Cheney Speech omissions and misstatements

[lazarus]

Former Vice President Dick Cheney's defense Thursday of the Bush administration's policies for interrogating suspected terrorists contained omissions, exaggerations and misstatements.

In his address to the American Enterprise Institute , a conservative policy organization in Washington , Cheney said that the techniques the Bush administration approved, including waterboarding — simulated drowning that's considered a form of torture — forced nakedness and sleep deprivation, were "legal" and produced information that "prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people."

He quoted the Director of National Intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair , as saying that the information gave U.S. officials a "deeper understanding of the al Qaida organization that was attacking this country."

In a statement April 21 , however, Blair said the information "was valuable in some instances" but that "there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090521/pl_mcclatchy/3237981

[Dr. Shane]

I do not support waterboarding at all. However what we have in this article is simply a difference of opinion between Blair and Cheney. Politicians disagree all the time. It may be newsworthy but certainly no smoking gun.

[carolaa]

It's not just a disagreement. Cheney is apparently misquoting Blair.

[Dr. Shane]

I think that is splitting hairs. They agree that valuable information was obtained. They disagree on whether or not the ends justify the means.

[lazarus]

I think that is splitting hairs. They agree that valuable information was obtained. They disagree on whether or not the ends justify the means.

This is not splitting hairs.

"The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

[Dr. Shane]

Correct, that is not splitting hairs. That is a difference of opinion.

[carolaa]

Shane, you're talking in circles.

[carolaa]

Blair said the information "was valuable in some instances" but that "there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090521/pl_mcclatchy/3237981

Here's a great video - "Former Interrogator Rebukes Cheney for Torture Speech":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfYov5o5_2s

[Dr. Shane]

Shane, you're talking in circles.

No. It is called straight talk. No spin. No circles.

[carolaa]

Shane's Straight Talk Express, complete with a bus donated by John McCain. LOL.

[phkrause]

That was an interesting link carolaa. Even Jesse Ventura agrees with this guy and even said so on the View and another show, the name escape's me now.

pk

[carolaa]

I would far rather trust a professional interrogator's opinion than Dick Cheney's opinion. The torture he condoned has made us less safe.

[Dr. Shane]

Most people trust the opinion of others that most closely reflects their preconceived ideas.

[phkrause]

Unfortunately Shane I have to agree with you on that, I think we all do that to one extent or another.

pk

[carolaa]

I would hope most people would tend to trust a professional over an amateur (particularly a politician!) in most areas. This would be one of them for me.

[Dr. Shane]

The Vice-President of the United States is a professional. We do not elect amateurs to be take over the presidency shall the President die. However many people have an agenda and a person's job or social status should not cause us to think they might be more trustworthy. A humble janitor may be more honest that a highly esteemed lawyer.

[there buster]

Quote:

Cheney is apparently misquoting Blair.

Apparently not.

Cheney did not misquote Blair. Blair did not say those techniques did not yield information, but that it was unknowable if the information could have been gained by other techniques.

Then he stated something as fact which is indeed unknowable: that the publicity concerning those methods has hurt us more than any benefit we could have gained from them.

This is invalid in two ways. First, misleading publicity may have been damaging, and there has been plenty of that, as evidenced continually on this forum. Misrepresenting something is a condemnation of the misrepresentation, not of the thing itself. Second, it's difficult to believe that any amount of disapproval could be more damaging than the deaths of thousands of civilians.

What makes young men volunteer for terrorism is success, not failure; seeing your enemy's proudest monuments and people go down in flames, not tales of terrorists suffering without inflicting damage on their enemies.

[carolaa]

A vice president is typically not a professional interrogator nor an expert in the field of interrogation. He would be wise to listen to those who are trained and do it for a living. But he is not wise. He is shooting off his mouth trying to protect his backside.

[carolaa]

Quote:

Cheney is apparently misquoting Blair.

Apparently not.

Cheney did not misquote Blair. Blair did not say those techniques did not yield information, but that it was unknowable if the information could have been gained by other techniques.

What I clarified subsequent to the above post is that Cheney misrepresented Blair's comments. Cheney was trying to imply that Blair supported Cheney's assertions, when in fact Cheney was not telling the whole story. There is a word for that; it is called deceit. Cheney was trying to deceive people by implying that Blair supported Cheney's assertions, when in fact he did not.

[Dr. Shane]

I can't read the motives of other people that clearly.

[there buster]

Quote:

Cheney was trying to imply that Blair supported Cheney's assertions, when in fact Cheney was not telling the whole story. There is a word for that; it is called deceit. Cheney was trying to deceive people by implying that Blair supported Cheney's assertions, when in fact he did not.

I don't go in for evil surmising. It's possible that Blair may have simply been clarifying something said earlier. Cheney's understanding may have been reasonable given previous statements, and Blair was making a distinction he had not previously. And given the disapproval of the MSM, it may be that Blair was simply trying to deflect criticism from himself.

But I don't have God's ability to read motives. There is a word for people who do that, as well.

[carolaa]

Cheney's motives are pretty obvious - no special skills needed to see them.