The Goat Pen

Where did you get the information that much if any of the intelligence information came as a result of waterboarding? I've not read that. The only specific item I recall seeing is that the hotshot they waterboarded 100 plus times refused to say he even knew the courier's nickname which had been given by underlings at Gitmo. Even under torture he and the other higher up that we had in hand denied having heard of him. It was the denial that caused suspicion.

Is there other real information out there that indicates/proves evidence was gleaned from torture which was not gathered by other means and methods?

I saw it on Fox. Said the guy had been waterboarded 184 times. Not sure what specifically he gave up in relation to Osama but the overall information about finding Osama was a combination of intelligence, some of it from waterboarding.

From Panetta himself JW...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel ... rding.aspx

Actually, that doesn't tell me much. What it says is that some ofthe intel came from detainees. Some of the detainees that this intel came from experienced enhanced interrogation techniques (EIT). It is in no way obvious, or stated (at this point, from a credible individual), that the specific information about couriers, compounds or any other information that led to the killing of OBL came directly from EIT.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (the guy waterboarded 183/4 times) did not give up courier information. He actually impressed his questioners.

What should be touted, instead of all this talk of EIT (which is a sad direction for us to take as a country) is to focus on Bush's contribution to the Arab Spring. That should be a legacy he trumpets. It's more valid.

If all these Arab uprisings continue then Bush Jr's name could loom large in the history books. Amazing.

What happens when you mix an individual's stupidity and arrogance with a misplaced prosecutorial focus?

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/201 ... incart_hbx

mandatory minimums applied to weed are ridiculous.

basically.

Panetta did not say any intelligence came from waterboarding. If you have a quote that he did, remember where you saw it?

He did say that some of the information came from Gitmo, and therefore implied that some 'may' have come from detainees who underwent some of the contentious interrogation methods. No specifics though.

Fox is hardly a reliable source in this sort of matter. I don't doubt that some infomation MAY have come from some of the more intensive interrogations, but saying it is so not only does not make it so, it doesn't mean that the same information may well have been achieved as well by more conventional means.

There have been some out and about on the bullshit circuit using the killing of Osama do justify/defend the now eliminated techniques such as water boarding; the only ones saying so I have read are the self serving usual suspects.

Its not a major point, but it is a minor one and it would be useful to know what intelligence methods worked, worked best and which did not work so well.

How I read it was that we did receive information from waterboarding but Panetta questioned if other techniques wouldn't have been more effective given how well trained the guy was at providing misleading information during the interrogation.

Doesn't matter either way - I'm staunchly against any form of torture by Americans, even outsourced torture to other nations on our behalf. I believe that is what separates us from the savages during war.

If you run across where you read that, let me know. As I said, its not a major issue at this point but it is of some interest.

You can put your fingers in your ears and drown out the sound of truth all you want, but...


WILLIAMS: Turned around the other way, are you denying that waterboarding was, in part, among the tactics used to extract the intelligence that led to this successful mission?

PANETTA: No, I think some of the detainees clearly were, you know, they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees. But I'm also saying that, you know, the debate about whether-- whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always gonna be an open question.

WILLIAMS: So finer point, one final time, enhanced interrogation techniques -- which has always been kind of a handy euphemism in these post-9/11 years -- that --

PANETTA: Right.

WILLIAMS: -- includes water boarding?

PANETTA: That's correct

I believe that is what separates us from the savages during war.

Yep

I looked it up and found the same piece/interview. It does seem like the topic of 'enhanced interrogation' has reared its head again:

>http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42880435/ ... aden-raid/<

I wonder if the issue will be pursued.......much.

Torture is bad and horrible. It doesn't work like it does in "24" and we should be better human beings and a better country than that.

With that out of the way...



Social Security is continuing to run red ink on the critical ratio of payroll tax revenue to benefits paid. This looks at the first five months over the past few years. Benefits march higher while revenues are flat

A closer look at the difference between the primary income and expense. The red ink for the five months in 11' is the first since 1983. Not long ago SS was a cash cow that funded a portion of the federal deficit. Not any longer.

how could benefits grow that steadily in just a few years?

Baby Boomers coming online? Not really sure. I need to research more.

Beyond that, however, is the issue that many people don't know regarding how SS has been raided throughout time to fund our deficits. As a result, Congress has made SS more dangerous than it should have been. The problem has not really been SS as much as it has been The Hill using SS surplus revenues to plug other holes. Now, SS itself has been made the boogeyman.

You can argue whether waterboarding is torture. You can argue that we should not use torture to get information. But to argue that torture isn't effective is refuting thousands of years of history...