CE said..."Opinions are NOT an unbiased source of accurate information. Nor is the Fox network or the Washington Post or anything else owned by Rupert Murdoch, including the GOP."

Now you're bringing up John McCain's OPINION?? When did you start becoming such a John McCain fan. In fact, you were probably one of those shmucks calling him McSame a couple years ago.

McCain and I differ on many matters. In fact I only voted for his a$$ in 2008 because the alternative that I now have to call President Obama sucked (and still does.) The long and short of it is I really don't care what McCain has to say. Frankly Equal I highly doubt you care what he has to say either.

Arthur, if you're so cocksure enhanced interrogation techniques led the U.S. to bin Laden, then it's your patriotic duty to tell John McCain he's wrong. Yes, that John McCain, the former North Vietnamese POW and GOP presidential candidate. Senator McCain doesn't agree with you, and he explains why in an article he wrote that was published in the Star-Trib today. The following is taken from that article; you can read the rest here: http://bit.ly/lhxApM

"Osama bin Laden's welcome death has ignited debate over whether the so-called enhanced interrogation techniques used on enemy prisoners were instrumental in locating Bin Laden, and whether they are a justifiable means for gathering intelligence.

"Much of this debate is definitional: whether any or all of these methods constitute torture. I believe some of them do, especially waterboarding, which is a mock execution and thus an exquisite form of torture. As such, they are prohibited by American laws and values, and I oppose them.

"I know those who approved and employed these practices were dedicated to protecting Americans. I don't believe anyone should be prosecuted for having used these techniques, and I agree that the administration should state definitively that they won't be.

"But this must be an informed debate. Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey recently claimed that 'the intelligence that led to bin Laden ... began with a disclosure from Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who broke like a dam under the pressure of harsh interrogation techniques that included waterboarding. He loosed a torrent of information -- including eventually the nickname of a trusted courier of Bin Laden.'

"That is false.

"I asked CIA Director Leon Panetta for the facts, and he told me the following: The trail to Bin Laden did not begin with a disclosure from Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times.

"The first mention of Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti -- the nickname of the Al-Qaida courier who ultimately led us to Bin Laden -- as well as a description of him as an important member of Al-Qaida, came from a detainee held in another country, who we believe was not tortured.

"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-Qaida.

"In fact, the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" on Khalid Sheik Mohammed produced false and misleading information. He specifically told his interrogators that Abu Ahmed had moved to Peshawar, got married and ceased his role as an Al-Qaida facilitator -- none of which was true.

"According to the staff of the Senate intelligence committee, the best intelligence gained from a CIA detainee -- information describing Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti's real role in Al-Qaida and his true relationship to bin Laden -- was obtained through standard, noncoercive means. ..."

No doubt Fox and World Nut Daily have bleated to the sheeple why they know this can't true. I wonder if P-hole or Arthur will be first to send me the links.

Evidently sitting CIA directors can't be trusted either according to CE.

created equal may have missed that Leon Panetta is the current CIA director; not the ex-CIA director.

One more thing...so ex Attorney Generals are probably lying, CIA Director is lying. I suppose Obama is telling the truth though right? Obama would NEVER lie.

Also...you say we may never know what led up to this operation on May 1st. If that's the case it's much more plausible that enhanced interrogation helped to get this info than by getting info Obama's way which pretty much amounts to "pretty please with sugar on top....won't you tell us where Osama is?" Be realistic Equal.

Hey Equal, nice George Bush quote at the end of your above rant. ...do/did you think George Bush was SO intelligent that he was able to persuade John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Pelosi and other fine Demos that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? It's so funny how libs on the one hand make fun of Bush as being stupid, but then on the other hand he was some evil mastermind that pulled a fast one on the entire country including prominent libs. Enjoy the below link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cwqh4wQPoQk

Arthur --

You always run when you're caught in a lie!

No, Arthur. Opinions are NOT an unbiased source of accurate information. Nor is the Fox network or the Washington Post or anything else owned by Rupert Murdoch, including the GOP.

You screwed up again -- you cited the wrong opinion piece. But who cares what I thought about it? I never used it as an unbiased source of information. You might think you're smart enough to get away with it, but you're not, and you don't.

To repeat: There is no credible evidence that enhanced interrogation techniques led to bin Laden.

And there never will be. For the record, I don't believe a blasted thing anyone has said about what led up to the special ops mission to Pakistan on May 1st. When they knew about Abbottabad ... the couriers ... who squealed and when ... the cellphone call ... or the 55/45 chance OBL was in the compound. I think it's all creative writing. This had to be one of the most, if not the most, highly classified military operations in the past 20 years, and it's inconceivable that the public will ever know what happened.

And what's with this "trustworthy" b.s.? The FORMER U.S. Attorney General was not in a position to know exactly what led to bin Laden. Nor was the FORMER CIA Director or Defense Secretary. Yet they and every other member of Bush's cabinet were hitting the Sunday morning TV talk shows claiming vindication for using torture to extract information. That's not trustworthy, and neither is this:

"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories ... And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them."

--George W. Bush, Washington, DC, May 30, 2003

****BREAKING NEWS*****

The 3 wifes of Osama Bin Laden, Mizzy,Lizzy and Dizzy

will finally be debriefed by US intelligence an unnamed

White House spokesman said today, After which time Mizzy

and Lizzy will appear on the View.Later in the week wife

Dizzy will appear on Dancing with the Stars....God willing

Oh really Equal?? No credible evidence if enhanced interrogation techniques worked? Are you expecting the CIA to tell you specifics? That's not going to happen.

Also...opinions don't count? It seems on February 23rd when you read the below totally biased link you said..."That's a very effective and powerful article, but right now I'm too overwhelmed to laugh." Oh what an opinion piece it was. You gushed over it like it was Gospel.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/mitchell/2008/09/what_is_white_privilege.html

If the former US attorney General is not trustworthy then who is? Someone who's against him?? Are you trustworthy Equal?

What about Leon Panetta? Would you trust what he has to say? Then watch this clip of Brian Williams interviewing Leon Panetta? How about Katie Couric interviewing Leon Panetta? Below you can view both.

http://nation.foxnews.com/usama-bin-laden/2011/05/03/cia-director-says-intel-waterboarding-led-bin-laden-raid

Arthur, you've lost your mind!

How do I show him where he's wrong when I never said that he was?

Sorry, Arthur, but I don't consider the Opinion page of the WSJ an unbiased source of accurate information.

The author of this editorial is the former U.S. Attorney General under GWB. He and other members of the former administration want to stop Eric Holder's investigation into allegations of torture at the hands of former CIA officials. They're attempting to do so by lying about the results produced by enhanced interrogation techniques. Saying KSM "broke like a dam" is just one example of their b.s.

There is no credible evidence whatsoever -- no matter what Fox or Peter King or Cheney say -- that intelligence resulting from enhanced interrogation techniques led to bin Laden.

"We must stop the terror. I call upon all nations to do everything they can to stop these terrorist killings. Thank you. Now watch this drive." --George W. Bush, August 2002

Bill Todd, your above post is right on the money. I suggest CE shows you where you are wrong. (she won't)

Equal...according to the Wall Street Journal, yes informatation from Waterboarding -or other enhanced interrogation techniques-was used to track down bin Laden.

"Consider how the intelligence that led to bin Laden came to hand. It began with a disclosure from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), who broke like a dam under the pressure of harsh interrogation techniques that included waterboarding. He loosed a torrent of information—including eventually the nickname of a trusted courier of bin Laden."

Below is the full link:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703859304576305023876506348.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

So are you complaining that Obama acted unilaterally by not telling Pakistan we'd be sneaking into their country and taking out bin Laden?

And, just so I'm clear, are you saying that information resulting from waterboarding -- or other enhanced interrogation techniques -- was used to track down bin Laden?

Obama should be commended for acting unilaterally against Osama. He acted much like Bush would have. The only difference is that Obama DID campaign against enhanced interrogation techniques and he was to close Guantanomo. Also....we ALL know that if there was a photo of Bush, Cheney, condoleeza and the gang watching this whole thing going down on closed circuit TV, the world would have been calling Bush and Company "war mongers" and "blood thirsty." No question about it. Since it was Obama though, I think the only one I heard complaining was one extremely obese Michael Moore who said the killing of an unarmed Osama was "an execution."

Hey Vic,

Take a lesson from Limbaugh and Peter King and accept the fact that Obama should be commended for what he carried out, You DOPE!!!

You know, Vic, I do agree with you on one point. Well, half a point:

"Vote for Obama and i will continue to golf and hold bitchin parties."

The bitchin' parties are nothing new; you were bitchin' about Obama months before he took office.

But I had no idea you golfed.

CE, I knew you had zero rebuttal to my points. And you know every word I said is true.

ILikeLakes ...

The last line of Vic's comment is all yours!