Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Waterboarding Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack

from CNS News:

CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief
.
(CNSNews.com) - The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) -- including the use of waterboarding -- caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.

Before he was waterboarded, when KSM was asked about planned attacks on the United States, he ominously told his CIA interrogators, “Soon, you will know.”

According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack -- which KSM called the “Second Wave”-- planned “ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles.”

KSM was the mastermind of the first “hijacked-airliner” attacks on the United States, which struck the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Northern Virginia on Sept. 11, 2001.

After KSM was captured by the United States, he was not initially cooperative with CIA interrogators. Nor was another top al Qaeda leader named Zubaydah. KSM, Zubaydah, and a third terrorist named Nashiri were the only three persons ever subjected to waterboarding by the CIA. (Additional terrorist detainees were subjected to other “enhanced techniques” that included slapping, sleep deprivation, dietary limitations, and temporary confinement to small spaces -- but not to water-boarding.)

This was because the CIA imposed very tight restrictions on the use of waterboarding. “The ‘waterboard,’ which is the most intense of the CIA interrogation techniques, is subject to additional limits,” explained the May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo. “It may be used on a High Value Detainee only if the CIA has ‘credible intelligence that a terrorist attack is imminent’; ‘substantial and credible indicators that the subject has actionable intelligence that can prevent, disrupt or deny this attack’; and ‘[o]ther interrogation methods have failed to elicit this information within the perceived time limit for preventing the attack.’”

The quotations in this part of the Justice memo were taken from an Aug. 2, 2004 letter that CIA Acting General Counsel John A. Rizzo sent to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

Before they were subjected to “enhanced techniques” of interrogation that included waterboarding, KSM and Zubaydah were not only uncooperative but also appeared contemptuous of the will of the American people to defend themselves.

“In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including KSM and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques,” says the Justice Department memo. “Both KSM and Zubaydah had ‘expressed their belief that the general US population was ‘weak,’ lacked resilience, and would be unable to ‘do what was necessary’ to prevent the terrorists from succeeding in their goals.’ Indeed, before the CIA used enhanced techniques in its interrogation of KSM, KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, ‘Soon you will know.’”

After he was subjected to the “waterboard” technique, KSM became cooperative, providing intelligence that led to the capture of key al Qaeda allies and, eventually, the closing down of an East Asian terrorist cell that had been tasked with carrying out the 9/11-style attack on Los Angeles.

The May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that details what happened in this regard was written by then-Principal Deputy Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury to John A. Rizzo, the senior deputy general counsel for the CIA.

“You have informed us that the interrogation of KSM—once enhanced techniques were employed—led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the ‘Second Wave,’ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles,” says the memo. “You have informed us that information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discover of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemaah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the ‘Second Wave,’” reads the memo. “More specifically, we understand that KSM admitted that he had [redaction] large sum of money to an al Qaeda associate [redaction] … Khan subsequently identified the associate (Zubair), who was then captured. Zubair, in turn, provided information that led to the arrest of Hambali. The information acquired from these captures allowed CIA interrogators to pose more specific questions to KSM, which led the CIA to Hambali’s brother, al Hadi. Using information obtained from multiple sources, al-Hadi was captured, and he subsequently identified the Garuba cell. With the aid of this additional information, interrogations of Hambali confirmed much of what was learned from KSM.”

A CIA spokesman confirmed to CNSNews.com today that the CIA stands by the factual assertions made here.

In the memo itself, the Justice Department’s Bradbury told the CIA’s Rossi: “Your office has informed us that the CIA believes 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.”

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

So the question for every American who bothers to think about these things and to hold an opinion is thus:

Which do you hold more valuable?

a. Absolute adherence to all relevant national values including those conceived prior to the realization of the previously inconceivable, or

b. Many American lives.

christian soldier said...

Un-uniformed combatants -in any war-used to be executed in the field...Now you know where I stand>>>>
C-CS

christian soldier said...

and this:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/CartoonPopUp.aspx?id=324593707292046
after a glass of Veuve Clicquot Champagne-
I'm LOL and everything SEEMS to connect! :-)
BTW- I am buying 'French' again MR-It's been a long time...
C-CS

midnight rider said...

And all because Obama wouldn't kiss the hot French babe. Guess his "diplomacy" was good for something :)

midnight rider said...

I still think he was afraid Michelle would whoop his ass. . .

Andre79 said...

CNN: Bush-era interrogation may have worked, Obama official says

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/21/obama.memos/index.html

Shocker!

Epaminondas said...

It's not about ANY OF THIS

This is not about information stopping attacks, or the geneva conventions.

This is not about history, Al Qaeda, or the future.

This is not about morals or our place in history as evil or nice guys.

This is not even about our survival as a nation or the security of the people of the USA

It's about partisan enemies at the voting booth.

American politics became a blood sport more 'innocently' beginning with Bork, and we are well along the way to the inevitable.

What can be legally defined as torture is ONLY A TOOL to GET DOMESTIC ENEMIES.

Watch the leaders of the charge.. Leahy, Conyers et al.

They should be asked every day why the Dem senate and House leaders who approved all this on 2002 should be spared prosecution?

Where are the republicans PUSHING AGGRESSIVELY for dems to be indicted?

Anonymous said...

Epaminondas -

They have sovereign immunity. They could be impeached, but not criminally prosecuted.

Does not explain why the Repubs are not clearly pointing out that those who bear the responsibility for actually defining "torture" are now trying to criminalize the use of that exact definition.

What does the left have on the Repubs that none of them are mounting any kind of "counteroffensive?"

Just like the Bush era. Say nothing - for whatever reason. Into that vacuum rushes the most virulent leftist message.

When I called my senators and rep and asked, a week ago, why the hell there was no response to that stalinist DHS "assessment" of possible "enemies of the state" the office people just stammered.

Weird and extremely frustrating.

I would love to go to DC in Sept. for the march.


Ro

Epaminondas said...

I always thought immunity was for what they said, not what they did.

Thus Congressman Jefferson is indicted, Coehlo, and Wright resigned rather than face indictment as part of a deal.

Anonymous said...

Those were not for things done as part of a legislative process. I thought you were talking about their culpability in the performance of their duties as legislators.

Graft, bribery, etc. - yes, absolutely they are vulnerable to prosecution and immunity does not attach in those circumstances.




Ro