This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
War Criminals Try to Evade Prosecution By Pretending Torture Was Vital to Getting Bin Laden ... When It Actually Delayed the Hunt for YEARS
Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and John Yoo were all instrumental in implementing the U.S. torture program.
So it is no surprise that they are now pretending that torture helped get Bin Laden. See this, this and this.
They're trying to avoid war crimes prosecution.
As I noted in 2009:
Cheney was the main architect of the torture policy (according to the number 2 man at the State Department and others).
So of course he would defend torture - he's trying to keep his behind out of the defense chair at a war crimes tribunal.
Cheney defending torture is exactly like Charles Manson appearing on all of the news shows defending murder as a public policy.
Matthew Alexander - a former top Air Force interrogator who led the team that tracked down Abu Musab al-Zarqawi - agrees:
"These guys are trying to save their reputations, for one thing," Alexander said. "They have, from the beginning, been trying to prevent an investigation into war crimes."
As does Colonel Wilkerson, the former number two man at the State Department:
Indeed, as Dan Froomkin notes in a little-noticed essay, torture actually delayed by years more effective intelligence-gathering methods which would have resulted in finding Bin Laden:
Defenders
of the Bush administration’s interrogation policies have claimed
vindication from reports that bin Laden was tracked down in small part
due to information received from brutalized detainees some six to
eight years ago.
But that sequence of events -- even if true --
doesn’t demonstrate the effectiveness of torture, these experts say.
Rather, it indicates bin Laden could have been caught much earlier had those detainees been interrogated properly.
"I think that without a doubt, torture and enhanced interrogation techniques slowed down the hunt for bin Laden,"
said an Air Force interrogator who goes by the pseudonym Matthew
Alexander and located Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al Qaeda in
Iraq, in 2006.
It now appears likely that several detainees had
information about a key al Qaeda courier -- information that might have
led authorities directly to bin Laden years ago. But subjected
to physical and psychological brutality, "they gave us the bare
minimum amount of information they could get away with to get the pain
to stop, or to mislead us," Alexander told The Huffington Post.
"We
know that they didn’t give us everything, because they didn’t provide
the real name, or the location, or somebody else who would know that
information," he said.
In a 2006 study by the National Defense Intelligence College,
trained interrogators found that traditional, rapport-based
interviewing approaches are extremely effective with even the most
hardened detainees, whereas coercion consistently builds resistance and
resentment.
"Had we handled some of these sources from the
beginning, I would like to think that there’s a good chance that we
would have gotten this information or other information," said Steven
Kleinman, a longtime military intelligence officer who has extensively
researched, practiced and taught interrogation techniques.
"By
making a detainee less likely to provide information, and making the
information he does provide harder to evaluate, they hindered what we
needed to accomplish," said Glenn L. Carle, a retired CIA officer who oversaw the interrogation of a high-level detainee in 2002.
***
For Alexander, Kleinman and others, the key takeaway is not just that the torture didn't work, but that it was actually counterproductive.
"The
question is: What else did KSM have?" Alexander asked. And he’s
pretty sure he knows the answer: KSM knew the courier’s real name, "or
he knew who else knew his real name, or he knew how to find him -- and
he didn’t give any of that information," Alexander said.
Alexander’s
book, "Kill or Capture," chronicles how the non-coercive interrogation
of a dedicated al Qaeda member led to Zarqawi’s capture.
"I’m 100 percent confident that a good interrogator would have gotten additional leads" from KSM, Alexander said.
***
This
new scenario hardly supports a defense of torture on the grounds that
it’s appropriate in "ticking time bomb" scenarios, Alexander said. "Show me an interrogator who says that eight years is a good result."
Indeed, Froomkin points out that the type of torture used is a special type focused on obtaining false confessions:
Experts agree that torture is particularly good at one thing: eliciting false confessions.
Bush-era
interrogation techniques, were modeled after methods used by Chinese
Communists to extract confessions from captured U.S. servicemen that
they could then use for propaganda during the Korean War.
And Froomkin notes that torture hurts national security:
"They
don’t want to talk about the long term consequences that cost the
lives of Americans," Alexander added. The way the U.S. treated its
prisoners "was al-Qaeda’s number-one recruiting tool and brought in
thousands of foreign fighters who killed American soldiers," Alexander
said. "And who want to live with that on their conscience?"
For background, see this.
Note: Cheney and Rumsfeld were never very interested in capturing Bin Laden. Their focus was elsewhere. So
their revisionist statements about the usefulness of torture for
intelligence purposes must be taken with a grain of salt. In reality,
their torture program was crafted to justify the Iraq war, not to catch Bin Laden (and see this.)
- advertisements -
According to my experts, John McCain and Dale Doss, everyone breaks, and breaks again, and can not keep the lie going consistently. With other data, the lies get cross checked and rejected.
See early on in e.g.:http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=heinlein&sts=t&tn=frida...
for the superior form of lying in this situation.
- Ned
Another cynical partisan story on torture from a liberal. Where does Clinton's outsourcing of torture fit into this storyline?
Lame attempt at diverting the middle class from the real agenda of the fascists running this country.
Go thru airport scanners and receive low dose cumulative radiation.
Have your junk touched by TSA personnel.
Get waterboarded.
It's all about choices, isn't it?
I certainly wish this poster would quit using George Washington as the pseudonym. Years from now, there is a slight possibility school kids will find these posts and think that one of the founders of our country and our first president was an idiot.
Stranger things have happened, hence, President Obama.
Torture Is Not a Partisan Issue . . . George Washington - Who Was Neither a Democrat or Republican - Forbid All Torture
1620: PLYMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS. As everyone knows, the first European colonists in what would one day become the United States arrived on the Mayflower, having left England to find religious freedom in a brave new land….…the glorious opening scene of that Hollywood blockbuster, “America!”.
Many Americans proudly trace their phony ancestry back to these lovers of freedom, these brave pioneers, these champions of religious freedom.
Unfortunately, like almost everything amerKlans have been systematically programmed to believe about the United States and its history, it just ain't true. The Mayflower was far from being the first ship to carry European colonists to what would become the U.S. Prior to the Mayflower's voyage, there were numerous attempts to colonize North America by Europeans, including at least nine by the British, five of which were successful, and many others by the French and Spanish and possibly some by Scandinavians.
None of the groups of British emigrants, including the Puritans, left Britain exclusively in order to escape religious persecution. They traveled to North America seeking economic advantage. The voyage of the Mayflower was, in fact, financed by a group of London investors who were to receive sixty percent of the profits of the colony in its first six years.
The Puritans who stepped ashore from the Mayflower instigated a reign of oppression and terror in the New World which lasted for more than a century.
Attendance at the only approved church twice every Sunday was mandatory. Those who refused were jailed. Those wearing clothing not approved by the zealots were jailed. Those labeled as atheists had holes burned through their tongues with red hot irons by these lovers of Christ.
In order to enforce universal obedience to what they claimed to be "God’s word", these much-lauded seekers after religious freedom also branded "offenders" with red hot irons, hanging many and burning others alive at the stake.
Quakers were hung for the crime of being Quakers.
Women accused of adultery were branded. Those called witches by the Puritans were burned alive at the stake in large numbers.
Far from seeking religious freedom, the Puritans' goal was to create an open prison in which only their own narrow, vicious zealotry and religious delusions were permitted and in which their domination of society would be maintained through intimidation, terror, torture and murder.
1650-51: MASSACHUSETTS. These fabulous freedom-loving Puritans take for themselves the honor of performing the first of many book burnings in what will become the United States. Businessman and magistrate William Pynchon goes a bit crazy and writes a theological treatise on some absurd point of Puritan doctrine. In doing so, he comes into conflict with the Puritan mullahs. The book is duly confiscated by the Puritan religious police, condemned by the General Court and burned by the public executioner in the Boston marketplace. A day of 'fasting and humiliation' is proclaimed by the mullahs, so that the population may consider how Satan had prevailed among them. Sure do love all that religious freedom.
1757: VIRGINIA. That impeccably honest lover of democracy, Slave Torturer/Owner, George Washington, begins a great American tradition, buying elections and bold face Lying and Native Genocide. Running for election to the Virginia House of Burgesses, Washington buys off every one of the 390 electors in his district with one and a half quarts of liquor.
DP, you left out the best part of the witches thingie: a woman accused of being a witch was sat upon a "dunking chair". She was dunked repeatedly. If she drowned, she was innocent. If she lived, she was a witch and was dealt with.
Was this original colonial "waterboarding"? Low tech as it is, it achieved its purpose. This was the first "Catch-22" that struck me.
- Ned
on second thought.....let him keep his pseudonym..it's befitting.
I certainly wish this poster would quit using George Washington as the pseudonym. Years from now, there is a slight possibility school kids will find these posts and think that one of the founders of our country and our first president was an idiot.
Stranger things have happened, hence, President Obama.
Soooo many conspiracies, George. And not one of them compatible. Just twelve hours ago you you were frothing at the mouth right here on Zero Hedge about how it clearly wasn't OBL the SEALS killed, because, hey, his beard was darker and he looked better fed than at Tora Bora. Conclusion: An intellegence service planted body double!1! The CIAs!!!!! Today? Water boarding KSM delayed finding Bin Laden for years. Hint: How about writing this stuff down on a little pad by your computer. It might help you keep track of all the conspiracies you are spinning.
Feel free to junk me for disagreeing with the author, "George Washington." It doesn't change the fact that the AUTHOR doesn't even agree with the author. He posts seemingly without any concept that he is taking a position which is 180 degrees the opposite of the one he forcefully argued just 12 hours ago on this site. I got junked for mocking that one, too, BTW.
nyet, tovarish, GW has a common theme, although the wind twirls his weather vane when it comes to the details and the timing. He's taking his clues for details on the WH press releases.
Like "sleep deprivation" is TORTURE. And hanging around in uncomfortable positions long enough for them to become, well, uncomfortable is TORTURE.
See the first half of: http://www.historyinfilm.com/jacket/index.htm for instance.
- Ned
Cheney and Rumsfeld were never very interested in capturing Bin Laden. Their focus was elsewhere. So their revisionist statements about the usefulness of torture for intelligence purposes must be taken with a grain of salt. In reality, their torture program was crafted to justify the Iraq war, not to catch Bin Laden (and see this.)
Thank God you see the light. By keeping Bin Laden alive they had an excuse for the war in Iraq. They needed a bogeyman.
What amazes me is that after all these years so many people are still ignorant of this. The stupidity of the (some) Amerikan sheeple never ceases to amaze me.
Easy way for bin Laden and KSM to avoid all interaction with the United States: Do not attack the United States. As an added bonus this would have avoided all the muslim hurt fees-fees when we went after them on their precious umma. So spare me the endless hand-wringing angst because these murderous scum were killed and/or made all soggy. And stop pretending Cheney or anyone else is "evading prosecution" for anything. It's just silly.
Unfortunately there is a shitload of people sitting on oil in the middle east therefore making it 100% impossible to avoid all interaction with the United States. I wonder what it must have been like on the recieving end of the illegal US invasion..operation OIL. (oops can someboday change the name of that please?) Why is Bush not on this war crimes list?? If the perpetual war machine wasn't so fucking blood & oil hungry there would be a lot less pissed off people claiming jihad against Los Estados Unidos. Somebody please educate me, what has the world gained from these war crimes, torture and murder? Killing Bin Laden doesn't change anything, it keeps things exactly the same.
1) Somehow the people in every other part of the planet manage not to become bitterly enraged because the people of the United States purchase their primary export at the full market price. What's different about the Middle East? Hmmm...
2) The Iraq war had 17 separate UN resolutions backing it, plus votes in Congress after lengthy debate. That is, it was legal. Unlike the the unprovoked US attack on Serbia, and what whatever the eff is happening with Libya.
3) What do you think Saddam Hussein would be up to right now if the US and the coalition hadn't killed him? Perhaps you think he'd be painting pictures of kittens and rainbows, but I think he'd be killing people and working on getting nuclear weapons. Because that's how he filled his time before.
It does do one thing, it keeps him fairly quiet
I hear he b hangin' 'round your locker. Any updates? - Ned
yeah, apparently he DOES eat meat
It's OK to punch a hole in heir heads with lead, but don't splash any water on them.
+111111
you tell em Lone
But of course! If you're dipped in water you can later tell how horrible it was. If you get a nice double tap and dipped into the briny sea with no pics made available the narative on your evilness can stand unchecked and the masses will cheer and celebrate in the streets.
You get what you deserve.
George doesn't understand the latin about no "ex post facto" laws. And Wilkerson? Powell-Armitage mouthpiece complicit in Valerie Plame "outing" fwiw.
George, no mention about outright assassination of OBL and the attempt to assasinate AMCIT cleric hanging around in Yemen. No mention about outright assasination attempts v. Q'addafi (resulting in civilian deaths). Truly a legal travesty as opposed to the nonsensense of Miranda rights on the battlefield.
And the "If only they were properly interrogated..." So happy we're doing it so smarter.
- Ned
Your use of language is vague and suspicious. If you are happy we are doing it smarter then you are a real American, but I am still not sure yet. You sound like a leftist liberal smartypants and those are always bad for America, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt for now.
36k-ya gotta warn me! Coffee sprayed over keyboard and screen too.
I'll leave the smartypants to your discerning judgement ;-)
But what part of the post is vague? You don't know that Wilkerson is a very (very) close Powell follower? That Powell and Rummy don't quite see eye-to-eye? That Novak identified Armitage as the individual who told him about Plame? That Armitage didn't have the stones to come forward and therefore let Libby be convicted? GW ignores these as well.
The post is attempting a legalistic argument after the fact, with different regulations (not laws) and (in usual GW fashion) ignoring the (il)legality of assassination. The counter to stated policy that we don't target foreign national leaders (Ford, primarily to avoid being targeted ourselves). And attempting to assassinate an American Citizen? Fifth Amendment "due process" clause comes to mind. But, of course, GW has them convicted in his self-written headline. Doesn't even have the excuse that someone else wrote the headline. So Due Process goes out the window all over.
I'll posit that we'll hear about these things from GW in due course:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQFEY9RIRJA
- Ned
{dang, how do I live up to smartypants?}
Then of course there is the Sept.14 2001 Joint Resolution (both House & Senate) saying to use all necessary and appropriate force.
But hell...lets not let the record get in the way of complicity and conspiracy.
I suppose next we start investigations and/or trials on every past and present member of the legislative branch for not defining necessary and appropriate?
Popcorn please ;-)
Hey nmewn, can you give me some coaching on the "smartypants" thing? I'm feeling inadequate, and there is nothing more pathetic than an inadequate little piglet :-(
I probably did react badly to the "doing things smarter" meme, since my senior senator has been droning on about that for years to no discernable effect.
- Ned
{you able to bend over enough to scoop up a grounder yet? or you as stiff as I am?}
"Hey nmewn, can you give me some coaching on the "smartypants" thing?"
Ain't gotta clue, give it a day or two it will change, he's the latest troll, he just doesn't know what a vicious bastard you are...LOL!
"you able to bend over enough to scoop up a grounder yet or you as stiff as I am?"
Still stiffer than a 16yr. old on prom night, but its better, be back to work soon.
The diladids were great, almost better than...but they inhibited movements of all kinds ;-)
I do have to commend you. You didn't torture the truth on this one. I hope you have permanently give up torture also.
Wishing, waiting for justice in Amerika circa 2011 is a waste of time.
Get over it.
Can I waterboard Sean Hannity? Please!
Pretty sure we are in open season now with the war on terror and Patriot act.
You could go with the citizen "he is a domestic terrorist" (we are at war with terrorism and really, everyone falls into the category now days) to citizen arrest to citizen "rendition" (head to Canada, Mexico or an Indian reservation?) there you may conduct your enhanced interrogations. After 5-7 years release a report that high value information was gotten..
(I am not a lawyer and this does not constitue a legal opinion. You never know who is watching anymore....I mean other than your own government)
Most people rarely get what they have coming to them. For you that is probably a good thing. You should be more respectful of your betters.
We are missing a great opportunity to prove enhanced interrogation works. There is a whole compound of widows and children that we can waterboard, strip naked and humiliate. I assure you that we will find the illegal Spongebob toy and the secret spice recipe for Osamas favorite mutton dish. Just turn them over to the CIA and they will start churning out high value information over the next 5-7 years. The ability of the US to do this is a God given right, therefore what ever is done will be blessed by Him.
Finally someone who understands America's uniqueness in the world. I don't think I could have said it any better.
So who can take these guys to a war crime tribunal?
Ed Shultz clip on ZH..
Isn't that something like dog crap in a steak sandwich?
No one because America rules the world. Love it or leave it. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
Bin dazed and confused for so long it's not true.
wanted a patriot, never bargained for you.
Lots of people talk and few of them know,
soul of our leaders were created below.
They'll hurt and abuse tellin' all of their lies.
Run around sweet Ronnie, Lord how they hypnotize.
Sweet little Ronnie, I don't know where you've been.
Gonna serve you again baby, here I come again.
"Love it or leave it", said by those 'patriotic' Americans supporting the war in Vietnam. A more fitting remembrance of 58,000 dead U.S. troops is "Fight the rich [international bankers] not their wars".
From the belly of the beast (MSNBC) May 3, 2011
CIA chief: Waterboarding aided bin Laden raidhttp://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42880435/ns/today-today_news/t/cia-chief-w...
So George, in addition to Bush and Rummy, would you include members of the current administration?
Is Nobel Peace Prize Winner Obama More Brutal than Bush?
Obama is more brutal, yes. He's also more dangerous. He is now claiming the right that kings didn't even have, killing his own citizens at anytime or place he chooses, no questions asked.
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/5/9/us_assassination_campaign_continues...
He's also a much more effective power pimp than either Clinton or Bush. He's has the fascist corporatists, banksters all around him in the government, and yet can still convince the sheeple that he's on their side. A very slick, charming but lethal abuser of power. He can even convince people of color that he's on their side without saying a word, regardless of how many of them he has murdered.
Childish article... take off the rose colored glasses.
It seems that we agree that Holder should be waterboarded. Glad to see a real American on this site.