osamanobama said:
GameOver22 said:
I would probably wait for some more information to come out because the current information thats been presented is contradictory.
"Prisoners in American custody told stories of a trusted courier. When the Americans ran the man’s pseudonym past two top-level detainees — the chief planner of the Sept. 11 attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed; and Al Qaeda’s operational chief, Abu Faraj al-Libi — the men claimed never to have heard his name. That raised suspicions among interrogators that the two detainees were lying and that the courier probably was an important figure."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/world/asia/03intel.html?src=me&ref=world
This information directly conflicts with Peter King's interview. This quote makes it seem that KSM and Libi verified the information, but they verfied the information by lying. If this is the case, water-boarding does not seem to be as useful because it did not lead to the disclosure of true information.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/us/politics/04torture.html?ref=world- this is also a pretty good article discussing the timeline and debate about water-boarding.
|
the got his suddoname from it.
also director of CIA Leon Penetta confirmed it was used, as well as former head of the CIA task force on Osama Bin Laden confirmed they got vital intel from using IET's. meaning the curriers name, which they were able to eventually get his real name, and then location.
|
I would still wait for more info. The question isn't really whether it was used. The question is whether new information was received by using it. It seems that the psedoname was acquired through some form of intense-interrogation (highly possible this means water-boarding), but the reporting by nytimes still directly conflicts with Peter King's interview (they give very different accounts of how successful the water-boarding of KSM and Libi were).
