression the detainee has of the evidence against him. The interrogator has to do his or her homework and become an expert in every detail known to the intelligence community about the detainee. The interrogator then uses that knowledge to impress upon the detainee that everything about him is known and that any lie will be easily caught.
This is not the first time I’ve heard this. It seems clear–that’s what produces results. And, sadly, the Cheney/Bush thugs weren’t really interested in them, I don’t think, beyond a producing phony link between Saddam and 9/11.
ty webb
May 13th, 2009
12:34 pm
Come on DB. Why do you not want the rest of the memos released? Shouldn’t we know everything concerning the “last gang of screwups”?
I Report/ You Whine
May 13th, 2009
12:36 pm
DimBulb, Gwinnettian- Why all the venom, self appointed watch puppy?
say what?
May 13th, 2009
12:37 pm
“It ain’t “24;” it ain’t Jack Bauer”
You just better hope he never gets a hold of this article! But seriously, the whole bit about “macho talk show hosts”, “unethical lawyers”, and “preening of a former vice president” just saps all credibility from the argument. We get it lefties, you think all torture is wrong (unless of course princess nancy says it’s okay, but we’re not supposed to know about that one are we?).
The simplest thing to do would be to take every terrorist in gitmo, take them outside, and line them up for a firing squad. Then there would be no more debate, the world could see what should be done to terrorists, and the whole diatribe on torture would no longer be necessary. But that would get in the way of whining now wouldn’t it?
DB, Gwinnettian
May 13th, 2009
12:39 pm
ty, the memos aren’t the topic. Try to keep up.
Paul
May 13th, 2009
12:40 pm
DB Gwinnettian
I’m about to go out for a bit, so I’ll hold off on more detailed posting, but in reference to your response to Report/Whine: Cheney’s laid it on the line and said his methods saved lives. Past CIA directors seem to back this up. The Obama Administration cherry-picking releasing information that supports their position and stonewalling releasing that which might challenge their position looks as manipulative as anything the Bush Administration did.
If Cheney’s wrong, it’d be real easy to prove.
Later -
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
12:41 pm
I saw an interview with some guy a couple weeks back – I can’t remember who it was, but he made a good point – in the real world, there are no ticking time bombs. He even referenced Mr. Bauer and the show ‘24′ as being bad for the American psyche because it makes people think there are.
He also mentioned that not one person in the Bush Administration has gone on record saying that torture produced information that led to saving a life. Not one – which I found pretty interesting.
If you have to waterboard someone 183 times – that takes a long time, so the notion of a ticking time bomb is rather lame if you think about it.
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
12:44 pm
say what?
Don’t you think they should at least be charged with something before executing them in front of the world? Yeah, and due process sucks. Who needs it.
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
12:45 pm
Does anyone but me find it odd that we’ve seen more of Dick Cheney (grunting his merry grunts and scaring little children who happen to pass by the TV) in the past two weeks than the previous eight years?
What’s up with that?
Jigsaw
May 13th, 2009
12:46 pm
It ain’t torture unless you hear that awful high-pitched screaming.
say what?
May 13th, 2009
12:47 pm
“Don’t you think they should at least be charged with something before executing them in front of the world?”
Terrorists are NOT American citizens, they are not guaranteed due process in OUR constitution. I say give them a taste of their own medicine.
ty webb
May 13th, 2009
12:47 pm
Okay, DB. So what a former FBI interrogator calls “borderline torture” is the topic. This has nothing to do with “Bush/Cheney thugs producing a phony link between Saddam and 9/11″. By the way, they never did that.
jewcowboy
May 13th, 2009
12:48 pm
md,
I’ve commented on your inter-species marriage concerns down below if you care to check it out.
jewcowboy
May 13th, 2009
12:49 pm
Bosch,
“If you have to waterboard someone 183 times – that takes a long time, so the notion of a ticking time bomb is rather lame if you think about it.”
They just set snooze on the timer.
RW-(the original)
May 13th, 2009
12:50 pm
And I’d like to interject a note of balance here. There are times when we all get in high dudgeon. We ought to be reasonable about this. I think there are probably very few people in this room or in America who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if thousands of lives are at stake.
Take the hypothetical: If we knew that there was a nuclear bomb hidden in an American city and we believed that some kind of torture, fairly severe maybe, would give us a chance of finding that bomb before it went off, my guess is most Americans and most senators, maybe all, would say, Do what you have to do.
So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can never be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different deal.
Oh my!
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 13th, 2009
12:50 pm
Paul- I expect to see an idiot yapping response to your reason from DimBulb any moment now.
jewcowboy
May 13th, 2009
12:52 pm
“Ali Soufan, a former FBI investigator and interrogator who at one point in his career went undercover as an al Qaida operative, testifies to the Senate Judiciary Committee today from behind a screen, where he cannot be seen or photographed.”
Just curious, why hide his face if they give out his name? Does anyone know?
Doggone/GA
May 13th, 2009
12:56 pm
“I say give them a taste of their own medicine.”
Got it. Torture is NOT about information, it’s about retribution…whether the person being tortured is guilty or not. Thanks for clearing that up. Now we know EXACTLY where YOU stand.
RW-(the original)
May 13th, 2009
12:56 pm
jewcowboy,
Maybe it’s not his real name, but if he said waterboarding worked the media/Obama administration would give you a map to his house.
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
12:59 pm
say what?
Hmm. Well, that’s something I didn’t know – so if a non-US citizen comes to our country and breaks a crime, they aren’t charged with anything or held in jail? Or given a trial?
LOL! Sorry, for the sarcasm, but your argument is lame, as is the notion of executing prisoners without due process.
jewcowboy,
“They just set snooze on the timer”
Bombs have snooze buttons? Oh, that makes perfect sense now that you put it that way!
DB, Gwinnettian
May 13th, 2009
1:00 pm
ty, I was speculating as to why the torture occurred in the first place. Although there is evidence to suggest that coercing a phony link between saddam and al-Q was, indeed, an order of business.
Must run. Enjoy speculating what that currently-classified bit of alleged toadying re: Cheney might actually accomplish if brought to light; I tend to put a bit more trust in those currently in charge than in those who’d screwed things up. YMMV.
WhoCares
May 13th, 2009
1:05 pm
Just curious, why hide his face if they give out his name? Does anyone know?
Maybe it is his Delta Tau Delta name
md
May 13th, 2009
1:08 pm
jew – responded.
eagle scout
May 13th, 2009
1:09 pm
Bosch…Ain’t it hilarious watching Cheney try to defend the undefensible! He has all of a sudden reared his ugly head from his undisclosed hidey hole to appear on every TV show that will host him.
Watch Larry Wilkerson at the 9:00 minute segment tear Cheney a new one…believe me it’s worth the watch.
http://mgx.com/blogs/2009/05/12/maddow-cheneys-magical-media-tour/
RW-(the original)
May 13th, 2009
1:09 pm
Obama has just changed his mind and adopted Bush’s position to fight the release of detainee “abuse” pictures.
Good, let’s hope he sticks to that decision.
Now about that forest…..
See y’all upstairs for happy hour.
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
1:12 pm
Why do I think Ali Soufan won’t be doing any interviews on Fixed Noise?!
Doggone/GA
May 13th, 2009
1:16 pm
“Just curious, why hide his face if they give out his name? Does anyone know?”
Maybe it’s not his real name?
getalife
May 13th, 2009
1:17 pm
They should man up, take their punishment so we can move on.
I doubt they have the guts.
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
1:22 pm
eagle scout @ 1:09,
Thanks for the link. Larry’s one of the good guys.
md
May 13th, 2009
1:23 pm
“Maybe it’s not his real name?”
Maybe he’s not real.
How in the world would we ever know? Because the “gov’t” told us?
ty webb
May 13th, 2009
1:25 pm
DB,
nice try. In the link you posted, it says that interrogators tried to find a link between Saddam and Al Qaida. Not Saddam and 9/11 as you claimed. Also the article’s sources are an unnamed former senior US intelligence official and a unnamed former army psychiatrist.
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
1:28 pm
It never ceases to amaze me how many people believe “24″ is real. Of course there are a lot of folks who don’t realize The Colbert Report is satire, either.
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
1:29 pm
eagle scout,
Thanks for the link – definitely worth the watch.
That Larry is a hoot!
Midori
May 13th, 2009
1:29 pm
Bosch –
about Cheney’s “torturepalooza tour”:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/opinion/13dowd.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&ref=opinion&adxnnlx=1242212957-iKKu2WnfOFFsy+wNfKcVQw
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
1:30 pm
Susan,
What? ‘24′ isn’t real and The Colbert Report is satire? Hehehehehehe. JK.
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
1:31 pm
Midori!
LOL!!! Torturpalooza Tour! Good one.
George American
May 13th, 2009
1:34 pm
“say what?” gets it right with:
“The simplest thing to do would be to take every terrorist in gitmo, take them outside, and line them up for a firing squad.”
Finally, someone on this blog who “gets it.” You gotta be tough! Terrorist don’t deserve American rights. Bush and Cheney were tough. The Obamatang is a wimp!
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 13th, 2009
1:38 pm
Ha ha, Pelosi is in the spin cycle.
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
1:43 pm
Midori @ 1:29,
Torturepalooza tour! Hysterical! Great link, too.
jewcowboy
May 13th, 2009
1:44 pm
“Maybe it’s not his real name?”
But why make it up? Why not just say Agent X? That even sounds cooler.
julio quintana
May 13th, 2009
1:53 pm
Hey Jay what do you think about the latest report….I guess the President didn’t think about the consequences…now he is backtracking. “WASHINGTON – In a reversal, President Barack Obama is fighting the release of dozens of new photos showing U.S. personnel allegedly abusing prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan, a White House official said Wednesday.”
WhoCares
May 13th, 2009
1:55 pm
OK….now that we’ve been around this Torture block AGAIN….for the 1000th time. Any more sightings of nekkid Miss California?
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
1:56 pm
Midori,
“Just as Jeb Bush and other Republicans are trying to get kinder and gentler, Cheney has popped out of his dungeon, scary organ music blaring, to carry on his nasty campaign of fear and loathing. The man who never talked is now the man who won’t shut up.”
Hehehehehehehe. Snicker. Snort.
Midori
May 13th, 2009
2:04 pm
she sure has a way with words, huh Bosch
Copyleft
May 13th, 2009
2:07 pm
George American: So we should simply shoot everyone detained at Guantanamo?
How about the guys who’ve already been released because they were innocent? Should we track them back down and shoot them too?
“Say What” has already made the position of the torture fans clear; guilt and innocence are irrelevant, this is all about revenge.
eagle scout
May 13th, 2009
2:07 pm
George American … What’s an Obamatang?
Is that President Obama with an artifical orange drink called Tang….Or is it as I suspect a racial slur? Referring to Obama as an ape which is known for their intelligence…Which you obviously have none!
They are not Orangatangs these wonderful animals are ORANGUTANS..Notice anything different?
jt
May 13th, 2009
2:09 pm
” and what happened when high-level officials in Washington — officials untrained and inexperienced in ______________ ”
FILL IN THE BLANK. Torture.
Healthcare.
Manufacturing.
How can you R & D voters differentiate.?
Dave
May 13th, 2009
2:16 pm
Release the memos and get Cheney under oath.
AmVet
May 13th, 2009
2:19 pm
eagle scout, watched that Cheney piece and have two thoughts.
First, and this is not exactly breaking news, the man is an inveterate liar. He states, “The bottom line is that we successfully defended the nation against another attack for seven and a half years.”
Fair enough.
But here’s where the scumbag can’t stop himself. “A remarkable achievement.NOBODY would have thought that was possible… and our policies, yada, yada, yada…”
Nobody?
The man’s arm must be throbbing from patting himself on the back so much.
I guess if you set the expectations bar low enough, things always look pretty damned successful. Even for losers like him.
Secondly, I am convinced he is a Democratic Party plant. They must be loving his bizarre behavior over the past few weeks.
Who in their right mind and other than the ever-dwindling collection of miscreants and uninformed in the “base” believe a word this man says?
jewcowboy
May 13th, 2009
2:22 pm
WhoCares,
“Any more sightings of nekkid Miss California?”
She and Sarah Palin were caught making out with moose. A polygamist, bestial, gay wedding is in the works. This will cause James Dobsons head to explode.
Goldie
May 13th, 2009
2:31 pm
Both Bush and Cheney have made America and the rest of the civilized world less safe today, all because they wanted to look macho and out-terrorist the terrorists… thank God we have a sane, cool-headed man in the White House today. We can only hope now that the damage done to America’s “beacon of light” can be minimized for the next 8 years.
jewcowboy
May 13th, 2009
2:34 pm
Goldie,
I do get a bit misty eyed, though, when our President speaks remembering some the great verbal gaffes of the last one. But, I guess we have Biden for that. A pale shadow, but still…
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
2:36 pm
jewcowboy @ 2:22,
Wouldn’t you know, just as I read that I took a drink of water and it ended up all over my monitor, but it was well worth it.
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
2:38 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gUzD1Ud4Lk
The only mushroom cloud I see is over the G”No!”P – LMAO! BOOM!
ty webb
May 13th, 2009
2:39 pm
Amvet,
For what it’s worth, this miscreant believes much of what Cheney says.
Goldie,
“out-terrorist the terrorists”? Does that include dropping bombs on pakistani civilians?
George American
May 13th, 2009
2:47 pm
the beagle trout searches for an answer to: “What’s an Obamatang?”
And then attempts a preemptive reply with: “Is that President Obama with an artifical orange drink called Tang….Or is it as I suspect a racial slur?”
This preemptive reply makes NO sense in a organic-rose-garden, post-racial Obamatang world.
You are just attempting to play the race card by deniggrating an apt and properly descriptive metaphor for an inept, incompetent boob masquerading as the president.
Dusty
May 13th, 2009
2:47 pm
Liberal playtime again..
Ali Soufan is not the real name of the witness mentioned by Bookman. His real name is Susan Myers.
bosch is sure that “24″ is not REAL. But Battleship Galatica–now that’s the REAL thing.
DB Gwinett is still trying to find out why anyone thought Saddam was a bad, bad man when he was just an innocent bystander.
Miss California says she is all for “transparancy”. That was what she was wearing when they took her pictures.
Eagle Scout just lost his merit badges. He doesn’t know that Cheney has a long history of service to the USA and is considered a man of high intelligence. That’s why liberals don’t feel comfortable with him.
bosch thinks Guantanamo’s “guests” are lil’ ol ladies in tennis shoes whom we should treat like citizens. What’s your home address, bosch? You are getting one to keep.
I confess: If Bookman brings up “torture” one more time, I will advocate waterboarding for him until he promises never again. Yes!!
Jason
May 13th, 2009
2:48 pm
Funny how the only trolls posting in defense of Bush/Cheney tactics sound like they’re also Klan members. For all the screaming about the “far left”, you’d think they might stop and wonder why they have been losing and losing and will continue to lose in elections, legal arguments, and all standing in America which has recoiled in horror from your vicious snarling hate and realized that it’s not about winning or losing a war for our safety for you, rather it’s about your joy of brutality. You imagine the success of the USA as your own personal achievement. I see you as selfish evil little monsters that are bound to vent your hate somewhere, so I guess it’s better you post on here than go further compromise the right to bear arms for all of us by going out and killing people who may, or may not be guilty, as it seems you wish you could, with impunity, just like the “good old days” before those lefties made it some sort of crime to lynch people. Laws are for civilized people who want the truth and want to do things correctly, and actually protect the country and defeat our enemies rather than harm it further. This is a nation of Laws, of civilized people. It appears you have decided you are not counting yourself among them. The military does not need you. Nobody does. The 21st century will teach your children more about being a citizen of the world and solving the problems that face this country by solving the problems faced in every corner of the world. That reality will instruct them better than you ever could and nothing you do to to them will negate their innate intelligence which tells them, yes, my father was an ignorant hate filled old fool.
At least, that’s my best guess. So, good luck with that!
getalife
May 13th, 2009
2:50 pm
In a major flip flop, obama fails to release the pics ordered by a judge.
The cover ups continue and now obama is breaking the law to cover up w’s mistakes.
Oh well, time to find a real leader that is man enough to uphold the law.
Northern Songs Ltd
May 13th, 2009
2:52 pm
It’s not torture! It is torture!! We did not torture!!! We did too torture!!!! It didn’t work!!!!! It did too work!!!!!! For Gawd all-mighty sake, LET IT GO! What “we” did, we did, and we had to do it. American lives were at stake – maybe yours – and you’re still here, ain’t ya? So can’t we just all move on?
Joe Matarotz
May 13th, 2009
2:53 pm
ANSWER: The silence is deafening.
Joe Matarotz
May 13th, 2009
2:54 pm
QUESTION: How much noise is the leftist media making about the climbing price of gasoline?
It’s off topic, but Jay Bird won’t have it on topic until the next Republicant administration. Funny how that works out.
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 13th, 2009
2:55 pm
WASHINGTON — Republicans amped up opposition on Thursday to President Barack Obama’s plan to close the prison camps at Guantánamo Bay, even as Attorney General Eric Holder sought to reassure senators that the United States won’t release anyone it considers a terrorist.
Heh, let’s put the little lovelies in the blue states.
With all the rest of the sickos.
AmVet
May 13th, 2009
2:56 pm
ty, your choice.
The man’s track record regarding his prevarications, exaggerations, half-lies and misinformation, and the deadly consequences thereof, stands on its own.
My use of the term “a word” falls under the category of sarcasm.
Sometimes even the irrepressible and now ubiquitous ex-VP must be telling the truth…
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 13th, 2009
2:57 pm
Aahhh, yes, the Obozo boom times are over after a whole……..week-
Weak Retail Sales Sink Stocks- AP
ew
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
2:57 pm
Dusty,
Dear, please do me a favor:
Please do not speak for me or assume to ever know what I’m thinking. It might hurt your feelings.
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
2:58 pm
And leave it to Mensa’s brainchild, G”No!”P Senator Lindsey Graham who cited an infamous ABC News report from 2007 that said a terror suspect broke under minimal waterboarding, and suggested it undercut the claim that torture didn’t work.
But Graham didn’t appear to be aware that the report has since been debunked, and that ABC itself has since corrected the record.
Of course, he didn’t excuse himself or provide an apology, as he continued on with his questioning after a blank stare for several seconds! He is just like the rest of them – IDIOTS!
Dusty
May 13th, 2009
2:59 pm
Err Joe Matarotz,
What was the question?
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
2:59 pm
Joe Matarotz,
Really? Two dollar/gallon gas? With summer coming up? Um, that’s not a big deal. Got any other straw man bs issues ya’ wanna throw out on de blog?
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
3:00 pm
Dusty @ 2:47,
Crawl back under your rock. You look better there.
Copyleft
May 13th, 2009
3:01 pm
Northern Songs: Problem is, we DIDN’T “have to do it”–and in fact, we had LAWS against doing it.
Should we just “let it go” when government officials break the law? I don’t think so… do you?
Dusty
May 13th, 2009
3:01 pm
Sorry, bosch. I have never accused you of thinking.
Northern Songs Ltd
May 13th, 2009
3:03 pm
YES I DO!
Dusty
May 13th, 2009
3:04 pm
Susan Myers, you look better behind a witness screen. Right, Ali?
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
3:07 pm
Dusty,
I’m referring to this:
“bosch thinks Guantanamo’s “guests” are lil’ ol ladies in tennis shoes whom we should treat like citizens”
where as you can see the first two words – you are trying to assume, incorrectly I might add, what I think.
These are your words, no? Or did someone namejack you?
Please do not speak for me or pretend to know what I’m thinking. It rude and obnoxious and I’ll be perfectly happy to tell you what I think anytime you want.
md
May 13th, 2009
3:10 pm
Careful Dusty, the blog monitor has spoken. You will soon be dismissed and rendered irrelevant.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 13th, 2009
3:10 pm
Joe, about the evil librul media suppressing gas price stories… well, I could link to a chart comparing prices between this year and last.
Or I could point out that googling “gas prices” nets stories in the media about the recent price hikes.
But you’re going to believe what you like, right?
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
3:11 pm
Dusty @ 3:04,
Well, thank you, thank you very much. I’m flattered. I love Ali.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 13th, 2009
3:11 pm
In the link you posted, it says that interrogators tried to find a link between Saddam and Al Qaida. Not Saddam and 9/11 as you claimed.
Well, setting aside how I’d said in my post that the hoped-for link was between Saddam and Al-Qaeda—that’s a link to 9/11, no?
(Furthermore, I conditioned my post with the magic words “I was speculating”.) Not to bang this thing to death, but I’m hardly the first to point out that Bush and Cheney took pains to stop just short of blaming Saddam for 9/11, but were happy to cite 9/11 as a reason for pre-emptive war against Saddam and did it regularly. I’m just applying what I know already to what we’re now learning.
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
3:13 pm
md @ 3:10,
You’ve just been pickin’ and choosin’ the day away, haven’t you?
Northern Songs Ltd
May 13th, 2009
3:14 pm
If I have to choose between saving American lives and kicking a terrorist in the sack if I think that will save those American lives, I choose the sack kicking. How abooot you??
Paul
May 13th, 2009
3:15 pm
There’s a lot here interesting, but it’s so jumbled up it’s like trying to trace a single spaghetti strand in a gallon bowl. I’ll try to keep it brief, do away with some of the supporting points (as they seem to be ignored by many. I’ll fill in if anyone’s interested).
Couple minor points out of the way: does it seem odd to anyone that an FBI agent (FBI mission is what, again?) went undercover as an al Qaeda operative? Where, exactly? FBI in Pakistan? Afghanistan? Not here, surely! Now we’re dispatching FBI agents on CIA-type missions? It sure sounds good for building credibility, though.
His point about serving justice – that would be an FBI mindset. Not CIA. Not Defense. FBI agent would likely be horrified at a soldier firing at a person in civilian clothes, seeing the person stagger, then watching the soldier pump a few more rounds into him. FBI agent would probably be horrified at a CIA agent blackmailing someone or obtaining information (not ‘evidence’) without a warrant. Different worlds, different mindsets.
And that “waterboarded 183 times” reference costs credibility. I ate 24,800 times last month. Three meals and one snack, swallowed 200 bites at each event. It’s already been established each application of water was counted as a ‘time.’ Apply water 8 times in 30 seconds, was the person waterboarded 8 times? I ate 120 meals and 30 snacks. Not 24,800.
But even if it was 10 times for an individual, that’s troubling and undercuts the “broke in 30 seconds” argument.
I wonder why Zubadyah is the one cited, repeatedly. Three were waterboarded. Is our experience with him the same in each instance as with the others? Or does his experience make certain points certain people want to make?
But as I understand it, the claims made and some issues to be decided are:
Did we in fact have a severe intelligence gap, at the same time we feared other multithousand casualty attacks at any moment? Did we break up any of these attacks as a result of conventional interrogation methods? As a result of enhanced? Did we obtain such information only after conventional methods were used and enhanced were used? Did the other two terrorists divulge actionable information under enhanced they’d resisted giving under conventional? Were there attacks that were so imminent that to have continued on with conventional methods would have meant the attack would have taken place?
Another problem I see with this Zubaydah interrogation is that it seems to violate the reasons given for resorting to enhanced. Were we on a fishing expedition? Then it’s unreliable. Did we have the overall outline of an imminent plan but lack certain key elements we were sure the detainee held? It seems to me this Zubaydah guy didn’t meet the criteria; therefore, to use him as an example of ‘didn’t work’ is an error.
The whole business of using contractors was incredible and reflects horribly on the professionalism of the directors of both the FBI and CIA, as well as the SecDef.
Couple other points: “In summary, the Informed Interrogation Approach outlined in the Army Field Manual is the most effective, reliable, and speedy approach we have for interrogating terrorists. It is legal and has worked time and again.” Problem is, the AFM the witness used is not the same AFM now in force. So that’s a problematic statement.
IF that’s the most effective, reliable and speedy approach, why not adopt those standards when interrogating American citizens? Simple example: watch an episode of Law and Order. Detective interrogations are filled with violations of the AFM. So why does not Justice Dept and Congress push for its adoption nationwide instead of restricting the methods to terror suspects?
Anyhow, this guy’s testimony will raise more questions than it answers. Which is why Jay’s commission with no prosecutions idea has merit. But would it be successful? Hint: will the House or Senate Judiciary Committees call a CIA expert witness with a decidedly different view than the FBI witness?
And one final thought. I wonder what the discussion would have been if waterboarding and Abu Ghraib hadn’t happened. If it had been found out later we’d interrupted sleep cycles, used loud music and threatened their families. Would we still be having this discussion, at this level? Especially, say, on September 11, 2003?
DB, Gwinnettian
May 13th, 2009
3:15 pm
Of course there are a lot of folks who don’t realize The Colbert Report is satire, either.
Susan, some conservatives, apparently, believe Stephen to be a double-agent. And no, I’m not making this up.
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
3:16 pm
Northern Songs,
Name one incident where torture saved American lives.
Paul
May 13th, 2009
3:18 pm
DB, Gwinnettian
[[setting aside how I’d said in my post that the hoped-for link was between Saddam and Al-Qaeda]]
There’s a big difference between a ‘hoped-for’ link and a ‘feared’ link. That’s one of the things we did not know. If there was a link, then potential problems would have multiplied. If a link was denied at every event, then the fear of a link could be put aside.
From a security and planning viewpoint, hoping for such a link makes no sense. Disproving one does.
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
3:19 pm
Paul,
You call that brief? Geez.
ty webb
May 13th, 2009
3:19 pm
DB,
Not your original post(12:30). You said Saddam and 9/11. That’s what I originally responded to. You corrected yourself in you 1:00 post. There can be a link between Al Qaida and Saddam without there being a link Between Saddam and 9/11. As for speculating, I think that’s done well to often, and not just by you.
Paul
May 13th, 2009
3:19 pm
Bosch
(Sorry, nothern lights, I’m interrupting again)
[[Name one incident where torture saved American lives.]]
Well, he MIGHT be able to answer that if the Obama Administration would release some memos…
hryder
May 13th, 2009
3:19 pm
Employing logical reasoning one uses only commonly accepted definitions of words and terms. When permitted to define words and terms I am never incorrect. Just as my personal opinion on any topic is always correct unless I am untruthful to curry favor from others.
Susan Myers
May 13th, 2009
3:20 pm
DBG @ 3:15,
I wouldn’t think you were making it up. It sounds like a logical conclusion for that abnormal bunch.
Dusty
May 13th, 2009
3:21 pm
DB Gwinnettian..
Have you ever heard of WMDs aka weapons of mass destruction? Have you ever heard that the CIA and British Intel were sure that Saddam had WMDs and were ready to use them and Congress agreed with that conclusion and Bush did not want WMDs used against America and it was his job to keep America SAFE and he did just that and took care of alledged WMDs after Congress said GO FOR IT?? Either you missed a few things or you have liberal dementia. Which is it?
Paul
May 13th, 2009
3:21 pm
Bosch
Yeah, given Jay’s posting. There’s a whole jumble of issues there. Intertwined, overlapped, misdirected, with lots called in ‘evidence’ that really doesn’t have to do with the issue. And assumptions. Lots and lots of assumptions.
Taxpayer
May 13th, 2009
3:21 pm
Paul is N.J.
Midori
May 13th, 2009
3:22 pm
Hi, Paul
Bosch
May 13th, 2009
3:23 pm
Paul,
Well of course he would – but until then let’s keep the hyperbole to a minimum.
And as to this:
“If it had been found out later we’d interrupted sleep cycles, used loud music and threatened their families. Would we still be having this discussion, at this level? Especially, say, on September 11, 2003?”
Interesting thought, but yeah, I think so. And do those techniques fit the definition of torture?
Paul
May 13th, 2009
3:23 pm
Taxpayer
That’s cruel. Torture, even. Thbpppttttttttttttt
Hi Midori!
Where ya’ been?
Northern Songs Ltd
May 13th, 2009
3:25 pm
I can’t. And you can’t name one time IT DIDN’T. Because any supporting documentation – for my point of view or yours – sits in a drawer someplace waiting for the President to grow a pair and release it.