Did Enhanced Interrogation Lead To Osama bin Laden?

Did the enhanced interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Faraj al-Libbi (who was not waterboarded and was captured after the enhanced interogation program was suspended) and other Gitmo detainees lead to the information that led to bin Laden?  The fog of war blows in from the left as Marcy Wheeler concludes that, since we can't prove that enhanced interrogation was helpful, we must assume that it wasn't.  Well, she dresses that up a bit:

The AP has confirmed that intelligence leading to the courier that in turn led to Osama bin Laden came from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and–as I surmised earlier–Abu Faraj al-Libi while in CIA custody. But partly because of the language AP uses to describe this–and partly because the wingnuts love torture–many are drawing the wrong conclusion about it.

We looked at this earlier ourselves.  As to whether the efficacy of enhanced interrogation is a wrong conclusion, or simply an inconvenient truth, well, who can say?  (As an aside, I am sure there are many who won't believe a word out of Obama's mouth on this subject; there are surely a comparable number who know that anything Dick Cheney says about this is a self-serving lie.)

Ms. Wheeler extracts a timeline from the various official comments and concludes that

...while the CIA may have learned the courier’s nickname earlier, they didn’t learn his true name until “four years ago”–so late 2006 at the earliest. And they didn’t learn where the courier operated until around 2009.

From these dates we can conclude that either KSM shielded the courier’s identity entirely until close to 2007, or he told his interrogators that there was a courier who might be protecting bin Laden early in his detention but they were never able to force him to give the courier’s true name or his location, at least not until three or four years after the waterboarding of KSM ended. That’s either a sign of the rank incompetence of KSM’s interrogators (that is, that they missed the significance of a courier protecting OBL), or a sign he was able to withstand whatever treatment they used with him.

Well, it may be rank incompetence, or it may be that, since KSM was captured in March 2003, he simply didn't know the location or operational procedures of this courier as of 2006.  In fact, it's easy to speculate that KSM may not have been aware that this particular protege had been promoted after his capture. 

As to whether KSM protected his protege's real name, maybe he just didn't know it - if, at the time of KSM's capture the courier was just a low-level operative with potential, good operational security should have included not passing his name around the organization.  At some point he would need to be fully vetted (we have a mental image of an al Qaeda operative touring his home village running a background check) but why do we presume this would have happened prior to KSM's capture?

One might expect that Abu Faraj al-Libbi, as the successor to KSM, knew more about this courier.  Al-Libbi was captured in May 2005; per Marc Thiessen (excerpted here) the enhanced interrogation program was suspended shortly thereafter, but al-Libbi may have been subjected to some rough treatment while in Pakistani custody or a US secret prison prior to his transfer to Gitmo [the WaPo says he was, below, and Thiessen can be read as confirming that.].  And maybe it will be argued that suspension of the program delayed his release of information about the courier - I have no idea whether that is true, which puts it on as strong a foundation as the Wheeler speculation.  But let's include this from the AP:

In a secret CIA prison in Eastern Europe years ago, al-Qaida's No. 3 leader, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, gave authorities the nicknames of several of bin Laden's couriers, four former U.S. intelligence officials said. Those names were among thousands of leads the CIA was pursuing.

One man became a particular interest for the agency when another detainee, Abu Faraj al-Libi, told interrogators that when he was promoted to succeed Mohammed as al-Qaida's operational leader he received the word through a courier. Only bin Laden would have given al-Libi that promotion, CIA officials believed.

If they could find that courier, they'd find bin Laden.

Hmm.  No word on the timing or circumstances of that revelation.

Let's flash back to April 2009 when Scott Shane of the Times reviewed the Justice Department OLC memos on enhanced interrogation and assessed the program:

Interrogation of one Qaeda operative led to tips on finding others, until the leadership of the organization was decimated. Removing from the scene such dedicated and skilled plotters as Mr. Mohammed, or the Indonesian terrorist known as Hambali, almost certainly prevented future attacks.

People knew that piecing together the Al Qaeda org chart was helpful.  However, these were not controlled experiments, so we won't know who would have talked anyway, who would not have, and who talked out of fear of being subjected to treatment that was never administered. 

It is clear that KSM was held in secret prisons and waterboarded, and that al-Libbi was held in secret prisons; it is being reported that both provided critical clues that eventually led to bin Laden.  To conclude from those facts that enhanced interrogation was not instrumental in cracking the case is a bit of a leap, just as it would be a leap to conclude that enhanced interrogation was essential.

FROM THE WAPO:

Libbi was held at CIA “black sites,” or secret prisons, where he was subjected to harsh questioning, which the George W. Bush administration called “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

CYA AT THE CIA:  Do keep in mind - today, following the Osama success, the CIA is run by Washington's golden boys.  But it was only a few years back that they were worried that Eric Holder would be prosecuting them.  If I were a CIA officer worried that the wheel might turn again, I would be very quick to leak that the enhanced interrogation program was important, whether it was or not.

It would be interesting to know the truth.  I assume Obama will lie about this in his eventual book but (if enhanced interrogation really was critical) it would be interesting to read an honest account of the sale and leaseback of his soul.

SOMETHING FOR EVERYONE IN THE TIMES:  From the NY Times tick-tock:

Years before the Sept. 11 attacks transformed Bin Laden into the world’s most feared terrorist, the C.I.A. had begun compiling a detailed dossier about the major players inside his global terror network.

It wasn’t until after 2002, when the agency began rounding up Qaeda operatives — and subjecting them to hours of brutal interrogation sessions in secret overseas prisons — that they finally began filling in the gaps about the foot soldiers, couriers and money men Bin Laden relied on.

Prisoners in American custody told stories of a trusted courier. When the Americans ran the man’s pseudonym past two top-level detainees — the chief planner of the Sept. 11 attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed; and Al Qaeda’s operational chief, Abu Faraj al-Libi — the men claimed never to have heard his name. That raised suspicions among interrogators that the two detainees were lying and that the courier probably was an important figure.

So do we credit enhanced interrogation of others?  Do we really believe that KSM and al-Libi never cooperated on this identification?

TACKLING IT HEAD-ON:  The Times takes a look and sees little:

Harsh Methods Of Questioning Debated Again

By SCOTT SHANE and CHARLIE SAVAGE

WASHINGTON — Did brutal interrogations produce the crucial intelligence that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden?

As intelligence officials disclosed the trail of evidence that led to the compound in Pakistan where Bin Laden was hiding, a chorus of Bush administration officials claimed vindication for their policy of “enhanced interrogation techniques” like waterboarding.

Among them was John Yoo, a former Justice Department official who wrote secret legal memorandums justifying brutal interrogations. “President Obama can take credit, rightfully, for the success today,” Mr. Yoo wrote Monday in National Review, “but he owes it to the tough decisions taken by the Bush administration.”

But a closer look at prisoner interrogations suggests that the harsh techniques played a small role at most in identifying Bin Laden’s trusted courier and exposing his hide-out. One detainee who apparently was subjected to some tough treatment provided a crucial description of the courier, according to current and former officials briefed on the interrogations. But two prisoners who underwent some of the harshest treatment — including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times — repeatedly misled their interrogators about the courier’s identity.

Well, the Times is totally in the tank on this question.  A bit more:

According to an American official familiar with his interrogation, Mr. Mohammed was first asked about Mr. Kuwaiti in the fall of 2003, months after the waterboarding. He acknowledged having known him but said the courier was “retired” and of little significance.

In 2004, however, a Qaeda operative named Hassan Ghul, captured in Iraq, gave a different account of Mr. Kuwaiti, according to the American official. Mr. Ghul told interrogators that Mr. Kuwaiti was a trusted courier who was close to Bin Laden, as well as to Mr. Mohammed and to Abu Faraj al-Libi, who had become the operational chief of Al Qaeda after Mr. Mohammed’s capture.

Mr. Kuwaiti, Mr. Ghul added, had not been seen in some time — which analysts thought was a possible indication that the courier was hiding out with Bin Laden.

The details of Mr. Ghul’s treatment are unclear, though the C.I.A. says he was not waterboarded. The C.I.A. asked the Justice Department to authorize other harsh methods for use on him, but it is unclear which were used. One official recalled that Mr. Ghul was “quite cooperative,” saying that rough treatment, if any, would have been brief.

Armed with Mr. Ghul’s account of the courier’s significance, interrogators asked Mr. Mohammed again about Mr. Kuwaiti. He stuck to his story, according to the official.

After Mr. Libi was captured in May 2005 and turned over to the C.I.A., he too was asked. He denied knowing Mr. Kuwaiti and gave a different name for Bin Laden’s courier, whom he called Maulawi Jan. C.I.A. analysts would never find such a person and eventually concluded that the name was Mr. Libi’s invention, the official recalled.

Again, the C.I.A. has said Mr. Libi was not waterboarded, and details of his treatment are not known. But anticipating his interrogation, the agency pressured the Justice Department days after his capture for a new set of legal memorandums justifying the most brutal methods.

Because Mr. Mohammed and Mr. Libi had both steered interrogators away from Mr. Kuwaiti, C.I.A. officials concluded that they must be protecting him for an important reason.

“Think about circles of information — there’s an inner circle they would protect with their lives,” said an American official who was briefed on the C.I.A. analysis. “The crown jewels of Al Qaeda were the whereabouts of Bin Laden and his operational security.”

The accumulating intelligence about Mr. Kuwaiti persuaded C.I.A. officials to stay on his trail, leading to the discovery of his real name — which American officials have not disclosed — and whereabouts. He in turn unwittingly led the agency to Bin Laden’s lair, where Mr. Kuwaiti and his brother were among those who died in Monday’s raid.

So we don't know whether Ghul talked after being enhanced, we don't know if al-Libi lied after not being enhanced - really conclusive stuff here.

Comments

[narciso]

Are we relying on Shane now, hasn't he bought
Soufan's pablum by the pound, erroneously painted the CIA in the same vein as the KGB
or Chinese State Security,

[bunky]

No, "smart power" saved the day.

[dk70]

Why would we announce right away that we've found a treasure trove of information (computers, thumb drives, hard drives, etc.). Wouldn't it be best to sit on that information and exploit it later? Any AQ who had been in contact with OBL or his couriers should be moving after hearing this announcement.

[Jack is Back!]

EIM had nothing to do with this. Didn't you hear Brennan's presser? Bambi did this all on his own. Binny was getting in the way of the Bamster establishing the Caliphate and something had to be done. Ever since he had that ultra-widewave antennae installed in his cranium he has been able to zero in on various frequency of dialysis machines running in Pakistan. That's why it took from August to May to sort through all the Islamic whilagigs and pinpoint the one in Abbottatbad. And there are no pictures. That's against Islam to photograph a body on its way to meet the 72 virgins.

/the spinning mind

[narciso]

We've been toying him, for a while, like a kitten with his favorite ball of yarn:

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2009/04/scott-shane-does-some-homework.html

[Tom Bowler]

Somewhat OT, you gotta love Iowahawk:

Recent events have happily made clear that the antiwar movement of 2001-8 was overwhelmingly dominated by a vast silent hypocritical majority of craven political opportunists awaiting a Democratic administration to gleefully celebrate the covert execution of a man whom, until 28 months ago, they would have described as a "tragic civilian casualty."

[clarice]

I believe I read somewhere that Rumsfeld said the info re the courier was not the result of enhanced interrogation--

[narciso]

From here, Thomas is Soufan, and Gibson, who agreed with the CIA, is Gaudin,

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2009/04/scott-shane-does-some-homework.html

[Thomas Collins]

Whether helpful info against bin Laden was obtained by waterboarding or long interrogation sessions or cash or pretty hookers is irrelevant to me. We got him.

[narciso]

Those two previous links, indicates either Shane, is too dim, or intentionally muddles
the water.

[Porchlight]

Why would we announce right away that we've found a treasure trove of information (computers, thumb drives, hard drives, etc.).

Because prudent silence would be seen in the WH as a missed opportunity to put extra sprinkles on Obama's victory lap cupcake.

[Sue]

Michelle Malkin is tweeting that the Wikileaks file suggests the tip came from operative captured in Iraq.

[clarice]

Or--maybe there wasn't much there but we want people to think so, move around and expose themselves and others.
In a grown up administration it would be harder to figure out which scenario is correct.

[Danube of Thought]

Here's Michael Isikoff last night:

The trail that led to the doorstep of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan began years earlier with aggressive interrogations of al-Qaida detainees at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and CIA “black site" prisons overseas, according to U.S. officials.

It was those sometimes controversial interrogations that first produced descriptions of members of bin Laden’s courier network, including one critical Middle Eastern courier who along with his brother was protecting bin Laden at his heavily fortified compound in Abbottabad on Sunday. Both the courier and his brother were among those killed, along with bin Laden, in the dramatic raid by U.S. special forces.

[Thomas Collins]

It is a no-win situation to engage in this argument with progs. Most likely we'll never have a full picture of what types of investigatory techniques led to what types of info about bin Laden. For all we know, the courier story could be a crock, and the key might have been info from ISI operatives on our payroll (after all, Obama is familiar with the concept of walking around money) who knew where bin Laden was because they had helped facilite the building of bin Laden's compound and who also take cash from Yemeni jihadists. If the Paks knew about this in advance, our government will attempt to keep that secret. I think the one thing we can be pretty sure of is that there was little or no effort to take bin Laden alive. And for that we can be thankful.

I think a lot of the aftermath was well planned. It is quite plausible, in my view, that the "scrambling" of Pak airpower was part of the plan to facilitate the cover-up of Pak official involvement in eliminating bin Laden. If so, fine with me.

[MarkO]

In an effort to help solve this problem, I provide one known fact: Obama is a liar.

[Porchlight]

It's not irrelevant to me, TC. Given what has transpired politically since 9/11, it is imperative that the enhanced interrogation program be publically vindicated if it can be shown to have provided useful information.

This is a rare moment of high visibility in the media's WOT narrative and for national security it is essential that we pursue as much information as possible to establish how it all went down, before the political clouds descend again.

[Danube of Thought]

And he's just not that smart.

[MarkO]

Amen, Brother Thought.

[narciso]

When it comes to Isikoff, what to believe, along with Mayer who gave vouched for Soufan and other critiques of EIMs;

he identity of at least one of the detainees who provided early information about the courier who led to bin Laden could be politically explosive. According to a U.S. official, that detainee was notorious Saudi al-Qaida operative and accused 9/11 conspirator Mohammed al-Qahtani, who was subjected to some of the most humiliating interrogations at Guantanamo. Among the enhanced interrogation techniques used on him were being forced to wear a woman’s bra, being led around on a leash and forced to perform dog tricks and being subjected to cold temperatures that twice required his hospitalization, according to a later U.S. military report

[Ph.Dr. Manuel Iglesias-Guerrero]

USA executed Osama Bin Laden. No evidence: no pictures, no corpse. "USA looking for a reaction that will serve as excuses for...? Osama killed in 2002. Does the DNA sample is then?. Madrid bombings on March 11, 2004. ETA was not involved. Was it a false flag operation? ... Now Libya, Syria ... Watch in:

http://aims.selfip.org/~alKvc74FbC8z2llzuHa9/default_libia.htm

[Ranger]

Why would we announce right away that we've found a treasure trove of information (computers, thumb drives, hard drives, etc.). Wouldn't it be best to sit on that information and exploit it later? Any AQ who had been in contact with OBL or his couriers should be moving after hearing this announcement.

Posted by: dk70 | May 03, 2011 at 11:07 AM

Several reasons.

1) Even if we didn't announce it, AQ itself has a pretty good idea of what information was at the compound, and would have to react as if all of it had been compromised in the raid.

2) The type of disruption caused by this type of security breach on a covert organization is massive. It means that for a significant amount of time AQ will be entirely focused on survivial, not planning and executing new operations.

3) Covert assests are much easier to spot when they are moving from one safe location to another. Lots of communications trafic and lots of money movement is required to reset everything, especially if it is being done on short notice.

4) Therefore, it is to our advantage to push AQ into panic re-location mode by announcing to them we have tons of new information (even if we don't have any).

BTW, this is also probably why the Bin Laden compound was located where it was. We have done significant damage to AQ networks by capturing people and keeping it secret long enough to tap into what they thought were still secure communications networks. This compound was located in a palce where it would be impossible to hit it without finding out immediately that the raid had happened, thus preventing any exploitation of the information we found before AQ could react.

[MayBee]

partly because the wingnuts love torture

Does Marcy care when she sounds like a bitter idiot?

[Thomas Collins]

I know my view is not shared among many of my friends here, Porchlight. But do you really think that going down this road will cause people to change their minds about waterboarding? I don't. Is a persuadable voter in Ohio or North Carolina or Florida going to vote for the GOP POTUS candidate in 2012 because we may have found out some information about some courier that may have been extracted by enhanced interrogation? I don't think it will make a difference to a persuadable voter. I think the focus of those of us who oppose Obama should be on the bravery and skill of our soldiers. I also think we should frequently point out that cutting military spending means degrading the intelligence gathering that aided in this operation. I also think we should come to terms that this will be viewed as a significant positive for Obama, especially in light of the bias of MSM toward him, and that acknowledging his success here and moving the public discourse back to jobs and the economy is the best approach.

[MayBee]

Anything that came after EIT cannot be proven to have not been influenced by EIT.

Sometimes you are very grateful that something doesn't happen, and you'll do a lot to keep it from happening.

[Sue]

Does Marcy care when she sounds like a bitter idiot?

Is she a liberal? Then of course not, because she doesn't sound like a bitter idiot to herself and her fellow liberals. She sounds...smart.

[MayBee]

Who is questioning the people who were left behind at the compound?

[MayBee]

ht. But do you really think that going down this road will cause people to change their minds about waterboarding?

I don't know the answer, but I don't think most people really care about waterboarding. I don't think there is anybody who really thinks water boarding someone is worse than say, shooting them in the leg or blowing off their lower body from a drone.

We've already seen Cheney's Assassination Squad become heroes. Who is to know what other miraculous changes can come about.

[Danube of Thought]

I think Ranger's analysis is persuasive.

[MayBee]

There are people who love torture. Many of our allies in the mideast are just those types.
Republicans do not love torture, but many are willing to concede it may be useful.
People like Marcy believe- find it very important to believe- that torture is never ever effective. That's been their line all along.
They had to shoehorn water boarding into the definition of torture- along with cold rooms, loud music, and fake menstrual blood.
All so they can feel superior, and say things like "wingnuts love torture, and it never works"

[MayBee]

This compound was located in a palce where it would be impossible to hit it without finding out immediately that the raid had happened, thus preventing any exploitation of the information we found before AQ could react.

That's genius.

[lyle]

Hey, I'm a wingnut and I hate torture and yet I'm subjected to it daily by the Fluffer Media. Free lyle now!

[MayBee]

In addition to preventing exploitation of information, the location would have kept us from being able to sneak OBL out without Pakistan knowing he was gone.

So we had to kill him, right? There was no option to sneak OBL out, question him, then have someone in the Pakistan mountains stumble upon a dead OBL a few months down the road.

[Janet]

I don't think most people really care about waterboarding.

& they never did. The MFM cared.

[Danube of Thought]

I love it--I mean I really love it--that in his final minutes that bastard knew he was cooked, and he knew that Americans were cooking him. Very, very sweet.

[narciso]

We had Jack Bauer 'in our living room' for the better part of a decade, he never stooped
to anything as pedestrian as waterboarding.

[dk70]

Thanks for responding Ranger. I understand your points. I'm just concerned that any new information learned from the data capture might be wasted because we didn't wait a few days to force the panic. For example, we may have learned about a new plot and training camp but couldn't develop that info and get eyes on it until 3-4 days later. By that time, AQ fearing their plot and location may be blown have already flown the coop. I can't imagine waiting a few days to announce the treasure trove of info would have matter too much.

[Tom Bowler]

TC:

I know my view is not shared among many of my friends here, Porchlight. But do you really think that going down this road will cause people to change their minds about waterboarding? I don't. Is a persuadable voter in Ohio or North Carolina or Florida going to vote for the GOP POTUS candidate in 2012 because we may have found out some information about some courier that may have been extracted by enhanced interrogation?

I'm with Porchlight. While I don't think you will persuade anybody to vote GOP based on the effectiveness of enhanced interrogation techniques, failing to push back and make the case in favor of them you concede the moral ground and permit persuadable voters to automatically rule out the GOP. The GOP brand name has been trashed by this kind of phony moral indignation on the left.

[Porchlight]

I don't think it will make a difference to a persuadable voter.

TC, I don't know whether it will or not. But this isn't just about elections. It's about how we fight this enemy. It's also about history. Generations hence people are going to want to know how we did this. I want it in the record.

[narciso]

The problem lies in the fact that Shane, Mayer
(who is acting up again) Isikoff, set the narrative, for the last decade, on these issues, not so much for the muddle, but more
the cognoscenti, or wannabies

[Porchlight]

failing to push back and make the case in favor of them you concede the moral ground

Very good point, Tom Bowler. Thanks. Cheney (as an example) never conceded that ground.

But TC, since you bring up elections, persuadable voters are persuaded by many things. One of them is a strong GOP standing up for strong national security policies and a strong American military. Obama has benefited in the last few days for being *more* like the GOP on these issues, not less like them.

[Ranger]

I can't imagine waiting a few days to announce the treasure trove of info would have matter too much.

Well, they already know the raid happened. They knew within hours, along with the rest of the world. We gain a lot of information just from watching the com networks activate and the money flowing just as we do from "putting eyes on" the target.

[narciso]

What did Orwell say about intellectuals:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,760358,00.html

[Stephanie]

Was Petraus trip to Pakistan (where he gave a speech and was extremely close to the OBL compound) a ruse for some on the ground surveillance or to shake the OBL tree and watch the results? ISTM, that OBL grew complacent in his den and the military shook his tree to see if he even reacted.

[Ranger]

Ok, this is pretty funny because it so completely sums up the Liberal mindset:

"When the Power of Love Overcomes the Love of Power/the World Will Know Peace."

Bumper sticker on a car that nudged into a crosswalk full of pedestrians... twice.

Seemed to fit the thread to me.

[MarkO]

I know I would give up sensative information that would lead to the death of my leader only when asked politely and never under duress. You see, I'm Lindsay Graham, of the South Carolina Grahams.

[Porchlight]

ISTM, that OBL grew complacent in his den and the military shook his tree to see if he even reacted.

Interesting idea. Or maybe Petraeus was hoping OBL would become even more complacent in the mistaken belief that his hidey hole was so secure that Petraeus could be right on top of him and still not know it.

[PaulL]

However, these were not controlled experiments, so we won't know who would have talked anyway, who would not have, and who talked out of fear of being subjected to treatment that was never administered.

You nailed it, TM.

[Thomas Collins]

Porchlight, I agree that Obama has benefitted, and I think he will benefit, from being viewed as stronger on national security than he was previously. In addition, the MSM will emphasize Obama's successes and not give the GOP credit where it is due. For example, see LUN for today's NY Times editorial on the bin Laden killing. The editorial makes it seem as if it was exclusively Obama's leadership that was the key Presidential leadership in tracking bin Laden. In addition, the editorial takes a gratuitous swipe at George W. Bush. My point is simply that we have to combat this by indirection. I don't think we can successfully argue that Obama doesn't deserve credit. But I think we can be positive about the GOP's contribution to national security. The line I like best is Cantor's about praising Obama for following Bush's vigilance.

[Ignatz]

--Well, they already know the raid happened.--

Yeah, if you keep the whole thing quiet for awhile it might make a difference, but since OBL's Paki protectors were going to be shooting their mouths off to their other AQ clients that wasn't much of an option.

[Porchlight]

TC, I agree that being positive about the GOP's contribution is a better tactic overall than being negative about Obama's (much as I might grumble about the latter). As long as we're getting it on the record that these were Bush administration programs that got the ball rolling.

[Extraneus]

If it was EIT that got the info, then the Dems have been irresponsible to politicize it the way they did, and have put us in more danger. Therefore, only Republicans can be trusted with national security. I'm with Porch: If this proves it, people should know that.

[Ignatz]

--But do you really think that going down this road will cause people to change their minds about waterboarding?--

Well, there is always the question of accuracy and speaking the truth for their own sake, regardless of the political consequences.
If it is true the enhanced interrogation set in motion the steps to kill OBL it is essential that it is established in the public narrative.
Will it help in an election down the road?
I don't know and don't much care.
Will it help make it easier to protect us from our enemies?
Probably, and that I do care about.

[cathyf]

Hmmm... Typhuspad strikes again... This post still shows as the next and previous post to the threads still there, but not as a "recent post" even on its own page.

[Thomas Collins]

Yes, Porchlight, it is frustrating that in certain quarters GWB is not even getting credit for starting the ball rolling when in reality most of the bowling alley was completed on his watch (in terms of the infrastructure of intelligence gathering that was used to track bin Laden).

[Porchlight]

Yeah, TC, to use another metaphor, it's like GWB tilled, planted, watered, weeded and hoed...and then got kicked off the farm in time for Obama to arrive and harvest.

[Frau Blide]

"... the CIA is run by Washington's golden boys. But it was only a few years back that they were worried that Eric Holder would be prosecuting them. "
TM, thanks for bringing that up. It's easy to forget that worrying about your job can affect your behavior. Even a National Archive biggy was afraid to confront Sandy "Socks" Berger with the rules.

[DebinNC]

...Or like FDR dying on April 12 and Hitler killing himself April 30, and Harry Truman getting the credit for VE Day 2 weeks later.

[Jack is Back!]

Folks, timing is everything. Bamster is being rewarded for being in the right place at the right time. Nothing more than that. He has battle tested/sniper fired at people of great experience in Battlefield Joe Biden and Hillary "Iron Pants" Clinton to call on for sage and sane advice. How could anything have gone wrong? This was a no brainer, such that even Bamster could pick a cherry from the top.

Now the hard work of lining up fundraisers at the American Legion and VFW PACs plus a cameo on Ollie North's War Stories begin. He has other stuff to take care of now that this little episode is behind him. As they say in Hollywood, "its a wrap".

[pagar]

"find it very important to believe- that torture is never ever effective."

"Barack Obama So Extreme on Abortion He Would Let Babies Die Who Survive Them"

http://www.lifenews.com/2008/07/09/nat-4034/

We're supposed to believe that people who believe it is OK to kill inconvenient kids are against torture? This is absolutely insane!

[Frau Blide]

Can the public now hope for a reprieve from Obama's almost daily TV speechifying? I didn't think so.

lyle, is it true that fluffers must join the SEIU?

[Extraneus]

Are you kidding, Frau?

DRUDGE: OBAMA TO APPEAR ON '60 MINUTES'... DEVELOPING...

[Extraneus]

I hope he wears the SEAL outfit.

[DebinNC]

Obama stays in the camera's focus...OBL taken out Sunday...Medal of Honor ceremony Monday...Wounded Warrior Riders arrive at WH Wednesday...Ground Zero speech Thursday...

A cynical person might find the timing of the raid and these previously scheduled events suspiciously fortuitous for Obama.

[narciso]

So the courier wasn't some wannabe messenger;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8489866/WikiLeaks-Bin-Ladens-courier-trained-911-hijack-team.html

[Sometimes I get the feeling the MSM has just been a mirage for the last ten years.]

Haha, n, the commenters at the Telegraph link are catching on to the big Iraqi connection with these al-Qaeda close to bin Laden.
==============

[Cecil Turner]

Anything that came after EIT cannot be proven to have not been influenced by EIT.

And there you have it. And since the big players here appear to be KSM and al Libi, the contention there's no connection requires an alternate reality to test. More importantly, it's obvious that if the left had its way about interrogation and Gitmo, KSM and Libi would've lawyered up and we'd never have gotten useful info out of 'em.

[Stephanie]

Fruit of the 'poisonous tree?'

Poisonous to Obama if it is shown that his opposition to EIT would have resulted in the CIA never getting OBL but for Bush's ignoring of Obama's and his cronies opposition.

[PD]

Comment from yesterday:

Who are we running in 2016? Because Obama is now a lock for 2012

To test this theory, I went to the authoritative market-based poll: The price on eBay of Obama Commemorative Plates, such as we saw everywhere leading up to following the election.

Based on the going prices of these "collector's items", you make the call.

[BR]

Yes, I can't believe the incredibly bad positioning.
Did Obama never hear of CBSgate? Doesn't he realize the CBS 60 Minutes show is perceived as synonymous with fake documents?!!!

Drudge now has article link. LUN.