• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CIA enhanced interigation docs released. Cheney responds

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
34,478
Reaction score
17,282
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
"CIA IG Report Confirms Effectiveness of CIA Interrogation Program"

That's the title on a Republican memo now being circulated on the Hill:


DATE: August 24, 2009
SUBJECT: release of CIA IG report confirms effectiveness of CIA interrogation program

A redacted version of the CIA Inspector General Report on the CIA interrogation program was released today. Media coverage seems to imply that CIA interrogators were constantly going beyond programmatic guidance, where the IG Report found the reality to be that “there were few instances of deviations from approved procedures.” IG Report page 5, para 10. Additionally, the media today has latched on to the use of a gun in an interrogation, without usually reporting the other important element of that salacious story, which is that the interrogator was promptly disciplined for his actions. Joby Warrick and R. Jeffrey Smith, CIA Officer Disciplined for Alleged Gun Use in Interrogation, Wash Post (Aug. 23, 2009).

Similarly going unreported today is that the release of the IG report should finally put to rest claims that the CIA interrogation program was not effective and did not produce actionable intelligence, made, for example, by Senator Whitehouse on the floor of the Senate on June 9, 2009. Analysis of the effectiveness of the CIA interrogation program in the IG Report reveals the following:

• “Agency senior managers believe that lives have been saved as a result of the capture and interrogation of terrorists who were planning attacks, in particular, Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, Abu Zubaydah, Hambali, and Al-Nashiri.” page 88 para 217.
• After the use of the enhanced interrogation techniques on the bomber of the USS Cole, “al-Nashiri provided lead information on other terrorists during his first day of interrogation.” pages 35-36, para 76.
• Hambali “provided information that led to the arrest of previously unknown members of an Al-Qa’ida cell in Karachi.” page 87 para 216.
• Intelligence derived from the CIA interrogation program led to a general increase in relevant intelligence reports, producing over 3,000 intelligence reports between 9/11 and the end of April 2003. page 86 para 213.
• A redacted entity “judge the reporting from detainees as one of the most important sources for finished intelligence.” Similarly, another redacted entity “viewed analysts’ knowledge of the terrorist target as having much more depth as a result of information from detainees and estimated that detainee reporting is used in all counterterrorism articles produced for the most senior policymakers.” page 88 para 218.

Analysis of the effectiveness of the CIA interrogation program in documents released with the CIA IG report reveals the following:

• “Results from the first al Qaeda HVT interrogated using the aforementioned enhanced techniques, Abu Zubayda, have been outstanding. . . . This has ultimately led to some instances of the US Government being able to neutralize Al Qaeda capabilities worldwide before there was an opportunity for those capabilities to engage in operations harmful to the United States.” CIA Business Plan discussing RDI program, page 13, March 7, 2003.
• “using the quality of the intelligence as the yardstick, the program has been an absolute success.” Interview with a senior CIA officer regarding CIA RDI program, page 1, para 2, July 17, 2003.
• “there was no other way CTC [CIA Counterterrorist Center] could have gotten the information they have obtained from the detainees.” Interview with a senior CIA officer regarding CIA RDI program, page 1, para 2, July 17, 2003.
• “detainees have provided information that led to the arrest of other terrorists Zubadayh provided information that led to the raid that netted Ramzi Bin al-Shibh.” Interview with a senior CIA officer regarding CIA RDI program, page 2, para 3, July 17, 2003.
• al Nashiri “is providing actionable intelligence” after the use of the enhanced interrogation techniques. Spot report regarding interrogation of al Nashiri, page 1, para 2, Jan. 22, 2003.

It is unclear why two other documents analyzing the effectiveness of the CIA interrogation program, namely the CIA CTC Effectiveness Memo and the CIA DI Khalid Sheikh Mohammad Preeminent Source Memo, were not released contemporaneously with the IG report. DOJ legal opinions, for example, have cited the Effectiveness Memo for the proposition 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.” OLC CAT Memo, page 8, May 30, 2005.


The Weekly Standard

Those are some of the documents Dick Cheney wanted declassified and released. Here's his response:

Cheney Statement on CIA Documents/Investigation


Former Vice President Dick Cheney gave The Weekly Standard a statement Monday night about the CIA documents and the coming Justice Department investigation.

The documents released Monday clearly demonstrate that the individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda. This intelligence saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks. These detainees also, according to the documents, played a role in nearly every capture of al Qaeda members and associates since 2002. The activities of the CIA in carrying out the policies of the Bush Administration were directly responsible for defeating all efforts by al Qaeda to launch further mass casualty attacks against the United States. The people involved deserve our gratitude. They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions. President Obama’s decision to allow the Justice Department to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA personnel, and his decision to remove authority for interrogation from the CIA to the White House, serves as a reminder, if any were needed, of why so many Americans have doubts about this Administration’s ability to be responsible for our nation’s security

The Weekly Standard

This comes as no surprise to me that the documents reveal that enhanced interrogation was effective. That's what Cheney, Bush, the CIA, and everyone else who was involved, or had first hand knowledge of EI, has gone on the record and attested to it's effectiveness.
 
Yes, but at the cost of our honor and the dignity we may have had as a nation. Cheney is an evil crook and should be locked up for the rest of his natural life. He disgusts me.
 
Please read the breaking news rules posted at the top of the page. Your source is a blog.
 
Yes, but at the cost of our honor and the dignity we may have had as a nation. Cheney is an evil crook and should be locked up for the rest of his natural life. He disgusts me.

So we would have had more honor if we would have let them attack us and kill innocent civillians all the while knowing that we could have stoped it by using those methods. I wonder if you would have felt the same way if one of the attacks that was prevented would have killed someone in your family.
 
Please read the breaking news rules posted at the top of the page. Your source is a blog.

This is not what you would classify as a "blog".

A blog is an internet website, where wannabee journalists (with no credentials) post their opinions on the news of the day.

This was taken from the website of the Weekly Standard, which is a credible, main stream, weekly political publication. Since they come out weekly, they use what they call their "blog" to post breaking news and the news of the day. Both pieces I posted were written by on-staff journalists employed by the magazine, and contained 100% factual information, with absolutely no opinion what so ever.

It's the same as when Jake Tapper posts a breaking story on the ABC News blog.

Now, would you care to comment on the story itself?

.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
Thread moved. When your link specifically states "Blog" in its address its a good indication its a blog. Same thing goes for Mr. Tapper. Yes, it is news and not opinion. This is the exact reason we have *BN* - MSM and *BN* - Blogs, and why this is here and not in Partisan Politics or another section.

In the future, please use the report function. To many threads have been derailed into discussions of whether or not its "breaking news" and "MSM or Blog".
 
Last edited:
So let me see if I understand you.

The transcripts of a memo written by house republicans and a statement released by former VP Cheney, that are published on the website of a main stream publication by their staff reporters, is deemed sub-standard information just because they dared to use the word "Blog" in the title of their page?

So does that mean that if I post a story written by the Associated Press, that is linked to the Huffington Post, that will also be moved?

I just want to understand where your coming from here, because I always thought there was a difference between a blog story written by a blogger, and a story written by a reporter from the main stream media.

.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Grim, I suggest you read the rules of the places you're posting. If you have questions or issues with moderation please address them over PM next time, not in thread.

*Breaking News* - Blogs is not, in any way, suggesting that the information is sub-standard to MSM information, simply that its delivered a different way. Indeed, such traditionally "sub-standard" Blogs that are generally factually innaccurate, exceedingly biased, and laced with opinion are not allowed in *BN* - Blogs.

A story by the Associated Press that is reposted on Yahoo!, Drudge, Huffington, or anywhere else could go in MSM because it is not written by Y!, Drudge, or HuffPo but is written by the Associated Press, a wire service, and simply reposted. A story written by a news writer of the Huffington Post would be in this section, the HuffPo is a blog by our rules.

If you have any further questions please direct them in PM. Now lets get this thread back on topic please.
 
EXTREMELY important story, whether blog or msm

once more, i'm grateful to the forums and the poster for breaking the news for me, i would not have known otherwise

cheney once again says loudly---bring it on!

obama is an IDIOT, the most INEPT politician at the national level america has ever seen

he trots out the pardoner of marc rich to get obamacare off the headlines while the chin in chief hides on martha's island

so they pick a topic on which the VEEP has already totally kicked obama's rushmore ass

per the documentation provided above

LOL!

The prophetic Prof repeats the VEEP---put em up
 
Enhanced interrogation...i.e. torture. If you want to torture, have the spine and resolve to at least own up to it.
 
Yes, but at the cost of our honor and the dignity we may have had as a nation. Cheney is an evil crook and should be locked up for the rest of his natural life. He disgusts me.

There's no honor, nor dignity in losing.
 
Yes, but at the cost of our honor and the dignity we may have had as a nation. Cheney is an evil crook and should be locked up for the rest of his natural life. He disgusts me.

We did what was necessary to protect our nation in a time of war; nothing dishonorable about that.
 
Not surprisingly, it seems that the anti Bush/anti-war/anti-American crowd here, seems to have either missed the point of this thread, or just chose to ignore it. Let me help you all out...

The point is, the claim by democrats and far left liberals that enhanced interrogation techniques were not effective, was false. Of course most of us already knew this, because we were told so several times over the years by the people who know... the CIA.

We listened to them, rather than the partisan democratic blowhards on Capitol Hill, who shamelessly lied to the American people and the entire world, for nothing more than cheap political gain... Again, I'm not surprised in the least.

.
 
Last edited:
There is in upholding ones ideals, integrity, and resolve though.

None of which mean jack anymore, if you lose. There are no good sportmanship awards in a war.
 
None of which mean jack anymore, if you lose. There are no good sportmanship awards in a war.

Well to be fair, if we stick to our ideals and integrity there's no way the terrorists can win. They may get a successful attack here and there, but they'll never beat us.
 
Well to be fair, if we stick to our ideals and integrity there's no way the terrorists can win. They may get a successful attack here and there, but they'll never beat us.

That's the most naive view point of war that I've ever heard. You're not going to kill the enemy with good intentions. History has proven that the side that responds with most speed and violence is the winner.

Were we worried about, "ideals an integrity", when we turned Tokyo into ashes? How 'bout when we leveled Hamburg, Dresdin, Berlin and Stuttgart? What about when we caused 15,000 French casualties during the invasion of Normandy? No, we didn't. Why? Because without victory all those, "ideals and integrity", didn't mean ****.

Those, "ideals and integity", are what brought us 9/11.
 
Last edited:
That's the most naive view point of war that I've ever heard. You're not going to kill the enemy with good intentions. History has proven that the side that responds with most speed and violence is the winner.

Were we worried about, "ideals an integrity", when we turned Tokyo into ashes? How 'bout when we leveled Hamburg, Dresdin, Berlin and Stuttgart? What about when we caused 15,000 French casualties during the invasion of Normandy? No, we didn't. Why? Because without victory all those, "ideals and integrity", didn't mean ****.

Those, "ideals and integity", are what brought us 9/11.

No, horrible interventionist policies breeding deep seeded anti-American attitudes which play straight into the hands of terrorist organizations led to 9/11. This is what I mean by understanding that actions have consequences and understanding what those consequences are. Some people grasp at the most immediate thing without applying thought.

As for my comment, there's no way terrorists can beat America. And if we stick to our ideology we don't let the government grow, become too intrusive, and usurp liberty. There's no way they can destroy this country, no way for them to change our government, no way for them to make us do anything, no way to bog us down in occupational wars which accomplish nothing. So you can keep running your mouth, but if you think a few terrorists can take down America then you have a very insulting opinion of this country, it's resolve, and its character.

Also, all your examples were from WW II, the last officially declared war. Iraq is more comparable to Vietnam or Korea. Undeclared, occupational war against an entrenched enemy which does near nothing for our own interests.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but at the cost of our honor and the dignity we may have had as a nation. Cheney is an evil crook and should be locked up for the rest of his natural life. He disgusts me.
Thank you for admitting that it works, and that lives were saved. You are now officially on the record. Carry on.
 
Enhanced interrogation...i.e. torture. If you want to torture, have the spine and resolve to at least own up to it.
Your post demonstrates that you care more about Semitics than saving lives. :doh
 
Your post demonstrates that you care more about Semitics than saving lives. :doh

My post demonstrates that I want people to own up to what the **** they are doing. People trying to *****foot around things, dehumanize certain folk, try to call something its not all so they don't have to face what it is they call for. Grow a spine and deal head on with what you want to do.

Your post is nothing but conjecture and propaganda as if saying people should call torture torture costs lives. Stupid.
 
My post demonstrates that I want people to own up to what the **** they are doing. People trying to *****foot around things, dehumanize certain folk, try to call something its not all so they don't have to face what it is they call for. Grow a spine and deal head on with what you want to do.

Your post is nothing but conjecture and propaganda as if saying people should call torture torture costs lives. Stupid.
Let's see, still not a single word about lives being saved. We see where your priorities are.
 
Let's see, still not a single word about lives being saved. We see where your priorities are.

Blah blah blah..."I'm going to equate honesty with wanting people to die".

Stupid. Come back when you bring the IQ of your arguments up a bit more.
 
Your post demonstrates that you care more about Semitics than saving lives. :doh

It's easy for some folks to see things like that, because they believe that it's not their asses on the line, nor do they think it ever will. Put any one of them in the WTC at about 9 am September 11, 2001 and bet they'll be screaming to rip that MF'ers arm off to make him talk.
 
That's the most naive view point of war that I've ever heard. You're not going to kill the enemy with good intentions. History has proven that the side that responds with most speed and violence is the winner.

Were we worried about, "ideals an integrity", when we turned Tokyo into ashes? How 'bout when we leveled Hamburg, Dresdin, Berlin and Stuttgart? What about when we caused 15,000 French casualties during the invasion of Normandy? No, we didn't. Why? Because without victory all those, "ideals and integrity", didn't mean ****.

Those, "ideals and integity", are what brought us 9/11.

I would rather die in a terrorist bombing attack than torture an individual which is against the law. Sorry folks but some things are worth dying for. One of those things are the integrity, honor and principles of our nation. To lie and beat around the bush (no pun intended) is to spit on the graves of every soldier that has died in the Iraq/Afghanistan wars. They go to fight for the ideals of this nation and then the people back here are going about doing things they know are illegal and frankly beneath us. You can try to justify it all you want, but there is no way that will ever be properly moral or ethical.
 
Back
Top Bottom