Rethugs going there...will demand answers on enhanced interrogation

[babylonsister]

Be careful what you wish for?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/republicans-will-demand-answers-on-eits/2011/03/29/AFPKMEjG_blog.html

Republicans will demand answers on enhanced interrogation
By Jennifer Rubin


In conversations with several Senate Republican offices, I learned today that key Republicans won’t shy away in upcoming confirmation hearings from asking probing questions about the administration’s policies on enhanced interrogation techniques and the ongoing-investigation of CIA operatives.

In my interview today, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) voiced the concern of many Republicans, namely that we have have discontinued interrogation methods that provided us with critical intelligence. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) sits on the Senate Armed Services committee. I asked his spokesman if Cornyn would insist in the confirmation hearing that Leon Panetta answer questions about enhanced interrogation techniques and the ongoing investigation of CIA operatives by the Justice Department. His answer was succinct. “Yes, ma’am.”

In a CNBC interview the day after Osama bin Laden’s killing, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said, “The information that eventually led us to this compound was the direct result of enhanced interrogations; one can conclude if we had not used enhanced interrogations, we would not have come to yesterday’s action.” Burr sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Although he doesn’t sit on the Armed Services Committee (so will not be at Panetta’s hearing), a spokesman said Burr would review the pre-hearing completed questionnaire from the CIA nominee (Gen. David Petraeus) “and formulate his questions.” One can imagine EITs will be on his list. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) (who has not been shy about holding up nominees) doesn’t sit on either relevant committee but his spokesman was clear that the senator “believes it would be appropriate for those questions to be asked.” He also pointed to DeMint’s comments at a hearing on Pakistan last week in which he saluted the CIA’s work in extracting information critical to the killing of Osama bin Laden.

In short, it is almost certain that more than one Republican will be asking the questions that my colleague Greg Sargent and I discussed yesterday: What information did we gather through EITs? What alternatives do we now have? And why are we still investigating CIA officials who did their jobs and apparently contributed to a significant victory in the war against Islamic terrorism?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=433&topic_id=671552
Bring it on-let's have this debate

[Tigress DEM]

1. IF the *ush administration had the info and sat their asses on it....

IF the *ush administration had the info and sat their asses on it.... then it just shows they had no interest in finding Bin Laden.


Let's just say it, if their techniques produced information they did not use that is COMPLICIT behavior and being COMPLICIT in TERRORISM is the same thing as being COMPLICIT with MURDERS - It's a crime in the first case. It's treason in the second.


IF they had valid information from their interrogation techniques, they shoulda/woulda/coulda caught Bin Laden BUT they DIDN'T CATCH him THEN OR NOW, did they? SO this is just another case of rethug wishful thinking. The same way they kept trying to take credit for the financial recovery of the Clinton administration. Puuuleeeeese!!


It wasn't until we went back to treating potential informants as human beings that they decided to spill any valid information.


REMEMBER TOO that Dickie Chenney got Valerie Plame Wilson "outed" which took down her whole network. Groups embedded for years and able to gather real intelligence without having to water-board anyone rendered useless as last year's cell phones.


Bin Laden could hide in plain sight in Pakistan because we were still pursuing false leads given to us by people whose only way of repaying their torturers was to lead them on wild goose chases.


Not to mention the leads that Clinton had handed *ush when he got in office that could have prevented 9/11 in the first place, so *ushites in the news taking credit. It isn't their first time at the RAILS of DELUSION and it won't be their last, but just because THEY think they are "all that" don't make it so.



Tig

[Tigress DEM]

2. OR the short answer

WHY aren't we torturing MORE to get information?



A) We have Osama Bin Laden's computer

B) TORTURE DOESN'T WORK!!! On ANY level.