Saksynt - Gunnar Tjomlid

Tortur førte ikke USA til Osama Bin Laden

Dette er interessant. John McCain gikk i går hardt ut mot med-republikanere som nå prøver å forsvare bruk av tortur fordi de hevder det var avgjørende i å lede USA til bin Ladens gjemmested i Pakistan.

Problemet er at dette slettes ikke stemmer. Jeg gir ordet til McCain som i går sa følgende i sin tale til Senatet:

“With so much misinformation being fed into such an essential public debate as this one, I asked the Director of Central Intelligence, Leon Panetta, for the facts. And I received the following information:

“The trail to bin Laden did not begin with a disclosure from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times. We did not first learn from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed the real name of bin Laden’s courier, or his alias, Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti — the man who ultimately enabled us to find bin Laden. The first mention of the name Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti, as well as a description of him as an important member of Al-Qaeda, came from a detainee held in another country. The United States did not conduct this detainee’s interrogation, nor did we render him to that country for the purpose of interrogation. We did not learn Abu Ahmed’s real name or alias as a result of waterboarding or any ‘enhanced interrogation technique’ used on a detainee in U.S. custody. None of the three detainees who were waterboarded provided Abu Ahmed’s real name, his whereabouts, or an accurate description of his role in Al-Qaeda.

“In fact, not only did the use of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed not provide us with key leads on bin Laden’s courier, Abu Ahmed; it actually produced false and misleading information. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed specifically told his interrogators that Abu Ahmed had moved to Peshawar, got married, and ceased his role as an Al-Qaeda facilitator — which was not true, as we now know. All we learned about Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti through the use of waterboarding and other ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ against Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the confirmation of the already known fact that the courier existed and used an alias.

“I have sought further information from the staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and they confirm for me that, in fact, the best intelligence gained from a CIA detainee — information describing Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti’s real role in Al-Qaeda and his true relationship to Osama bin Laden — was obtained through standard, non-coercive means, not through any ‘enhanced interrogation technique.’

“In short, it was not torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of detainees that got us the major leads that ultimately enabled our intelligence community to find Osama bin Laden. I hope former Attorney General Mukasey will correct his misstatement. It’s important that he do so because we are again engaged in this important debate, with much at stake for America’s security and reputation. Each side should make its own case, but do so without making up its own facts.

Avisen The New York Times gransket også dette og konkluderte med at tortur bare hadde spilt en minimal rolle, om noen i det hele tatt, i å finne bin Laden.

Talen kan sees i sin helhet her:

  • Bjørn T.

    Det er vel kanskje ikke noen bombe at de som propagerer dette (altså hvor viktig enhanced interrogation) har vært, er de som har mest å vinne på at det oppfattes slik, og mest å tape på bli fremstilt som de idiotene de er…

    Richard (probably small) «Dick» Bruce Cheney f.eks. Of Fox “News” lar dem holde på. Dette er interessant though, for når så prominente republikanere som dette kommer med infoen er det vanskelig å ikke legge merke til den, også for den skylappede delen av velgerne.

  • http://andershusa.wordpress.com Anders

    McCain ’08! Oh wait…

    Fine mannen.

  • http://hugsandscience.com marit

    Virker som en passende tid å minne om at Christopher Hitchens lot seg “waterboarde” da han en stund mente at waterboarding ikke var tortur.
    Artikkel.
    Link til video.

  • Bjørn T.

    marit skrev:

    Virker som en passende tid å minne om at Christopher Hitchens lot seg “waterboarde” da han en stund mente at waterboarding ikke var tortur.

    Er du sikker på at du har fakta rett her? Hitchens var, og er, for militær intervensjon i midt-østen, i alle fall i Irak, men så vidt meg bekjent har han ikke sagt noe annet enn at tortur er en uting, og at waterboarding er tortur. Jeg mener å erindre at hele poenget med å la seg waterboarde selv var for å kunne systematisk motarbeide argumentet “det er ikke noe ille, og du vet det ikke siden du ikke har prøvd det selv”. Han skulle altså vise _at_ det er tortur,. ikke _om_ det er tortur. Subtle difference. At han ble mye mer aktiv i diskusjonen etterpå er en annen sak.

  • Bjørn T.

    her har vi sannelig en referanse også.. ca 45 minutter inne
    http://fora.tv/2009/07/09/Axis_of_Evil_Christopher_Hitchens#fullprogram