Torture Still Doesn’t Work

Filed in National by on August 25, 2009

What a surprise – the declassified document that Cheney says proves the effectiveness of the “enhanced interrogation techniques” (and the rest of the world calls torture) doesn’t prove Cheney’s point at all. Spencer Ackerman gives some examples:

Those documents were obtained today by The Washington Independent and are available here. Strikingly, they provide little evidence for Cheney’s claims that the “enhanced interrogation” program run by the CIA provided valuable information. In fact, throughout both documents, many passages — though several are incomplete and circumstantial, actually suggest the opposite of Cheney’s contention: that non-abusive techniques actually helped elicit some of the most important information the documents cite in defending the value of the CIA’s interrogations.

The first document, issued by the CIA in July 2004 is about the interrogation of 9/11 architect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003 and whom, the newly released CIA Inspector General report on torture details, had his children’s lives threatened by an interrogator. None of that abuse is referred to in the publicly released version of the July 2004 document. Instead, we learn from the July 2004 document that not only did the man known as “KSM” largely provide intelligence about “historical plots” pulled off from al-Qaeda, a fair amount of the knowledge he imparted to his interrogators came from his “rolodex” — that is, what intelligence experts call “pocket litter,” or the telling documentation found on someone’s person when captured. As well, traditional intelligence work appears to have done wonders — including a fair amount of blundering on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s part:

In response to questions about [al-Qaeda’s] efforts to acquire [weapons of mass destruction], [Khalid Sheikh Mohammed] revealed that he had met three individuals involved in [al-Qaeda’s] program to produce anthrax. He appears to have calculated, incorrectly, that we had this information already, given that one of the three — Yazid Sufaat — had been in foreign custody for several months.

You can read the documents yourself, here. I’m not really sure how we got to this place – arguing whether torture was o.k. if it works, but here we are. I personally think whether torture “works” or not is irrelevant. We’re supposed to be a nation of laws and a model for other nations to follow. However, these documents show that torture doesn’t even work so why are we bothering? As people that are experts in the field have been telling us – torture gives you a lot of false information. The real information only comes from building a relationship with the person who has the information. I’m sorry to tell you that the ticking time bomb scenario isn’t real. If you have to waterboard someone 183 times in a month – that ticking time bomb has already gone off.

Tags: ,

About the Author ()

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

Comments (17)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. One we didn’t torture and two we got a tremendous amount of information from enhanced interogation. The documents show that the techniques were superior to sitting down and trying to be their buddy for a couple of years, which results in a lot of false information.

    Any technique you use gives false information, but you can piece the information together to get a fuller picture. Most of the valid information we got came from the methods you unreasonably despise. Using your logic, there is no reason to talk with anyone because everything won’t be accurate.

  2. anonone says:

    Republican David –

    You must therefore feel that it is acceptable and lawful for any or all of these techniques to be used on American troops or American citizens identified by another county as “enemy combatants” or “terrorists.”

    Why do you hate Americans?

  3. h. says:

    Far worse techniques have been used against our soldiers and citizens.

  4. cassandra_m says:

    And even though UI posted a link to exactly where to see these documents, we see our resident wingnuts relying in the lies they’ve been told.

    We did torture people.
    We got no actionable information from it.

    Altho I will stipulate that we are dealing with people whose ability to evaluate data has been impairs by a steady diet of talk radio and Fox Noise.

  5. Scott P says:

    h., you’re absolutely right. But if you (and all the torture supporters out there) think that is a valid excuse for what we did, you haven’t learned a basic precept of our society that my 3 year old pretty much understands — Just because somebody else does something, it doesn’t make it right. And besides, isn’t it the neocons who are always going on about how America is “The City on the Hill”, is so exceptional, and is better than everyone else? Well, this is our chance to prove it.

  6. anonone says:

    h.,

    So?

  7. h. says:

    No, my response was to anon1’s ridiculous response.

    I’m sure the soldiers and american citizens who died in the hands of terrorists would much rather have been waterboarded and mock executed than beheaded.

  8. Scott P says:

    Would they also rather have been tortured to death as we did with at least about 100 detainess?

  9. anonone says:

    h.,
    So I’ll put you down as agreeing that torturing American soldiers and citizens by other countries is OK as long as they’re not beheaded. Thanks for letting us know.

  10. Let’s not get into a ridiculous tit-for-tat. Are we as a nation going to let al Qaeda determine what is acceptable? Somehow I don’t think “we’re slightly less bad than al Qaeda” or “at least we didn’t behead them” is a strong moral selling point. The truth is, a lot of people have died in Iraq because of the war. American soldiers, bad guys and many, many innocent Iraqi people.

    We have to decide that we are a country that aspires to follow our own Constitution and not throw it away when it’s slightly inconvenient. It’s served us well for more than 200 years, through some very rough times – civil war, world wars and the cold war.

    The truth is that we tortured people. Some people think that’s o.k. because we were scared at the time. Whatever. They should be able to sit up and defend that idea. What I don’t like is the complete dishonesty – don’t pretend if we’re against torture that we’re against interrogation. We’ve just proven, yet again, that torture is ineffective and counter-productive. Why are people continuing to defend that? Why do they want less effective interrogation techniques used? Seriously, are people defending the use of torture to cover Bush’s behind?

  11. The DEMS have saved the day for the GOP. The instance where Obama feels he has to put George Bush on trial is the day the GOP knows the wheels have come off in a huge way.

    Whatever opinion one may have of Bush only the left hates Bush for keeping the country safe after 9/11 and when we get hit again anw we will Obama will look like so inept he will face a challenge ad lose.

    The CIA and the function it served it bigger than a Hope and Change charlatan who will sacrifice security for a small and short political advantage.

    Mike Protack

  12. h. says:

    anon1, Matthews was right, you are an asshole.

  13. edisonkitty says:

    Mike P. – 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch after he got a memo about ‘Bin Laden determined to attack inside U.S.’ so any statement about Bush keeping us safe is so much hot air.

    As far as trials, Bush, Cheney, and several other members of that administration deserve trials for War Crimes, in my opinion. That would likely fall the the World Court. Since that isn’t likely to get much traction with Republicans anywhere, I would settle for trials based on Treason right here at home. I think fomenting a war based on false pretenses, lying repeatedly to the American people, and bankrupting the country qualify.

  14. anonone says:

    h.,
    You can call me all the names you want. At least I don’t think torturing of American soldiers and American citizens by foreign governments should be legal, like you and Repub David do.

  15. h. says:

    I just said far worse techniques have been used on our soldiers.

    I mentioned nothing about legalities. Quit putting words in my mouth.

  16. anon2 says:

    Eric Holder and Obama went kicking and screaming not to do anything. “We are not going to look back but look forward”. The 2004 CIA Inspector General report, the Levin Committee Report and the American red Cross report detailed the vicious midevil tactics by Cheney and his goon squad (some of which came from the Pinochet regime). Read Jane Mayers book and see how this country under Bush/Cheney are exactly like: Pinochet, Pol Pot, Papa Doc, Stalin and Hitler. If you read the Geneva Conventions, and the Military Code of Justice you would know that what occured during the last 8 years was/is absolutely war crimes. How far will this “investigation” go? We the public will never know what all that redacted black ink is. Panetta threatening to resign from the CIA if they are exposed is as abhorent as the war crimes themselves. Colonel Wilkerson said, “he has read these documents, they were sickening an mid-evil and he cannot believe our country was involved! He said, “only 1% of the CIA were involved.

    Sorry, I dont believe any high level actors like Cheney, Yoo, Addington and that crew will ever be proscecuted.

    They were interrogating one of the “high operatives” and were getting all the information they needed with tea and biscuits until the “contractors started torturing the guy,and they got nothing else”. Faulty intelligence is no intelligence.

  17. anonone says:

    h.,

    So what, then? It’s pretty clear that you think it’s perfectly legal for the United States to torture suspected enemy combatants and suspected terrorists. If that’s the case, then you must also agree that it is legal for other countries to do the same to our soldiers and citizens.

    What other point is there to draw?