LadyJane wrote on Apr 28
th, 2009 at 4:59am:
Tough issues...NO DOUBT.
So I guess this article is pure bullshit?
I don't know if the entire article is "pure bullshit" as I have not taken time to research all of its claims. The "waterboarding KSM exposed the Library Tower plot" story is certainly pure bullshit. Google "Library Tower plot" for a variety of articles debunking this story: here are a few examples:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200904260008http://www.slate.com/id/2216601/I recommend skepticism when ideologues such as Deroy Murdock write about intelligence issues. I suggest columnists such as Robert Baer, a former Middle East CIA field officer. Here's an article from the current
Time magazine:
Dumb Intelligence: The torture memos prove that the U.S. sacrificed its moral authority for nothing
It's easy to forget that when the U.S. began interrogating al-Qaeda operatives in 2002, the CIA had no idea what it was doing. The last time the agency had been charged with conducting hostile interrogations was during the Vietnam, era, and most of those officers were long retired. The wisdom inside the CIA has always been that the best intelligence is obtained through persuasion rather than coercion. New CIA recruits have even been counseled against using blackmail because the information it produced couldn't be relied on.
When the CIA was asked to resume hostile interrogations after Sept. 11, some agency leaders were dead set against it, arguing that the military was better equipped for the task. But Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld insisted the job belonged to the CIA. We now know that Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in one month. His interrogator, a former CIA colleague of mine, admits he had almost no training in the technique and knew nothing about how the cumulative effect of waterboarding might affect the quality of the information he was trying to extract.
President Obama's decision to declassify Justice Department memos detailing the interrogation techniques legalized by his predecessor has sparked a predictable partisan furor. Bush Administration officials say the release has somehow compromised national security and let the enemy in on our secrets--even though U.S. interrogators' use of harsh and even sadistic techniques has been known for years. Liberals criticized the President for initially rejecting the idea of prosecuting former Bush officials, though Obama later said he is open to a 9/11-commission-style inquiry into interrogation abuses.
That would be a start. Obama shouldn't stop at declassifying the memos. He needs to launch a full-scale investigation into our intelligence-gathering practices over the past eight years, because once you get past the details of what was made legal to fight the war on terrorism, there's an even starker realization: we tortured people for almost no verifiable information.
Obama apparently spent weeks debating the merits of releasing the documents and was lobbied by CIA Director Leon Panetta to keep them classified. In the end, the case for transparency was too great. The harsh tactics--isolation, sleep deprivation, humiliation, waterboarding--not only had been widely reported, but much of it was also acknowledged to have originated in "Communist Attempts to Elicit False Confessions from Air Force Prisoners of War," a 1957 article written for the Air Force about abusive Chinese interrogations of U.S. troops during the Korean War. Anyone who wanted to could find it via Google for years.
The crucial point, though, is that even the communists suspected that torture can't be relied on to produce more than false confessions--because people will say anything to make the pain stop. This is the history that Bush officials chose to ignore. I asked a former CIA officer privy to the decision-making that led to the waterboarding of al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah whether he thought the abusive tactics worked. His answer: to a degree. From the interrogations of Abu Zubaydah, Mohammed and other al-Qaeda prisoners, the CIA learned a lot more than it knew before about the group's communications, its use of safe houses and codes, and the outlines of its worldview. Valuable stuff, but stuff that could have been extracted through patient and relentless persuasion.
In the declassified Justice Department memos, former CIA director Michael Hayden asserts that it was only after the waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah that authorities learned about Ramzi Binalshibh, a midlevel al-Qaeda member who helped coordinate the Sept. 11 attacks. The memos also say it was because of the waterboarding of Mohammed that U.S. intelligence learned about a "second wave" of attacks planned for after Sept. 11. Was there truly another 9/11 in the works? Maybe. Or maybe Mohammed made it up to stop the waterboarding.
The use of torture has come at huge costs to American credibility and the morale and psychology of out intelligence agencies. If we're going to pay those costs, we ought to know what we're getting. A thorough clearing of the air will help discredit the idea that we either torture terrorists or become victims. This false choice is played out on shows like
24, leaving people with the notion that had the FBI somehow caught one of the hijackers in the hours leading up to Sept. 11, torture would have led to the arrests of the 18 others before those planes took off. the truth is less sensational and more unsettling--but ultimately one that Americans should learn to accept. There are ticking time bombs out there. But torture won't get us any closer to discovering when they're going to go off.
Pages: 
Obama elected President (Read 624,672 times)
