Should We Waterboard For Information

[rushmc 23]

Byt the way, I , me am not talking about torture. I am talking about water boarding. Very different

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

There are also those who have stated that is does work. Do we just pick and chose the side that we decide to sit on?

I sent you the interview (and again I forget his name) who said it did work .

Yes. It was an interview on Fox News with former DCI Michael Hayden.

As I wrote before and to you directly, I was already aware of Hayden's comments. They were not something I had not seen.

He's not specific -- the closest is this:

This statement:

Quote

HAYDEN: I should correct you — before he was slammed against a false flexible wall with something wrapped around his neck so that he would not be injured.

In September 2006, President Bush gave a speech on the Abu Zubaydah case. He pointed out that he — Zubaydah gave us nominal information, probably more valuable than he thought. He clammed up. The decision was made to use techniques.

After that decision was made and the techniques were used, he gave up more valuable information, including the information that led to the arrest of Ramzi Binalshibh. After the New York Times story yesterday, I called a few friends to make sure my memory was correct, and I guess, to quote somebody from your profession, we stand by our story.

The critical information we got from Abu Zubaydah came after we began the EITs.

is contradicted by (1) the statements of those who were there, including those who *were* there. See former FBI interogator Ali Soufan[s testimony *under oath*: Fox News isn't under oath. And the DoD-transcripts released by the Bush administration. It’s also contradicted by (2) chronology.

There’s too much contradictory in Hayden’s statements.

We have nothing yet that shows anything gained from torture/waterboarding. Sorry.

As I wrote, I think these guys genuinely were operating under a ‘fog of war’ and wanted to do what they were persuaded was best.

Have you followed the money, as they say, to James Mitchell? He and another were largely responsible for filling a knowledge void in CIA with what they were recommending, i.e., use of waterboarding.

Quote

Then people say they had all the info before water boarding was used. He says no, we got better intel during and after.

Cheney is saying it did work. I am sorry, the hype doesnt match up.

Who's pushing the hype?
I agree that Cheney is pushing hype.

(Imagine if it was another former Vice President who just kept repeating over & over with *no evidence* that global warming was occuring, how would you react?)

/Marg

We will have to disagree.

Cheney and others are saying we got important info that saved lives using EIT's. HE is asking that docs be released that prove his side. Mr Obamas will not do that. Why?

Anywat

It will be years before we ever find out for sure. That is dependant on keeping Burger away from files until then however.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Why do you think the CIA uses the technique if it isn't effective?

As I've written before I think these guys genuinely were operating under a ‘fog of war’ and wanted to do what they were persuaded was best.

Two PhD psychologists (not experienced of trained interrogators) James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, were largely responsible for filling a knowledge void in CIA with what they were recommending, i.e., use of waterboarding. They were independent contractors selling their ideas.

The DOJ lawyers who re-interpreted law to enable the use of waterboarding and other "enhaced interrogation techniques" (which were considered illegal previously) cited Jack Bauer more frequently than the Constitution.

If people who are as smart as John Yoo (I may disagree vehemently with his legal and ethical thinking; he's not 'dumb,' however) can be influenced by fictional television, what does that say for the rest of us? No one wants to think that they're influenced by television -- we all want to think that we're independent skeptical thinkers.

Do you realize that they don't use it anymore? Do you know who made that decision?

Do you realize what was the window of time during which waterboarding was utilized by the CIA?

Quote

Do you think Mr. BHO should release the other intel on the attacks that were thwarted? If they show that enhanced interrogation saved American lives you can still be against it, but would you admit its validity as a technique? Why won't he release it? Maybe it doesn't support his position?

Yes, I heartily support release of additional documents. I suspect the lag is due to (1) lawyers, (2) the tortuous (bad choice of words) declassification process, and (3) the fact of ongoing litigation.

I don't see any evidence to suggest that it will show what you suggest. And given the other arguments that have nothing to do with morals or ethics: reciprocity on US service members and deployed civilians, impedance of US foreign policy and national defense goals, and use as propaganda for recruitment of terrorists), there is no strategic or operational advantage to employing waterboarding or “enhanced interrogation” as a euphemism for torture as part of investigatory process. Quite to the contrary, one may argue that such a policy has (strongly) negative strategic and operational repercussions.

Why would the Bush administration release all sorts of evidence -- look beyond the unsupported assertions to the evidence and facts -- showing the ineffectiveness of the technique? All the while that a few political appointee lawyers (Yoo & Busbee, mostly) were saying "this is now legal" (it hadn't been before), the DoD was releasing direct evidence (transcripts) and indirect evidence (re-writing doctrine and training materials) that it wasn't. That is fascinating to me! How do we choose which to believe? How do we know what we think we know?

Quote

Lets just say that based on our experience, we have a very different view of reality. I was in the Middle East immediately after 9-11 and one of my friends - a security policeman - drew the job of helping to escort detainees from staging areas in Afganistan through our air base to Gitmo. When I did get to see him, he had some horrific stories. These people were shackled, cuffed, and hooded almost all the time for a reason. They would kick, spit, urinate, bite, and throw feces at every opportunity. Being nice to the animals would not yield actionable inteligence.

First off, you don't know my experience. And it's not about me. I don't invoke myself as authoritative expert. It's part of the fun challenge of SC for me.

Second, do the experiences of your friend, which I have no issue with accepting as true - support of the methods you seem to want to enable ... or do they support the experience of the USMC interrogators? It's not clear what the directionality of events is, i.e., which came first -- the bad behavior or the shackling, hooding, and cuffing. To which detainees is he referring?

What we do know is that use of traditional interrogation methods, like those outlined in the FMs, with radical, militant Islamists has worked. It worked with Abu Zubayduh -- and he was a *very* bad man.

Those traditional interrogation techniques, maligned as "soft," have also worked in a real-world “ticking time-bomb” scenario:

"[Jack]Cloonan [32-year FBI veteran, whose experience included counterintelligence, counterterrorism, the Joint Terrorism Task Force] and a New York Police Department detective secured actionable intelligence from a suspect in the foiled millennium-bombing plot in just six hours on December 30, 1999 -- by following FBI procedure, and by encouraging a suspect to pray during his Ramadan fast. The suspect even agreed to place calls to his confederates, which led to their speedy arrests.

... and worked in the real world interrogation of an al Qa’eda member: L'Houssaine Kherchtou, aka “Joe the Moroccan,” who was a member of the alQa'eda cell that bombed the US Embassy in Nairobi. He eventually became the US government's “star witness” in the criminal case. Prayer rugs and figs worked.


I'm still curious: how did you come to the conclusion that “The CIA has studied this for years, and they have a graduated set of techniques with waterboarding up at/near the top.” What do you think is the history of waterboarding in CIA interogation?

Maybe you know something I don’t. What studies? Show us, please.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Cheney and others are saying we got important info that saved lives using EIT's.

Thus far every supposed example offered by Mr. Cheney, et al., e.g., interdicting the planned attack on Los Angeles library tower, has proven to not be true.

Quote

HE is asking that docs be released that prove his side. Mr Obamas will not do that. Why?

Not being part of the Obama administration, my experienced speculation is it's due to (1) lawyers, (2) the arduous declassification process, and (3) ongoing litigation.

Quote

I dont think you will find any that have used it (and it worked) talk publically because it is the wrong thing to do. Those that are against it just say it doesnt work. Make them prove it or do you not have too because you just agree with them.

At this point I do agree that what we have largely is Mr Cheney and former DCI Hayden making, thus far unsupported general assertions, i.e., "just saying it didn't work."

On the other side there are transcripts of evidence release by the DoD, DoD reports (led by active duty general officers), statements of experienced operators and the testimony under oath of individuals who interrogated successfully radical Islamists, false information generated through torture that led to bad intelligence being passed along to US policy makers (e.g., Ibn al Shaykh al Libbi), historical examples of waterboarding producing false confessions, 60+ years of experience on what does work (e.g., the traditional interogation methods), etc.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Look, I am talking about Cheney and the ex CIA chief who was inteviewed on Fox.

Right. In other words, you're not talking about operatives with actual experience interrogating terrorists and other suspects & detainees.

Quote

I dont think you will find any that have used it (and it worked) talk publically because it is the wrong thing to do.

Surely you can find a first hand account of some interrogation session in which the detainee gave up accurate, actionable intelligence due to being water boarded, right? It's not as though the US invented water boarding during the Bush administration. It's been done for decades, if not centuries. If it is a useful interrogation technique, one would expect to find numerous first hand accounts of it being used successfully.

Quote

Those that are against it just say it doesnt work. Make them prove it or do you not have too because you just agree with them.

Marg has provided more than sufficient evidence that experienced interrogators tend to agree that torture is not effective w/r/t obtaining reliable, actionable information.

Quote

He will only release part of them. Why?

Most reasonable people give him the benefit of the doubt and recognize that there are probably very good reasons to keep some documents classified, and that those reasons have nothing to do with the unsubstantiated conspiracy theories promoted by former Vice President Cheney.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Byt the way, I , me am not talking about torture. I am talking about water boarding. Very different

As I have stated before, torture is a proper superset of water boarding. In other words, water boarding is torture, despite any semantical difference that Cheney, Yoo, et al. have conjured up.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Look, I am talking about Cheney and the ex CIA chief who was inteviewed on Fox.

Right. In other words, you're not talking about operatives with actual experience interrogating terrorists and other suspects & detainees.

Quote

I dont think you will find any that have used it (and it worked) talk publically because it is the wrong thing to do.

Surely you can find a first hand account of some interrogation session in which the detainee gave up accurate, actionable intelligence due to being water boarded, right? It's not as though the US invented water boarding during the Bush administration. It's been done for decades, if not centuries. If it is a useful interrogation technique, one would expect to find numerous first hand accounts of it being used successfully.

Quote

Those that are against it just say it doesnt work. Make them prove it or do you not have too because you just agree with them.

Marg has provided more than sufficient evidence that experienced interrogators tend to agree that torture is not effective w/r/t obtaining reliable, actionable information.

Quote

He will only release part of them. Why?

Most reasonable people give him the benefit of the doubt and recognize that there are probably very good reasons to keep some documents classified, and that those reasons have nothing to do with the unsubstantiated conspiracy theories promoted by former Vice President Cheney.

I love the "most resonable people " bull shit type statement.

So we know what you think before you even listen it seems so,

Most thinking people would think you are wrong!

(see, I can do it too)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Byt the way, I , me am not talking about torture. I am talking about water boarding. Very different

As I have stated before, torture is a proper superset of water boarding. In other words, water boarding is torture, despite any semantical difference that Cheney, Yoo, et al. have conjured up.

Most resonable people do not agree with you.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Most resonable people do not agree with you.

The law agrees with me.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Most resonable people do not agree with you.

The law agrees with me.

Most with full use of thier minds do not agree with this either.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I love the "most resonable people " bull shit type statement.

So we know what you think before you even listen it seems so,

Most thinking people would think you are wrong!

(see, I can do it too)

It would appear that you are not quite clear about what reasonable actually means. For example, thus far there have been no reasonable arguments made w/r/t torture, including water boarding, being an effective interrogation method that results in accurate, actionable information. All such arguments have been made without any supporting evidence (i.e. there is no logical reason they should be given the same credibility as the very well supported arguments to the contrary).

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Most resonable people do not agree with you.

The law agrees with me.

Most with full use of thier minds do not agree with this either.

That particular subset of people seem to unanimously agree with me here in SC (on this particular topic).

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Most resonable people do not agree with you.

The law agrees with me.

Most with full use of thier minds do not agree with this either.

That particular subset of people seem to unanimously agree with me here in SC (on this particular topic).

I see that a "reasonable" exchange can not be had with you.

Have fun in your world though

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

I have to say though, that you have elevated my sig lne to a new level.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

On this very topic, Liz Cheney makes Anderson Cooper look like a baffon.

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/28347

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[ASTKU 1]

Why don't we act like the badass's we are and really torture people. Like Lethal Weapon style!!

It would boost the economy! More Jobs like assistant to the chief torturer, etc.etc....

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

I'm still curious: how did you come to the conclusion that “The CIA has studied this for years, and they have a graduated set of techniques with waterboarding up at/near the top.” What do you think is the history of waterboarding in CIA interogation?

Maybe you know something I don’t. What studies? Show us, please.

Obviously I don't have access to CIA studies, as they are and should remain secret. In the recently released DoJ memo, though, there are references to both previous studies and court cases that date back several years. Interrogation being a large part of what the CIA does - do you honestly believe they don't study it and desire to do it effectively? The memo also addresses the escalation of techniques. The fact they used waterboarding on only three detainees and under very strict controls pretty much points to its position at the top.

Quote

The DOJ lawyers who re-interpreted law to enable the use of waterboarding and other "enhaced interrogation techniques" (which were considered illegal previously) cited Jack Bauer more frequently than the Constitution.

"As Sands and Mayer tell it, the lawyers designing interrogation techniques cited Bauer more frequently than the Constitution."

I don't find this very credible. Its heresay fom people trying to sell books. Maybe I missed it but I didn't find any mention of Bauer in the actual memo. Do you have sources other than this article?

From the memo:

“Your office has informed us that the CIA believes that ‘the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qa’ida has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.”

The CIA believes EITs to be a necessary tool. I would let them use it judiciously. Obama won't . You win. I hope you are right.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Why don't we act like the badass's we are and really torture people. Like Lethal Weapon style!!

It would boost the economy! More Jobs like assistant to the chief torturer, etc.etc....

I think the term High Inquisitor is what they prefer.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm still curious: how did you come to the conclusion that “The CIA has studied this for years, and they have a graduated set of techniques with waterboarding up at/near the top.” What do you think is the history of waterboarding in CIA interogation?

Maybe you know something I don’t. What studies? Show us, please.

Obviously I don't have access to CIA studies, as they are and should remain secret.

There are quite a few unclassified CIA, FOIA'd CIA studies, and other declassified CIA & IC studies available. As well as CIA funded studies. So yes, you, me, & everyone else on the internet, do have access to many CIA studies ... whether one extends the effort to track down primary documents is another issue.

Quote

In the recently released DoJ memo, though, there are references to both previous studies and court cases that date back several years. Interrogation being a large part of what the CIA does - do you honestly believe they don't study it and desire to do it effectively?

Four memos from the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel were declassified; to which one are you referring?

I know that waterboarding has been studied; it’s been found to not be effective. I asked for studies supporting your claim (quoted above).

Human intelligence (HUMINT) gathering is not same as interrogation. In late 2001, the CIA did not have significant capabilities in interrogation; they largely coordinated with the FBI, who did/does have significant experience. (From an interagency rivalry perspective, it’s notable that the CIA went to the DOJ/FBI rather than to the DIA or military intelligence agencies.) One can also argue as to the extent of the CIA's HUMINT capabilities in the Muslim world (as opposed to residual "Fulda Gap" mentality and the unreformed Soviet specialists), but that's a different discussion.

Some examples of studies:

From 2006, the DNI’s Intelligence Science Board (ISB) review, which includes members from the CIA (i.e., ITIC) “Educing Information: Interrogation: Science and Art: Foundations for the Future,” concluded:

“(1) pain does not elicit intelligence known to prevent greater harm; (2) the use of pain is counterproductive both in a tactical and strategic sense; (3) chemical and biological methods are unreliable; (4) research tends to indicate that ‘educing’ information without the use of harsh interrogation is more valuable.”

The ISB also noted, what one might call the ‘Jack Bauer’ effect:

“A major stumbling block to the study of interrogation, and especially to the conduct of interrogation in field operations, has been the all-too-common misunderstanding of the nature and scope of the discipline.”

“Most observers, even those within professional circles, have unfortunately been influenced by the media’s colorful (and artificial) view of interrogation as almost always involving hostility and the employment of force — be it physical or psychological — by the interrogator against the hapless, often slow-witted subject.” (p. 95)

At the other end of the historical spectrum, there are a large number of studies: “Communist Attempts to Elicit False Confessions from Air Force Prisoners of War” Bull N Y Acad Med. 1957; “The Methods of Interrogation and Indoctrination Used by the Communist State Police,” Bull N Y Acad Med. 1957 (pdf available freely); “Effects of Communist indoctrination attempts: Some comments based on an Air Force prisoner-of-war Study,” 1959 (PM me if you want a pdf for personal or educational use).

It’s not that aren’t available studies; it’s just that the studies don’t seem to support the claim that ““The CIA has ... a graduated set of techniques with waterboarding up at/near the top.”

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Why don't we act like the badass's we are and really torture people. Like Lethal Weapon style!!

It would boost the economy! More Jobs like assistant to the chief torturer, etc.etc....

I think the term High Inquisitor is what they prefer.

Not to be confused with the Grand Inquisitor.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

The CIA believes EITs to be a necessary tool. I would let them use it judiciously. Obama won't .

In Congressional hearings, former DCI Hayden indicated that he officially prohibited the use of waterboarding and other "enhanced interrogation" techniques by the CIA interrogations in February 2006, well before the Obama administration:

“It [waterboarding] is not included in the current program, and in my own view, the view of my lawyers and the Department of Justice, it is not certain that that technique would be considered to be lawful under current statute.”

It was not viewed as a "necessary tool" by DCI Hayden during the Bush administration. Hayden was the same CIA Director who declassified and released the CIA’s “Family Jewels.”

There’s also purportedly a classified Executive Order from President Bush prohibiting use of waterboarding and enhanced interrogation methods.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[billvon 3,116]

>Most resonable people do not agree with you.

Actually, they do. 71% of americans think waterboarding is torture. It's only the Cheney dead-enders who play such semantic games.

[Rstanley0312 1]

Quote

>Then, if it were up to me I'd have given you the job of explaining to
>all those families that you had the power to stop it, but your morals stood
>between the terrorists, and the death of their loved ones.

As Marg has pointed out, if such an issue ever happened in the real world (god forbid) you might be tasked with explaining to all those families that interrogators could have gotten the information to save 3000 lives - but you wanted to waterboard him instead, and thus got the wrong information.

So what about a two stage approach...... try the your option and if it produces then that's fine but if it doesn't then move to different techniques. My question is..... do you think they went straight to waterboarding? I seriously doubt that they did.... I bet they used normal procedures first but they were not getting any results.

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[billvon 3,116]

>do you think they went straight to waterboarding? I seriously doubt that they did....

Well, let's see:

Khalid Sheik Mohammed was captured in March 2003 and was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003.

Abu Zubaydah was captured in April 2002 and shot three times, twice in the abdomen and once in the thigh. He nearly died, but US doctors patched him back up. He was waterboarded 83 times in August 2002, presumably after he recovered sufficiently to survive the experience.

So yes, I think they waterboarded prisoners as soon as they could.

[Rstanley0312 1]

Quote

>do you think they went straight to waterboarding? I seriously doubt that they did....

Well, let's see:

Khalid Sheik Mohammed was captured in March 2003 and was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003.

Abu Zubaydah was captured in April 2002 and shot three times, twice in the abdomen and once in the thigh. He nearly died, but US doctors patched him back up. He was waterboarded 83 times in August 2002, presumably after he recovered sufficiently to survive the experience.

So yes, I think they waterboarded prisoners as soon as they could.

Well I would presume differently....... in a matter of days I think you can easily tell if a person is going to talk. I do not think what you posted says they were waterboarded right away. What about what I asked? If effort is put in to getting a person to talk but they still will not is it then acceptable to waterboard them? It seems to me that the argument is that we can get all the information we need not using the technique so what if we cannot? Is it then okay to use?

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com