Even by the president’s standards, his speech today on torture policies was remarkable.

“In this new war, the enemy conspires in secret — and often the only source of information on what the terrorists are planning is the terrorists themselves. So we established a program at the Central Intelligence Agency to question key terrorist leaders and operatives captured in the war on terror. This program has produced critical intelligence that has helped us stop a number of attacks — including a plot to strike the U.S. Marine camp in Djibouti, a planned attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, a plot to hijack a passenger plane and fly it into Library Tower in Los Angeles, California, or a plot to fly passenger planes into Heathrow Airport and buildings into downtown London.

“Despite the record of success, and despite the fact that our professionals use lawful techniques, the CIA program has come under renewed criticism in recent weeks. Those who oppose this vital tool in the war on terror need to answer a simple question: Which of the attacks I have just described would they prefer we had not stopped?”

Seriously? To question whether the United States government is torturing people, outside the law and treaties to which we are a part, is necessarily to “prefer” that terrorists execute successful attacks?

Also, pointing to today’s list, Dan Froomkin asks, “Which of those attacks was more than a fantasy? And which would not have been stopped with more humane and arguably more effective interrogation techniques?”