[Hmntezmb]

He actually didn't say waterboarding worked, he admitted it was something that was used.

When they waterboarded KSM and asked for him to provide the names of couriers, he told them nothing. When they asked him about a specific courier to Bin Laden, he kept denying it, and they took from that that he was lying, and that's what little the chicken hawks have to say waterboarding works.

The NSA and deputy NSA have repeated that KSM gave the US no actionable intel during the over 100 times he had been waterboarded, but gave up lots of info a year later when he was comfortable and being treated well.

Larry Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff to Colin Powell and a Republican, says of course it doesn't work, and one of the reasons why they didn't go after one of the couriers long ago was because they didn't glean the right information from KSM when they were torturing him.

He went on to say on the news the other day that yet another former CIA official is releasing a book next month titled "Interrogator" and the man explicitly states in his book that waterboarding is ineffective for landing good information because the person being tortured can never be counted on to give accurate information.

The NSA was clear to say yesterday that if you look at the interview carefully, Panetta never said that it was effective or not, but that it had been used.

Liz Cheney is trying to make the same case, but she's just another chicken hawk who doesn't know a lick about interrogation.

That's the thing with this so-called "debate"; the know-nothings think they know everything while one expert after another debunks the claims. That means there isn't a real debate, just a bunch of noise from neo-cons and people who watch too much t.v. and think the world works like an episode of "24".