Who thought there was so much creativity in the Bush admin?

[Ramo]

Third, the President said Abu Zubayda gave up information leading to the capture of another top Al Qaeda terrorist, Ramsi Bin Al Shibh. But circumstantial evidence, as well as previously published accounts, suggest that Bin Al Shibh was more likely located by the United States as the result of an interview he gave to Al Jazeera.

Zubaydah did not, as Bush maintained, identify bin al Shibh. As Spencer Ackerman blogged for the New Republic in 2002: "A Nexis search for 'Ramzi Binalshibh' between September 11, 2001 and March 1, 2002 -- the U.S. captured Abu Zubaydah in March 2002 -- turns up 26 hits for The Washington Post alone. Everyone involved in counterterrorism knew who bin Al Shibh was."

Zubaydah did not, as Thiessen asserts, provide information that led to bin al Shibh's capture. Bin al Shibh was captured almost half a year after Zubayda was, and Suskind reported that the key information about his location came not from Zubaydah but from an al-Jazeera reporter who had interviewed bin al Shibh and KSM at their safehouse apartment in Karachi. The reporter passed the information to his superiors, who passed the information to al-Jazeera's owner, the Emir of Qatar -- a friend of the CIA -- who then passed it to Langley.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/white-house-watch/2009/01/the_unsupportable_defense_of_t/pf.html

[Drake Tungsten]

This is the difference between you and me. When it comes to information about intelligence operations, I tend to trust people like the DCIA. You tend to trust people like Spencer Ackerman. We're never going to see eye-to-eye because of this.

[Sirotnikov]

Republican incompetence



Abu Zubaydah had provided much valuable information under less severe treatment, and the harsher handling produced no breakthroughs, according to one former intelligence official with direct knowledge of the case. Instead, watching his torment caused great distress to his captors, the official said.

Even for those who believed that brutal treatment could produce results, the official said, “seeing these depths of human misery and degradation has a traumatic effect.”

C.I.A. officers adopted these techniques only after the Justice Department had given its official approval on Aug. 1, 2002, in one of four formerly secret legal memos on interrogation that were released Thursday.

A footnote to another of the memos described a rift between line officers questioning Abu Zubaydah at a secret C.I.A. prison in Thailand and their bosses at headquarters, and asserted that the brutal treatment may have been “unnecessary.”

Quoting a 2004 report on the interrogation program by the C.I.A. inspector general, the footnote says that “although the on-scene interrogation team judged Zubaydah to be compliant, elements within C.I.A. headquarters still believed he was withholding information.”

Exemplary case of high ranked HQ officials being ignorant asses.


edit:
Granted, we still don't know exactly how much information came after each stage of increasing pressure.

My response assumes that the water boarding was top-dictated, and proved useless.

[Sirotnikov]

this is by the way a key important point:

Beyond that, anyone in government who seeks an opinion from the OLC as to the propriety of any action, or who authors an opinion for the OLC, is on notice henceforth that such a request for advice, and the advice itself, is now more likely than before to be subject after the fact to public and partisan criticism. It is hard to see how that will promote candor either from those who should be encouraged to ask for advice before they act, or from those who must give it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123993446103128041.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

[Ramo]

This is the difference between you and me. When it comes to information about intelligence operations, I tend to trust people like the DCIA. You tend to trust people like Spencer Ackerman. We're never going to see eye-to-eye because of this.

No. Ackerman made a claim that could be verified as easily as using the internets. Suskind, also a well-regarded reporter, made a claim that is corroborated by circumstantial evidence (a large interval of time passed between the capture of the two guys, AJ interviewed him in a Karachi safe house prior to his capture, AJ is a Qatari client). So sure, I place a lot more credence in well-respected reporters saying entirely plausible things than a pair of Bush lackies trying to justify their douchebaggery.

[Ramo]

this is by the way a key important point:

No, it's not. The OLC guys made policy. The public has a right to know what they were saying.

[Drake Tungsten]

So sure, I place a lot more credence in well-respected reporters saying entirely plausible things than a pair of Bush lackies trying to justify their douchebaggery.

Nice try. Hayden and Mukasey weren't even a part of the administration when the "torture" decisions were made. They were in a position to know a hell of a lot more about the intelligence operations that involved "torture" than Spencer Ackerman is, however.

[Ramo]

Your point? You might want to look up Mukasey's opinion on water-boarding.

I don't know what your Ackerman fascination is all about, but you clearly aren't bothering to read my posts.

[Drake Tungsten]

Honestly, I don't get your hard-on for members of the juicebox mafia. I'm pretty sure I've embarrassed you for relying on Ezra Klein before and now you're here quoting Ackerman as though he's an authority on anything...

[Ramo]

I didn't quote Ackerman as part of this argument. That was an aside (and one that could be verified with fancy insider information known as "the internet"). Suskind was making the argument. Which you would know if you bothered to read any of my posts, you douchenozzle.

[Drake Tungsten]

Suskind's argument offers nothing but circumstantial evidence, as you yourself have pointed out. Suskind is certainly less embarassing to quote than Ackerman, though, I'll give you that. Maybe you should go back and edit your post so only the Suskind half is there.

You should probably also edit your claims that both Ackerman and Suskind are "well-respected reporters." Only one is...

[Ramo]

Yes, because an AJ reporter is going public about being effectively an informant for the CIA. That's a totally reasonable expectation.

[Drake Tungsten]

I'm not going to bother trying to change your mind. Go ahead and believe what you want to.

[Zkribbler]

A lot? Can you name some Bush policies he hasn't continued?

Gitmo
Torture
"If you aren't for us, you're against us" approach to foreign relations.
Cuba
Tax breaks for the middle class but not the upper class.
Global warming
Offshore drilling.

[chequita guevara]

Gitmo
Torture
"If you aren't for us, you're against us" approach to foreign relations.
Cuba
Tax breaks for the middle class but not the upper class.
Global warming
Offshore drilling.

Gitmo, still in action, and in any event, moving the same practices to someplace other than Gitmo isn't a real policy change

Torture is still being practiced and the torturers are still being protected

Approach to foreign relations, fuzzy handcuffs are still handcuffs,

Policy on Cuba hasn't changed substantially, the embargo still holds

Nothing has changed on global warming or offshore drilling