Americans voted for Change

[chequita guevara]

Where is the proof that they were factually incorrect?

Read the reports.

They aren't accessible.

[Drake Tungsten]

Matalin says Armitage 'devoid of courage'

(CNN) — Mary Matalin, a former adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, sharply criticized former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage Sunday for his comments about the CIA's Bush-era interrogation techniques.

In an interview with the English language service of Qatar-based network Al Jazeera last week, Armitage said: “I hope, had I known about it at the time I was serving, I would’ve had the courage to resign. But I don’t know. It’s in hindsight now.”

In response, Matalin told CNN's John King on State of The Union: "If Richard Armitage, as the number two guy in the State Department, didn't know [about the interrogation techniques], not only is he devoid of courage, he is completely incompetent."

Armitage's comments came after the Obama administration released once-secret CIA memos revealing authorized interrogation tactics such as waterboarding, sleep deprivation and slapping.

"We know he has no courage," Matalin said in response. "This is the man who leaked Valerie Plame's name, knew he leaked it, let the president spin and the administration spin in the wind for two years. Many of his colleagues spent hundreds of thousands, millions of dollars, a valued colleague of his, his life is ruined, Scooter Libby, and he was the one who did it and let nobody know the whole time."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/19/matalin-says-armitage-devoid-of-courage/

Ouch...

[Whoha]

Obama

[Arrian]

I don't think it was so dark and painful, at least as far as the interrogations go.

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2008/Detainees.121108.pdf

Really?

-Arrian

[DinoDoc]

Obama intel chief: tough interrogations yielded "high-value info"

President Obama's Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, told colleagues in an internal memo last week that the aggressive interrogation tactics approved by the Bush administration yielded "high-value information" which helped the U.S. in the war on terror.

“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country," Blair wrote in a memo to the intelligence community the same day Obama ordered the release of legal memos detailing the techniques, which included waterboarding, slamming detainees into "flexible" walls, and prolonged sleep deprivation.

Blair's assertion of the program's fruits was notable because while former President Bush, former Vice President Cheney and others have claimed that the program produced volumes of useful intelligence, Obama and other top aides have refused to acknowledge any benefits from the tough tactics. As recently as Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs demurred when asked about claims that the program helped break up terror plots.

Curiously, Blair's assessment that the program was to some degree a success was omitted from the public press statement he issued on Thursday. However, even that press release signaled some distance with Obama by cautioning against 20-20 hindsight prompted by reading the legal memos "on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009."

Blair's internal memo has been posted on the Web since Friday, the day after Obama released the legal opinions from the Justice Department. A blog post Friday at a non-profit think tank, the U.S. Naval Institute, noted several discrepancies between the press release and the internal memo. The press release also omitted a line claiming that Congressional leaders and executive branch officials were "repeatedly" briefed on the interrogation program and allowed it to continue.

Critics who have branded the tactics as "torture" said the issue of whether the program yielded some intelligence was largely beside the point.

"The issue is not whether the CIA obtained information, but whether it was reliable, whether it was lawful, and whether the CIA could have obtained the same information and perhaps more through the use of lawful means," said Jameel Jaffer, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who pressed the lawsuit which triggered release of the legal memos.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0409/DNI_Blairs_highvalue_info_memo_on_web_for_days.htm l

[Darius871]

Obama intel chief: tough interrogations yielded "high-value info"

President Obama's Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, told colleagues in an internal memo last week that the aggressive interrogation tactics approved by the Bush administration yielded "high-value information" which helped the U.S. in the war on terror.

“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country," Blair wrote in a memo to the intelligence community the same day Obama ordered the release of legal memos detailing the techniques, which included waterboarding, slamming detainees into "flexible" walls, and prolonged sleep deprivation.

Blair's assertion of the program's fruits was notable because while former President Bush, former Vice President Cheney and others have claimed that the program produced volumes of useful intelligence, Obama and other top aides have refused to acknowledge any benefits from the tough tactics. As recently as Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs demurred when asked about claims that the program helped break up terror plots.

Curiously, Blair's assessment that the program was to some degree a success was omitted from the public press statement he issued on Thursday. However, even that press release signaled some distance with Obama by cautioning against 20-20 hindsight prompted by reading the legal memos "on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009."

Blair's internal memo has been posted on the Web since Friday, the day after Obama released the legal opinions from the Justice Department. A blog post Friday at a non-profit think tank, the U.S. Naval Institute, noted several discrepancies between the press release and the internal memo. The press release also omitted a line claiming that Congressional leaders and executive branch officials were "repeatedly" briefed on the interrogation program and allowed it to continue.

Critics who have branded the tactics as "torture" said the issue of whether the program yielded some intelligence was largely beside the point.

"The issue is not whether the CIA obtained information, but whether it was reliable, whether it was lawful, and whether the CIA could have obtained the same information and perhaps more through the use of lawful means," said Jameel Jaffer, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who pressed the lawsuit which triggered release of the legal memos.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0409/DNI_Blairs_highvalue_info_memo_on_web_for_days.htm l

Uh, this was already old news months ago after the DOJ memo on KSM and the L.A. plot. I'm assuming (nay, hoping) after that point the debate wasn't whether the methods were effective but rather whether sacrificing some of the moral high ground was "worth it," just to make sure preconceived opinions wouldn't have to change one bit...

[DanS]

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/sup...ees.121108.pdf

Really?

The best complaint that Levin has is that the harsh interrogations bled through from interrogations not covered by the Geneva Conventions (AQ/Taliban) to interrogations covered by the Geneva Conventions (Iraq). It may be too difficult or impossible to keep them separate from a doctrinal or operational standpoint. And as a practical matter, you might not be able to sort non-Geneva versus Geneva.

But put simply, I doubt the majority of folks are feeling any sympathy at all for even hard-core torture of AQ members who might have information about terrorist attacks on the US, if the gov't thinks that the information gleaned from torture is useful. That's the context here. That's why it's not a dark chapter in our history. (I want to know whether the information was actually useful or detrimental -- we have been told that torture is inneffective in any event and I'm curious about that.) Further, I don't think that these harsh interrogation techniques were hard core torture, even if arguably a couple (stress positions, waterboarding) may have crossed the line into torture.

[Zkribbler]

I don't have a lot of sympathy for al Qaeda members.

I'm more worried about what we're doing to ourselves when we jettison American principles about good treatment of prisoners [first started by George Washington when he captured the Trenton garrison]. I'm more worried that our reputation for torturing prisoners will dissuade terrorists who find themselves surrounded from surrendering. I'm more worried because experienced interrogators at the FBI say humane treatment yields far more intel than torture. I'm more worried about how this treatment degrades American's image in the world, particularly in the Arab world. I'm more worried about this kind of American conduct being used by al Qaeda to recruit more members. I'm more worried about this kind of conduct being used to justify torturing American who are taken prisoner.

[Drake Tungsten]

I'm assuming (nay, hoping) after that point the debate wasn't whether the methods were effective

That's a bad assumption. The stock line on the left is still that "torture" is never effective in garnering worthwhile intelligence and is therefore not worth the moral price paid.

Further, I don't think that these harsh interrogation techniques were hard core torture, even if arguably a couple (stress positions, waterboarding) may have crossed the line into torture.

[DanS]

The stock line on the left is still that "torture" is never effective in garnering worthwhile intelligence and is therefore not worth the moral price paid.

Obama's argument is even simpler, I'm afraid. Torture is bad. This is self-evidently torture. Therefore, we will not do it.

It's an attempt to cut off a broader discussion of the topic.

[Velociryx]

You guys have fun on that slippery slope.

-=Vel=-

[Drake Tungsten]

You guys have fun on that slippery slope.

I'm sorry you don't want to join us in the reality-based community.

[Velociryx]

Considering what your version of reality is?

Nahh, I think I'll pass, but thanks!

-=Vel=-

[chequita guevara]

Because we're not evil.

[Velociryx]

Getting Drake's comments on his "reality" is really rather akin to getting Ben's comments on homosexuality (or any number of other topics). The similarities are...striking.

-=Vel=-