Be INFORMED

Tuesday, May 03, 2011

Republicans say torture led U.S. to bin Laden. Facts say otherwise.

  Those darned Republicans still distorting the facts after Bin Laden is killed.

You could see this one coming a mile off. Here's Dick Cheney on Fox News: "I would assume the enhanced interrogation program we put in place produced some of the results that led to bin Laden's ultimate capture.... We need to keep in place those policies that made it possible for us to succeed in this case."

Here's an AP story reiterating the same.

Current and former U.S. officials say that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, provided the nom de guerre of one of bin Laden's most trusted aides. The CIA got similar information from Mohammed's successor, Abu Faraj al-Libi. Both were subjected to harsh interrogation tactics inside CIA prisons in Poland and Romania.

Or how about the Heritage Foundation screaming "Detainee Interrogations: Key to Killing Osama bin Laden": "This lead was developed during the Bush Administration, most likely from al-Qaeda associates picked up and transferred to Guantanamo and subject to interrogations that critics have repeatedly deemed to be pointless in terms of intelligence value. Whether these detainees remain at Guantanamo is an open question." See, if Bush and Cheney hadn't been man enough to torture people, we never would have found bin Laden. Nine years later.

There's plenty more where that came from:

  • Rep. Steve King (R-IA) tweeted, "Wonder what President Obama thinks of water boarding now?"
  • Karl Rove said on Fox & Friends this morning: "I think the tools that President Bush put into place—GITMO, rendition, enhanced interrogation, the vast effort to collect and collate this information — obviously served his successor quite well."
  • Bush torture architect John Yoo says "Without the tough decisions taken by President Bush and his national security team, the United States could not have found and killed bin Laden. It is the continuity of policies in the war on terror that has brought success, not the misguided effort of the last two years to disavow them."

Let's revisit history, again, by going to the best source, Marcy Wheeler at emptywheel. The waterboarding of KSM, all 183 instances, occurred in March, 2003. The torture of al Libi happened in early 2002, after his November, 2001 capture.

As Marcy explained in an e-mail:

Assuming they got the courier's name in 2005 or 2006, per reports, it happened 2 years or more after KSM's waterboarding.

Which would say KSM withheld this information under waterboarding.

And given how much time it took to actually get from the courier to the compound (presumably about 4 years), both KSM and al-Libi didn't give all that much on the courier(s).

KSML was waterboarded 183 times, presumably without revealing the name of the courier. And, since it took 183 tries, the efficacy of the whole enterprise can only be questioned. [Update: The following applies to Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, not to Abu Faraj al-Libi, who is sourced in the AP story. The lesson about the effectiveness of torture remains unchanged, but the timeline for Abu Faraj al-Libi is slightly different. See emptywheel for more on that.] But what the torture of al Libi "revealed" is even more damning for the pro-torturers's case.

Having slipped off the radar, the government clearly does not want his case revived, not only because it may have to explain what has happened to him, but also because, as a result of the application of "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques," al-Libi claimed that Saddam Hussein had offered to train two al-Qaeda operatives in the use of chemical and biological weapons.

Al-Libi's "confession" led to President Bush declaring, in October 2002, "Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb making and poisons and gases," and his claims were, notoriously, included in Colin Powell's speech to the UN Security Council on February 5, 2003. The claims were of course, groundless, and were recanted by al-Libi in January 2004, but it took Dan Cloonan, a veteran FBI interrogator, who was resolutely opposed to the use of torture, to explain why they should never have been believed in the first place. Cloonan told Jane Mayer, "It was ridiculous for interrogators to think Libi would have known anything about Iraq... The reason they got bad information is that they beat it out of him. You never get good information from someone that way."

What torture got us, in practical terms, was the Iraq debacle. And the complete and well-deserved debasement of our international standing. And a hell of a lot more anti-American terrorists.

Right-Wingers Still Short On Facts

  It never ceases to amaze me at the lengths that the right-wing will to go in order to make themselves look like assholes.

DKos           by   Stand Strong

By now, you've probably seen this pathetic excuse of an attempt to deny the President any credit for the recent events that resulted in the death of Osama Bin Laden:

Let's be clear on this: OBAMA did NOT kill Bin Laden. An American soldier, who Obama just a few weeks ago was debating on whether or not to PAY, did. Obama just happened to be the one in office when our soldiers finally found OBL and took him out. This is NOT an Obama victory, but an AMERICAN victory!!!

This is one of the most ridiculous, disingenuous and steaming piles of dog mess I've seen in a while. It almost tops the chain-mail I got several years ago about how all Democrats hate the troops, want them to die, and support the terrorists. That one didn't end well either, thanks to "Reply All."

Yes, Obama did NOT personally kill Bin Laden but then again, George Bush didn't personally kill Saddam Hussein either but he got credit for it, didn't he? And surprisingly, there are some out there today giving Bush credit for this, and yet he happens to not be the guy in office anymore which pretty much nulls that first argument.

But to get to a more serious point, the truth of the matter is that this was a long-term project which involved numerous meetings between the President and his security advisers, as well as the diligence of those in the intelligence community and ultimately, those soldiers who actually carried out the mission.

However, HAD THIS MISSION FAILED and Osama Bin Laden gotten away and/or those SEALs who underwent the mission been injured or killed, are you telling me you're going to dish out a heaping cup of blame on the SEALs for fucking it up?

No, of course not. But I'll tell you what you WILL do. You're going to turn and you're going to look at the President and you're going to blame him.

Why?

HE was the one who had the meetings and reviewed the intelligence.
HE was the one who made the decision to launch the mission.
HE, as Commander in Chief of the United States, who is ultimately responsible for the well-being of those who serve this nation, sent a SEAL team on probably one of the most high profile, risky individual campaigns those people had ever gone on.

If things go to shit, THAT'S on the President. But if it succeeds...?

As for the other myths in this meme, the soldiers didn't just "finally found OBL" while doing a routine patrol. They were given intelligence, they trained, they planned. This was a mission, not some spider-hole they stumbled upon, popped the lid off of and said "Whoa! Hey! What do we have here?!" This was a mission reviewed and approved by the President.

And lastly, with regards to "cutting off pay," I assume this involves the recent threats of shutting down the government?

Yeah, that wasn't Obama either.