A war crime to support a war crime

[Popeye]

Well, isn't that just swell?...If you don't have the evidence to support your invasion of Iraq, you just keep torturing until they say what you want.

Sounds to me as if torture was used not so much to defend America from attack, but to hopefully come up with reasons so the Bush Administration could defend the criminal act of attacking a country that hadn't attacked us.

You keep torturing someone long enough, eventually they'll say anything...something Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield and the rest of the Bush regime war criminals were counting on...truth be damned.

A former senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the interrogation issue said that Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld demanded that intelligence agencies and interrogators find evidence of al Qaida-Iraq collaboration.

"There were two reasons why these interrogations were so persistent, and why extreme methods were used," the former senior intelligence official said on condition of anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity.

"The main one is that everyone was worried about some kind of follow-up attack (after 9/11). But for most of 2002 and into 2003, Cheney and Rumsfeld, especially, were also demanding proof of the links between al Qaida and Iraq that (former Iraqi exile leader Ahmed) Chalabi and others had told them were there."

It was during this period that CIA interrogators waterboarded two alleged top al Qaida detainees repeatedly — Abu Zubeida at least 83 times in August 2002 and Khalid Sheik Mohammed 183 times in March 2003 — according to a newly released Justice Department document.

"There was constant pressure on the intelligence agencies and the interrogators to do whatever it took to get that information out of the detainees, especially the few high-value ones we had, and when people kept coming up empty, they were told by Cheney's and Rumsfeld's people to push harder," he continued.

"Cheney's and Rumsfeld's people were told repeatedly, by CIA . . . and by others, that there wasn't any reliable intelligence that pointed to operational ties between bin Laden and Saddam, and that no such ties were likely because the two were fundamentally enemies, not allies."

Senior administration officials, however, "blew that off and kept insisting that we'd overlooked something, that the interrogators weren't pushing hard enough, that there had to be something more we could do to get that information," he said.

A former U.S. Army psychiatrist, Maj. Charles Burney, told Army investigators in 2006 that interrogators at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility were under "pressure" to produce evidence of ties between al Qaida and Iraq.

"While we were there a large part of the time we were focused on trying to establish a link between al Qaida and Iraq and we were not successful in establishing a link between al Qaida and Iraq," Burney told staff of the Army Inspector General. "The more frustrated people got in not being able to establish that link . . . there was more and more pressure to resort to measures that might produce more immediate results."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/66622.html

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Well, isn't that just swell?...If you don't have the evidence to support your invasion of Iraq, you just keep torturing until they say what you want.

Sounds to me as if torture was used not so much to defend America from attack, but to hopefully come up with reasons so the Bush Administration could defend the criminal act of attacking a country that hadn't attacked us.

......AFTER it didn't sound like that-good-an-idea....ORIGINALLY!!!

​

 

[BigRob]

Well, isn't that just swell?...If you don't have the evidence to support your invasion of Iraq, you just keep torturing until they say what you want.

Sounds to me as if torture was used not so much to defend America from attack, but to hopefully come up with reasons so the Bush Administration could defend the criminal act of attacking a country that hadn't attacked us.

You keep torturing someone long enough, eventually they'll say anything...something Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield and the rest of the Bush regime war criminals were counting on...truth be damned.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/66622.html

You have the former Vice-President, you have multiple Bush intelligence sources, and now an Obama Intelligence Director all saying these techniques produced valuable intelligence.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You have the former Vice-President, you have multiple Bush intelligence sources, and now an Obama Intelligence Director all saying these techniques produced valuable intelligence.

How (typically) "conservative", of you.

You wanna dance-around the Primary-reason for torture.....​

"Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s people were told repeatedly, by CIA ... and by others, that there wasn’t any reliable intelligence that pointed to operational ties between bin Laden and Hussein, and that no such ties were likely because the two were fundamentally enemies, not allies."

Senior administration officials, however, "blew that off and kept insisting that we’d overlooked something, that the interrogators weren’t pushing hard enough, that there had to be something more we could do to get that information," he said.​

.....with those (typical) "LOOK!! Over THERE!!!!!!!" distraction-tactics!!!

Dick Cheney was DESPERATE to get someone (thru whatever-means-necessary) to verify the "cherries" that he & Richard Perle had "picked", at The Pentagon!!!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Sounds to me as if torture was used not so much to defend America from attack, but to hopefully come up with reasons so the Bush Administration could defend the criminal act of attacking a country that hadn't attacked us.

.....Not-to-mention enhancing Richard Perle's portfolio!

​

"The main one is that everyone was worried about some kind of follow-up attack (after 9/11)," the official adds. "But for most of 2002 and into 2003, Cheney and Rumsfeld, especially, were also demanding proof of the links between al Qaida and Iraq that (former Iraqi exile leader Ahmed) Chalabi and others had told them were there."

*

"Anyway, Perle was just a one-note Johnny, with his whole message being "We must give away Iraq to Ahmad Chalabi yesterday! That will solve all the problems."​

Oh....I forgot....the Iraq War Wasn't About Oil.....REALLY!!!!

​

"What's also startling about these plans is that Chalabi is scorned by most of America's national-security establishment, including much of the Department of State, the CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He is shunned by all Western powers save the United Kingdom, ostracized in the Arab world and disdained even by many of his erstwhile comrades in the Iraqi opposition. Among his few friends, however, are the men running the Bush administration's willy-nilly war on Iraq. And with their backing, it's not inconceivable that this hapless, exiled Iraqi aristocrat and London-Washington playboy might end up atop the smoking heap of what's left of Iraq next year.

In Washington, Team Chalabi is led by Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle, the neoconservative strategist who heads the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board. Chalabi's partisans run the gamut from far right to extremely far right, with key supporters in most of the Pentagon's Middle-East policy offices -- such as Peter Rodman, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser and Michael Rubin. Also included are key staffers in Vice President Dick Cheney's office, not to mention Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former CIA Director Jim Woolsey.

The INC and its backers make no bones about the fact that the American forces gathering to attack Iraq will be liberating Iraq's oil. Unable to restrain himself, Chalabi blurted to The Washington Post that the INC intends to reward its American friends. "American companies will have a big shot at Iraqi oil," he proclaimed.

Ain't Vulture Capitalism Grand??!!!!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"White House officials have expressed confidence that a congressionally backed investigation will not come to pass. But they have been drawn into a debate they did not foresee. The president has a full plate, domestically and internationally. He had hoped that, in winning the election and moving quickly to change his predecessor's policies, he could close the books on Bush's presidency.

Instead, he has found in his first months how difficult that is. Hopes for an immediate change in tone have withered. Republican opposition to his economic policies remains nearly unanimous. With this latest controversy, he is learning that neither the opponents nor the defenders of Bush's presidency are ready to move on."​

......Not-to-mention those that no-LONGER have a voice-in-the-matter!!!!

​

 

[Dr.Who]

And yet the interrogations did result in information in which the recently released memos show the cia says stopped a terrorist attack in LA and resulted in the capture of AQ allies.

After he was subjected to the “waterboard” technique, KSM became cooperative, providing intelligence that led to the capture of key al Qaeda allies and, eventually, the closing down of an East Asian terrorist cell that had been tasked with carrying out the 9/11-style attack on Los Angeles.

The May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that details what happened in this regard was written by then-Principal Deputy Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury to John A. Rizzo, the senior deputy general counsel for the CIA.

“You have informed us that the interrogation of KSM—once enhanced techniques were employed—led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the ‘Second Wave,’ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles,” says the memo.

“You have informed us that information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discover of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemaah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the ‘Second Wave,’” reads the memo. “More specifically, we understand that KSM admitted that he had [redaction] large sum of money to an al Qaeda associate [redaction] … Khan subsequently identified the associate (Zubair), who was then captured. Zubair, in turn, provided information that led to the arrest of Hambali. The information acquired from these captures allowed CIA interrogators to pose more specific questions to KSM, which led the CIA to Hambali’s brother, al Hadi. Using information obtained from multiple sources, al-Hadi was captured, and he subsequently identified the Garuba cell. With the aid of this additional information, interrogations of Hambali confirmed much of what was learned from KSM.”

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2005/01/05_johnyoo.shtml

 

[Mr. Shaman]

HEY, POPEYE!!!​

It's lookin' like Bill-O is badly-in-need of some Hormone-Replacement-Therapy!!!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

And yet the interrogations did result in information in which the recently released memos show the cia says stopped a terrorist attack in LA.......

C'mon....c'mon.......

It's already been established that John Yoo is full-o'-crap......besides being a liar.

​

"On Feb. 10, 2006, the LA Times quoted a "US official familiar with the operational aspects of the war on terrorism," who said that "the Library Tower plot was one of many Al Qaeda operations that had not gone much past the conceptual stage….The official spoke on the condition of anonymity, saying that those familiar with the plot feared political retaliation for providing a different characterization of the plan than that of the president."​

 

[The Scotsman]

Please post all further comments to the other torture threads running

 

[BigRob]

How (typically) "conservative", of you.

You wanna dance-around the Primary-reason for torture.....


.....with those (typical) "LOOK!! Over THERE!!!!!!!" distraction-tactics!!!

Dick Cheney was DESPERATE to get someone (thru whatever-means-necessary) to verify the "cherries" that he & Richard Perle had "picked", at The Pentagon!!!​

Shaman... claiming that there is no link between Saddam and terrorism hardly means anything when discussing the question of if these techniques resulted in valuable intelligence, which both parties are saying it did.