As we have all read, the DNI memo’s recently release do show that actionable intelligence was obtained from various interrogation methods used by the CIA and others (you can read more here.) However, what has been left out of this discussion is that it appears the Obama Administration intentionally edited the memo to correspond more closely with their world view. According to the New York Times there are some odd omissions:
Admiral Blair’s assessment that the interrogation methods did produce important information was deleted from a condensed version of his memo released to the media last Thursday. Also deleted was a line in which he empathized with his predecessors who originally approved some of the harsh tactics after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
“I like to think I would not have approved those methods in the past,” he wrote, “but I do not fault those who made the decisions at that time, and I will absolutely defend those who carried out the interrogations within the orders they were given.”
In sum, the Administration covered up the fact that their own DNI acknowledges that these interrogation methods did indeed lead to actionable intelligence. This is why Dick Cheney has been lobbying so hard to have these memos released, because they refute claims made by the Obama Administration that these interrogation methods do not work. Welcome to the new era of government transparency.
Ed Morrisey has a very interesting quote:
We need to have an honest debate on interrogation techniques and securing America against attack from radical, committed terrorists. Conservatives should stop pretending that waterboarding isn’t a form of torture that the US has opposed for decades when used abroad, especially against our own citizens. But everyone else should stop pretending that it doesn’t work, and that we would have been safer without its use. The real question — the one Obama wanted to avoid in his cover-up of Blair’s memo — is how many American lives is it worth to say we don’t waterboard? Ten? A hundred? Three thousand? Fifty thousand, the intended result of 9/11 and presumably the Second Wave waterboarding stopped?
I think in general he is right. I know some of you think I’m a disgusting human being who should just die (according to one of our comments). However, Morrisey’s last question is particularly an interesting one, is there some figure at which even the most committed leftist would approve of the use of waterboarding? For instance, if you could, with 100% accuracy, save 1 million lives by waterboarding a known terrorist like Mohammed would you be in favor? 10 million? Preventing World War III? Is there a line? Should there be a line. I don’t know how most American’s feel, however I think a majority probably think that there is some value when it comes to saving actual lives.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:17 am
From the article:
A spokeswoman for Admiral Blair said the lines were cut in the normal editing process of shortening an internal memo into a media statement emphasizing his concern that the public understand the context of the decisions made in the past and the fact that they followed legal orders.
It sounds like *Blair* himself, not Obama, removed the sympathy-for-the-torturers observation in his office’s condensing process. It’s unlikely to me that Obama is interested in cutting out this kind of stuff considering it was only yesterday that he voluntarily declassified and released the Bush Justice Department memo suggesting the exact same thing.
If this was an intentional misrepresentation to the public, I condemn it. But from reading the story, I find it extremely unlikely that this was the case.
But lest there be any confusion about Blair’s position, Blair reaffirmed last night that “these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.”
For a real example of hiding memo which was somehow overlooked by rightpundits, check out this story from yesterday. Then decide who you think is more credible on burying memos.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:24 am
But lest there be any confusion about Blair’s position, Blair reaffirmed last night that “these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.”
CYA is the biggest way. It was the key aspects in the memo and they just happened to be edited out for space…riiiight. Sort of like the NIE that edited out all the intelligence on Iran’s nuclear capability.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:27 am
“…is there some figure at which even the most committed leftist would approve of the use of waterboarding?”
No. Not that hey would ever publicly admit. The last thing that the left wants is metrics. Remember, that this is ultimately about politics and the advantage that comes from smearing your ideological opponents.
Privately, the left approves of torture, but only for the right reasons. When perpetrated by the Maos, Stalins and Ches of this world, and when it is used to sadistically humiliate your adversaries and to remind them about who won, the left is O.K. with torture.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:49 am
Denny Blair has received the memo from the WH and is now in full butt-covering mode.
His latest statement re-aligns him with the administration’s view on the subject, the substance and inadvertant truth-telling of last week’s memo be damned.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:09 am
Remember, that this is ultimately about politics and the advantage that comes from smearing your ideological opponents.
Funny you should say that. This just in. Turns out the torture was in part about trying to manufacture a (non-existent) 9/11-Iraq link as justification for their war.
Absolutely disgusting. These people who sanctioned and ordered this torture must be prosecuted now.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Conjecture and conflation do not make for a convincing argument.
Didn’t read anything specific in the McClatchy piece, like, about KSM being waterboarded IOT provide the Bush Admin with manufactured evidence. I know that there are lots of broad allusions and assertions, but “how did the cow eat the cabbage?”
Coersive interrogation and pressure to produce Iraq-AQ links do not equate to “torture”. Too much factually deficient conflation in this story for me to come to any conclusions. Other than about the agendas of the journalists involved, that is.
That said, if it can be established that we went on “fishing expeditions” or extracted politically convenient confessions using methods that are commonly understood to be torture, let the hearings begin. Before that, let’s release and review ALL of the “torture” memos before we arrive at any ideologically biased conclusions, O.K.?
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Obviously we went on a fishing expedition because Joe Wilson said we did, and he’s completely credible. /snark
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Your argument about where do we draw the line is fallacious because it could only be answered in hindsight.
Morrisey is saying it is OK to torture the enemy. This is repugnant, and against the principles our country stands for, though the enemy be from hell itself.
Cheney wants more info released, OK then, let’s release EVERYTHING. But he wouldn’t go for that. He might wind up in jail.
Obama edited something? But I thought it was OK for the President to do things like that. Bush did it every day.
April 23rd, 2009 at 3:26 am
Are you mainstream liberal bleeding-heart apologists absolutely batsh!t insane? You assert that America has somehow become just like its enemies by performing a torture technique on admitted perpetrators of terrorists attacks that killed thousands of American civilians?
Do you remember the interrogation techniques our enemies used on Michael Durante? If you’re outraged by America employing interrogation techniques on an admitted murderer, but you had to Google Michael Durante to figure out who he is and what type of torture he endured at the hands of America’s enamies, then just look in the mirror and admit to yourself that you’re wrong. There’s no comparison between what our enemies did to Michael Durante, and what our CIA interrogators did 183 times to a worthless scumbag terrorist responsible for killing thousands of Americans in a single morning.
What happened to Michael Durante was far from the worst torture Americans have been subjected to over the last 80 years. Yet it took the knowledge of America torturing a couple admitted terrorists (who, by the way, suffered no broken bones and lossed no blood) for you to suddenly become outraged over torture, and somehow in your mind this one incident immediately sends America down to the same level its enemies have worked so hard to achieve for at least the last 80 years.
The least you can do here is simply agree that if the CIA had waterboarded Khalid Mohammed 2,346 times, we would still be nothing like our enemies.
I mean really, save the drama for your mamma.
April 23rd, 2009 at 4:50 am
Ladies and gentlemen, I’ll be brief. The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our prisoners - we did.
(wink)
But you can’t hold a whole agency responsible for the behavior of a few sick, twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn’t we blame the Department of Homeland Security? And if the Department of Homeland Security is guilty, then isn’t this an indictment of our intelligence institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg - isn’t this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we’re not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America.
Gentlemen!
April 23rd, 2009 at 5:24 am
The “real” question asked at the end of this article is valid, but can also be turned completely around. For instance:
What acts of torture can be justified so long as American lives are being saved? Can we put bamboo shoots under fingernails, or put people on the rack? Can we harm or kill the families of our “enemy combatants”? Can we simply imprison an entire population and assume their universal guilt?
This is my point: yes there is a line that needs to be drawn regarding the risks to which we expose ourselves for the sake of avoiding torture, as this article says. However, there is also a line that needs to be drawn regarding our behavior, and what activities can be justified.
Can any and every brutal act of torture or violence be justified so long as it may end up leading to intelligence that will save lives?
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:55 pm
“However, there is also a line that needs to be drawn regarding our behavior, and what activities can be justified.”
And I do believe that lines were drawn; read the memos. The lines and, more importantly, the line-drawers are the subject at hand. If you have an issue with the legally established parameters of “enhanced interrogation techniques”, then please specify your objections.
Remember that AQ had already committed mass murder in the U.S., we were “in the blind” regarding their capabilities and intentions, and we believed, in good faith, that we didn’t have the luxury of time to develop a more comprehensive picture using less coersive methods. Perspective and context; they’re really important here.
Did we “torture”? Please define. What standard, either by law or convention, is applicable to this case? Read the Geneva Convention very carefully prior to using this as a reference.
I remember reading something about the deliberate infliction of pain and/or causing permanent physical or psychological damage. Admittedly, KSM can never again lay flat on his back in near proximity to a large glass of water without suffering acute anxiety. Torture?
To the best of my knowledge, absolutely nobody proposed anything remotely resembling “bamboo shoots” or “the rack”, or the actual harming of family members. If you are in possession of better info, please share.
But please, no more strawmen.
April 23rd, 2009 at 5:18 pm
I’m amazed at those who are asking for insisting that we adapt a more moral and ethical standard yet themselves are practicing contempt prior to investigation and/or lying through their teeth.
What I fail to see anyone doing is asking the question as to whether or not any Americans were hurt as a result of these techniques and what the repercussions of the memos being released will be to our boots on the ground.
If this investigation does go forward we will see a divide in this country like never before as every word uttered by any elected official will have to go through the scrutiny of a handful of lawyers before its ever spoken.
The can of worms has been opened and right away we see those that opened it like Pelosi saying “its not the can we wanted” and so are making sure they have in their “dont look at me” cards in before the game gets into full play.
April 23rd, 2009 at 5:23 pm
sorry, should say;
I’m amazed at those who are asking for investigations and insisting that we adapt a more moral and ethical standard yet they themselves are practicing contempt prior to investigation and/or lying through their teeth.
April 23rd, 2009 at 5:36 pm
It’s not about “a more moral and ethical standard”, it’s about absolute political advantage and domination. Call it Political Death Match 2009 if you will; it’s gonna get messy.
Political careers and professional reputations on both sides of the aisle will be destroyed if this goes forward. At best, a Phyrric Victory is all that will be obtained. But, hey, this is the game that the left and the Follower-In-Chief have chosen to play.
Hey, Nancy P., you still wanna play?
April 24th, 2009 at 7:30 am
I’m telling you, the only purpose all this serves is to spotlight Bush.
These morons should be happy now that they’ve won the election but their addiction to their hatred of Bush still needs to be fed.
Thats all I see here. Any fool knows that not one person will go to jail over this, not one.
There were stories about how Obama wrestled with his conscience about the release of the documents. If you believe that you probably think you own a bridge somewhere.
Obama won the election running against Bush, not McCain and hes been keeping those BDS flames alive since he came into office. Evertytime he made a trip to Europe or the middle east everything was about a reflection on/or something connected to Bush by apologizing for past actions and policies that clearly were those of Bush. After now you would think this would stop but with the torture thing being brought up he can keep that image of himself as the great corrector of George Bushs derelictions alive for quite a while along with guaranteeing his junkie BDSrs their fix for months if not a couple years. Its the only thing this talentless schmuck can do to make himself look good. Its sickening
Thats why these guys are salivating over this because they know if it goes forward the proceedings, hearings and commisions will be to them what a years supply of heroin is to a junkie.
They dont care about establishing a moral and ethical standard for our country or that this percieved injustice never happens again. They could care less. Thats why we see so many of them ready to convict with no proof. Like a bunch of little children on Christmas morning they are oblivious to anything but to open that package and see an action figure like Bush with a rope around his neck.
Theres no way Obama will be able to prosecute lawyers who simply offered advice or officials who acted in good faith, but by attacking those people it will serve as a great fishing expedition as he knows there will be more intriguing tidbits to feed the frenzy that come with it.
Any fool knows they wont prosecute and that this is simply going to be the biggest dammed dog and pony show we will of ever seen. If they prosecute they’ll have go after the dems who ok’d these interogation techniques back when the CIA inquired. If that happens you’ll be able to time these proceedings from start to finish with an egg timer.
April 24th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Yep, Bread and Circuses for the Left-Wing rabble.
In the show trials to follow, will the accused have to wear dunce caps and endure struggle sessions before their proletariat betters?
Question: Has “Bush Did It” become Obama’s “Easy Button”? Lord knows that the Follower-In-Chief has yet to man-up over anything.