Cheney starts to hedge on what the CIA documents say about torture's effectiveness

[Phokus]

There?s a very revealing moment buried in an interview that Dick Cheney gave to Fox News last night that really gives away his game plan on torture.

Specifically: Cheney seemed to edge away from the claim that the documents he?s asking the CIA to declassify will prove unequivocally that torture worked.

The key moment came when his interviewer said: ?You want some documents declassified having to do with waterboarding.? Cheney replied:

?Yes, but the way I would describe them is they have to do with the detainee program, the interrogation program. It?s not just waterboarding. It?s the interrogation program that we used for high-value detainees. There were two reports done that summarize what we learned from that program, and I think they provide a balanced view.?

Bear with me here, because this is crucial. Cheney is carefully saying that the documents summarize what we learned from the overall interrogation program. Torture, of course, was only a component of that program. So he?s clearly saying that the docs summarize what was learned from a program that included non-torture techniques, too.

Here?s why this is important. It dovetails precisely with what Senator Carl Levin, who has also seen these docs, says about them. Levin claims the docs don?t do anything to ?connect acquisition of valuable intelligence to the use of the abusive techniques.?

My bet is Cheney is planning to cite the valuable intel in the docs and say that the program ? of which torture was only a part ? was responsible for producing it. He?ll fudge the question of whether the torture itself was actually responsible for generating that information. Cheney is as experienced as any Washington hand at using precise language to obfsucate, and this is the game plan. You heard it here first.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov....-prove-torture-worked/


Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh sounds like Cheney isn't so cocksure about torture's effectiveness, now is he? We pointed out time and time again that Cheney is a pathological liar yet the right took his word hook line and sinker (it's becoming like an absolute like death and taxes here). This was extremely deceptive for him to paint the WHOLE interrogation program's effectiveness as being torture's effectiveness. Looks like Levin was right and the right still has their heads in the sand.

 

[Moonbeam]

It might be worth remembering that if our tortured sang like canaries the torture was still illegal and all the evidence collected, in our system of justice, would have been thrown out when it comes to convicting people.

Cheney is trying to set up Obama with his 'we prevented attacks during our administration, as an excuse for torture. He hopes that if we are attacked the Republicans can say, see, give us power and we will protect you.

But torture is illegal and Cheney and Bush should go to jail. They didn't want to preside over another attack and, for their political careers, were willing to torture people to stay in power, two total and worthless swine who took this fine country down in the mud for their personal gain.

 

[Phokus]

Attention conservatives who bought this shit (pretty much all of you): THIS IS THE FUCKING GUY WHOSE WORD YOU TOOK AT FACE VALUE

 

[Harvey]

Cheney is again trying to rewrite history to hide his own criminality. In another example, speaking at the National Press Club, he tried to shift the blame for the Bushwhackos' failures to Richard Clarke, former terrorisim advisor to Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton, claiming he "obviously missed" the warning signs, despite the fact that Clarke, is documented to have given the Bushwhackos explicit warnings about attacks by Al Qaeda. Clarke also warned Bush that Saddam probably was not tied to 9/11.

Writing in Sunday?s Washington Post, Richard Clarke, the former counterrorism chief under Presidents Clinton and Bush, slammed Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice for invoking what he called ?the White House 9/11 trauma defense? ? namely, the shock of 9/11 was so great as to justify all and any actions taken in the name of national defense. Clarke called the decisions on interrogations, detentions, and Iraq were all ?wrong,? and the White House panic proved that Cheney and company had simply been ignoring the warning signs:

Cheney?s admission that 9/11 caused him to reassess the threats to the nation only underscores how, for months, top officials had ignored warnings from the CIA and the NSC staff that urgent action was needed to preempt a major al-Qaeda attack.

Speaking at the National Press Club today, Cheney struck back at Clarke. When asked about Clarke?s argument, Cheney ? once again ? invoked the ?burning ashes? of 9/11 and the victims who leaped to their deaths from the World Trade Center. Then, quite succinctly, Cheney pinned the entire blame for 9/11 on Clarke:

CHENEY: You know, Dick Clarke. Dick Clarke, who was the head of the counterrorism program in the run-up to 9/11. He obviously missed it. The fact is that we did what we felt we had to do, and if I had to do it all over again, I would do exactly the same thing.

When the moderator reminded Cheney that Clarke had repeatedly warned the administration about al Qaeda?s determination to attack the U.S., Cheney snarkily replied, ?That?s not my recollection, but I haven?t read his book.?

Maybe he's trying to influence up a public perceptions before he goes on trial for treason, murder, torture, war crimes and crimes against humanity. If that's his intent, I think the best he can expect is to establish an insanity defense. :roll:

 

[Rainsford]

I'm not sure what we expect to hear from administration officials or intelligence community officials who supported waterboarding. Are we REALLY expecting them to go on Fox News and say, "Yeah, we waterboarded detainees, but we didn't really get anything useful out of them."?

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
I'm not sure what we expect to hear from administration officials or intelligence community officials who supported waterboarding. Are we REALLY expecting them to go on Fox News and say, "Yeah, we waterboarded detainees, but we didn't really get anything useful out of them."?

True

maybe I expected them to just STFU because they seem to be diging deeper holes for themselves

and when I say they I am talking about Cheney and Rice.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Rainsford
I'm not sure what we expect to hear from administration officials or intelligence community officials who supported waterboarding. Are we REALLY expecting them to go on Fox News and say, "Yeah, we waterboarded detainees, but we didn't really get anything useful out of them."?

True

maybe I expected them to just STFU because they seem to be diging deeper holes for themselves

and when I say they I am talking about Cheney and Rice.

If twisted minds didn't cling to their twisted ways they would become unraveled.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Faux Outrage!!!!!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Faux Outrage!!!!!

It really doesn't matter at this point, does it? Cheney can say whatever he wishes. One day it's going to come out and we'll see what's what.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Faux Outrage!!!!!

It really doesn't matter at this point, does it? Cheney can say whatever he wishes. One day it's going to come out and we'll see what's what.

Why can't anybody else read this? All of their foaming at the mouth means nothing.

 

[microbial]

Time to throw a shoe at this MFer.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Faux Outrage!!!!!

You need to work on your macro. It doesn't even measure up to Harvey's standards.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: microbial
Time to throw a shoe at this MFer.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sadly, its not a matter of throwing a symbolic shoe at Cheney, its a matter of sending Cheney to the Hague ASAP. Its the only way to send that message, the the USA is not morally bankrupt.

 

[SecPro]

From Adm. Blair, Oblah-blah's Director of National Intelligence:



"All of us remember the horror of 9/11. For months afterwards we did not have a clear understanding of the enemy we were dealing with, and our every effort was focused on preventing further attacks that would kill more Americans. It was during these months that the CIA was struggling to obtain critical information from captured al-Qaeda leaders, and requested permission to use harsher interrogation methods....High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country."

He went on to say:


"I also strongly supported the president (Obama) when he declared that we would no longer use enhanced interrogation techniques. We do not need these techniques to keep America safe. The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: SecPro
From Adm. Blair, Oblah-blah's Director of National Intelligence:

"All of us remember the horror of 9/11. For months afterwards we did not have a clear understanding of the enemy we were dealing with, and our every effort was focused on preventing further attacks that would kill more Americans. It was during these months that the CIA was struggling to obtain critical information from captured al-Qaeda leaders, and requested permission to use harsher interrogation methods....High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country."

He went on to say:

"I also strongly supported the president (Obama) when he declared that we would no longer use enhanced interrogation techniques. We do not need these techniques to keep America safe. The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

So the techniques used caused us far more damage than any benefit they provided, and may not have provided any information that would not have been obtained otherwise? Good point!

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Attention conservatives who bought this shit (pretty much all of you): THIS IS THE FUCKING GUY WHOSE WORD YOU TOOK AT FACE VALUE

Busted. LIAR. The shameless liar is busted.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Harvey
CHENEY: You know, Dick Clarke. Dick Clarke, who was the head of the counterrorism program in the run-up to 9/11. He obviously missed it. The fact is that we did what we felt we had to do, and if I had to do it all over again, I would do exactly the same thing.

When the moderator reminded Cheney that Clarke had repeatedly warned the administration about al Qaeda?s determination to attack the U.S., Cheney snarkily replied, ?That?s not my recollection, but I haven?t read his book.?

MORE unambiguous and absolutely DOCUMENTED LIES from Cheney.

How long until even an dedicated Dick sucker like Fear No Evil is shamed into admitting the truth.

I guess he'd have to have the ability to feel and admit shame first . . . :|

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Harvey
CHENEY: You know, Dick Clarke. Dick Clarke, who was the head of the counterrorism program in the run-up to 9/11. He obviously missed it. The fact is that we did what we felt we had to do, and if I had to do it all over again, I would do exactly the same thing.

When the moderator reminded Cheney that Clarke had repeatedly warned the administration about al Qaeda?s determination to attack the U.S., Cheney snarkily replied, ?That?s not my recollection, but I haven?t read his book.?

MORE unambiguous and absolutely DOCUMENTED LIES from Cheney.

How long until even an dedicated Dick sucker like Fear No Evil is shamed into admitting the truth.

I guess he'd have to have the ability to feel and admit shame first . . . :|

The right will never concede that Dick Cheney is a lying scumbag because he's the very reflection of their souls. He's their hero.

 

[trenchfoot]

And folks, this is just the apex of a very very huge iceberg.

I just hope there's no too much damning evidence of Cheney's and Bush's complicity in violating US laws and International Treaties that the gov't has to keep hidden due to present national security concerns.

To me, it would be nice for Cheney, Bush and their accomplices to get tried and convicted for the crimes they committed, but if it came to be that all that happens to them is being thoroughly exposed and convicted in the eyes of the public then I'd reluctantly settle for that.

I guess to Cheney the truth is merely a temporary and inconvenient consequence of being a chronic liar, because apparently, he expects everyone to believe everything he says at the very moment he says it and then he expects us to completely forget what he said when it contradicts his most recent lies, with him convincing us with his "disarming personality" and the looks and demeanor of a benevolent saint that whatever he says is always the truth.

And approximately twenty percent of the population thinks it perfectly fine for him to be that way and that somehow, they believe he is an honest man.

That is scary man, that is scary.

 

[Siddhartha]

Mr Cheney is in a tough situation. He needs to justify torture and breaking US law and treaties. He is going to force Congress to hold public hearings to investigate what was done during Mr Bush presidency. Which I doubt will go well for the Republicans.

I am surprised no one has not pulled Mr Cheney aside and told him to STFU.

 

[StageLeft]

If Cheney loves water boarding so much he should succumb to it and then tell us it's not torture.

 

[SecPro]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: SecPro
From Adm. Blair, Oblah-blah's Director of National Intelligence:

"All of us remember the horror of 9/11. For months afterwards we did not have a clear understanding of the enemy we were dealing with, and our every effort was focused on preventing further attacks that would kill more Americans. It was during these months that the CIA was struggling to obtain critical information from captured al-Qaeda leaders, and requested permission to use harsher interrogation methods....High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country."

He went on to say:

"I also strongly supported the president (Obama) when he declared that we would no longer use enhanced interrogation techniques. We do not need these techniques to keep America safe. The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

So the techniques used caused us far more damage than any benefit they provided, and may not have provided any information that would not have been obtained otherwise? Good point!

No we don't know whether it could've been obtained otherwise, do we? The point, as you and the other ignorant fucks on here continue to ignore, is that when asked if we obtained good intelligence from torture, were lives saved, the answer is yes. O-blah blah's own DNI has said so. In writing.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: SecPro

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: SecPro
From Adm. Blair, Oblah-blah's Director of National Intelligence:

"All of us remember the horror of 9/11. For months afterwards we did not have a clear understanding of the enemy we were dealing with, and our every effort was focused on preventing further attacks that would kill more Americans. It was during these months that the CIA was struggling to obtain critical information from captured al-Qaeda leaders, and requested permission to use harsher interrogation methods....High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country."

He went on to say:

"I also strongly supported the president (Obama) when he declared that we would no longer use enhanced interrogation techniques. We do not need these techniques to keep America safe. The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

So the techniques used caused us far more damage than any benefit they provided, and may not have provided any information that would not have been obtained otherwise? Good point!

No we don't know whether it could've been obtained otherwise, do we? The point, as you and the other ignorant fucks on here continue to ignore, is that when asked if we obtained good intelligence from torture, were lives saved, the answer is yes. O-blah blah's own DNI has said so. In writing.

Surely you should keep torturing then, after all, it's only your national integrity and honour that's at stake.

An "ignorant fuck"

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: SecPro

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: SecPro
From Adm. Blair, Oblah-blah's Director of National Intelligence:

"All of us remember the horror of 9/11. For months afterwards we did not have a clear understanding of the enemy we were dealing with, and our every effort was focused on preventing further attacks that would kill more Americans. It was during these months that the CIA was struggling to obtain critical information from captured al-Qaeda leaders, and requested permission to use harsher interrogation methods....High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country."

He went on to say:

"I also strongly supported the president (Obama) when he declared that we would no longer use enhanced interrogation techniques. We do not need these techniques to keep America safe. The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

So the techniques used caused us far more damage than any benefit they provided, and may not have provided any information that would not have been obtained otherwise? Good point!

No we don't know whether it could've been obtained otherwise, do we? The point, as you and the other ignorant fucks on here continue to ignore, is that when asked if we obtained good intelligence from torture, were lives saved, the answer is yes. O-blah blah's own DNI has said so. In writing.

When asked the question, the answer was a highly qualified "maybe", with the addenda that more harm was done than good. Do you not read what you post?

 

[SecPro]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: SecPro

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: SecPro
From Adm. Blair, Oblah-blah's Director of National Intelligence:

"All of us remember the horror of 9/11. For months afterwards we did not have a clear understanding of the enemy we were dealing with, and our every effort was focused on preventing further attacks that would kill more Americans. It was during these months that the CIA was struggling to obtain critical information from captured al-Qaeda leaders, and requested permission to use harsher interrogation methods....High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country."

He went on to say:

"I also strongly supported the president (Obama) when he declared that we would no longer use enhanced interrogation techniques. We do not need these techniques to keep America safe. The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

So the techniques used caused us far more damage than any benefit they provided, and may not have provided any information that would not have been obtained otherwise? Good point!

No we don't know whether it could've been obtained otherwise, do we? The point, as you and the other ignorant fucks on here continue to ignore, is that when asked if we obtained good intelligence from torture, were lives saved, the answer is yes. O-blah blah's own DNI has said so. In writing.

When asked the question, the answer was a highly qualified "maybe", with the addenda that more harm was done than good. Do you not read what you post?

Did you read it? There was no "highly qualified maybe". Did torture produce high quality intelligence that saved lives? Yes, it did. Could have other methods been used, should we use torture, was what we did torture, was the possible harm done worth the info. we got, etc. etc. are all seperate but related, and highly relevant, topics of discussion.