easy there I'm taking credit for it. mine first. I thought of it, and then colbert just carried it out. colbert did nothing.
Uhhh..how does this theory (that they guy who was waterboarded didn't help) help the pro-torturers? It only makes them look worse. Regardless Casey - I have several sources -all it took was googling "khalid sheikh mohammed courier". It was not very difficult. Surely, casey, this is within your capacities. If I give you the source, and cure your own laziness, willl you apologize to me for doubting me? I think that's a fair trade. Please apologize in advance and I will edit this post to include it. The answer you seek is a mere CTRL-V away....!
Wow, you totally nailed me... Seriously...you need to take a laxative or something. Bush is satan. WE GOT IT. I can just see the steam coming from your ears as you type. Why don't you try some deep breathing or something? LOL.
i love how a few gogle searches makes people experts and all knowing in the exact time frame what was given up when. why didnt intelligence just google "where is osama?"
Why do you consider it remarkable that people use a news search engine to search news articles? Where do you get your info - sarah palin's twitter page?
The magical ass also seems allergic to providing any opinion or factual rebuttal. Throwing out nothing but condescending and oft-nonsensical barbs is hardly an accomplishment. At least Sam is funny when he does it.
good for him: -- To get bin Laden, Obama relied on policies he decried By: Michael Barone 05/03/11 8:05 PM Senior Political Analyst Follow Him @MichaelBarone In tracking down and nailing bin Laden, Obama led the right way by making right and risky decisions, without any leaks to the press.-Charles Dharapak/AP Let's cheerfully and ungrudgingly give credit to Barack Obama for approving the military operation that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden. In my Washington Examiner column last Sunday I criticized Obama's foreign policy, which was characterized by one of his advisers in an interview with the New Yorker's Ryan Lizza as "lead from behind." That criticism still stands. But in tracking down and nailing bin Laden, Obama led from behind the right way -- behind the scenes he made a right but risky decision, without any leaks to the press, to achieve an objective sought by two presidents and thousands in the American government and military since Sept. 11, 2001. The decision was risky because the operation could have failed, like Jimmy Carter's Desert One operation to rescue American hostages in Iran failed in April 1980. But this time, even though one helicopter was lost, the operation succeeded. There was evidently a lot of redundancy in the plan and a lot of flexibility on the ground. A lot of good people did a lot of good things right. While we may not know all the details about and behind this operation, it's fascinating to see how many of the things that made the success of this operation possible were not so long ago decried by many of the president's fans and fellow partisans. For one thing, it apparently would not have happened without those infamous enhanced interrogation techniques -- "torture," according to critics of the Bush administration. The enhanced interrogation techniques reportedly led to identification of the courier who eventually led our forces to bin Laden's hiding place. Critics of waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques assured us that "torture" could not produce reliable information. They were probably right that sometimes such techniques yield false information. But the bin Laden operation shows that they can also produce actionable intelligence. You may remember that many Democrats called for criminal prosecution of CIA interrogators who were acting under orders vetted by legal counsel. Attorney General Eric Holder actually considered bringing such prosecutions. Fortunately he decided not to do so -- fortunately for the individuals involved but fortunately also for his own reputation. Who would want to be known for prosecuting the people who helped track down bin Laden? It has also been reported that in hunting down bin Laden our forces relied on intercepted communications. I wonder if any of them included contacts between suspected terrorists abroad and persons in the United States. This was the "domestic wiretapping" revealed to great acclaim by the New York Times and presented as an intolerable infringement of civil liberties. Given what we know now, it's a good thing our folks were tuning in. Obama deserves credit also for employing the Navy SEALs who are part of the Joint Special Operations Command. It was fashionable a few years ago to call the JSOC Cheney's death squad and Cheney's assassination team. The assumption behind such criticism was that Bush administration officials were using what they termed the war against terrorism as a smokescreen for persecuting domestic dissidents. But there is not a scrap of evidence that either the Bush administration or the Obama administration were doing anything of the kind. They were too busy trying to protect us. There was criticism as well of the idea of targeting particular individuals for assassination. But in ordering the raid on bin Laden's compound Obama authorized the killing of bin Laden. And no Miranda warnings first. Bin Laden's death removes the possibility of any debate about where he would be confined or tried. On this Obama has already been forced to keep the Guantanamo detention center open and Holder has had to concede that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will not be tried in a civilian court in Manhattan. Finally, let us note that this was a unilateral operation. Obama didn't go to the United Nations Security Council. He didn't, so far as we know, consult NATO allies. He took care not to inform the government of Pakistan, some elements of which obviously knew that bin Laden was ensconced in a house 800 meters away from Pakistan's military academy. For years we heard supposedly enlightened people excoriate our leaders for torture, lawlessness, unilateralism -- the list goes on and on. Now the president they have wanted has used the tactics and methods they excoriated to get bin Laden. Good for him. Michael Barone, The Examiner's senior political analyst, can be contacted at mbarone@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Wednesday and Sunday, and his stories and blog posts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com. Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/polit...bama-relied-policies-he-decried#ixzz1LOcvSL8j
Not surprising that Barone is repeating the falsehood that enhanced interrogation lead to the indentity of the courier. Nor is is it surprising that basso would keep trying to get people to believe it.
Actually, the notion that waterboarding/other harsh interrogation techniques provided evidence that helped locate Bin Laden is still specious, at best. Andrew Sullivan has an excellent article on this topic: Marcy Wheeler also has an interesting take that furthers Sullivans sentiments. Even Rumsfeld has come out and stated that information that led to Bin Laden wasnt obtained via waterboarding. As always, Glenn Greenwald also has a strong take against waterboarding and enhanced interrogation. For the record, I'm not unequivocally against waterboarding. I'd rather the CIA and US intelligence judge the efficacy of waterboarding and enhanced interrogation against the totally of what its provided them by way of useful information. I just find it a little disingenuous for partisan commentators to come out parading the merits of waterboarding/enhanced interrogation at this time in order to win political points. Let this moment stand for the success that it is without constantly politicizing issues....Anyways, just my 2 cents.
Is this your first 'big news' rodeo? You've basically got a car crash halfway around the world in the middle of the night with 20 or so eye witnesses... as if the details regarding the event weren't going to be fuzzy the first 24-48 hours afterwards
seriously, you complaining about not having the petty details of the OBL's assasination right the first time? did they correct it or not?
No kidding. Meanwhile, you've got people dropping falsehoods about something which is several years old that has zero excuse for "fuzzy" recounting.
Leon Panetta says that it's "true" they worked from a lot of different sources of information. What is so earth shattering about that?
