The Obama administration got Osama bin Laden through a combination of persistent intelligence gathering, extensive surveillance, and well-coordinated military action (for an excellent summary of these efforts see the National Security Network's account, here). But now a rogue's gallery of right-wing ideologues and Bush administration operatives are trying to argue that the key to the success in finding Bin Laden was torture (or "enhanced interrogation," to put it more gently and less accurately).
One of the first responses to these absurd claims came from Brian Beutler, whose piece, "GOP's Tortured Logic: How We Got Osama Bin Laden" appeared at the Talking Points Memo web site. Rep. Steve King tweeted "Wonder what President Obama thinks of water boarding now?" Rep. Peter King (R-NY) went on Bill O'Reilly to claim (falsely) that "We got that information through waterboarding. So for those who say that waterboarding doesn't work, who say it should be stopped and never used again, we got vital information which led directly to Bin Laden." The two Kings (Steve and Peter) were joined by Bush administration stalwarts like Karl Rove, John Woo (author of the infamous torture memo that described the Geneva Conventions as "quaint"), and Dick Cheney (the man who infamously claimed that Saddam Hussein was on the verge of getting nuclear weapons).
So, we can believe this discredited group, or we can listen to people with actual knowledge of what happened (the "reality-based community," as a prominent neo-con once called people of this sort). Senate Intelligence Committee chair Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) stated flatly that "I happen to know a good deal about how those interrogations were conducted, and in my view, nothing justifies the kind of procedures that were used." And as Tanya Somanader noted in her post on Think Progress, former Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the ranking member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence during the Bush years, said "I am skeptical that [waterboarding] was the 'critical info' to our week-end success," noting that it "ended years ago." And the National Security Network cites a statement by Mark Fallon, a former interrogator and head of the criminal investigation task force at Guantanamo: "I've seen no information that the infliction of pain equates to the elicitation of accurate information . . . it's a shame to diminish the incredible work that went on through the intelligence community with analysts and case officers that led to bin Laden's capture."
So, if you want to refute the claims of the right about the "value" of torture, the information is available. But we need to do it repeatedly, wherever and whenever these outrageous claims pop up, as they surely will in the run up to the 2012 presidential elections. To paraphrase the old adage, a lie repeated often enough starts to sound like the truth. We can't let them get away with that on an issue this important.
We all know conservative's don't know how to lie
only conservstive's can do no wrong
Oppose waterboarding and sleep deprivation if you want. But state the facts right. Don't rewrite history to satisfy your political leaning. That's dishonest and it weakens your own argument.
That said, waterboarding is absolutely appropriate... and I'd love to ask some of the ridiculous liberals who say it's not.... if a nuclear bomb is going off in an hour, and you have the guy who knows where it is... are you really not going to do anything possible to get him to tell you where it is? Will you really let millions of people perish so that this one known terrorist doesn't have to swallow some water? (Seriously.... if you answer yes, at least you're consistent in your idiotic views and I am sure the millions of people killed will appreciate your consistency... but if you answer no, then you can't say enhanced interrogation techniques in certain situations isn't appropriate because you're hypocritical.)
I do not believe that waterboarding would be the appropriate solution to your n-bomber scenario and furthermore, since my opinion is based on evidence of the efficacy (or more accurately the lack thereof) of torture, I am confident that this does not make me either idiotic or hypocritcal.
Your problem seems to be that you believe everything you saw Jack Bauer doing on 24. That was fiction. Please see http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fiction.
I hope Obama does not break his arm patting himself on the back. Bin Laden was one man. The war is only beginning.
The US power elite, because of their arrogance and ability to shield themselves through the creation of moral hazards, refuses to acknowledge that Muslims have legitimate and significant grievances and Americans are kept ignorant as to what they are. Accordingly, true Americans we will be fighting and shedding blood against Muslims for generations and eventually we will lose. One thousand years from now there will still be Muslims in the Middle East.
Day of Rage in Washington D.C. on 6/30/11
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/462/358/Day_of_Rage_Scheduled_in_Washington_D.C._for_June_30,_2011.html
Joseph Zrnchik, MAJ (Ret.)
Dead or Alive...?
We fight 'em over there so we don't have to fight 'em over here..?
And my personal favorite...
"WE'RE # 1...!!!
Looking beyond republican angst and handwringing, I cannot help but wonder what these same hypocrites would say if cheney & co had caught bin laden?
I am shamed by the Bush administration's illegal, immoral, and unacceptable actions.
Not expecting it to stop anytime soon.
The point is that assassinating an unarmed subject is a crime against humanity. And as far as these crimes against humanity go, assassination is a far graver crime then waterboarding is.
Was the United States legal system not robust enough to try Bin Laden in a court of law?