The Bush Legacy

“LMAO”

“I heard Michael Jackson was selling his 'ranch' in California because.....

Once it turned 9 he lost interest.”

“What's that?
Ya say Michael Jackson is buying a plantation in Mississippi?”

“Check that link ----”

“Is this the thread where you guys talk about Sarge---oops, I mean Stovestomper---and call him a stalker, then when he shows up you cry, "see what we mean, he's stalking us"?”

“April 20, 2009
What Releasing the CIA Memos is Really About
By Lee Cary


It's realistic, not cynical, to assume political entities generally act out of their own self-interests. And political self-interests are what the CIA memos are really about.

The oldest declassified CIA memo is from 2002, the youngest from 2005. So one question is about timing. Why now? Another is about content. What do they offer that's new?

The bulk of material can be grouped under two headings: (1) Elaborate lawyerly parsing of legal terms (like "shocks the conscience") coupled with citations of case law; and, (2) redundant descriptions of enhanced interrogation techniques. The most controversial technique, waterboarding, is a rehash of what we've heard before, and often. It was only used on three high-value captives. The less aggressive techniques won't make headlines, unless a fraternity uses one to haze a pledge and someone dies accidently.

The explanations for, and consequences of, publishing the documents spin in two directions.

David Axelrod says is all about Obama respecting the law and being transparent. He called releasing the documents a "weighty decision" that took Obama weeks to make as he balanced two principles. "One is ... the sanctity of covert operations ... and keeping faith with the people who do them, and the impact on national security, on the one hand. And the other was the law and his belief in transparency." ("A wise ruler ought never to keep faith when by doing so it would be against his interests." Niccolo Machiavelli)

The Beltway use of "transparent" is similar to "robust." Just saying the word is intended to summon the reality of its meaning. A self-actualizing language event.

Political opponents say releasing the documents threatens national security. Any enemy now knows the protocol and self-imposed limits of our most aggressive interrogation methods and can train against them. The documents offer a ready-made outline for an Interrogation Resistance Class.

But it's been over seven years since 9/11. Each day since without a homeland attack brings us closer to complacent. The national defense argument won't get the traction it deserves.

Self-described neutral pundits (e.g., FOX's Bill O'Reilly) say Obama is playing to the Leftwing of his base. But Obama has no need to do that now. Grumble as they might, they're firmly entrenched in his camp and aren't likely to shift their support to, say, Ron Paul.

So all the yin yang to date hasn't told us what this is about. Here's another option:

It's about controlling the news cycle, putting opponents on the defensive, and diverting attention away from other, more-timely battles underway. We recently witnessed a similar tactic.

The release of the Department of Homeland Security's "rightwing extremism" report, dated April 7, offered the MSM a counterpoint to frame their minimum coverage of the April 15 Tea Parties. The protesters were portrayed as non-violent expressions of rightwing extremism. The transparent intent behind releasing the DHS report a week before the protests was to preemptively diminish their impact.

Today, inside the Beltway, there are serious debates involving trillions of dollars and federal programs that will effect America for generations. Oxygen that might fuel coverage of those debates is being diverted to topics like the use of dietary manipulation in interrogating al-Qaida operatives, years ago.

It's all about misdirection of public attention, and all sides of the media are conscious, or unconscious, facilitators of the ploy choreographed from inside the Obama administration. (Including me herein.)

Most Americans won't take the time to download the CIA material and wade through it. If they did, many would say, "So this is what all the commotion is about?"

Days ago, three Somali pirates held an American captive for ransom and threatened his life. The President ordered them shot through their respective heads. Small hole going in, big one coming out. Even though Somali pirates have never harmed an American seaman, it was the right decision.

Years ago, the CIA used several enhanced interrogation techniques on 28 captives from an organization that killed thousands of American civilians. When in CIA custody, the al-Qaida detainee would face an interrogator...

"...positioned directly in front of the detainee, generally no more than 18 inches from the detainee. With his fingers held tightly together and fully extended, and with his palm toward the interrogator's own body, using his elbow as a fixed pivot point, the interrogator slaps the detainee in the detainee's abdomen. The interrogator may not use a fist, and the slap must be delivered above the navel and below the sternum. This technique is used to condition a detainee to pay attention to the interrogator's questions and to dislodge expectations that the detainee will not be touched. It is not intended to-and based on experience you have informed us that it does not-inflict any injury or cause an significant pain. Medical and psychological personnel are physically present or otherwise observing whenever this technique is applied." (May 10, 2005 memo stamped 0000013, p.11)


Head shot, to save a life, versus tummy slaps, to save multiple lives.

The question is, away from what is our attention being diverted?”

“I guess the USA is #&%!$ed then, huh? Time to start the looting pilaging, raping and tea bagging?”

“CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief



(CNSNews.com) - The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) -- including the use of waterboarding -- caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.

Before he was waterboarded, when KSM was asked about planned attacks on the United States, he ominously told his CIA interrogators, “Soon, you will know.”

According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack -- which KSM called the “Second Wave”-- planned “ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles.”

KSM was the mastermind of the first “hijacked-airliner” attacks on the United States, which struck the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Northern Virginia on Sept. 11, 2001.

After KSM was captured by the United States, he was not initially cooperative with CIA interrogators. Nor was another top al Qaeda leader named Zubaydah. KSM, Zubaydah, and a third terrorist named Nashiri were the only three persons ever subjected to waterboarding by the CIA. (Additional terrorist detainees were subjected to other “enhanced techniques” that included slapping, sleep deprivation, dietary limitations, and temporary confinement to small spaces -- but not to water-boarding.)

This was because the CIA imposed very tight restrictions on the use of waterboarding. “The ‘waterboard,’ which is the most intense of the CIA interrogation techniques, is subject to additional limits,” explained the May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo. “It may be used on a High Value Detainee only if the CIA has ‘credible intelligence that a terrorist attack is imminent’; ‘substantial and credible indicators that the subject has actionable intelligence that can prevent, disrupt or deny this attack’; and ‘[o]ther interrogation methods have failed to elicit this information within the perceived time limit for preventing the attack.’”

The quotations in this part of the Justice memo were taken from an Aug. 2, 2004 letter that CIA Acting General Counsel John A. Rizzo sent to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

Before they were subjected to “enhanced techniques” of interrogation that included waterboarding, KSM and Zubaydah were not only uncooperative but also appeared contemptuous of the will of the American people to defend themselves.

“In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including KSM and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques,” says the Justice Department memo. “Both KSM and Zubaydah had ‘expressed their belief that the general US population was ‘weak,’ lacked resilience, and would be unable to ‘do what was necessary’ to prevent the terrorists from succeeding in their goals.’ Indeed, before the CIA used enhanced techniques in its interrogation of KSM, KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, ‘Soon you will know.’”

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

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

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

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

A CIA spokesman confirmed to CNSNews.com today that the CIA stands by the factual assertions made here.

In the memo itself, the Justice Department’s Bradbury told the CIA’s Rossi: “Your office has informed us that the CIA believes that ‘the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qa’ida has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.””

“Drop by Drop: Forgetting the History of Water Torture in U.S. Courts

Evan J. Wallach is a federal judge of the United States Court of International Trade and one of the nation's most foremost experts on war crimes and the law of war.[1][2] He was decorated for his service during the Vietnam War. Wallach also served in the United States Army Judge Advocate General's Corps in the International Affairs Division of the Office of TJAG at The Pentagon during the Gulf War, where he assisted in advising on the law of war and investigating war crimes allegedly committed by Iraqi leaders.

As an adjunct law professor Wallach specialises in the law of war. From 1989 - 1995 he served as Judge Advocate General in the Nevada Army National Guard, with the rank of major. His responsibilities included giving annual lectures to Military Police regarding their legal obligations on treatment of prisoners. During the Gulf War he served at the Pentagon in the International Affairs Division of the Office of The Judge Advocate of the Army, where he assisted in advising on the law of war and investigating war crimes allegedly committed by Iraqi leaders.

Since 1997 he has been adjunct professor in Law of War at both New York Law School and Brooklyn Law School. Since 2001 he has been a visiting professor in Law of War at the University of M�nster.

Wallach is a member of the International Law of War Association, which is a "loose confederation of military lawyers, academics, and government officials including members of the judiciary, who are interested in the advancement of a legal regime to ameliorate suffering and for the regulation of the use of armed force in armed conflicts".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_Wallach”

“your last link doesn't work for me. the one before it is quite interesting. nobody can claim mr. wallach is out of his realm of knowledge here. wonder which direction this will go.”

“Ronald Reagan was finally right. His kind of government is the problem - what end was it that was to justify these means?”

“Thanks for fixing my link, uncliff.”

“LOL..Lefties want so bad to control the military officers on the ground. I can only imagine if maggots like vile and Drunko were advising the Generals in World War II.

Germany would most likely still be under Soviet Control. Japan would be constantly threatening us in Asia and the Pacific and Generations of kids born in the baby boom would not have happened because the bombing campaigns and A bombs would have been put off for a large scale invasion of Japan.”

“You're getting an early start today, Mr. X.

”

“Sniffing glue in WWII?”

““CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

...
In the memo itself, the Justice Department’s Bradbury told the CIA’s Rossi: “Your office has informed us that the CIA believes that ‘the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qa’ida has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.””
stratd00d


BS!

Last year, FBI Director Robert Mueller told Vanity Fair http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2008/12/torture200812?printable=true¤tPage=all that he did not "believe" that there had been a case where "any attacks had been disrupted because of intelligence obtained through the coercive methods." John Miller, a spokesman for Mueller, confirmed that position http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/us/politics/23detain.html?hp to the New York Times on Tuesday, saying, "The quote is accurate."”

“TPM Reader MM is confused ...

Last week, conservatives were complaining Obama was establishing a socialistic fascist dictatorship.

This week, conservatives are complaining Obama does not want to torture his opponents.”

“ROTFLMAO!!!!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/23/republicans-claim-lawmakers-loop-interrogations/

So we will like a banana republic prosecute REPUBLICANS guilty of the "torture" of the Terrorists...


WELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL...OOPSIE

FOX News has learned there were more than 30 meetings and briefings with members of Congress on the subject since 2002.

The first such briefing dealt with the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, the Al Qaeda operations chief who ran the training camps in Afghanistan where the Sept. 11 hijackers were trained. Sources said California Rep. Nancy Pelosi, now the speaker of the House, attended the meeting with then-Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla. (who later became CIA director), and she did not raise any objections.

The briefings were given to the chairmen and ranking members of the intelligence committees in the House and Senate until 2006. That could cover Sen. John Rockefeller, W.Va., and Rep. Jane Harman, Calif., both Democrats, as well as Sen. Pat Roberts, Kan., Sen. Lindsey Graham, S.C., Sen. Richard Shelby, Ala., and Rep. Pete Hoekstra, Mich., all Republicans.

Defenders of the interrogation program note that if Congress had wanted to kill the program, all it had to do was withhold funding, which didn't happen.

Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, has personally requested from Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair an unclassified list of names of all members of Congress who attended those briefings, complete with dates and locations.

He told FOXNews.com the list will probably show many members were briefed "early and often." ”

“Waterboarding doesn't sound like it is that big of a deal. It is like bobbing for apples, right? Except someone is forcing your head under water.

If terrorists ended up giving up info due to this, they are pussies! Suck the water in and drown so you cannot spill your guts. Fall on the sword!

Then we locked them up. Just kill them! No one is going to miss them.”

“That's not what waterboarding is. Waterboarding is simulated drowning.

Just kill them? You're kidding, right? You realize that many of them have been released, right? Not all of them were "terrorists"...

You can't really condone torture. If we turn our back on the virtues of this country then what are we fighting for? If we become our enemy, then what are we fighting to defend?”

“There was a great cartoon from "Prickly City" last year, I couldn't find it on line. This is a pretty conservative comic strip, but they were with McCain on the torture issue. The dialogue went like.

"We don't torture, we're the good guys."
"But how are we going to get the information we need?"
"We don't torture, we're the good guys"
"But what if we really really need to know something."
"The good guys don't torture."
"Its not easy being one of the good guys."
"If it was easy, everyone would do it."”

“'Defenders of the interrogation program note that if Congress had wanted to kill the program, all it had to do was withhold funding, which didn't happen. '

It can't work that way when your're trading votes for your bike path.
last edited: 4/23/09 12:53:58 PM”

“
Spanish court opens investigation of Guant�namo torture allegations

� Allegations include 'sexual abuse' and 'beating'
� Eric Holder urges European countries to take detainees

Giles Tremlett in Madrid and agencies guardian.co.uk
Wednesday 29 April 2009
18.50 BST

A court in Spain has today opened an investigation into torture allegations against US military personnel at the Guant�namo detention centre.

Meanwhile in Berlin, Barack Obama's attorney general Eric Holder said that about 30 Guant�namo detainees have been cleared for release and urged European allies to take some of them. Holder also signalled the Obama administration might cooperate with the Spanish investigation.

Judge Baltasar Garz�n, an investigating magistrate at the National Court in Madrid, said he would investigate allegations made by four detainees who were held at the centre and later released without charges, according to a court document quoted by the Spanish press.

The torture allegations include "sexual abuse", "beating" and the throwing of fluids into prisoners' eyes.

A recent decision by the Obama administration to release documents about Guant�namo helped the judge conclude that a police investigation, which could lead to criminal charges, was necessary.

Holder said in Germany that while the US created the Guant�namo site, closing it is a shared responsibility for the US and its allies.

"Mistakes were made" in the creation of the Guant�namo programme, Holder said. "Obviously, we would look at any request that would come from a court in any country and see how and whether we should comply with it."

"This is an administration that is determined to conduct itself by the rule of law and to the extent that we receive lawful requests from an appropriately created court, we would obviously respond to it," he said.

”

“I'm not eating anymore mexican food.”

“
Pakistan Reinforces Army in Taliban Battle
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 9, 2009
(1 hour ago)

Pakistan has told the Obama administration that it is sending an additional six army brigades to join a major government offensive against Taliban forces in the northwestern part of the country, and it has pledged to hold territory where extremist forces are dislodged, Pakistani and U.S. officials said yesterday.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said domestic support for the offensive, combined with U.S. assistance, would allow the effort to succeed where two previous military drives into the Swat Valley and surrounding territory failed.

In an interview yesterday with Washington Post reporters and editors, Zardari did not confirm the movement of the brigades, some of which were said by others, on the condition of anonymity, to be moving from Punjab province and the country's border with India.

”

“It's Obamy's war now, goober. LOL”

“India not pakiscam, what were they thinking that the scamiis would be allies against the Taliban (many of their own people).”

“"It's Obamy's war now, goober. LOL"

You betchya, home boy.

And now that the grownups are in charge perhaps they will get serious about wrapping this mess up and not drag it out for decades.”

“Getting serious = tucking tails and running home.

Nice!”

“Drunk again, I see, DrunkO.”

“We've done our part to make Iran the unchallenged leader of the middle east, time to go over and get rid of all of Syria's enemies for them.”

“Just think how much better the situation in Afghanistan & Pakistan might be if the redneck imbecile hadn't invaded the wrong country.”

“Poor little t*lty.”

“And some of them wanted to follow the Dud with Caribou Barbie.

BRAIN DAMAGE.”

“

t*ltypoo's dream”

“Ali Soufan

Read all about the Bush Legacy.... � amateur rednecks at play, and the damage they did to national security.

The hearing went as expected yesterday: � Lindsey Graham was knocking himself out defending the Bush Admin.�s turture policies. � His Old Buddy McCain needs to have a talk with that kid and straighten him out.

BTW�. � Waterboarding is flatly described as torture a dozen times in � U.S. v. Lee.
[Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, 1983(?)].”

“Okay Tilty you know that Military Prisoners are not necessarily covered by US Law?

UM yeah a little earlier than your idiotic reference

http://www.meforum.org/651/does-human-rights-law-apply-to-terrorists

Nazis and Islamists
The United States has faced such challenges before. In early morning darkness on June 13, 1942, a German U-boat surfaced off the coast of Long Island. Four men wearing German naval uniforms piled into a rubber dinghy and headed for shore. They buried their uniforms on the beach and headed toward their objective dressed in civilian clothes.[2] Four nights later, another German unit came ashore in northern Florida. After hitting the beach, they too discarded their uniforms.

These Nazi intelligence agents sought to sabotage targets within the United States. They were unsuccessful. Several weeks later, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) arrested them in Chicago and New York, remanding them to a U.S. army military commission for trial.

Like the "illegal combatants" held today at the U.S. naval base in Guant�namo Bay, Cuba, these Nazi saboteurs challenged the legality of the military tribunal process. Their lawyers took the case all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled against them. In a unanimous decision delivered by Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, the court determined that the German agents had violated the law of war and that a "military commission was lawfully constituted" to try them for that crime. Thus, declared the Supreme Court, "the motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus are denied."[3]

OH

By violating every tenet of international law regarding treatment of prisoners, terrorist groups forfeit any entitlement to protection under the Geneva Conventions. U.S. forces would be within their legal rights to treat captured Al-Qaeda members as they did Nazi saboteurs during World War II�trial by military commission and execution by firing squad.[18]

[18] Ex Parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942).”

“Dan is just jealous he didn't get to torture anyone himself.

Why aren't you locked up somewhere?”

“LOL...translation "Direct Hit"

Sucks when you can't get your lies across.”

“T*lty is just jealous he didn't get to fry children to death himself.”

“"Why aren't you locked up somewhere?"

Perhaps he escaped, Tilty.”

“Professional interrogators say time and again that your preffered sadistic methods are completely counterproductive. �

CIA and FBI interrogators refused but the "contractors" continued on. �They weren't military at all.

Sorry you missed your chance to beat the crap out of some "rag-heads". The Obama Administration isn't allowing psychopaths to play their sick amateur interrogator games anymore.

That Cheney-era policy has been terminated.”

“Why aren't you locked up somewhere

Are you sure he wasn't tortured by his boss?”

“

T*lt and drunkO's Leader”