Apr 23 2009
Worth More Than The FBI, CIA And NSA Put Together
Â
“Worth More Than The FBI, CIA And NSA Put Together” – this being the program of enhanced interrogation used for only 2 years right after 9-11. So says the then head of the CIA George Tenet, who was selected for his position by Bill Clinton. All of this comes from an eye popping article from GOP Congressman Pete Hoekstra, who was briefed on this program:
Reactions to this former CIA program, which was used against senior al Qaeda suspects in 2002 and 2003, are demonstrating how little President Barack Obama and some Democratic members of Congress understand the dire threats to our nation.
George Tenet, who served as CIA director under Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, believes the enhanced interrogations program saved lives. He told CBS’s “60 Minutes” in April 2007: “I know this program alone is worth more than the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency put together have been able to tell us.”
So some evil guys who declared war on us and helped execute the murder of 3,000 innocent people on 9-11-01 where given a bit of rough treatment by tricking their senses into reacting like they were drowning (not actually drowning, not even close to drowning). And thousands of lives were probably saved. I think most Americans can and will gladly live with that.
Khalid Sheik Mohammed is not a victim, he is unrepentant killer. The people in the CIA and administration who finally had to use some techniques they discovered in our military training programs (which means we inflict this fake drowning test on our own people hundreds of times a year) are not criminals for stopping al Qaeda before it could kill again. They are defenders of this nation.
The left has this all backwards because they hate America. They hate its capitalism, the free flow of opportunity so anyone can get ahead, its unchallenged strength and its ability to project that strength to save humanity form itself (e.g., Kuwait, Iraq, Kosovo). They hate what we are so in their mind the mastermind behind the worst attack in this nation’s history is a victim because we had to keep him cold and awake for a few days straight so he would tell on his allies working to execute the next attacks.
If Tenet is right and this program produced more complete and detailed (and actionable) intelligence then all our premier spy and investigative organizations combined, then we know the answer to “wasn’t there another way?” There wasn’t – unless we let more innocent people die. That is what Obama and the left think is right, to leave people exposed to murder by Islamist fanatics. In my mind, THAT is a crime, especially given the oath of office they took to protect this nation and its people from attacks, foreign and domestic.
Addendum: And don’t be fooled by any faux shock from the democrats – it is all an act:
It was not necessary to release details of the enhanced interrogation techniques, because members of Congress from both parties have been fully aware of them since the program began in 2002. We believed it was something that had to be done in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to keep our nation safe. After many long and contentious debates, Congress repeatedly approved and funded this program on a bipartisan basis in both Republican and Democratic Congresses.
Just like with our invasion of  Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein, we have a legal activity here.
2nd Addendum: I am quickly coming of the opinion this program should be fully investigated in the light of public congressional hearings:
Members of Congress calling for an investigation of the enhanced interrogation program should remember that such an investigation can’t be a selective review of information, or solely focus on the lawyers who wrote the memos, or the low-level employees who carried out this program. I have asked Mr. Blair to provide me with a list of the dates, locations and names of all members of Congress who attended briefings on enhanced interrogation techniques.
Any investigation must include this information as part of a review of those in Congress and the Bush administration who reviewed and supported this program. To get a complete picture of the enhanced interrogation program, a fair investigation will also require that the Obama administration release the memos requested by former Vice President Dick Cheney on the successes of this program.
An honest and thorough review of the enhanced interrogation program must also assess the likely damage done to U.S. national security by Mr. Obama’s decision to release the memos over the objections of Mr. Panetta and four of his predecessors. Such a review should assess what this decision communicated to our enemies, and also whether it will discourage intelligence professionals from offering their frank opinions in sensitive counterterrorist cases for fear that they will be prosecuted by a future administration.
That’s a broadside warning shot to the Dems, open this up and we open it all up. It is time to have this debate, bring it on. Let’s get this over with.
As for AlQaida threatening a nuclear armed country, why do you care now? You do not even want to muss their hair, much less defeat them. The Democrats had years to deal with these people and did virtually nothing about it. And the Democrats were more than happy with troop levels in Afghanistan, until they found they could use those levels as something to whine about. But the truth is the operation in Afghanistan was under way for more than a year before we ever went to Iraq and no one wanted more troops there. No one.
So AlQaida is a problem when and if it suits you to say it is. Now, on the other hand if Zarqawi had wanted to expand his terrorist training camps in Iraq after he fled there from Afghanistan, you and your kind were fine with that.
Kathie,
You are mixing apples and oranges. What you do in the theatre of war and what you do with captured prisoners is completely different – not even comparable. Nobody is arguing that we shouldn’t be allowed to kill people in wars, but do you know anyone advocating simply killing Al Qaeda members captured? Anyone? We tried Nazi and Japanese officials for war crimes related to what they did to prisoners/detainees, but did you ever hear of us trying Germans bombers or Japanese soldiers that killed people on the battlefield? That is because we treat those two situations differently.
It has nothing to do with whether they wear uniforms or if we saw them coming. It has to do with what we are willing to do once we capture them and want to interrogate them to get intelligence. You don’t think that captured soldiers could possibly have valuable intelligence about troop locations, combat strategies, etc that could save American troop’s lives? And yet we don’t condone the use of torture in those instances even when American lives are on the line. And please tell me why you don’t think that the Nazis, Japanese soldiers and Viet Cong who brutally tortured our own troops, don’t qualify as having “sick minds” like Al Qaeda.
As for the Japanese internment camps, are you suggesting that was a good policy? Didn’t we disown that policy and acknowledge that it was wrong? Don’t we treat that part of our history as an instance of over-reacting to our fears and undermining our democratic principles all in the name of “protecting Americans”? If we screwed up in the past, does that mean we should keep repeating our mistakes? I don’t get your line of reasoning.
Conman I wasn’t making a value judgment on any of it, I was just stating a fact. My hunch Conman, is you have no idea what we did with guys we caught during past wars. No TV, no internet and reporters who lived with our soldiers, respected how hard the job was, and didn’t comment.
Bottom line Conman, I wouldn’t trade either of my daughters lives for some theoretical, moral, highground. And I dearly thank President for making the decision he did. I frankly don’t care what other countries think of America.
Terrye,
I’m not partisan on this issue. I object to Obama using these same techniques just as much as Bush. I agree that some Democrat leaders knew about these programs, didn’t object and are now be hypocritical (Pelosi and Reed I’m sure were aware of these programs) – they should be publically raked over the coals for their failures as well. I want the truth about these programs to come to light so nobody continues them, Democrat or Republican.
I care very much about the threat of Al Qaeda. 9-11 scared the crap out of me. I love this country just as much as you do and I have a family that I don’t want killed by some random terrorist. I just disagree about the wisdom of our GWOT strategy under Bush. The Al Qaeda leadership was in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not Iraq. We diverted massive resources from that area to Iraq before we finished the job. I believe the fact that they are now threatening Pakistan is evidence of the failure of that policy – we took our eye off the ball. Not to mention the fact that Iraq’s long-term stability is still not a sure bet. And I don’t think the EIT, Gitmo, etc. made us any safer – I actually think it undermined our security. Just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean that I’m partisan, it simply means that I don’t agree that the GWOT has made us safer.
Kathie,
One last response and I’ll let it rest. I understand that individuals have done some pretty bad stuff in prior conflicts – that is what happens in wars. But there is a big difference between a few bad apples doing bad things when nobody is looking and official U.S. policy sanctioned by the President. They are very different animals.
I too care about my two daughters lives. But our history demonstrates that this country has done pretty well adhereing to our core principles. We have survived for over 200 years without resorting to torture, so I don’t see a good reason to change now. I don’t think that the EIT provided us good intelligence and there are many, many experts out there who advocate that belief. If you look into this EIT issue further, you will find out that there was quite a bit of disagreement within the CIA, FBI, etc over the effectiveness of these techniques.
58% Say Release of CIA Memos Endangers National Security
Thirty-seven percent (37%) of voters now believe the U.S. legal system worries too much about protecting individual rights when national security is at stake. But 21% say the legal system is too concerned about protecting national security. Thirty-three percent (33%) say the balance between the two is about right.
Only 28% of U.S. voters think the Obama administration should do any further investigating of how the Bush administration treated terrorism suspects.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics2/58_say_release_of_cia_memos_endangers_national_security
Conman, we tried it Clinton’s way for eight years, and Bush’s way for eight years. Now we will try it Obama’s way for a while.
I truly believe that it is the intension of the Islamic terrorists to take as much geography that they think belongs to them. They will kill as many Christians and Jews as they can, and some Muslims as well. They will do it in any way they can. How we protect ourselves from them is through trial and error. We will win some and loose some battles. The President’s job is to find a way to protect and defend us. No mortal being should be crucified for trying to so his job. I don’t believe for one minute President Bush was trying to do something barbaric, or underhanded. He did what he thought was best for the Nation. It took courage, focus and the ability to make decisions. I say thank you Mr. President. I hope Obama will do as well, because Americans lives are at stake.
Conman, being warned of a possible attack in August 2001- a month before it occurs- does not give anyone any time to prevent a catastrophe. I don’t care if Superman were president in August ’01. If you were warned you would have a bad day tomorrow, what would that entail? How could you possibly prevent it?
Conman, I think your analysis on who wants full accounting and who doesn’t is a bit off. First of all, Obama, released selected information/memos — not the full memos (including the success of the techniques reported by past CIA heads since the memos were released).
Secondly, the last I read….
Obama is against a “truth commission”. Reid is against a “truth commission”. Pelosi wants one (but, that was after Obama nixed it, and before she remembered she was informed about the techniques). The Republicans are warning that if you have it…..you will have it all (including Demecrats who knew about it without objection, and the memos about the success of it).
Read what you want into that.
Obama: Truth Commission is a Mistake
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21654.html
Democrats already getting uncomfortable with Obama’s foreign policy:
Obey Rains On Obama’s Parade
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21633.html
Dem strategist close to the White House said the president looks “like the scarecrow, pointing in both directions†on waterboarding.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21569.html
This is not good, folks:
——-
Slow Roll Time at Langley
By David Ignatius
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
At the Central Intelligence Agency, it’s known as “slow rolling.” That’s what agency officers sometimes do on politically sensitive assignments. They go through the motions; they pass cables back and forth; they take other jobs out of the danger zone; they cover their backsides.
Sad to say, it’s slow roll time at Langley after the release of interrogation memos that, in the words of one veteran officer, “hit the agency like a car bomb in the driveway.” President Obama promised CIA officers that they won’t be prosecuted for carrying out lawful orders, but the people on the firing line don’t believe him. They think the memos have opened a new season of investigation and retribution.
One veteran counterterrorism operative says that agents in the field are already being more careful about using the legal findings that authorize covert action. An example is the so-called “risk of capture” interview that takes place in the first hour after a terrorism suspect is grabbed. This used to be the key window of opportunity, in which the subject was questioned aggressively and his cellphone contacts and “pocket litter” were exploited quickly.
Now, field officers are more careful. They want guidance from headquarters. They need legal advice. I’m told that in the case of an al-Qaeda suspect seized in Iraq several weeks ago, the CIA didn’t even try to interrogate him. The agency handed him over to the U.S. military.
Agency officials also worry about the effect on foreign intelligence services that share secrets with the United States in a process politely known as “liaison.” A former official who remains in close touch with key Arab allies such as Egypt and Jordan warns: “There is a growing concern that the risk is too high to do the things with America they’ve done in the past.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/21/AR2009042102969.html?sub=AR
conman said:
It’s hard to be really sure about all this stuff, but it would appear that the confusion could be due to the fact that there may have been two plots:
http://junkyardblog.net/archives/2006/10/ksm-xrlq-and-th.php
A Corner exclusive: How many times have you read and heard in the mainstream media that terrorists were waterboarded more than 180 times?
It turns out that’s not true. What is?
According to two sources, both of them very well-informed and reliable (but preferring to remain anonymous), the 180-plus times refers not to sessions of waterboarding, but to “pours†— that is, to instances of water being poured on the subject.
Under a strict set of rules, every pour of water had to be counted — and the number of pours was limited.
Also: Waterboarding interrogation sessions were permitted on no more than five days within any 30-day period.
No more than two sessions were permitted in any 24-hour period.
A session could last no longer than two hours.
There could be at most six pours of water lasting ten seconds or longer — and never longer than 40 seconds — during any individual session.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTJjNjg1OThmOTVlMWVmYTZiM2Q5ZGU5NzdjY2E0ODQ=
[…] The Strata-Sphere Worth More Than The FBI, CIA And NSA Put Together “Worth More Than The FBI, CIA And NSA Put Together” – this being the program of enhanced interrogation used for only 2 years right after 9-11. So says the then head of the CIA George Tenet, who was selected for his position by Bill Clinton. All of this comes from an eye popping article from GOP Congressman Pete Hoekstra, who was briefed on this program: Reactions to this former CIA program, which was used against senior al Qaeda suspects in 2002 and 2003, are demonstrating how little President Barack Obama and some Democratic members of Congress understand the dire threats to our nation. George Tenet, who served as CIA director under Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, believes the enhanced interrogations program saved lives. He told CBS’s “60 Minutes” in April 2007: “I know this program alone is worth more than the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency put together have been able to tell us.” __________________ For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye. […]
[…] on America. The use of these methods (which fool the body, don’t actually invoke drowning) saved lives – thousands of them in LA so far as we know. Other places are likely to come to light if this witch […]
[…] to his position by Bill Clinton – said that the enhanced interrogations by themselves were “Worth more than the FBI, CIA and NSA put together.” Career intelligence professional and CIA Director General Michael Hayden said, “fully half of […]