Did Waterboarding Actually Work? by Niki2

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Did Waterboarding Actually Work?

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Thursday, August 27, 2009 05:55
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 612
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 6:31 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Just-released CIA documents don't back up Dick Cheney's claims

Internal CIA reports released by the Obama administration on Monday suggest that former vice president Dick Cheney was right about one thing: the CIA's interrogations of suspected terrorists provided U.S. authorities with precious inside information about Al Qaeda's leadership, structure, personnel, and operations. In fact, the newly released evidence—some of which Cheney had pushed to make public—suggests that detainees provided so much detailed information, CIA personnel conducting the interrogations were under pressure to squeeze prisoners even harder in hopes of getting more.

What the newly declassified material does not convincingly demonstrate, however, is that Cheney is right when he insists that it was the agency's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques"—including sleep deprivation, stress positions, violent physical contact, and waterboarding—that produced this useful information. In fact, though two of the newly released CIA reports offer examples of the kind of details that detainees surrendered, the reports do not say what information came as a result of harsh interrogation methods and what came from conventional questioning.

Another key document released Monday was a long-suppressed CIA inspector-general report on possible detainee abuse. It claims, with only vague details, that in the cases of three of the earliest "high value" Qaeda suspects subjected to CIA questioning, the use of "enhanced" methods got results. For example, the document says that the number of intelligence reports generated from the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, an early CIA captive, "increased" after the detainee was waterboarded 83 times. But the report doesn't say precisely what information he gave up before or after being harshly interrogated. So, based on this evidence, it is impossible to tell whether waterboarding and other brutal methods really were more effective than nonviolent techniques in extracting credible, useful information from Abu Zubaydah or other detainees.

Likewise, supporters of the harsh techniques have repeatedly pointed to the interrogation of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as an example of the effectiveness of harsh methods. The inspector general's report says that Mohammed "provided only a few intelligence reports prior to the use of the waterboard," and much of it was outdated or wrong. Bush administration officials have claimed that after Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times, he started to talk and gave interrogators a wealth of credible information that helped thwart other attacks. In July 2004 the agency's analytical branch issued a secret report titled "Khalid Shaykh Muhammad: Preeminent Source on Al-Qaeda." It names alleged Qaeda operatives, inside the U.S. and overseas, whom KSM identified to U.S. authorities, and enumerates specific plots that KSM told interrogators he was planning. But the paper, which was one of the documents released this week, offers no breakdown of which pieces of this information KSM provided before or after being subjected to waterboarding and other rough treatment.

The documents also don't address the question of whether, under the stress and pain of intense interrogation, detainees gave false information that they thought their questioners wanted to hear. The CIA documents offer no evidence that the agency made any effort to assess whether the "enhanced" interrogations may have, in fact, produced more bad information than good. Nor do the documents address the question, recently raised by the CIA's current director, Leon Panetta, of whether the same information could have been obtained through nonviolent interrogation tactics.

A former intelligence official, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information, noted that in selling the notion of "enhanced" interrogation techniques to congressional leaders, the Bush administration regularly argued that the main purpose of the techniques was to extract information that could be used to foil imminent terror plots. But the inspector general said his investigation failed to "uncover any evidence that these plots were imminent."

The CIA documents show how dependent on detainee interrogations the agency became for inside information on Al Qaeda. The July 2004 paper that anointed KSM a "pre-eminent source" states that "information from KSM has not only dramatically expanded our universe of knowledge on Al-Qaeda plots but has provided leads that assisted directly in the capture of other terrorists." The inspector general's report indicates that some agency officials became convinced that "enhanced" interrogations helped loosen recalcitrant tongues: "When a detainee did not respond to a question posed to him, the assumption at headquarters was that the detainee was holding back and knew more; consequently, headquarters recommended resumption of [enhanced techniques]."

Agency officials, acting with the blessing of the White House and the Justice Department, may have believed that the brutal interrogations were legal. But it has taken years for the government to take a hard look at the evidence and ask: did it work?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/213620

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 6:43 AM

GINOBIFFARONI

does it matter ?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 6:55 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Hell, yeah! Waterboarding, and other methods they used, were illegal and immoral. To excuse them by saying "they worked" when we don't know if other forms of interrogation would have worked gives credence to Cheney's lies and meglomania--two things which do NOT need any encouragement.

The argument has been bounced back and forth, but as far as I'm concerned, if we torture, which is against our laws, we deserve no more respect than the most egregious actions used against our own troops; those who perpetrated this myth and continue to defend them should be held accountable.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 7:04 AM

GINOBIFFARONI

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Hell, yeah! Waterboarding, and other methods they used, were illegal and immoral. To excuse them by saying "they worked" when we don't know if other forms of interrogation would have worked gives credence to Cheney's lies and meglomania--two things which do NOT need any encouragement.

The argument has been bounced back and forth, but as far as I'm concerned, if we torture, which is against our laws, we deserve no more respect than the most egregious actions used against our own troops; those who perpetrated this myth and continue to defend them should be held accountable.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

that is my point as well.... whether it may have had some results it still should not have happened

and even in the case they state, how many people did they torture before they recieved any info ?

100?

1000?

we will never know

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/08/200981813114632353.html

" Guantanamo's 'more evil twin'? "

" I don't believe in hypothetical situations - it's kinda like lying to your brain "

" They don't hate America, they hate Americans " Homer Simpson

Lets party like its 1939

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 7:26 AM

HKCAVALIER

Before 9/11 there was no debate. The matter had been settled for 100 years and longer. Waterboarding is as old as China. Did torture suddenly become effective 8 years ago? Did they discover "new and improved" methods of torture that weren't simple coercion and abuse? No. After 9/11, Americans from all walks of life, from the halls of power on down, decided they wanted to make some people suffer--that's what's changed.

It is well documented that sympathetic interrogation works--establishing rapport, improving the subject's life condition, patience even--they work. The problem is, genuine interrogation involves showing real kindness and decency toward the subject--something Americans, in their current hysteria, can't imagine extending toward the "t'r'ists." And for the man on the street, this is understandable enough. That's why we put such matters in the hands of professionals, who are supposed to know what works and what is purely destructive--to far more than the unfortunate victim.

Torture truly is a crime against humanity itself.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 7:35 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Well, in Cheney's defense, he worded his claims so carefully that it's really hard to prove him wrong. He says things like, "Everybody who gave us actionable intelligence was waterboarded," which isn't patently false, but it does confuse the issue more than a little. Did they give you intel AFTER they were waterboarded, or before?

It's the nuances that make the biggest difference, really. Either way, it's not legal and it IS torture - and so are mock executions and threatening people by putting guns to their heads and telling them that you're going to kill their families. Those are, in fact, textbook definitions of what "torture" is.

Still, Cheney's claims don't really tell us much, do they? Saying that everyone who talked was tortured doesn't mean the same thing as saying that everyone who was tortured talked, or that everyone who talked did so BECAUSE they were tortured. Nope, one gets the distinct impression, especially after hearing about people like Abu Zubaida (who STOPPED giving usable information after the torture began, but who HAD been giving good info prior to being tortured), that in many cases, people were waterboarded just for the hell of it, or out of sheer nastiness and a hard-on for some kind of sick revenge fantasy.

"I already told you everything I know! Why are you torturing me?!"

"Because I have pliers, a budget, and a schedule to stick to."

"But I don't have any more information for you! Why won't you stop?! For the love of all that's holy, STOP!!!"

"You don't understand - I have pliers, a budget, and a schedule to stick to. I can't stop. Sucks to be you, but you'll be dead soon, so stop whining."

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:16 AM

FREMDFIRMA

No, it doesn't work.

All it does is flood your data with bullshit they think you wanna hear, as grunts who know nothing finger other grunts who know nothing till pretty soon you're waterboarding everyone and getting nothing but shit fillin your databases.

And then everyone is pissed at you for your malice and stupidity, and those who might have talked won't say shit cause they're pretty sure you'll torture them anyway, and use the tactics I detailed here once before to make sure you get nothing useful out of them.

Unless, of course, you want folk to "confess" to shit they didn't DO - then it works fine.

Just HOW many folk have we "convicted" for that Bali nightclub bombing so far, six ? seven if you include KSM ? and all despite the Balinese officer who actually did it coming forth and confessing long ago, with details only the bomber would know.

KSM gave us the whole ball of wax, corroborated and substantiated in a by the book hands off interrogation after being picked up on a properly served and legally executed warrant via a coordination of the ISI and DSS, although I note that the "official" story has now changed to something so laughably fictional it belongs in an episode of 24.

Soon as they sent him to the waterboard the quality of the info dropped into the shithole, and his questionable sanity thereafter made all the "good" info he gave us before all but fucking worthless.

Goings hands on is the surest sign of either a completely incompetent interrogator, or someone with an agenda who doesn't give a shit about the facts, period.

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:25 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
whether it may have had some results it still should not have happened

Ah, my apologies, I misunderstood.

I love how Cheney keeps saying the info they got "kept us safe". That's such bullshit--in many cases the "plots" they uncovered were a joke, or exaggerated, or just plain "not"...yet he continues and continues unabated. Is he doing this to cover his ass, or is he really that obsessed with torture?

Quote:
Unless, of course, you want folk to "confess" to shit they didn't DO - then it works fine.

That, too.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our partsuo

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 26, 2009 11:37 AM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Quote:
whether it may have had some results it still should not have happened

Ah, my apologies, I misunderstood.

I love how Cheney keeps saying the info they got "kept us safe". That's such bullshit--in many cases the "plots" they uncovered were a joke, or exaggerated, or just plain "not"...yet he continues and continues unabated. Is he doing this to cover his ass, or is he really that obsessed with torture?
Quote:
Unless, of course, you want folk to "confess" to shit they didn't DO - then it works fine.

That, too.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our partsuo

Neither - he's doing it because there are a certain segment of the population that not only believe him, but will believ him all the more, the more often he repeats the lie.

And yes, the methods they are using were specifically designed to extract FALSE confessions, because they were designed by the Chinese and others to use against American soldiers in Korea and Vietnam, in order to get them to give false confessions that they could then use as propaganda against the wars.

So, like Frem pointed out, for getting people to admit to shit they DIDN'T do? Yeah, waterboarding's great for that. Hell, you can get someone to admit to ANYTHING (even witchery!) if you're drowning them. In fact, the Baptists are kinda counting on the fact that if you hold someone's head under water long enough, they'll come around to your way of thinking... (apologies to A. Whitney Brown for stealing the joke)

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 27, 2009 2:44 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Waterboarding did work... to send 5 deputies to federal prison in Tennessee. When the US citizen refused to sign the "voluntary" contract for consent to search his home, the detective forged his name, but no drugs were found. BTW he was also beaten with a baseball bat, electrodes were clipped to his testicles and he was electrocuted, and a loaded gun was put in his mouth and told he would be murdered and made to look like a suicide. Listen to the actual torture taking place:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3386531596598980684&hl=en
http://radio.indymedia.org/uploads/cambell-co-tn-deputies-torture-home
owner2005.mp3
http://www.piratenews.org/silertranscript.pdf
http://piratenews.org/tortured-by-copsters-in-tn.html

That's why $20 hidden tape recorders are not allowed for POW/MIAs at CIA death camps.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 27, 2009 5:55 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Unfortunately, true, Mike. What got me from the beginning was McCain's story of what he told his captors just to get them to stop...he made something up. While everyone lauded the man for his experience as a prisoner, nobody seemed to connect what he said to the concept of getting REAL information that way. Why weren't people able to make the connection, I wonder?

I still think Cheney, besides believing in his own mad philosophies to the exclusion of all else, repeating his lies to try and brainwash the public, is also trying to "validate" his actions and those of others in hopes of avoiding reponsibility for those actions.

Cheney:

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE