Torture Works

[Kalam]

It has been proven via the obama declassified CIA memo that gave the details of it.

Which, as I said, is based on invalid testimony extracted through torture.

The group that you relates too.

Engrish.

 

[kyzr]

1. You gave enough of a **** to invade Iraq twice.

2. Who said anything about oppression in the Middle East?

3. I don't support any monarchy.

Saddam invaded Kuwait. We threw him out......first "invasion". You should be thanking us for playing world cop. Tell me you supported Saddam's military invasion and his warped regime?!
The second time was to remove Saddam before he got NY worse. We installed a democracy, we didn't enslave anyone. The "Butcher of Baghdad" deserved his nickname.

2. Tell me that AQ is worried about "oppression" outside the ME?! This makes no sense. Why is there terrorism? You still haven't enlightened us as to why AQ is perpetrating terrorism against the US.

and that we, who simply buy oil at market rates, are "oppressing" anyone. Care to explain that warped logic.

One typically punctuates a question with a question mark.[/QUOTE]

Are you Jewish. Only Jews answer a question with a question.

 

[Kalam]

Saddam invaded Kuwait. We threw him out......first "invasion".

So much for "not giving a **** about what sand ******* do to each other."

You should be thanking us for playing world cop.

And for slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, I suppose. No, I think I'll withhold my thanks.

Tell me you supported Saddam's military invasion and his warped regime?!

Are you suggesting that I have to support either America's efforts in the ME or Saddam's? I'd prefer that Westerners keep out of Islamic affairs. Saddam could have been handled without unwanted interference.

The second time was to remove Saddam before he got NY worse.

OK, that's pretty funny, but I'm not in the mood for joking around. Let's keep this serious.

We installed a democracy,

Come on, I'm serious.

We don't want oppressive regimes replaced with oppressive puppet regimes. Kindly leave the regime change to us.

2. Tell me that AQ is worried about "oppression" outside the ME?! This makes no sense. Why is there terrorism?

I didn't say anything about al-Qa'idah. I made a reference to Amir Khattab.

You still haven't enlightened us as to why AQ is perpetrating terrorism against the US.

Al-Qa'idah has explained that its actions were primarily in response to America's support of Israel and America's presence in the Arabian peninsula.

Are you Jewish. Only Jews answer a question with a question.

My answer wasn't a question.

 

[Zona]

Torture seemed to have worked pretty well against the christmas day bomber.

 

[sboyle24]

Actually, Bush is currently torturing the US citizens with his economic collapse. He's hoping to find out who took his dog, fluffy.

 

[kyzr]

Saddam invaded Kuwait. We threw him out......first "invasion".

So much for "not giving a **** about what sand ******* do to each other."

Stop dodging. Did you support Saddam's invasion of Kuwait or not? Besides, it wasn't the SNs it was their oil, if there was no oil in Kuwait do you think we'd look at it any differently than the Tutsis and Hutus butchering each other??

You should be thanking us for playing world cop.

for slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, I suppose. No, I think I'll withhold my thanks.

Thats a lie. Saddam killed over 300,000 Iraqis during his regime. The US avoided killing civilians. It was the Iraqis who put women and kids in front of them during battle.

you suggesting that I have to support either America's efforts in the ME or Saddam's? I'd prefer that Westerners keep out of Islamic affairs. Saddam could have been handled without unwanted interference.

Thats a lie. His regime was entrenched, now its gone, good riddance. "Islamic affairs"??? can't seem to stop a few warped terrorists, let alone a million man military, the 4th largest at the start of the war. Its a bit smaller now.

, that's pretty funny, but I'm not in the mood for joking around. Let's keep this serious. Come on, I'm serious.

Saddam had too much power, and was too vicious to keep around, so his head popped off. Whats the problem?

don't want oppressive regimes replaced with oppressive puppet regimes. Kindly leave the regime change to us.

"us" being Sunnis or Shiites? yeah, okay, I'm sure that will work.

didn't say anything about al-Qa'idah. I made a reference to Amir Khattab.

We were discussing terrorism and the basis for it, including US "oppression" in the ME. You seem to have backed-off of that line to the old standby..."US support for Israel". You two "tribes" deserve each other. I'm sure God will keep you both at each other's throats just for the entertainment value.

-Qa'idah has explained that its actions were primarily in response to America's support of Israel and America's presence in the Arabian peninsula.

Maybe they should talk to their kings. I thought we were invited?! I don't recall invading Arabia?!

 

[Coyote]

It's hard to follow the gibberish of the OP.

This is based on an Obama declassified CIA memo, from the CIA to the justice department.

This is the CIA criteria for waterboarding, which was done only 3 times.

Not really true since the policy of extraordinary rendition sent suspects to countries where waterboarding and other "enhanced interrorgation methods" were practiced.

 

[Coyote]

No, because Al Qaida is the enemy. The group that you relates too. Things that they don't like are usually good.

Kalam relates to Al Qaida? Got anything to support that claim?

 

[QUENTIN]

Prove that it was done on more than 3 people, and prove how many times it was done to each of the arch terrorists?

The benefit of the 3 arch terrorists being waterboarded was a major terrorist attack was thwarted.

Let me make it clear.

On one hand, 3 arch terrorists got wet

On the other hand, a major 911 terrorist attack was thwarted.

It's really quite simple and a no brainer.

Neither I nor you can prove how many times it was done or to how many people.

However according to the source you keep citing, the CIA and their declassified memos, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 186 times and Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times. That would put the use of waterboarding a couple hundred times over your claim of three.

You must have missed the first post in this thread, the point of this thread, that proves your lie. The Library Tower bombing was thwarted over a year before KSM or anyone else was ever captured, let alone tortured. It was already thwarted, it's the height of inanity to claim waterboarding KSM led to thwarting the attack when it's on the record that it was already thwarted. What next? Sleep deprivation at Gitmo ended the Cuban Missile Crisis?

You're making false assertions to prop up your argument because no factual assertions could ever support it, because torture doesn't work.

 

[CMike]

Prove that it was done on more than 3 people, and prove how many times it was done to each of the arch terrorists?

The benefit of the 3 arch terrorists being waterboarded was a major terrorist attack was thwarted.

Let me make it clear.

On one hand, 3 arch terrorists got wet

On the other hand, a major 911 terrorist attack was thwarted.

It's really quite simple and a no brainer.

Neither I nor you can prove how many times it was done or to how many people.

However according to the source you keep citing, the CIA and their declassified memos, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 186 times and Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times. That would put the use of waterboarding a couple hundred times over your claim of three.

You must have missed the first post in this thread, the point of this thread, that proves your lie. The Library Tower bombing was thwarted over a year before KSM or anyone else was ever captured, let alone tortured. It was already thwarted, it's the height of inanity to claim waterboarding KSM led to thwarting the attack when it's on the record that it was already thwarted. What next? Sleep deprivation at Gitmo ended the Cuban Missile Crisis?

You're making false assertions to prop up your argument because no factual assertions could ever support it, because torture doesn't work.

The CIA memo never said the number of times on one person. How do you know what it is?

Your editorial had zero backup. It was the opinion of author with no internal documenation.

How about proving that it was already thwarted other than by opinions of left wingers?

Once again, according to the Obama declassified CIA memo to the justice department, it was done just to 3 arch terrorists who were uncooperative in lighter methods.

Waterboarding caused them to give information that led to the thwarting of a 911 attack of a plane into a Los Angeles building.

I can document everything that I said here.

Can you document anything that you say? So far you haven't.

 

[CMike]

No, because Al Qaida is the enemy. The group that you relates too. Things that they don't like are usually good.

Kalam relates to Al Qaida? Got anything to support that claim?

Yeah, because he defend terrorism, and Al Qaida is a terrorist group.

 

[Vanquish]

So what some of you are saying is, "the end justifies the means, especially when the other guys aren't following the rules."

Shame on you. Your use of the deaths of thousands of Americans to satisfy your blood lust not only cheapens their suffering, but hurts our country.

We shouldn't break the rules because we can get away with breaking them. We shouldn't break the rules because other people are breaking them. We follow the rules (i.e. our internal conscience) because it's the right thing to do. I'm all for self-defense and wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger if a home invader had a gun on me or my family...but once you have them in custody, you don't torture people. That's not what AMERICA does. End of f@#$%@g story.

 

[CMike]

So what some of you are saying is, "the end justifies the means, especially when the other guys aren't following the rules."

Shame on you. Your use of the deaths of thousands of Americans to satisfy your blood lust not only cheapens their suffering, but hurts our country.

We shouldn't break the rules because we can get away with breaking them. We shouldn't break the rules because other people are breaking them. We follow the rules (i.e. our internal conscience) because it's the right thing to do. I'm all for self-defense and wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger if a home invader had a gun on me or my family...but once you have them in custody, you don't torture people. That's not what AMERICA does. End of f@#$%@g story.

Good grief.

We didn't break the rules.

Okay terrorist supporters please try and follow.

1) 911 just occurred

2) 3 arch terrorists were caught

3) When asked about futher terrorist attacks they simply responsed ominiously "soon, you will know"

4) The guidelines for when to apply waterboarding were very strict, and the 3 arch terrorists met those guidelines

5) The information extracted them stopped a 911 like attack of a plane crashing into a Los Angeles building

This is all documented in the Obama declassified CIA memo.

The CIA operatives that did this were heros

The arch terrorists were taunting them about what the terrorist attack would be. The CIA also had to assume it could be biological or nuclear. They didn't know. They had to get tht information.

Because they did what they did thousands of american civilian lives were saved.

Also waterboarding is done routinely on CIA people as part of their training, so apparently it's not quite that bad.

 

[Coyote]

No, because Al Qaida is the enemy. The group that you relates too. Things that they don't like are usually good.

Kalam relates to Al Qaida? Got anything to support that claim?

Yeah, because he defend terrorism, and Al Qaida is a terrorist group.

Where did he defend terrorism....and, particularly Al Qaida since that is what we are talking about? Terrorism is to vague a concept to defend or condemn - who and what a terrorist is depends on the powers that be in the situation. Are they Chechnyan freedom fighters against the Soviets occupation or are they terrorists?

When it comes to Al Qaida however, there is greater clarity and in this thread I find this:

Mike: There is no justifiable reason for intentionally targeting civilians to spread terror.Kalam: That's why I dislike terrorist organizations like al-Qa'idah and the IDF.

Doesn't sound like he's relating to al-Qa'idah much.
__________________

 

[CMike]

Kalam relates to Al Qaida? Got anything to support that claim?

Yeah, because he defend terrorism, and Al Qaida is a terrorist group.

Where did he defend terrorism....and, particularly Al Qaida since that is what we are talking about? Terrorism is to vague a concept to defend or condemn - who and what a terrorist is depends on the powers that be in the situation. Are they Chechnyan freedom fighters against the Soviets occupation or are they terrorists?

When it comes to Al Qaida however, there is greater clarity and in this thread I find this:

Mike: There is no justifiable reason for intentionally targeting civilians to spread terror.Kalam: That's why I dislike terrorist organizations like al-Qa'idah and the IDF.

Doesn't sound like he's relating to al-Qa'idah much.
__________________

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2011482-post47.html

 

[QUENTIN]

The CIA memo never said the number of times on one person. How do you know what it is?

Your editorial had zero backup. It was the opinion of author with no internal documenation.

How about proving that it was already thwarted other than by opinions of left wingers?

Once again, according to the Obama declassified CIA memo to the justice department, it was done just to 3 arch terrorists who were uncooperative in lighter methods.

Waterboarding caused them to give information that led to the thwarting of a 911 attack of a plane into a Los Angeles building.

I can document everything that I said here.

Can you document anything that you say? So far you haven't.

You didn't click the link, did you? The one provided at the very top of the first post to the article? It's got documentation and links to sources for every single assertion of fact. Here it is again:

Why al-Qaida's plot to bomb L.A.'s Library Tower didn't warrant torture. - By Timothy Noah - Slate Magazine

From the links provided in that article, which link to the White House archives:

Press Briefing on the West Coast Terrorist Plot by Frances Fragos Townsend, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism

The cell leader [Hambali] was arrested in February of 2002, and as we begin -- at that point, the other members of the cell believed that the West Coast plot has been canceled, was not going forward. You'll recall that KSM was then arrested in April of 2003 -- or was it March -- I'm sorry, March of 2003.

Again, the plot was thwarted in February, 2002 with the arrest of the cell leader. KSM wasn't arrested until over a year later. Since time progresses forward linearly, it's impossible to claim something that happened over a year after the plot was thwarted is responsible for thwarting it.

Another link that is provided in that article that you erroneously claim had no internal documentation and was just the author's opinion, also from the White House's site:

Fact Sheet: Keeping America Safe From Attack

In 2002, we broke up a plot by KSM to hijack an airplane and fly it into the tallest building on the West Coast. During a hearing at Guantanamo Bay two months ago, KSM stated that the intended target was the Library Tower in Los Angeles.

The plot was broken up in February, 2002, KSM was captured March, 2003. This is according to all the documentation of both produced by the government.

That KSM talked about the plot after being interrogated or tortured is likely true, but that's all that's in those CIA memos. What the author of the memos apparently didn't know is that the plot was already known about, its cell leader captured, and the attack stopped over a year before anyone so much as tickled Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

So, I've not only provided the evidence that proves that the attack was thwarted in 2002 as I claim without torture and before KSM was even captured, but in the process demonstrated that what you keep asserting that waterboarding forced them to give up the information that thwarted the attack is absolute bullshit. We already knew of the attack and already stopped it, more than a year before.

As for how many times we waterboarded the three suspects whose waterboarding was authorized by the Executive and later made public:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html

C.I.A. interrogators used waterboarding, the near-drowning technique that top Obama administration officials have described as illegal torture, 266 times on two key prisoners from Al Qaeda, far more than had been previously reported.

The C.I.A. officers used waterboarding at least 83 times in August 2002 against Abu Zubaydah, according to a 2005 Justice Department legal memorandum. Abu Zubaydah has been described as a Qaeda operative.

A former C.I.A. officer, John Kiriakou, told ABC News and other news media organizations in 2007 that Abu Zubaydah had undergone waterboarding for only 35 seconds before agreeing to tell everything he knew.

The 2005 memo also says that the C.I.A. used waterboarding 183 times in March 2003 against Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described planner of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

How Waterboarding Got Out of Control - TIME

One of the OLC memos, dated May 30, 2005, quotes an internal investigation by the CIA inspector general (IG), revealing that two detainees were waterboarded on scores of occasions in the space of a single month. In August 2002, Abu Zubaydah, the first prisoner put through the CIA's overseas detention program, was waterboarded at least 83 times; and in March 2003, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the confessed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, was waterboarded 183 times.

Here's the OLC memo itself: http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X13...et/o10/clients/aclu/olc_05302005_bradbury.pdf

And exactly what it says on the subject:

The CIA used the waterboard "at least 83 times during August 2002" in the interrogation of Zubaydah. IG Report at 90, and 183 times during March 2003 in the interrogation of KSM, see id. at 91.

Notice that it cites the CIA Inspector General's Report (IG Report) which derived its numbers from actually viewing the videotapes of the interrogations, doesn't get much more backed up than that.

Now will you stop pretending that waterboarding was used three times and that it prevented the Library Tower attack? If not, frankly, you're intellectually dishonest. It couldn't be more plain and clear and proven.

 

[CMike]

The CIA memo never said the number of times on one person. How do you know what it is?

Your editorial had zero backup. It was the opinion of author with no internal documenation.

How about proving that it was already thwarted other than by opinions of left wingers?

Once again, according to the Obama declassified CIA memo to the justice department, it was done just to 3 arch terrorists who were uncooperative in lighter methods.

Waterboarding caused them to give information that led to the thwarting of a 911 attack of a plane into a Los Angeles building.

I can document everything that I said here.

Can you document anything that you say? So far you haven't.

You didn't click the link, did you? The one provided at the very top of the first post to the article? It's got documentation and links to sources for every single assertion of fact. Here it is again:

Why al-Qaida's plot to bomb L.A.'s Library Tower didn't warrant torture. - By Timothy Noah - Slate Magazine

From the links provided in that article, which link to the White House archives:

Press Briefing on the West Coast Terrorist Plot by Frances Fragos Townsend, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism

The cell leader [Hambali] was arrested in February of 2002, and as we begin -- at that point, the other members of the cell believed that the West Coast plot has been canceled, was not going forward. You'll recall that KSM was then arrested in April of 2003 -- or was it March -- I'm sorry, March of 2003.

Again, the plot was thwarted in February, 2002 with the arrest of the cell leader. KSM wasn't arrested until over a year later. Since time progresses forward linearly, it's impossible to claim something that happened over a year after the plot was thwarted is responsible for thwarting it.

Another link that is provided in that article that you erroneously claim had no internal documentation and was just the author's opinion, also from the White House's site:

Fact Sheet: Keeping America Safe From Attack



The plot was broken up in February, 2002, KSM was captured March, 2003. This is according to all the documentation of both produced by the government.

That KSM talked about the plot after being interrogated or tortured is likely true, but that's all that's in those CIA memos. What the author of the memos apparently didn't know is that the plot was already known about, its cell leader captured, and the attack stopped over a year before anyone so much as tickled Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

So, I've not only provided the evidence that proves that the attack was thwarted in 2002 as I claim without torture and before KSM was even captured, but in the process demonstrated that what you keep asserting that waterboarding forced them to give up the information that thwarted the attack is absolute bullshit. We already knew of the attack and already stopped it, more than a year before.

As for how many times we waterboarded the three suspects whose waterboarding was authorized by the Executive and later made public:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html




How Waterboarding Got Out of Control - TIME

One of the OLC memos, dated May 30, 2005, quotes an internal investigation by the CIA inspector general (IG), revealing that two detainees were waterboarded on scores of occasions in the space of a single month. In August 2002, Abu Zubaydah, the first prisoner put through the CIA's overseas detention program, was waterboarded at least 83 times; and in March 2003, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the confessed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, was waterboarded 183 times.

Here's the OLC memo itself: http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X13...et/o10/clients/aclu/olc_05302005_bradbury.pdf

And exactly what it says on the subject:

The CIA used the waterboard "at least 83 times during August 2002" in the interrogation of Zubaydah. IG Report at 90, and 183 times during March 2003 in the interrogation of KSM, see id. at 91.

Notice that it cites the CIA Inspector General's Report (IG Report) which derived its numbers from actually viewing the videotapes of the interrogations, doesn't get much more backed up than that.

Now will you stop pretending that waterboarding was used three times and that it prevented the Library Tower attack? If not, frankly, you're intellectually dishonest. It couldn't be more plain and clear and proven.

Thank you.

1) I could care less about the anonymous sources and the other drivel from the NYT, but I do care a lot about what the CIA memo says. I posted this memo as well. This is the actual documentation.

2) I don't see the actual number in the CIA memo, other than it was done twice to one of the people.

3) I would like to extend my remarks. Not only was a 911 like plot to crash a plane into a Los Angeles building was thwarted.

ADDITIONALLY, another plot to explode a "dirty bomb" in Washington D.C. was also thwarted as a direct result of the waterboarding of the 3 arch terrorists.

Also it led to over 6000 intelligence reports, and over half of the information on Al Qaida came as a result as well.


From the memo.


The CIA l!;slXl the waterboard extensively in the interrogations ofKSM and Zubaydah,
but did so only after it became clear that standard interrogation techniques Were not working.
Interrogators used enhanced techniques in the intertogation ofal-Nashiri with notable results as
as the first day. See 1G Report at 35-36. Twelve days into the interrogation, the CIA
subjected a!~Nashiri to one session ofthewaterboard during which water was applied two times,
See id, at 36.3

http://luxmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o10/clients/aclu/olc_05302005_bradbury.pdf

Pages 8-11


informed us that the interrogation ofKSM.....-,Ql1ce enhanced techniques were employed-led to
the discovery ofaKSM piot, the "Second Wave," "to use East Asian operatives fo crash Ii
hijacked airliner into" a building in Los Angeles. Fjfectiveness Memo at 3, You have informed
us that infoffiJation obtained from KSM als-o led to the capture ofRidl.ltil1 bin Isomudditl, better
known as Hambali, and the discovery of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member lemaah Islatniyah ceil
tasked with executing the "Second Wave," See/d. at 3-4; CIA Directorate ofJIltellige.l1ce, AlQa
'ida's Ties to Other Key Terror Grotlps: Terrorists Links in a Chain 2 (Aug. 28, 2003), More
specifically, we understand that KSM admitted that he bad . " a
of money to an a1 Qaeda associate. See Fax fro
C1 Counterterrorist Center, Briefing Notes on the e Reporting at 1
15,2005) ("Briefing Notes'). Khan subsequently identified the associate (Zubair), who
was thcncaptured. Zubair, in turn, provided jnformation that led to the arrest ofHambali. See
id The infor.n1ation acquired from these captures allm'lcd CIA interrogi.1Jors to pose more
specific questions to KSlvf, which led the CIA Hambali's brother, al-HadL Using information
obtained from multiple sources, al-Hadi "vas captured, and he subsequently identified the Guraba
cd!. See id at 1 With the aid oftbis additional information, interrogations ofHambali
confirmed much of what was learned from KSM6

Interrogations of Zubaydah-again, once enhanced techniques were empfoyedfurnished
detailed information regarding a( Qaeda's "organizational structure, key operatives,
and modus operandi" and identified KSM as the mastermind of tile September 11 attacks. See
Briefing Notes at 4. You have informed us that Zubaydah also "provided significant infonnation
on two operatives, [including] Jose Padilla-[,] who p.Iaruied to build and detonate a 'dirty bombl
in Wasbington DC area." Effectiveness Memo at 4. Zubaydah and KSM have also supplied
important information about al-Zarqawi and hisnetv.'ork dsmith.m,
Assistant Attorney Ge '
General Counsel, CI

The actual Inspector General CIA memo.

http://luxmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o10/clients/aclu/olc_05302005_bradbury.pdf

 

[CMike]

If you read the text even after Hamali's arrest they were still investigating the planned West Coast attack.

So what's your point?

Press Briefing on the West Coast Terrorist Plot by Frances Fragos Townsend, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism

The President today highlighted one example of a disrupted plot, in which al Qaeda intended to use a hijacked airliner to attack the West Coast of the United States. I should say, he used the phrase "Liberty Tower," that should have been "Library Tower." This plot is an instructive and chilling reminder of al Qaeda's global connections and their intention to attack our homeland. More importantly, it makes clear to the American public that there's an ongoing and effective international cooperation that is working to undermine al Qaeda's attempts to attack us. It also reminds us that we must continue to gather as much information as possible and from all sources, especially detainee debriefings and intelligence operations, to reveal the evolving terrorist networks and plots.

In telling the American public about this foiled plot, we have to be sensitive to the need to protect sources and methods since we are dealing with the ongoing threat from al Qaeda -- and you'll appreciate that's why the President doesn't name the countries, the particular allies or the particulars of the sources and methods to glean the operational leads that led to the disruption of the plot.

As you'll all recall, the September 11th attack was conceived as a broader plot than what was actually executed. It was meant to include -- it was intended, in its initial, formative stages, to include by the East Coast and the West Coast plots. It was bin Laden who decided that it should just focus on the East Coast, and that the West Coast should be held in abeyance until there was a -- as a follow-on attack. It's our understanding now that it was too difficult to get enough operatives for both the East and West Coast plots at the same time.

Khalid Shaykh Muhammad was the individual who led this effort. He initiated the planning for the West Coast plot after September 11th, in October of 2001. KSM, working with Hambali in Asia, recruited the members of the cell. There was a total of four members of the cell. When they -- KSM, himself, trained the leader of the cell in late 2001 or early 2002 in the shoe bomb technique. You all will recall that there was the arrest of the shoe bomber, Richard Reid, in December of 2001, and he was instructing the cell leader on the use of the same technique.

After the cell -- the additional members of the cell, in addition to the leader, were recruited, they all went -- the cell leader and the three other operatives went to Afghanistan where they met with bin Laden and swore biat -- that is an oath of loyalty to him -- before returning to Asia, where they continued to work under Hambali.

The cell leader was arrested in February of 2002, and as we begin -- at that point, the other members of the cell believed that the West Coast plot has been canceled, was not going forward. You'll recall that KSM was then arrested in April of 2003 -- or was it March -- I'm sorry, March of 2003.

The ongoing cooperation between -- and information exchange between all of the international partners of the various countries involved in this operation permitted us to continue to get more leads, even after Hambali's arrest. And it permitted us -- even after KSM's arrest, I'm sorry. And that allowed us to follow the path of Hambali, who was ultimately arrested in August of 2003.

 

[CMike]

I want to add I don't know what LA building was going to be hit with a plane. The CIA memo doesn't say.

However not only did waterboarding 3 arch terrorists

1) Thwart a plane crashing into a LA building

but it also

2) Stopped a dirty bomb from being built and exploding in Washington, D.C.

Thanks for the info.

 

[Vanquish]

So what some of you are saying is, "the end justifies the means, especially when the other guys aren't following the rules."

Shame on you. Your use of the deaths of thousands of Americans to satisfy your blood lust not only cheapens their suffering, but hurts our country.

We shouldn't break the rules because we can get away with breaking them. We shouldn't break the rules because other people are breaking them. We follow the rules (i.e. our internal conscience) because it's the right thing to do. I'm all for self-defense and wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger if a home invader had a gun on me or my family...but once you have them in custody, you don't torture people. That's not what AMERICA does. End of f@#$%@g story.

Good grief.

We didn't break the rules.

Okay terrorist supporters please try and follow.

1) 911 just occurred

2) 3 arch terrorists were caught

3) When asked about futher terrorist attacks they simply responsed ominiously "soon, you will know"

4) The guidelines for when to apply waterboarding were very strict, and the 3 arch terrorists met those guidelines

5) The information extracted them stopped a 911 like attack of a plane crashing into a Los Angeles building

This is all documented in the Obama declassified CIA memo.

The CIA operatives that did this were heros

The arch terrorists were taunting them about what the terrorist attack would be. The CIA also had to assume it could be biological or nuclear. They didn't know. They had to get tht information.

Because they did what they did thousands of american civilian lives were saved.

Also waterboarding is done routinely on CIA people as part of their training, so apparently it's not quite that bad.

Don't call me a terrorist supporter you c*@k-juggling thunder@unt. Flippant use of that moniker makes anything you say circumspect at best and complete ASS-HATTERY at worst.

I was referring to the prevalent sentiment in this thread and on this board that any form of torture seems to be ok because "them r bad. we r gud."

Get your head out of your ass on waterboarding, btw. Your shock jock Mancow seems to change his tune when it was done to him. That liberal bastion of all things Soviet the Red Cross calls it torture. And the possible results can be brain damage, dry drowning, and broken bones. Let me help your retarded ass out - I said possible. There's where you can try to attack my argument. I said "try" because even that's not a real weakness in the logic. If American interrogators are doing ANYTHING with consequences like this, we're ******* criminals.

Do you think torture is a new thing? You think your founding fathers had never thought of putting people on a rack or slitting them a few holes in the ribs before? Of course they did. And that's why our constitution doesnt allow it!

Now, uber-genius, lets get to the legal argument about citizens getting rights that non-citizens don't...since that seems to be the technicality that you suckers try to use as an end run. Just because you have someone off American soil...and just because there may or may not be formal war declared doesnt mean that the Founders expected you to treat a living, breathing person like a voodoo doll. If you like, I can educate you on the law. I'm a lawyer who defends people's civil rights and liberties via constitutional arguments every day.

Our principles and our moral values encompass what the way we think it's civil and humane to treat even the least of people. You suckers are taking defense of country past where the founders wanted you to. Cheney and Bush shredded the Constitution to the point that it's unrecognizable...to the point that America looks like a ******* joke...and you still want to chant USA! USA! USA! like some frothing at the mouth redneck? Fine. Knock yerself out, Cochise. But realize your end-justifies-the-means rhetoric...no matter how many lives you delude yourself into thinking you're saving...is RUINING America.