Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mastermind of 9/11 Attacks Designs a Secret Vacuum Cleaner

Posted by timothy on from the your-snide-response-must-include-the-word-sucks dept.

HonorPoncaCityDotCom writes "AP reports that while confined to the basement of a CIA secret prison in Romania about a decade ago, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the admitted mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, asked his jailers whether he could design a vacuum cleaner. After all KSM earned his bachelor's in mechanical engineering, the agency had no long-term plan for him, but might thought he might someday prove useful and might even stand trial one day and for that, he'd need to be sane. They were concerned that his long imprisonment might do so much psychological damage that he would no longer be useful as source for information. "We didn't want them to go nuts," said a former senior CIA official. So, using schematics from the Internet as his guide, Mohammed began re-engineering one of the most mundane of household appliances. It remains a mystery how far Mohammed got with his designs or whether the plans still exist and even Mohammed's military lawyer, Jason Wright, says he is prohibited from discussing his client's interest in vacuums. 'It sounds ridiculous, but answering this question, or confirming or denying the very existence of a vacuum cleaner design, a Swiffer design, or even a design for a better hand towel would apparently expose the U.S. government and its citizens to exceptionally grave danger,' says Wright. So now, says Doug Mataconis, if you happen to start seeing ads for the CIA's revolutionary new home cleaning device, you'll know where it came from." Sounds perfect for In-Q-Tel.

34 of 284 comments (clear)

  1. admitted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He was tortured in order to obtain the confession, I don't know what good it is.

    1. Re:admitted? by Zemran · · Score: 3, Funny

      He was tortured to get a confession and when they read it, it was the plan for a vacuum cleaner...

      --
      I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    2. Re:admitted? by artor3 · · Score: 4, Informative

      He admitted to his role in 9/11 several months before being captured, in an interview with Al Jazeera.

      That in no way excuses torture, nor does it mean he's guilty of the dozens of other crimes that they tortured him into confessing to, but he was responsible for 9/11.

    3. Re:admitted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is why you don't torture people who you think are criminals -- it does nothing but contribute doubt to your case. Society learned long ago that a torture-free imprisonment, followed by a fair and impartial trial, was the most effective way to ensure that an admission of guilt (or conviction) was credible and final.

    4. Re:admitted? by Raenex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To play devil's advocate, if you're looking for information, torture with cross-checking will probably gain you some. It will cost you in other ways, though.

    5. Re:admitted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      He admitted to his role in 9/11 several months before being captured, in an interview with Al Jazeera.

      9/11 and that interview were clearly an amazing publicity stunt to generate hype for his vacuum cleaner design. Slashvertisement was just the next step in his plan. Next week, he'll open up the kickstarter project and the money will start rolling in like an avalanche.

      Call me pessimistic, but I expect delays in any delivery date he sets.

      All in all, it seems like the ???????????? before PROFIT was "get waterboarded". Who knew?

      captcha: gigawatt

    6. Re:admitted? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      nor does it mean he's guilty of the dozens of other crimes that they tortured him into confessing to

      To the best of my knowledge he didn't give them jack shit despite being waterboarded around 180 times. For a while there was this pro-torture narrative going around that he "broke" after ~30 seconds of waterboarding when later it turned out that the real story was closer to the CIA gave up waterboarding him after ~30 days of doing it to him 5 times a day and getting nothing.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    7. Re:admitted? by erikkemperman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Really? Care to give examples? Because I thought that torture will only get people to tell you what they think you want to hear. Truth doesn't figure into it.

      Unless the aim of torture of one guy is actually to frighten and discourage a bunch of other guys not yet residing in your secret lair dungeons. Maybe that would work. But that would be, you know, terrorism.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    8. Re:admitted? by mysidia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      followed by a fair and impartial trial, was the most effective way to ensure that an admission of guilt (or conviction) was credible and final.

      And then they went and screwed it up, by letting interrogators lie -- imply that they had enough evidence to put 'em away for life, and coax the prisoner into confessing under a false pretense that they'll get off with less prison time, than they'd be certain to have if they insisted upon exercising their right to a trial.

    9. Re:admitted? by Omestes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yup, the sad fact is that torture actually works and it can save lives when executed properly.

      I doubt the truthfulness of this statement, on the basis of numerous studies, history, and a basic understanding of human psychology. But even if it was true, it is irrelevant, since it switches the argument against torture into and ethical and humanitarian one, which is also pretty solid. There also is the matter of hypocracy, since we can never actually condemn torture (of the so-called "good-guys"), as long as we advocate it.

      The fact that there is a debate about the merits of torture is absolutely astounding to to me. Astounding and abhorrent.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    10. Re:admitted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yup, the sad fact is that torture actually works and it can save lives when executed properly.

      That has never happened and never will.

      The example that people bring up is "what if the is a bomb and you need to find it before it detonates."
      What would happen in those cases is that the subject will tell you anything as long as it stops the torture. He will give you a false location that you need to verify, thereby stopping the torture temporarily. You could keep torturing him continuously until the bomb is found but that removes the connection between answering and removal of torture so that is also inefficient.
      Torture never works in a time critical scenario because then the subject knows that he only has to stall for a fixed time.
      For torture to even theoretically work you will need an unlimited time frame and ask about something that can be quickly verified. (Preferably within a 10 minute span or so. Without a strong connection between the correctness of the answer and the torture all answers will be lies.)
      In those cases you can work just as well without the torture.

    11. Re:admitted? by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You see, right there is your problem. You're arguing it wrong. Don't argue that it leads to better trials, better convictions, yada yada, then they can argue back against you about it. They can disagree. This isn't something that should be a debatable issue.

      Argue: "Torture is evil. If we administer it, WE are evil people. It is all about hate, revenge and there is no excuse, no justification for it, ever. If a man were guarding the knowledge that would cure all mortal illness and the only way to get the cure from him were torture, it would STILL be wrong to commit it. We cannot give up our very souls for security because all we'll truely be secure in is our own shame."

    12. Re:admitted? by dbIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, it just gets you something else to use in a show trial once you've already decided the person is guilty. In the USSR they were well aware that torture was utterly useless as a means of gaining information when they did things like get someone to confess to blowing up more railway locomotives than existed in the USSR at the time. Torture is only good if you want to put on a show that makes it look like punishment is being carried out for crimes and catching the actual criminals instead of whoever is convenient is a lucky accident.
      As for costing in other ways, guess who tried to kill off the President of France some years ago? It was a group of returned soldiers from Algeria that had tortured doctors, priests and plenty of others that they had seen as authority figures so they didn't see why they shouldn't kill off their President. This sort of stuff has a way of following people home, which may be when some torture was outsourced to Egypt and Syria (two we know about) as part of the "extraordinary rendition" that had large numbers of suspects being flown to places where US law does not apply with people that won't be setting foot in the USA committing the atrocities.
      In my view it's another thing to add to the list, not just having atrocities committed but being cowardly weasels about it.

    13. Re:admitted? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      US Soldiers are more likely to engage in spousal abuse, whether that's rape or pugilism. This distinction doesn't even involve combatants; there's enough brainwashing and rape to achieve this goal even for a non-com. I presume it's the same elsewhere. You teach people to solve problems with violence and that they are better than other people (as enlisted typically feel) and guess what happens?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:admitted? by Anarchduke · · Score: 3

      Now, now, it wasn't torture. It was just "enhanced interrogation." We would never countenance torture. Just like we would never support rape. Its just "enhanced kissing."

      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    15. Re:admitted? by Livius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unless the aim of torture of one guy is actually to frighten and discourage a bunch of other guys not yet residing in your secret lair dungeons.

      The purpose of torture is to terrorize others. That's why torture is 'secret' (because it's illegal), but that 'secret' always seems to very widely known.

      When a prisoner is tortured, a decision has already been made that it's not about criminal justice or reliable information.

    16. Re:admitted? by 0ld_d0g · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I doubt the truthfulness of this statement, on the basis of numerous studies, history, and a basic understanding of human psychology.

      If I had information and if someone wanted to pull my fingernails or gouge my eyes, I think I would consider giving up that bit of information (discounting obvious external factors). Ofcource at the same time, I would be scared that my torturers would think I was lying and continue torturing me for information that I *DONT* have. Then ofcource as you say, people make up any kinds of shit to make it stop.

      You can't make blanket statements like "it works" or "it never works", etc. Like everything else in the world, its a large grey area.

      The fact that there is a debate about the merits of torture is absolutely astounding to to me. Astounding and abhorrent.

      A debate does not necessarily validate any POV. In fact good debates can serve as a great arguments against certain points of view.

    17. Re:admitted? by Raenex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it just gets you something else to use in a show trial once you've already decided the person is guilty.

      You need actionable information or some way of verifying it. Example: Leon v. Wainwright:

      "Leon [one of the kidnappers] and Frank Gachelin [a relative of the kidnapee] met in the shopping center parking lot at 2:00 a.m. During the confrontation Leon drew a gun on Frank. The police officers, who had accompanied Frank to the meeting, immediately arrested Leon and demanded that he tell them where he was holding Gachelin. When he refused to tell them the location, "he was set upon by several of the officers." Leon v. State, 410 So.2d 201, 202 (Fla.3d DCA 1982). "They threatened and physically abused him by twisting his arm behind his back and choking him until he revealed where Louis [Gachelin] was being held." Id. The officers went to the apartment, rescued Gachelin and arrested Armand [the second kidnapper]."

      Sure, you can practice crude torture, get signed "confessions" and boatloads of real and made up information. But to say you can't get any information from torture is just trying to shortcut the argument.

    18. Re:admitted? by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because I thought that torture will only get people to tell you what they think you want to hear

      Why? Why do you think that people will _ONLY_ lie? What makes you so sure? If someone had information to hide and were tortured, its certainly ONE OF THE POSSIBILITIES that they would reveal that information.

      Truth doesn't figure into it.

      So every single person who was tortured always lied in each and every instance? lol.. your brain seems particularly receptive to propaganda and seems to exhibit a tendency of non-critical thought. Ah... to think of the things I could sell you...

      well.. you can't know if it was a lie, a hopeful thought or something else. people might confirm your "suspicions", which might be a lie or might not - the guy telling you it might not know it though.

      but more to the point.. why you don't torture people is simply because that it's evil, wrong and against the principles of western morality, idiot.
      that's why it's illegal and against international laws. sure, you might save a life sometime - that's the risks you run by abiding to rule of law for which you're supposed to be fighting for, there's NO FUCKING WAY to execute torture "properly" except with consent for sexual satisfaction.

      if you go the other way around then you could justify killing everyone in middle east because someone of them might sometime kill someone american. thus you would be "saving american lives" by killing everyone, going all judge death - preventing all kinds of crime with a simple "cure". now that sounds fucking stupid doesn't it? yeah, it's not so black and white but actually what's black and white very simply is that you don't torture people on purpose.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    19. Re:admitted? by Omestes · · Score: 3

      I know I would break really fast.

      I might, you might... but imagine it was something truly important, something you were willing to give your life for? There are plenty of stories of people withstanding torture. A lot of American POWs never gave in, because they believed in their cause, believed their cause was greater than them, or their families.

      Love of God, or Country is a very powerful thing.

      I know I would break really fast. Although I don't know what you would do in the position if you don't actually know something but they think you do.. that would suck

      If we need to torture you, then we can't know what you know, so how do we ever verify that you don't know?

      All this is fine and dandy, be we're still arguing about torture. I don't care if torture is 100% effective, I'd still oppose it. If torture would save my family, I'd still be against it. If torture saved us from 100 9/11s, I'd still oppose it.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  2. Re:He Should Be Executed by Grave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is he still alive?

    Simple. We threw him in Gitmo instead of treating him like the a criminal, and trying him by jury. He'd already have been executed if we would've done that. But since due process was not afforded, we are now paying the bills for keeping him alive. Funny how that worked out for us..

  3. Mk 1 by Coditor · · Score: 5, Funny

    If the vacuum starts looking like a giant metal guy with a glowing center light maybe they should rethink this idea.

  4. I've heard... by Guano_Jim · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...his design sucked.

    Thank you! I'll be here all week. Try the veal.

    --
    3D Printing Tips and Tricks at Zheng3.com
  5. Many terrorists are engineers by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's interesting how many terrorists are trained as engineers.

    1. Re:Many terrorists are engineers by rasmusbr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's interesting how many successful terrorists are trained as engineers.

      Fixed that for you. It is interesting, but it is also unsurprising if you think about it.

  6. And evil geniuses by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Funny

    Doctor Octopus
    Doctor Doom
    Doctor Evil
    Doctor No
    Doctor Horrible

    It's interesting how many evil geniuses have an advanced degree.

  7. Life Imitates Art ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Remember the Grahame Greene novel "Our Man in Havana"? The protagonist is a CIA agent who gets tired of his job trying to uncover missile silos and communist plots in Cuba and starts microfilming close-ups of vacuum cleaner schematics and sending those back to Washington.

    So now we have a Guantanamo detainee drawing vacuum cleaner schematics? Which are no doubt being photographed and pored over by CIA agents for evidence of terrorist plots.....

  8. grave danger by thereitis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It sounds ridiculous, but answering this question, or confirming or denying the very existence of a vacuum cleaner design, a Swiffer design, or even a design for a better hand towel would apparently expose the U.S. government and its citizens to exceptionally grave danger

    This kind of hyperbole is what makes people ignore warnings.

  9. Vacuum man. by Seiken · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think that if you were to overlap all of the schematics, you would find that they are in fact for a mechanized suit designed to break out of jail and also prevent shrapnel from entering his heart, via a magnetic push.

  10. Re:He Should Be Executed by swiftdr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But death penalty is useless, and insanely expensive in the US (which doesn't even prevent innocent niggers from being executed regularly

    innocent niggers? really? was that necessary?

  11. Our man in havana by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Graham Greene rolls over in his grave.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  12. Re:I wont pretend to be impressed for this salesma by quenda · · Score: 4, Informative

    How is this for impressive then:

    Britain admits to using 'brutal' vacuum bomb against Taliban
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/britain-admits-using-vacuum-bomb/story-e6frg6to-1111116704067

    Is this where KSM got the idea?

  13. Re:He Should Be Executed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "but it's another thing to execute a person without trial."

    Osama was executed without trial.

    I watched Zero Dark Thirty last night and it made me so sick.

    Why America did you act like fucking children?

    The state is supposed to be better than that. The state is supposed to represent what's best about a society. If the best that America has to offer is the endorsement of sneaking into a sovereign nation and murdering a bunch of people in the night, then I'll say it again, FUCK YOU AMERICA.

    I do not, for the life of me, understand why, if they knew where OBL was, they couldn't invoke regular measures and have the police go to the house and arrest him. He could then be charged and extradited to the US. He could be represented in court. And then once the due process is followed, he could be executed (as per the laws of your own land) or jailed for life (as per the preferred punishment in the rest of the civilised world).

    The US does not represent freedom in any form. My advice (FWIW) is to get your shit together and start respecting human rights again!

  14. Re:I wont pretend to be impressed for this salesma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    10 years in prison without due process.
    Tortured.

    Nice democracy you have there.