TRADITION! OR, Truth, Get Your Boots On

Yesterday I noted a factually challenged op-ed in the NY Times.  Ali Soufan, a former FBI agent, was involved in the interrogation of Zubaydah, the first terrorist to be waterboarded.  Mr. Soufan, writing in the NY Times, claimed that "traditional" interrogation techniques were working well with Zubaydah and producing good intelligence until June but the CIA switched to a heavier hand anyway.

However, the Department of Justice Inspector General report on torture devoted a chapter to the Zubaydah interrogation.  Per that report (p. 100-111 of 438), the CIA adopted harsh tactics "within days", tactics so harsh (yet redacted) that one of the two FBI agents on the scne described that as "borderline torture" and both agents were recalled by June rather than be associated with the interrogation.

Here is Mr. Soufan:

It is inaccurate, however, to say that Abu Zubaydah had been uncooperative. Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned him from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence.

David Johnston of the NY Times wrote about this on Sept 10, 2006:

The events that unfolded at the safe house over the next few weeks [after the capture of Zubaydah]  proved to be fateful for the Bush administration. Within days, Mr. Zubaydah was being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques — he was stripped, held in an icy room and jarred by earsplittingly loud music — the genesis of practices later adopted by some within the military, and widely used by the Central Intelligence Agency in handling prominent terrorism suspects at secret overseas prisons.

So, what is the truth?  Did the DoJ Inspector general get it wrong?  Or are "traditional" FBI interrogations normally described by FBI agents as "borderline torture", and so harsh that FBI agents are not allowed to participate in them (I see a prisoner in an empty room...)?

Or is Mr. Soufan serving up the sort of dish that a certain audience is sure to savor uncritically?  Harsher techniques were introduced in August, but the techniques before then were surely harsh.

Let's sample reaction to the op-ed.  Dan Froomkin of the WaPo:

But to me, the most significant news of the day can be found on today's New York Times op-ed page, where former FBI supervisor Ali Soufan persuasively and memorably rebuts the misinformation being spread by those complicit in torture.

Fight fire with fire and misinformation with misinformation.  We can make up stuff faster than they can!  Mr. Froomkin includes this warning:

The point is this: Any assertions from these people should presumptively be considered misinformation.

By "these people" he means those on the other side from Mr. Soufan, of course.

Michael Winter at USA Today flagged the Soufan piece but did not assess it.

Spencer Ackerman had the best title (click to see) and looked truth in the face by researching the Zubaydah interrogation, but backed away.  From Mr. Ackerman:

Somehow, a SERE guy was part of the Abu Zubaydah interrogation as soon as CIA officials deployed to interrogate the detainee...

[O]thers present [at the interrogation] said he seemed to think he had all the answers about how to deal with Zubayda. Mitchell announced that the suspect had to be treated “like a dog in a cage,” informed sources said. “He said it was like an experiment, when you apply electric shocks to a caged dog, after a while, he’s so diminished, he can’t resist.” [as quoted on page 156 of Jane Mayer’s The Dark Side:]

This horrified the FBI agents on scene, Mayer reports. (”Science is science,” Mitchell retorted. Spoken like Sean Hannity!) They were eventually ordered to leave the interrogation, which became brutal.

Well, yet another source confirming that the interrogation was rough from the outset, which is why the FBI left.

Now to be fair and balanced, the Inspector General report says that the two FBI agents got an identification of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as the mastermind of the 9/11 report while caring for Zubaydah in the hospital prior to the CIA involvement, so it is fair enough to say that they were getting results with a traditional technique.  However, that traditional technique was not employed up to June, as Soufan claims, nor were harsh techniques only applied beginning in August.  Per the IG, the CIA assumed control of the Zubaydah interrogation within "a few days" and made a quick judgment that they needed to "diminish his capacity to resist".

We will see whether anyone cares to have their talking points disrupted.

Comments

[anduril]

It would be nice to know a bit more about Ali Soufan.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

We will see whether anyone cares to have their talking points disrupted.

Hah! That's a good one.

I know one: Jesus and St Peter decide to play golf...

[BumperStickerist]

My understanding - then - is that the CIA used science in its interrogation techniques.

The FBI preferred something ... less scientific.

So, Obama is now politicizing, and criminalizing, science.

Great.

---------

[clarice]

Just so you have this handy--two interviews of Pelosi from 2007:
"Transcript: Speaker Nancy Pelosi on ‘FNS’
Monday, October 08, 2007

WASHINGTON — This is a rush transcript from "FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace," October 7, 2007. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: It’s been nine months since Nancy Pelosi became the first woman speaker of the House and opened a new combative relationship between Congress and the president. On Friday in the Capitol, we had a chance to talk with the speaker about that and why public approval of Congress is now at historic lows. Our interview took place in the speaker’s ceremonial office.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WALLACE: Speaker Pelosi, welcome back to Fox News Sunday.

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., HOUSE SPEAKER: My pleasure…

WALLACE: It’s been disclosed this week that the Justice Department, after publicly declaring torture abhorrent in 2004, secretly, a few months later, approved the — in combination — the use of head slapping, water boarding and exposure to extreme temperatures.

The president now says that the leadership, the Congress, was fully informed, and that this is not torture.

First question: Were you ever briefed about this policy or the secret Justice Department memos?

PELOSI: Well, in order to know if I’m briefed about it, I’d have to be briefed about it now. What exactly is the president talking about? Yes, let me get my credentials right out there. I’m the longest-serving member of Congress on the intelligence committee, both on the committee and ex officio as a leader. So we have been briefed on some tactics used by the administration.

But I’d have to see what we’re talking about here, because this is — all I know is what I’ve read in the New York Times.

WALLACE: You were never briefed about these secret memos in 2005?

PELOSI: No, not about the secret memos.

But let me say also, again, as one who appreciates the value of intelligence to protect the American people, I think it’s very important that we have the best possible intelligence. And there’s international cooperation on this, and there are international standards on it. And I think that protecting the American people being our top priority, we should do so in a way that is within the law, and experts agree that you do not obtain reliable intelligence through using these tactics.

WALLACE: So let me ask you directly…

PELOSI: … and you diminish our reputation in the world, which hurts the cooperation we need to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people.

WALLACE: So let me ask you directly. Do you think that the interrogation techniques that have been reported — let’s not talk about what’s in the memo, but what’s been reported — in combination, head slapping, water boarding, exposure to extreme temperatures. Torture?

PELOSI: There is a legal definition of torture that I believe this would fit. The president says it is not. Again, we have to see the degree and what he is talking about, because again, to answer on the basis of something that’s been reported in the press that the president has deemed is not torture, it’s just not — I just can’t give you an informative answer on that."

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/repost-pelosi-on-waterboarding-10807

In Meetings, Spy Panels’ Chiefs Did Not Protest, Officials Say

By Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen
Sunday, December 9, 2007; A01

In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.

Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.

"The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough," said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange…

[L]ong before "waterboarding" entered the public discourse, the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.

With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter. The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

Individual lawmakers’ recollections of the early briefings varied dramatically, but officials present during the meetings described the reaction as mostly quiet acquiescence, if not outright support. "Among those being briefed, there was a pretty full understanding of what the CIA was doing," said Goss, who chaired the House intelligence committee from 1997 to 2004 and then served as CIA director from 2004 to 2006. "And the reaction in the room was not just approval, but encouragement." …

U.S. officials knowledgeable about the CIA’s use of the technique say it was used on three individuals — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; Zayn Abidin Muhammed Hussein Abu Zubaida, a senior al-Qaeda member and Osama bin Laden associate captured in Pakistan in March 2002; and a third detainee who has not been publicly identified.

Abu Zubaida, the first of the "high-value" detainees in CIA custody, was subjected to harsh interrogation methods beginning in spring 2002 after he refused to cooperate with questioners, the officials said. CIA briefers gave the four intelligence committee members limited information about Abu Zubaida’s detention in spring 2002, but offered a more detailed account of its interrogation practices in September of that year, said officials with direct knowledge of the briefings.

The CIA provided another briefing the following month, and then about 28 additional briefings over five years, said three U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge of the meetings. During these sessions, the agency provided information about the techniques it was using as well as the information it collected.

Lawmakers have varied recollections about the topics covered in the briefings.

Graham said he has no memory of ever being told about waterboarding or other harsh tactics. Graham left the Senate intelligence committee in January 2003, and was replaced by Rockefeller. "Personally, I was unaware of it, so I couldn’t object," Graham said in an interview. He said he now believes the techniques constituted torture and were illegal.

Pelosi declined to comment directly on her reaction to the classified briefings. But a congressional source familiar with Pelosi’s position on the matter said the California lawmaker did recall discussions about enhanced interrogation. The source said Pelosi recalls that techniques described by the CIA were still in the planning stage — they had been designed and cleared with agency lawyers but not yet put in practice — and acknowledged that Pelosi did not raise objections at the time…

All of this nonsense about a practice that was used at most three times and which was not and is not torture — or illegal.

But the Democrats and their minions in the media will use anything to try to destroy our intelligence agencies and weaken our national security.

[Once again, isn’t it funny how the rest of our watchdog media are only discovering this briefing now?]

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/repost-pelosi-briefed-on-waterboarding-02
The Heartbreak of Botox Brain Poisoning

[Semanticleo]

Here we go again with the tortured logic and scatalogical preening of right-wing feathers.

It's a pity the energy displayed by such self-justification can't be converted
to passion for the ideals we espouse as Americans. But the 'End justifies Means'
crowd will suffer any complaint for the sake of survival, even if that survival undermines
the foundation of their value system, whatever that is.

[Appalled]

TM:

Per Soufan, the harsher techniques were introduced in August. Also, the memos authorizing the harsher methods were drafted in August.

Per the IG, harsher measurers were introduced very soon after the capture.

All of which begs the question -- under what legal authority were the CIA guys operating between the commencement of harshness and June--August?

if there is a timeline problem introduced by Soufan's article, it cuts both ways.

[GMax]

I choose life, my own that is. Some crybabies will no doubt worry about the effect on the baby seal population of this policy. I in my own tortured logic way will remember that these bastards flew planes full of people into buildings full of people with the full intent of triggering a world war which would lead to a world wide Caliphate much to their delight. Sorry if that offends your sensibilities.

[Semanticleo]

"If you can't argue the facts, focus on the 'nuance'." R. Limbaugh

[narciso]

Who were these informed sources again, can we get any of these people on the record.Is Mitchell the one who's practice was outed in the course of the 'burning of Keith Martinez',

[MayBee]

I see other people must be googling Ali Soufan. At the top of google is this article written last year for the WaPo:

On Oct. 12, 2000, when I flew to Yemen to lead the FBI's Cole investigation, I had no idea how uncooperative the Yemeni government would initially be. Nor could I have imagined how disconnected from reality the U.S. ambassador to Yemen then, Barbara K. Bodine, would prove.

Didn't Clinton claim he couldn't do anything about the Cole because it wasn't confirmed it was an AlQ operation until after he left office?

[MayBee]

Soufan is no fan of the CIA:

Wright talks about how turf wars with the C.I.A. got in the way. Wright’s book “The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11” will be published by Knopf in August.

AMY DAVIDSON: The question your article asks is whether the C.I.A. stopped an F.B.I. agent from preventing 9/11. Let’s start with the F.B.I. agent. Who was he, and why was he remarkable?

LAWRENCE WRIGHT: On 9/11, Ali Soufan, an Arab-American F.B.I. agent, was one of only eight agents in the F.B.I. who spoke Arabic, and the only one in New York City. He was absolutely invaluable to the bureau because of his skills, his innate talent, and his relentless nature. At the age of twenty-nine, he was appointed the chief agent in charge of investigating the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, in the harbor of Aden, Yemen, which killed seventeen American soldiers in October of 2000.

That was an Al Qaeda attack as well?

As it turned out—Soufan’s investigation proved that it was.

What could he have done to stop Osama bin Laden from attacking the World Trade Center?

People who were involved in the planning of the Cole bombing were connected to the people who planned 9/11. There was a meeting in Malaysia in January, 2000, where at least two of the 9/11 hijackers and the mastermind behind the Cole bombing, a man named Khallad, met with other Al Qaeda operatives. After that meeting, two of the hijackers flew to the United States and settled in San Diego. The C.I.A. knew about the meeting; the agency had had it monitored by Malaysia’s secret service, Special Branch, which took surveillance photos and sent them to the C.I.A. So the agency had in its file pictures of Khallad and of people who turned out to be among the hijackers. Had the C.I.A. told Soufan what it knew about the meeting, he might have uncovered the plot.

[MayBee]

Weird. Links didn't show.

[Cecil Turner]

. . . if there is a timeline problem introduced by Soufan's article, it cuts both ways.

I seem to recall some stories about CIA interrogators that asked for a legal ruling before continuing harsh interrogations (that unfortunately resists my google-fu because of all the recent stories), which suggests formal authorization followed the program's inception. That's typical of the bad old days approach, which is basically to disregard the law in extremis situations:

“If we had a ticking bomb situation, and obviously, whatever was being used I felt was not sufficient, I would not hesitate to go to the president of the United States and request whatever additional authority I would need,” Mr. Panetta said in his nomination hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Considering the foofraw over the memos, and the ongoing inability to keep anything with a political bent secret, I suspect many would like to have those days back.

[clarice]

Hence my suggestion of a presidential medal with the inscription "With the thanks of an ungrateful nation"

[MayBee]

An article from last year has Soufan at Guiliani partners and buying a $1.7 million apartment.

[MayBee]

I love that, clarice.

[verner]

Small point. He may have given up the IDNENTITY of KSM, but when did he give up the intel that resulted in the CAPTURE of KSM.

Because If I'm remembering the reports,KSM was CAPTURED as a result of intel gathered from A-Z and the other one through enhanced interrogation. That's what Hayden, and also Blair implied without going into any detail--which of course they could not do.

So maybe we're playing bait and switch.

In other words, maybe the CIA knew from other interrogations that A-Z wasn't being completely, umm, transparent, and it took an extra nudge to get what they needed.

That's what they said happened in the WaPo article, no? They were mainly getting "trash", and they thought there was more.

And if Mr FBI was gone from the interrogation process, he wouldn't know that, now would he.

CIA vs. FBI cat fight, with a dollop of Soros money somewhere. Bet on it.

[narciso]

Ali Soufan, i remember from the "Looming Tower" was one of those that threw up when he discovered that the people he had been tracking on the Cole investigation, Al Midhar and Al Masri, were part of the September 11th. Apparently the CIA had their information but they didn't do anything with it. Maybe they wanted to use them as informants, but there's no information on this, the FBI had there landlord as their source, but they didn't relay much information. Or Zia Jarrah flag when he traveled the UAE.

[verner]

I'm, so sick of the "ticking bomb" requirement.

As I posted on another thread, Hambali was captured in Thailand in August of 2003--six weeks before he was planning on turning Bangkok during the APEC conference into the same horror show we saw in Mumbai.

400 people were killed in the Bali bombing, so we know how capable Mr. Hambali was.

Really, how much of a ticking bomb do these idiots require?

[Ranger]

Hmmm... If the harsh methods started as soon as the CIA arrived in June, and the FBI backed out because of them, it would make sense for the CIA to CYA in the turf battle by requesting an opinion from DoJ (the FBI's home) declaring their methods legal, and making the FBI team look like a couple of wusses for complaining about them.

[verner]

Shall we remind everyone, the head honcho throughout ALL of this merry tale was none other than Clinton appointee George Tenet.

Makes you wonder what kind of interrogation was going on under Mr Hillary Clinton, now doesn't it. By the way, has she chimed in?

[Jane]

So what is going on in DC? Why the evacuation (which now appears over)?

[Ranger]

Well, the CIA people were most probably working under legal advice from the CIA legal people. The decision to go up the chain to OLC was very probably a response to FBI complaints about CIA going over "the line" as the FBI saw it. If the FBI leadership was concerned enough to pull their agents out of the interogation (a decision that was probably made by the director himself given the significance of the person be interogated), they must have also raised the issue at DoJ as well.

[clarice]

An evacuation!! I'll have to go lookm Jane.

[Jane]

I think a plane was in the wrong spot Clarice. Apparently it is over.

[clarice]

Yeah--just saw that..Nothing like DC after 9/11 when security forces were secretly telling their families and friends to get out of town and anthrax shut down everything and sirens with hazmat teams were running all over town. Focused the mind, that did.

[clarice]

The PM article I mentioned earlier

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/playing-partisan-politics-with-terrorists-and-torture/

[clarice]

Roger L. Simon:"April 24th, 2009 7:20 am

Tortured by Pelosi
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Maybe it’s the perspective of having just returned from Geneva, where I had to deal with Ahmadinejad, only to find the American media engaged in an absurd and meretricious debate about torture (led by the NYT, of course), but I have this to say:

I would rather be waterboarded than spend ten minutes with Nancy Pelosi. The lying harridan who happens to be our Speaker of the House is one of the most tedious women on the planet.

Regarding waterboarding, Cliff May had interesting post, if you haven’t seen it. "

[narciso]

There is nowhere the level of outrage directed in the world against Ahmadinejad,
IRGC (Vevak Sepah Pasdaran)commando implicated in the assasination of an exiled Kurdish dissident leader, Quassemlou in Vienna, warden at the notorious Evin prison, which makes Gitmo look like juvenile
hall, than over the forceful treatment of the most brutal persons on the planet.

[Enlightened]

"Had the C.I.A. told Soufan what it knew about the meeting, he might have uncovered the plot."

If Soufan was chief agent in charge of the Cole investigation, why the hell didn't he know about the meeting of the Cole mastermind and two hijackers and the movement of the hijackers to San Diego? If Mr. FBI Soufan was doing his job as CI on the Cole, he should have known about these two guys, someone should have been tailing them and the cell leader at all times and someone should have stopped them when it appeared they were up to no good.

CIA had intel on the two guys but didn't turn it over to FBI? So what - Gorelick made that predcitable.

A chief investigator of a terrorist act that doesn't keep track of the players is an idiot that has alot of explaining to do. No wonder he threw up.

IMO - he obviously screwed up any interogations he did on the Cole players, did not play hard ball and let two murderers directly linked to the cell leader roam around the US unfettered.

Soufan is highly unreliable IMO.

[MayBee]

The clean toga club puts its sandals on:

In my opinion, after reading the Bybee memo, waterboarding should have been avoided altogether unless the interrogators made clear to the subjects that they would not be harmed — as they did with the insect drop. If waterboarding saved lives in Los Angeles and elsewhere, then we need to discuss how many American lives we’re willing to sacrifice to say that we don’t waterboard, but first, we have to know if waterboarding actually saved lives at all.

[matt]

This whole thing will have a life of its own as it is paraded as another moral failure of the US government by our enemies, both foreign and domestic. A funny term that these days; domestic enemies. I guess our forefathers knew something pretty basic.

this is the only country in the world where such a farce could take place. Terrorists committed to our annihilation are accorded more rights than military trainees.

Our own intelligence agents have more to fear from a bunch of leftist human rights lawyers whose politics are antithetical to the survival of the nation than from our enemies. It reminds me of the song played by Cornwallis' troops as they were marched past Washington's army at Yorktown; "The World Turned Upside Down".

[clarice]

See what I mean about, Ed.

In a fight with bums I want people like you and Jane and Cecil and Tom and Boris and Ranger and narciso erc..NOT Ed or Michelle.

[Enlightened]

"If waterboarding saved lives in Los Angeles and elsewhere, then we need to discuss how many American lives we’re willing to sacrifice to say that we don’t waterboard, but first, we have to know if waterboarding actually saved lives at all"

No we don't you jackass. We don't need to know anything about it, and we sure don't need to broadcast to future murderers what we will do to them if they kill innocent Americans.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Hmmm. It appears Olbermann is challenging Hannity to be waterboarded, with $1000 a second for charity on the line.

I'll be posting something on Explorations later, but I just want to make it public that I'm going to be offering to take the same deal.

[verner]

But they're soooo HIP! Maybee

Bad case of worrying about what the Kewlkidsthinkaboutyouitis.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

That is, I'll be waterboarded if Olby puts up the money.

I'm kind of thinking the Palin Legal Defense Fund.

[verner]

When we do have the revolution, nice to know we'll have all the CIA agents on our side.(I guess?!?)

I have a feeling that the UN Torture Court will be the very last straw. I know it would be for me.

[Elliott]

I know one: Jesus and St Peter decide to play golf...

Don't anyone say you weren't warned.

[narciso]

O.K. I understand Ed, or is it Allah being soft on the matter, but Michelle I would think would be the one that says give them a medal not a subpoena. The fact is the lack of an attack, precisely because we chose some rough tactics have made us very
softminded. The Brits faced the same problem
over their operations in Northern Ireland,
the French in the case of Gen, Aussaresse
nearly 40 years later, because of the Battle
of the Casbah.

[Porchlight]

OT but not really:

Congress Reaches Tentative Deal on the Budget

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, warned President Obama in a White House meeting on Thursday that the use of the procedural tool was likely to cause trouble in Congress. But Mr. Obama said that he backed relying on the reconciliation approach to move ahead with one of his legislative priorities and did not want it to fail if 59 senators were on board rather than the 60 needed to break filibusters.

So they are going forward with the "reconciliation" procedure to push health care through with a simple Senate majority.

I've had the feeling all week that the torture memos were a smokescreen thrown up to distract people from something else. Maybe this is it.

[clarice]

Just whisper someone might have done something wrong and whe runs far aaway as fast as she can. I've seen her do it repeatedly well before she knows whether the charges are true or not..

ChaCO!! You darling. (Kind of like mud wrestling for her favors..Oooohh narciso is already getting into his mud wrestling gear .)

[Porchlight]

Okay, my link was there one minute ago, even after refreshing a couple of times. Trying again:

Congress Reaches Tentative Deal on the Budget

[MayBee]

No, Allah isn't soft on the matter at all. He thinks it should be legal and rare. Patterico is on board with that.

I think reasonable people can have different ideas of what constitutes torture and whether the US should engage in it.
I just don't understand how someone can find himself morally superior for allowing that other people might be killed because he didn't approve of water boarding.

But even that isn't Ed. Ed thinks it needed to be done to the letter of the law as he thinks the law should be, even if it makes the interrogation ineffective.

[Bill in AZ]

WALLACE: Speaker Pelosi, welcome back to Fox News Sunday.

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., HOUSE SPEAKER: My pleasure…

Her first two words were a lie, and it went downhill from there.

[clarice]

I want MayBee's hand on the waterboard not Ed's.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Time warp: AP News from 2013

[Charlie (Colorado)]

ChaCO!! You darling.

no big deal. It's unpleasant. okay, got it. It won't kill me. Got that.

What doesn't kill me makes me stronger.

If it makes Olby look like an ass, even better.

[Parking Space]

what??!! Olbermann is okay with a member of the vast right wing conspiracy being waterboarded ??? .. what a frkn hypocrite

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Okay, the post is up.

[narciso]

Look I don't want gratuitous use of these techniques, ala Jack Bauer, although one would concede his efforts have cost him a great deal. But people like Keith Martinez
and Kiriaologos, should have the latitude to employ these tactics without excessive
oversight, A fact that Soufan and Cloonan don't seem to get.

[bad]

Here is a comment from Tappers post LUN about Obama's decision to release photos of unlawful detainee abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I am finding it sadly ironic, that the CIA which did EVERYTHING possible to undermine the Bush administration is now under attack by Bush' successor. If this isn't a 'be careful what you wish for moment', I don't know what is.

OUCH!!

[MayBee]

I just know that if a US city was hit again, and the president came on tv and said,

"The losses have been devastating. There is some good news. 2 weeks ago we did capture the plotter of this attack on LA, and I can assure all Americans listening to me today that we did not subject him to any enhanced interrogation."

The response would not be overwhelming moral relief of the part of Americans.

[JM Hanes]

Sematicleo:

Finally found a bandwagon you can jump on, eh? Pickin's have been pretty slim since Jan. 20th!

""If you can't argue the facts, focus on the 'nuance'."

As usual, Rush nails the lefty M.O. to the wall.

"But the 'End justifies Means' crowd will suffer any complaint for the sake of survival, even if that survival undermines the foundation of their value system, whatever that is."

Ah, Semantic, you're like a human wayback machine. I remember when you first appeared at JOM posing ends & means questions which everyone but you was willing to answer.

[Jane]

Hmmm. It appears Olbermann is challenging Hannity to be waterboarded, with $1000 a second for charity on the line.

What a cheap bastard.

Make it $100,000 a second and we will all line up.

[JM Hanes]

Charlie:

We're all Sean Hannity now! It does seem emblematic that Olbermann would be perfectly willing to see a conservative subjected to "torture," while presumably condemning its use on terrorists and watching it from the sidelines, doesn't it?

How do you suppose waterboarding compares to getting a tooth fillied without novocaine -- and with a low speed drill -- like I did in my teens? Unless I hear otherwise from JOM vets, I figure I'm good to go on the waterboarding!

[clarice]

Heh--I like Matt Lewis' piece a lot.. Very clever.

[clarice]

Ooh--JMH--every Saturday afternoon for longer than I can remember--bzzzzzzzzzzzzt , temporary filling--see you next week.......ARGH

[boris]

"without novocaine"

I always hated novocaine. Never used it for regular cavities and rarely for crowns.

Gnerally a much quicker visit to the dentist without.

[JM Hanes]

Jane:

How about a $100,000 for every second Hannity can outlast Olbermann or vice versa. That's might even be pay-per-view material, where the winner takes the proceeds. Hannity, of course, would win whether or not he outlasted Olbermann, because when waterboarding becomes farce, the public won't be buying the torture meme.

[boris]

Hannity should cross challenge Oby for "real" torture. Every second H holds out on waterboarding, Oby has to endure mild electric shock to his big toe.

[bad]

I'll undergo waterboarding for Olbermann's pleasure. I have a certain advantage. And he doesn't have to pay anyone as long as it's televised.

[boris]

Oooh H and Oby each get a kill switch, Whoever hits the switch first loses.

[clarice]

Angleton's spook weighs in:

http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/04/22/spooks-scoops-and-pols/

[Charlie (Colorado)]

How do you suppose waterboarding compares to getting a tooth fillied without novocaine -- and with a low speed drill -- like I did in my teens? Unless I hear otherwise from JOM vets, I figure I'm good to go on the waterboarding!

I'm allergic to novocaine. But I am rather a Nietzsche fan.

[JM Hanes]

O.K. Once more without blockquote tags or preview. Sorry if this duplicates itself later.

The coping mechanisms on offer from my mother at the dentist's door:

** Every pain has a rhythm. Find it. Go with the flow.

** Picture yourself an hour from now, when it will all be over, and you'll be doing something else.

The second has proven to be a multipurpose tool.

[Parking Space]

((How about a $100,000 for every second Hannity can outlast Olbermann or vice versa. ))

how about reality show about the CIA interrogating suspects?

[Charlie (Colorado)]

JMH, I'm also fond of one from one of the Kung Fu series. "The key is just not to care that it hurts."

[Jane]

How do you suppose waterboarding compares to getting a tooth fillied without novocaine -- and with a low speed drill -- like I did in my teens?

Unlike Boris I would prefer waterboarding, or even death. I guess some people's teeth are harder than others. (Or I'm a wimp)

How about a $100,000 for every second Hannity can outlast Olbermann or vice versa.

I'm in, and I would contribute.

[bad]

I'm confused by the lefties continued scream for "the rule of law" therefore we need truth commissions and/or trials.

But Obama says (Thursday) he is against truth commissions, etc. and wants to move forward.

Is Obama not in favor of the rule of law and why is this not a problem for the left?

[ben]

Added bonus: just think what Olberwrought will confess to during waterboarding....

[sbw]

Olbermann, entertainment of the first water. If olby gets waterboarded, can we choose the liquid?

[ben]

I bet the trial lawyers of Obama, er, I mean America are between a rock and a hard place. They would some circus political trials but on the other hand if you start prosecuting people for giving legal advice it will put a big damper on their profession (and income).

[ben]

whoops..they would love some circus political trials

[Semanticleo]

There appears to be no apparent end to Wingnut Nation's 'whistling through the graveyard'....pity

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Okay, this is pretty cool.

[ben]

"So they are going forward with the "reconciliation" procedure to push health care through with a simple Senate majority."

Instapundit has a poll up on this. So its 2000 votes to 24 against this travesty.

[Parking Space]

((Added bonus: just think what Olberwrought will confess to during waterboarding....))

he will confess that in truth he doesn't give a rat's patooty about waterboarding ... it's all a big act

[ben]

"he will confess that in truth he doesn't give a rat's patooty about waterboarding ... it's all a big act"

EXACTLY....and neither does Nick or Semanticleo or any of the other moonbats here...if Clinton and Obama had terrorists waterboarded they would all be perfectly ok with it (as were Pelosi and all the other Democrats who were told about it). The backlash against this charade will huge.

[PeterUK]

The supreme irony is that the Islamists hate liberal morals and man made laws the most.If it were not for the right protecting the liberals,the liberals would be gone.
Interesting said liberal regard the righ as the enemy.

[PeterUK]

"Oby has to endure mild electric shock to his big toe."

His big toe? Something more personal surely?

[clarice]

"** Picture yourself an hour from now, when it will all be over, and you'll be doing something else.

The second has proven to be a multipurpose tool"

This is essentially what my husband tells kids about to be bar mitzcah--"In an hour it'll be over, Almost no one here knows Hebrew well enough to know if you made a mistake or not and those who do love you so much they won't notice or care. Just go out there and do it, Whether you do a great job or a poor job it'll be over in an hour."

That always works.

[Parking Space]

((... and those who do love you so much they won't notice or care))

sweet

[Enlightened]

"Something more personal surely?"

Well - someone would have to find it first....

[matt]

The Japanese are now planning a new game show based on waterboarding. It will be exported to the United States in @ 3 years as "Chinese Water Torture" starring Howie Mandel and the Japanese will make millions and every American child will want to be on it.

[anduril]

Somehow I thought John O'Neill was in charge of the Cole investigation: the man who knew. The Google result says:

As an FBI agent who specialized in counter-terrorism, John P. O'Neill investigated the bombing of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the USS Cole ...

I always distrust those author characterizations of people who worked in organizations that the author never really had access to.

[Captain Hate]

If olby gets waterboarded, can we choose the liquid?

Janeane Garofalo's annual shampoo water?

[narciso]

We know of John O'Neil's valiant efforts to get to the bottom of the Cole bombing an episode obstructed by the likes of Barbara Bodine, who had observed Saddam's savagery
and briefly was in Iraq at the outset of the war. Having worked the O.C, division, I'm sure he wouldn't have been squeamish
of what had to be done. But in O'Neil's absense, Soufan ended up running the operation.

[Stephanie]

Golden Shower?

(I will thwack myself for that one, couldn't resist, though)

[bad]

LOL, Stephanie (although I have NO IDEA as to what you are referring)

[Stephanie]

Me either, I just overheard some uber hip Obama supporters fantasizing about taking one with Megan somebody or other when I was downtown today and I thought I would parrot their words to be uber cool like them...

[Gmax]

Garofolo ... shampoo water? Have you seen that hair? Just what about it made you think of shampoo, or water for that matter.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

How do you suppose waterboarding compares to getting a tooth fillied without novocaine -- and with a low speed drill -- like I did in my teens? Unless I hear otherwise from JOM vets, I figure I'm good to go on the waterboarding!

Been there, done that and more. I rode in cars without a carseat and later without seatbelts, rode bikes without a helmet, played on asphalt playgrounds without any rubber padding, played tag and, ::drumroll please:: survived many games of Dodogeball.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

** Dodgeball **

[cathyf]

How do you suppose waterboarding compares to getting a tooth fillied without novocaine -- and with a low speed drill...

Gee, I wonder how it compares to 6 hours of tetanic contraction on a freshly-sutured uterus? Packing 100 or so feet of gauze into an open wound, and pulling it all out a day later and repeating... for 6 weeks?

Heck, at least when they waterboard you they don't charge you $10,000 for the privilege.

[clarice]

Sounds divine, Cathy.

[Lesley]

JMH - filling a tooth without novocaine?

As I recall, you are a mother. Remember hard labor? Holy Carp. If the CIA could only replicate contractions (via pitocin) resulting in a terrorist squeezing something the size of a basketball out of some nether orifice.

That would get a grown man singing like a canary, pronto.

[JM Hanes]

Lesley:

Oh yes, I remember. My first labor took so long, my husband went home for a nap in the middle of it.

[Captain Hate]

Garofolo ... shampoo water? Have you seen that hair? Just what about it made you think of shampoo, or water for that matter.

Did you miss the word "annual"?

[Jane]

I really love my very sick friends.