Another recycled liberal-fanatic lie: "Waterboarding never produced any useful info"

[Little-Acorn]

Looks like the liberals are scraping the bottom of the barrel, after their historic landslide defeat at the polls on Nov. 4.

They've hurriedly published a hit piece on the GWB administration, disguised as a Senate report (disavowed by half the Senate) pretending we practiced "torture" on terrorists who attacked us, when it wasn't even torture.

Another fib that permeates the "report", is the assertion that we got no useful information from the terrorists after using waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other harsh interrogation methods.

How quickly they forget, that those techniques got us the information that Osama bin Laden was using couriers to send and receive information to his fellow terrorists... and the exact identity of some of those couriers.

After getting that information by waterboarding terrorists like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, we then began tracking those couriers... and one of them led us straight to bin Laden's hideaway in Pakistan. One Navy SEAL mission later, Osama bin Laden was dead.

That takes care of that lie.

I wonder what other falsehoods the liberal fanatics will try to push on us, in their desperate desire to pretend the country is mean and worthless?

[revelarts]

Looks like the liberals are scraping the bottom of the barrel, after their historic landslide defeat at the polls on Nov. 4.

They've hurriedly published a hit piece on the GWB administration, disguised as a Senate report (disavowed by half the Senate) pretending we practiced "torture" on terrorists who attacked us, when it wasn't even torture.

Another fib that permeates the "report", is the assertion that we got no useful information from the terrorists after using waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other harsh interrogation methods.

How quickly they forget, that those techniques got us the information that Osama bin Laden was using couriers to send and receive information to his fellow terrorists... and the exact identity of some of those couriers.

After getting that information by waterboarding terrorists like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, we then began tracking those couriers... and one of them led us straight to bin Laden's hideaway in Pakistan. One Navy SEAL mission later, Osama bin Laden was dead.

That takes care of that lie.

I wonder what other falsehoods the liberal fanatics will try to push on us, in their desperate desire to pretend the country is mean and worthless?
your not reading other threads here on the same issues

Concerning the nature of the intel that final got Bin Laden
Letter from CIA's Panetta May 9 2011.
http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Leon Panetta former CIA Director

"....Nearly 10 years of intensive intelligence work led the CIA to conclude that Bin Ladin was likely hiding at the compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. there was no one “essential and indispensable” key piece of information that led us to this conclusion. Rather, the intelligence picture was developed via painstaking collection and analysis. Multiple streams of intelligence — including from detainees, but also from multiple other sources — led CIA analysts to conclude that Bin Ladin was at this compound. Some of the detainees who provided useful information about the facilitator/courier’s role had been subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques. Whether those techniques were the “only timely and effective way” to obtain such information is a matter of debate and cannot be established definitively. What is definitive is that that information was only a part of multiple streams of intelligence that led us to Bin Ladin."

"...Let me further point out that we first learned about the facilitator/courier’s nom de guerre from a detainee not in CIA custody in 2002. It is also important to note that some detainees who were subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques attempted to provide false or misleading information about the facilitator/courier. These attempts to falsify the facilitator/courier’s role were alerting.

In the end, no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means...."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...F04G_blog.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/exclusive-private-letter-from-cia-chief-undercuts-claim-torture-was-key-to-killing-bin-laden/2011/03/03/AFLFF04G_blog.html)

..

But i'll add here another report



http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/04/cia-debunks-claims-torture.html
CIA Debunks Its Own Claims About Torture

Posted on April 8, 2014 (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/04/cia-debunks-claims-torture.html) by WashingtonsBlog (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/author/washingtonsblog)

But former CIA director Leon Panetta said that torture did not help get Bin Laden (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/05/cia-director-torture-did-not-lead-to-osama-bin-laden.html).
....In 2011, John Brennan agreed (http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/05/obama-advisor-waterboarding-didnt-lead-to-bin-laden-kill/):
White House deputy national security advisor John Brennan Tuesday knocked down the myth that waterboarding provided crucial intelligence that led to the location of Osama bin Laden.
“So we’ve been talking about the different details and methods that lead up to this moment, and obviously there is word out today that waterboarding played a very big role or role in actually getting the information,” MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski told Brennan. “Is that the case?”
“Not to my knowledge,” Brennan explained.

Brennan is now the current director of the CIA.
Likewise, former secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld – who had a big hand in the torture program (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/04/22/madden) – stated (http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/DonaldRumsfeld-gitmo-waterboarding-osamabinladen/2011/05/02/id/394820?s=al&promo_code=C30F-1):
“The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.”

Senator Lindsey Graham – a vocal proponent of waterboarding (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Lindsey+Graham%22+waterboarding&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a)– said (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/senate-intel-chair-torture-did-not-lead-to-bin-laden-in-any-way.php):
This idea we caught bin Laden because of waterboarding I think is a misstatement. This whole concept of how we caught bin Laden is a lot of work over time by different people and putting the puzzle together. I do not believe this is a time to celebrate waterboarding, I believe this is a time to celebrate hard work.

The New York Times noted (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/us/politics/04torture.html):
“The bottom line is this: If we had some kind of smoking-gun intelligence from waterboarding in 2003, we would have taken out Osama bin Laden in 2003,” said Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council. “It took years of collection and analysis from many different sources to develop the case that enabled us to identify this compound, and reach a judgment that Bin Laden was likely to be living there.”

Huffington Post reported (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/04/administration-bin-laden-waterboarding_n_857529.html):
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, produced a 263-page report in 2009 on the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody in the years following 9/11. He too dismissed the idea that the interrogation techniques used at that time were efficacious. “If they had any information under the Bush administration that could have led to bin Laden it would have been terribly neglectful for them not to use it,” Levin noted in an interview on the “Bill Press Show.”
The confirmation of the courier’s significance appears to have come in 2004, from an al Qaeda operative who was not waterboarded: Hassan Ghul.

Dan Froomkin argued (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/06/torture-may-have-slowed-h_n_858642.html) that – rather than helping catch Bin Laden – torture actually delayed by years more effective intelligence-gathering methods which would have resulted in finding Bin Laden:
Defenders of the Bush administration’s interrogation policies have claimed vindication from reports that bin Laden was tracked down in small part due to information received from brutalized detainees some six to eight years ago.
But that sequence of events — even if true — doesn’t demonstrate the effectiveness of torture, these experts say. Rather, it indicates bin Laden could have been caught much earlier had those detainees been interrogated properly.
“I think that without a doubt, torture and enhanced interrogation techniques slowed down the hunt for bin Laden,” said an Air Force interrogator who goes by the pseudonym Matthew Alexander and located Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, in 2006.
It now appears likely that several detainees had information about a key al Qaeda courier — information that might have led authorities directly to bin Laden years ago. But subjected to physical and psychological brutality, “they gave us the bare minimum amount of information they could get away with to get the pain to stop, or to mislead us,” Alexander told The Huffington Post.
“We know that they didn’t give us everything, because they didn’t provide the real name, or the location, or somebody else who would know that information,” he said.....

there's more


And who said the countriy is mean and worthless?
We didn't pretend that torture was good for us but evil if the other guy does it until a few years ago.

[jimnyc]

And also:

Ex-CIA officials say torture report is one-sided, flawed

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A group of former top-ranking CIA officials disputed a U.S. Senate committee's finding that the agency's interrogation techniques produced no valuable intelligence, saying such work had saved thousands of lives.

Former CIA directors George Tenet, Porter Goss and Michael Hayden, along with three ex-deputy directors, wrote in an op-ed article published on Wednesday in the Wall Street Journal that the Senate Intelligence Committee report also was wrong in saying the agency had been deceptive about its work following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

"The committee has given us ... a one-sided study marred by errors of fact and interpretation - essentially a poorly done and partisan attack on the agency that has done the most to protect America after the 9/11 attacks," they said.

The report concluded the CIA failed to disrupt any subsequent plots despite torturing captives during the presidency of George W. Bush.

But the former CIA officials said the United States never would have tracked down and killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2011 without information acquired in the interrogation program. Their methods also led to the capture of ranking al Qaeda operatives, provided valuable information about the organization and saved thousands of lives by disrupting al Qaeda plots, including one for an attack on the U.S. West Coast that could have been similar to the Sept. 11 attacks.

More - http://news.yahoo.com/ex-cia-officia...134901457.html (http://news.yahoo.com/ex-cia-officials-torture-report-one-sided-flawed-134901457.html)

[red states rule]

your not reading other threads here on the same issues

Concerning the nature of the intel that final got Bin Laden
Letter from CIA's Panetta May 9 2011.
http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Leon Panetta former CIA Director

"....Nearly 10 years of intensive intelligence work led the CIA to conclude that Bin Ladin was likely hiding at the compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. there was no one “essential and indispensable” key piece of information that led us to this conclusion. Rather, the intelligence picture was developed via painstaking collection and analysis. Multiple streams of intelligence — including from detainees, but also from multiple other sources — led CIA analysts to conclude that Bin Ladin was at this compound. Some of the detainees who provided useful information about the facilitator/courier’s role had been subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques. Whether those techniques were the “only timely and effective way” to obtain such information is a matter of debate and cannot be established definitively. What is definitive is that that information was only a part of multiple streams of intelligence that led us to Bin Ladin."

"...Let me further point out that we first learned about the facilitator/courier’s nom de guerre from a detainee not in CIA custody in 2002. It is also important to note that some detainees who were subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques attempted to provide false or misleading information about the facilitator/courier. These attempts to falsify the facilitator/courier’s role were alerting.

In the end, no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means...."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...F04G_blog.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/exclusive-private-letter-from-cia-chief-undercuts-claim-torture-was-key-to-killing-bin-laden/2011/03/03/AFLFF04G_blog.html)

..

But i'll add here another report



And who said the countriy is mean and worthless?
We didn't pretend that torture was good for us but evil if the other guy does it until a few years ago.

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTiUITCjfEvyHBXQI2PB3YhtvOaaUFrC mG8tuYJEnG7c_EeVNBogA

[aboutime]

rev. For crying out loud. Why don't you just gather some guts here, and just admit how much you HATE everyone so much for anything, at any time, anywhere, who doesn't agree with your Holier-than-thou opinions?

[Kathianne]

I don't know that these extraordinary means are the best way to get info, though from what Brennan said today, seems they certainly gave a point to start at. Seems that the 'breaking' of some lead to more information through non-extraordinary means afterwards.

I'm sort of looking at this from a historical perspective, though 2001 is was too recent to be called history. The means though were vetted by both Congress and the DOJ-given the green light. Now Udall and UN and others are calling for firings and prosecutions. I really wonder if Obama recognized what he was unleashing?

As for Feinstein, she was someone I've disagreed on many issues for many years, but not foreign affairs or the military. I'll never trust her again.

[Drummond]

rev. For crying out loud. Why don't you just gather some guts here, and just admit how much you HATE everyone so much for anything, at any time, anywhere, who doesn't agree with your Holier-than-thou opinions?

Revelarts has his Leftie agenda, as do others of his kind. They cannot, they DARE not, depart from it. It just won't happen.

On the subject of waterboarding, I don't accept it qualifies as 'torture'. OK, it's 'highly unpleasant'. But, so what ? Let them suffer it.

But I have this challenge for Revelarts.

Assuming, Revelarts, that you genuinely care about whether US officials can / will gather terrorist information .. and as you're EVEN against waterboarding (!) .. can you suggest to us a better, effective, means of information extraction which will meet your fanatically focused (and outrageous) need to see terrorists enjoy human comforts ???

[I'm assuming you'll want to meet that challenge, since you obviously want terrorists to live lives of comfort .. ?]

My own thinking: terrorists deserve every bit of waterboarding, and actual torture, they receive. I make no judgment as to how much they should receive ... I only say that inflicting it is not a 'wrong' thing to do.

It's not even as though they're human beings, after all.

[Kathianne]

I don't know that these extraordinary means are the best way to get info, though from what Brennan said today, seems they certainly gave a point to start at. Seems that the 'breaking' of some lead to more information through non-extraordinary means afterwards.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/12/11/democrats-cia-gambit-backfires/
I'm sort of looking at this from a historical perspective, though 2001 is was too recent to be called history. The means though were vetted by both Congress and the DOJ-given the green light. Now Udall and UN and others are calling for firings and prosecutions. I really wonder if Obama recognized what he was unleashing?

As for Feinstein, she was someone I've disagreed on many issues for many years, but not foreign affairs or the military. I'll never trust her again.

Someone else thinks perhaps this 'release' wasn't well thought out:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/12/11/democrats-cia-gambit-backfires/


Democrats’ CIA gambit backfires

By Jennifer Rubin (http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jennifer-rubin)December 11 at 3:30 PM


I strongly suspect Senate Democrats did not anticipate the events that played out after the release of their much-criticized report on CIA (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/12/09/lying-about-the-cia-lying/)interrogation tactics. Sure, the gory details dominated headlines and delighted the antiwar left, but then conservatives and some Democrats — and most telling, current and former CIA officials — struck back.

We have seen a parade of former CIA directors, deputy directors and even former senator Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) blast release of the report and the shoddy attempt to pronounce upon the agency without interviewing those who knew the most. That story — condemn first and don’t ask questions because you might get an answer you don’t like — has resonated. All of this has cast the Democratic Party once again as the party that’s weak on (and unserious about) defense.

Even worse, the president won’t say (!) whether he agrees with his own handpicked CIA director, John Brennan, that the information gained through enhanced interrogation techniques was useful, and he won’t criticize or endorse the Senate Democrats. Now, there’s a resounding vote of no support for Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).
...

And to top it off, Brennan went to the press (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-director-john-brennan-addresses-senate-torture-report/)to hold forth on the report. He offered an entirely reasonable conclusion: “Detainees who were subjected to EITs [enhanced interrogation techniques] at some point during their confinement subsequently provided information that our experts found to be useful and valuable. The cause and effect relationship between the use of those EITs and useful information subsequently provided by the detainees is unknown and unknowable.” Indeed, one cannot tell whether eventuallywe would have obtained the information about Osama bin Laden and additional terrorist plots without the information. What we do know is that we got actionable information that was used to foil deadly attacks.

That strikes at the heart of Feinstein’s hatchet job. Brennan turned the knife a little more: “For someone to say that there was no intelligence of value, of use that came from those detainees…I think that lacks any foundation at all.” Take that, senator.

Moreover, Brennan pointedly refused to call the techniques “torture,” and unlike the president and Senate Democrats, sympathetically put the CIA’s use of these methods in the context of 9/11. He said, “There were no easy answers, and whatever your views are on [enhanced interrogation techniques], our nation and in particular this agency did a lot of things right during this difficult time to keep this country strong and secure.” He recounted the horror of those days and reminded the media that we looked to the CIA for answers.

[revelarts]

One thing I don't get is I've posted several items where General Petraeus, an FBI interrogator and an Army interrogator say without equivication that torture has caused more soldiers deaths.

the army interrogator says the D.O.D. told new interrogators that it was the main tool for recruiting new terrorist.
the FBI al qada interrogator said in other interviews that based on his interviews and knowledge of the culture he knew that if wanted to get new recruits for terror all he'd have to do is to walk into a certain Muslim Friday prayer meeting with pictures of torture.

So I just don't get the PARTISAN support/protection for more of the same.
Especially when the professional interrogators say they get FAR BETTER intel WITHOUT it. always have.

Why can't the U.S. gov't put on a united face and says "it's a bad policy and we should have never have pretended that it was ever legal and we're going BACK to our old standards"?

If we don't nip this thing, i'm sure it's going to come home in more ways than one.
1st in the form of attacks and 2ndly and, maybe worse,The fed, state and local gov'ts decide that it's OK for them to use it too. Why not? If it's "legal" are kidnappers and rapist less evil than some of terrorist? and if you need to find child? What about armed robbery?
why not?
the Bible doesn't apply to torture i've been told.
the Constitution doesn't apply because they are bad guys. no other laws apply just the law of "i don't care just get the bad guys".

the CIA isn't suppose to have ANY dealings in the U.S. but they do tape our phones already. What exactly should stop them from torturing a suspect here for some crime some "terror"? And you know the definition of terror has expanded but tortures not just good for terror is it?

[Kathianne]

Rev, could this be the answer?

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2014/12/04/Why-FBI-Won-t-Close-Books-Petraeus-Sex-Scandal


...“This a circumstance in which the principle ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ is certainly in play,” McCain scolded Holder. “The fact that you and others within your department have weighed in publicly on the case raises questions about whether this investigation is being handled in a fundamentally fair and appropriate manner.”

Considering the threats emerging in a region where Petraeus’ expertise could help inform better policy responses, McCain adds, “Congress and the American people cannot afford to have this voice silenced or curtailed by the shadow of a long-running, unresolved investigation marked by leaks from anonymous sources.”

McCain isn’t alone. I spoke with former House Intelligence chair Pete Hoekstra (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4_lvRZwRZ0#t=3619) , now at the Investigative Project on Terrorism (http://investigativeproject.org/), about the delay.

“It’s not a complicated case,” Hoekstra said, noting that it had no connection to espionage or other malicious intent. “Why would they be keeping it open? And the speculation swirls around [that] the best way to keep David Petraeus quiet, if he has any criticism of the Obama administration, is to have this hanging out over David’s head, knowing that at any given time, anything he says can and will be held against him.” It looks like the case is being held open “for political reasons,” Hoekstra said, “and not legal reasons.”

Chaffetz said much the same to Lake and Rogin. After noting that Petraeus has had little to offer in public comments except for a handful of supporting remarks for Obama’s policies, Chaffetz responded, “When the president has the ability to charge him with crimes, maybe it affects your perspective.”

This administration has already had its feckless security policies pilloried by other former members of Obama’s team. Defense Secretaries Robert Gates and Leon Panetta – Petraeus’ predecessor at CIA – published highly critical memoirs of their time on President Obama’s national security team...

- See more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2014/12/04/Why-FBI-Won-t-Close-Books-Petraeus-Sex-Scandal#sthash.CALzyAlN.dpuf

[revelarts]

Rev, could this be the answer?

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2014/12/04/Why-FBI-Won-t-Close-Books-Petraeus-Sex-Scandal

I'm sorry the answer to?

[Kathianne]

I'm sorry the answer to?

Patreus's non-responses on many, many issues since he resigned.

[revelarts]

Patreus's non-responses on many, many issues since he resigned.

Sure I can see that. I suspect that the FBI and CIA have things on generals and all of congress that will keep some quiet on various issues.

the CIA admits it spies on the Senate. And a NSA whistlers blower says they spied on congress and federal judges.

"our" spy agencies are real special.

[Kathianne]

Sure I can see that. I suspect that the FBI and CIA have things on generals and all of congress that will keep some quiet on various issues.

the CIA admits it spies on the Senate. And a NSA whistlers blower says they spied on congress and federal judges.

"our" spy agencies are real special.

I don't doubt that either, however it seems in this case much more likely DOJ. Of course FBI is under DOJ. ;)

[jimnyc]

Sure I can see that. I suspect that the FBI and CIA have things on generals and all of congress that will keep some quiet on various issues.

the CIA admits it spies on the Senate. And a NSA whistlers blower says they spied on congress and federal judges.

"our" spy agencies are real special.


I don't doubt that either, however it seems in this case much more likely DOJ. Of course FBI is under DOJ. ;)

You could have a shitload of folks who are trying to dismiss reports of torture, or it's effectiveness, and have another group of people, saying how effective it was. We may never know for sure. But if one side says lives were saved, they should be able to report specifically what information was gotten and how lives were saved with that information. "We" may not know, as perhaps its confidential, but those in the know should be able to trace and report on this. Just the same with the amount supposedly receiving such techniques.

What really matters is WHO is being told the information. I think the facts are likely changed a bit depending on who is being spoken to and why. My belief is that things are made to look a lot worse right now, as a shove against the GOP. Let's face it - would these results be the same if ran by the "opposing" side? Doubtful. Those now speaking up for, or against, what specifically did they tell the investigators? The 6 folks I posted about, former directors and deputies. It sounds as if their words are rather important. Why are they not in the report and/or splashed on the investigation results?

And we'll likely never hear all the truth. I said the same the other day - I doubt it even stopped. And I doubt it started in the past decade. And I'm sure certain techniques will be used in the future if they are confident lives will be saved.

[revelarts]

You could have a shitload of folks who are trying to dismiss reports of torture, or it's effectiveness, and have another group of people, saying how effective it was. We may never know for sure. But if one side says lives were saved, they should be able to report specifically what information was gotten and how lives were saved with that information. "We" may not know, as perhaps its confidential, but those in the know should be able to trace and report on this. Just the same with the amount supposedly receiving such techniques.

What really matters is WHO is being told the information. I think the facts are likely changed a bit depending on who is being spoken to and why. My belief is that things are made to look a lot worse right now, as a shove against the GOP. Let's face it - would these results be the same if ran by the "opposing" side? Doubtful. Those now speaking up for, or against, what specifically did they tell the investigators? The 6 folks I posted about, former directors and deputies. It sounds as if their words are rather important. Why are they not in the report and/or splashed on the investigation results?

And we'll likely never hear all the truth. I said the same the other day - I doubt it even stopped. And I doubt it started in the past decade. And I'm sure certain techniques will be used in the future if they are confident lives will be saved.

If you look at some of the links i gave with the OBL info you'll find a lot of that detail. What info KBL gave, how much of it was wrong, how it wasted time, what the info was, and what it lead to.
plenty of it's available. and it leads to the conclusion that little to nothing actionable really came from the torture of "3" people.
it's not just a blind assertion you have to take or leave.

Plenty of other info that was obtained without torture is noted as well.

if you listen/read in detail to the links of the professional interrogators they explain what info they got and how and what the info was when the CIA came in and started harsh interrogation.
1 FBI agent ali Sofon (sp) makes it very clear that some suspects who were cooperating STOPPED talking after "harsh interrogation" began and only started talking again after NORMAL interrogation started.

and again Jim the professionals DOING the main work all seem to agree that the BEST way to get info is via rapport not force.
why would they lie about their jobs?
But, as you say, you have to be open as well to hear what they say and not assume ... we can't know .

they give far more detail and --often under oath before congress-- than the 6 you mention who simply make the assertion that it "saved lives".
you do have a chance to examine some of the details ...if you really want to know.

I don't ay this stuff off the top of my head I've read these articles for years this report is not news to me. the partisan aspects everyone's on about make no sense to me.
This crap happened. it was bad and it was at times extremely wrong. it's been in the news papers and in congressional testimonies, red cross and ACLU reports etc etc for the past 10 years.

[revelarts]

If the Professional interrogators are in agreement that Waterboarding etc doesn't work and other means work better WHERE did it the practice come from?
WHY did they do it that way when most people knew better?



The Senate Intelligence Committee’s 500-page executive summary of its report on the CIA’s torture program .... also highlights and adds some details about the important role two psychologists had in both developing the “enhanced interrogation” program and carrying it out.....

...But both the New York Times and NBC News have identified them as Jim Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, two psychologists who have been previously singled out for their roles in developing and legitimizing the torture program.


Both men came from an Air Force background, where they worked on the Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) program in which military personnel are trained to resist enemy questioning by enduring oftentimes brutal mock interrogations. Beyond that, though, they seemed otherwise poorly suited for the task of interrogating al-Qaeda detainees. “Neither psychologist had any experience as an interrogator,” the report notes, “nor did either have specialized knowledge of al-Qa'ida, a background in counterterrorism, or any relevant cultural or linguistic expertise.” Despite their lack of experience in these key areas, Mitchell and Jessen “carried out inherently governmental functions, such as acting as liaison between the CIA and foreign intelligence services, assessing the effectiveness of the interrogation program, and participating in the interrogation of detainees in held in foreign government custody.”...
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/12/meet-the-shrinks-who-helped-the-cia-torture.html


here a 2011 interview with Captain Kerns an AirForce Intel officer that worked with Jessen and kept his notes of the SERE purpose etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTUMsjWpqBE


2011
....Indeed, a report released in 2009 by the Senate Armed Services Committee about the treatment of detainees in US custody said Jessen was the author of a “Draft Exploitation Plan” presented to the Pentagon in April 2002 that was implemetned at Guantanamo and at prison facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan. But to what degree is unknown because the document remains classified. Jessen also co-authored a memo in February 2002 on “Prisoner Handling Recommendations” at Guantanamo, which is also classified.

Moreover, the Armed Services Committee’s report noted that torture techniques approved by the Bush administration were based on survival training exercises US military personnel were taught by individuals like Jessen if they were captured by an enemy regime and subjected to “illegal exploitation” in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Jessen’s notes, prepared for an Air Force survival training course that he later “reverse engineered” when he helped design the Bush administration’s torture program, however, go into far greater detail than the Armed Services Committee’s report in explaining how prisoners would be broken down physically and psychologically by their captors. The notes say survival training students could “combat interrogation and torture” if they are captured by an enemy regime by undergoing intense training exercises, using “cognitive” and “exposure techniques” to develop “stress inoculation.”

The documents stand as the first piece of hard evidence to surface in nine years that further explains the psychological aspects of the Bush administration’s torture program and the rationale for subjecting detainees to so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Jessen’s notes were provided to Truthout by retired Air Force Capt. Michael Kearns, a “master” SERE instructor and decorated veteran who has previously held high-ranking positions within the Air Force Headquarters Staff and Department of Defense (DoD).
...

“Special Mission Units”

Jessen, then the chief of Psychology Service at the US Air Force Survival School, immediately started to work directly with Kearns on “a new course for special mission units (SMUs), which had as its goal individual resistance to terrorist exploitation.”...

“I hadn’t seen these notes for over twenty years,” he said. “However, I’ll never forget that day in September 2009 when I discovered them. I instantly felt sick, and eventually vomited because I felt so badly physically and emotionally that day knowing that I worked with this person and this was the material that I believe was ‘reverse-engineered’ and used in part to design the torture program. When I found the Jessen papers, I made several copies and sent them to my friends as I thought this could be the smoking gun, which proves who knew what and when and possibly who sold a bag of rotten apples to the Bush administration.”......

....A copy of the syllabus for SV-91, obtained by Truthout from another source who requested anonymity, states that the class was created “to provide special training for selected individuals that will enable them to withstand exploitation methods in the event of capture during peacetime operations…. to cope with such exploitation and deny their detainers useable information or propaganda.”....

....Although the syllabus focuses on propaganda and interrogation for information as the primary means of exploiting prisoners, Jessen’s notes amplify what was taught to SERE students and later used against detainees captured after 9/11 . He wrote that a prisoner’s captors seek to “exploit” the prisoner through control and dependence.......

.....The SSTP course was “specifically and intentionally designed to assist American personnel held in hostile detention,” Kearns said. It was “not designed for interrogation, and certainly not torture. We were not interrogators we were ‘role-players’ who introduced enemy exploitation techniques into survival scenarios as student learning objectives in what could be called Socratic-style dilemma settings. More specifically, resistance techniques were learned via significant emotional experiences, which were intended to inculcate long-term valid and reliable survival routines in the student’s memory. The one rule we had was ‘hands off.’ No (human intelligence) operator could lay hands on a student in a ‘role play scenario’ because we knew they could never ‘go there’ in the real world.”...

...., according to the Senate Armed Services Committee report “SERE resistance training … was used to inform” Yoo and Bybee’s torture memo, specifically, nearly a dozen of the brutal techniques detainees were subjected to, which included waterboarding, sleep deprivation, painful stress positions, wall slamming and placing detainees in a confined space, such as a container, where his movement is restricted. The CIA’s Office of Technical Services told Yoo and Bybee the SERE techniques used to inform the torture memo were not harmful, according to declassified government documents....
...
EXCLUSIVE: CIA Psychologist's Notes Reveal True Purpose Behind Bush's Torture Program (http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/205:exclusive-cia-psychologists-notes-reveal-true-purpose-behind-bushs-torture-program)

[Kathianne]

Will there be backlash? Really it seems that Feinstein and Obama didn't really give this idea enough thought:

http://news.investors.com/Politics-Andrew-Malcolm/121214-730293-senate-torture-report-dianne-feinstein-cia.htm?ven=rss


News Flash for Sen. Feinstein: Americans are OK with CIA tactics
By Andrew Malcolm (http://news.investors.com/ibd-columnists/andrew-malcolm.aspx)
Posted 12/12/2014 09:12 AM ET

For days now Americans have heard graphic details of intense CIA interrogation tactics imposed on a handful of captured terrorists years ago and deemed torture by the media and Democrats on Dianne Feinstein's oddly-named Senate Intelligence Committee.

The goal, of course, in those early post-9/11 attack days when almost 3,000 had just died was to encourage these fellows to divulge details about other plots and plotters planning further expected attacks on the homeland.

The rough methods included exposure to sleep deprivation, terrible music, cold temperatures and water-boarding similar to that imposed on U.S. Special Forces candidates. Democrats and sympathizers who do not see the country in an undeclared war with terrorism profess profound shock at such ruthless methods against helpless prisoners by a Republican administration.

It turns out, however, that about half of Americans, who've been witnessing bomb attacks and barbaric beheadings, are just fine with the nasty CIA questioning and see real value in preventing future losses of American lives in unprovoked and unanticipated attacks.

Rasmussen Reports (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2014/despite_report_voters_still_see_value_in_cia_inter rogation_tactics) this week surveyed 1,000 likely voters and found that 49% agreed with both Republican and Democrat former intelligence chiefs that such questioning produced valuable information that protected the country. (That information detailed in an IBD editorial here. (http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/121014-730054-cia-tough-methods-saved-lives-but-democrats-attack.htm))


A similar percentage (47%) believe such aggressive interrogation methods should be used against these captives. Thirty-three percent were opposed while 20% claimed to be unsure.

Forty-nine percent of Democrats oppose enhanced interrogation. But those types evenly divide on whether the information gathered is valuable regardless.

Among Republicans and independents, the lines are clear. A majority of GOP members (64%) and a plurality of independents (48%) are good with water-boarding etc.

While 69% of Republicans and 46% of unaffiliateds believe valuable intel comes from them. The more that respondents have followed the

Feinstein report and its torture allegations, the more value they see in such severe interrogations.

These new findings match similar recent polls (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/november_2014/when_it_comes_to_nsa_voters_put_preventing_terrori sm_ahead_of_privacy)showing Americans listing concern with terrorism and attacks among their top concerns, prompting a belief "that preventing a terrorist attack is more important than protecting Americans’ privacy right now."

Feinstein, an 81-year-old ex-mayor of San Francisco, rushed out her report before Democrats lose committee control to the Senate's new GOP majority in early January. As with the recent Rolling Stone article on university rape, Feinstein's Democrat staff did not interview any of the accused -- intelligence or contract workers.

These Democrats, however, display a selective outrage. They are un-bothered by President Obama's deadly drone program that vaporizes suspected terrorists and anyone else nearby with Hellfire missiles silently dispatched from above.


...

[gabosaurus]

The truth is a horrible thing to deal with sometimes. Best answer is to avoid it's existence.

http://bloggingblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Ostrich-man-head-in-sand.gif?6b854b

[Bilgerat]

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/12/12/Poll-Feinstein-s-CIA-report-more-harmful-to-America-than-torturing-detainees

It's probably a good thing the Cromnibus saga blew that stupid hyper-partisan Democrat report on CIA interrogations off the front pages, because it wasn't working out at all the way Senator Dianne Feinstein and her crew expected it to.


Everything damaging to Democrats instantly becomes "old news," but somehow the enhanced interrogation techniques used against terrorist detainees in 2004 was supposed to be the biggest, freshest story in the land. The final draft of history on President Bush's achievements in national security would be discredited, while all credit due to the Bush Administration for developing the intelligence that led to the slaying of Osama bin Laden would be erased. The kook anti-war base of the Democrat Party would feel a surge of vindication, a moment of partisan elation, after which they would go back to not giving half a damn about Barack Obama blowing people to shreds with drone strikes.

Instead, Feinstein got to watch even Obama's CIA chief, John Brennan, dispute her "report" and its conclusions (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/11/john-brennan-cia-enhanced-interrogations-justified/), including the attempt to claim that the intelligence obtained through enhanced interrogation was useless.

[red state]

Looks like the liberals are scraping the bottom of the barrel, after their historic landslide defeat at the polls on Nov. 4.

They've hurriedly published a hit piece on the GWB administration, disguised as a Senate report (disavowed by half the Senate) pretending we practiced "torture" on terrorists who attacked us, when it wasn't even torture.

Another fib that permeates the "report", is the assertion that we got no useful information from the terrorists after using waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other harsh interrogation methods.

How quickly they forget, that those techniques got us the information that Osama bin Laden was using couriers to send and receive information to his fellow terrorists... and the exact identity of some of those couriers.

After getting that information by waterboarding terrorists like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, we then began tracking those couriers... and one of them led us straight to bin Laden's hideaway in Pakistan. One Navy SEAL mission later, Osama bin Laden was dead.

That takes care of that lie.

I wonder what other falsehoods the liberal fanatics will try to push on us, in their desperate desire to pretend the country is mean and worthless?




REV WROTE: "....Bin Ladin was likely hiding at the compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. there was no one “essential and indispensable” key piece of information that led us to this conclusion. Rather, the intelligence...."

_______________________________________________



Yeah, REV.....and I suppose that if we didn't waterboard the terrorist scum, they'd stop killing our soldiers any less or more (if given the chance). That, is flat out wrong and I know that you're not that blind so please stop foolin' everyone else with that avatar's pulling the glasses down to see better (it isn't working with me.....YET).

And REV, I quoted you above for a reason.......Your words in RED was spot on (IF) you wish to acknowledge that this also includes so-called torture as not "THE" but "A" crucial/essential/indispensable KEY that led us to unlocking the door to obl compound and closing a chapter in History.

Thanks for the article, Lil' Acorn, it said EVERYTHING that needed to be said (except for failing to mention that poor chap who actually CONFIRMED that obl was definitely inside the compound). WE (b.o. and crew, left Dr. so and so HIGH and DRY).

I'm glad Lil' Acorn was spot on and REV, whether realizing it or not, supports our claim to the FACTS. As for right or wrong and (IF) we have inflicted torture on the scum....I'd like to ask what limits should we NOT torture these scum (make them go without prayer rugs......take away their soccer time.....or muSLUM food). How about we put them on bread and water with a vitamin pill once a week, give them "outside time" to grow their own food or clean the prison. THEY have it real good in my opinion.....especially for why 99.9% of them are in there. THAT IS GRANTED and in GRANITE!!!!

[aboutime]

The truth is a horrible thing to deal with sometimes. Best answer is to avoid it's existence.

http://bloggingblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Ostrich-man-head-in-sand.gif?6b854b



Right you are gabby. Proud of you for finally admitting what you constantly have been doing here. Pull your head out, dust yourself off, and join the rest of the human race, and truth, for a change.

[revelarts]

June 24, 2008

Top Interrogators Declare Torture Ineffective in Intelligence Gathering

New York City — Fifteen former interrogators and intelligence officials with more than 350 years collective field experience have declared that torture is an "unlawful, ineffective and counterproductive" way to gather intelligence, in a statement of principles released today.
The group of former interrogators and intelligence officials released a set of principles to guide effective interrogation practices at the conclusion of a meeting convened by Human Rights First last week in Washington. The meeting participants served with the CIA, the FBI and the U.S. military.
The principles are based on the interrogators and intelligence officials' experiences of what works and what does not in the field. Interrogation techniques that do not resort to torture yield more complete and accurate intelligence, they say. The principles call for the creation of a well-defined single standard of conduct in interrogation and detention practices across all U.S. agencies. At stake is the loss of critical intelligence and time, as well as the United States' reputation abroad and its credibility in demanding the humane treatment of captured Americans.
The full text of the principles and brief bios of its signers follow below.
The group gathered together in Washington last week for two days to discuss the most effective ways to obtain timely and credible information from suspected terrorists and other individuals who threaten the security of the United States, during which time they also met with Presidential campaign advisors and Members of Congress to discuss these issues.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Summer, 2008
The principles below were developed by 15 individuals who served as senior interrogators, interviewers and intelligence officials in the United States military, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Central Intelligence Agency. The group met at a forum hosted by Human Rights First on June 17 and 18, 2008, in Washington, D.C. to discuss the most effective ways to obtain timely and credible information from suspected terrorists and other individuals who threaten the security of the United States.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
We believe:
1. Non-coercive, traditional, rapport-based interviewing approaches provide the best possibility for obtaining accurate and complete intelligence.
2. Torture and other inhumane and abusive interview techniques are unlawful, ineffective and counterproductive. We reject them unconditionally.
3. The use of torture and other inhumane and abusive treatment results in false and misleading information, loss of critical intelligence, and has caused serious damage to the reputation and standing of the United States. The use of such techniques also facilitates enemy recruitment, misdirects or wastes scarce resources, and deprives the United States of the standing to demand humane treatment of captured Americans.
4. There must be a single well-defined standard of conduct across all U.S. agencies to govern the detention and interrogation of people anywhere in U.S. custody, consistent with our values as a nation.
5. There is no conflict between adhering to our nation's essential values, including respect for inherent human dignity, and our ability to obtain the information we need to protect the nation.
Signed by:


Frank Anderson

Frank Anderson worked for the CIA from 1968 until 1995. He served three tours of duty in the Middle East as an agency station chief, headed the Afghan Task Force (1987-1989), and was chief of the Near East Division. He now runs a consulting practice that focuses on the Middle East.


Jack Cloonan

Jack Cloonan served as a special agent with the FBI from 1977 to 2002. He began investigating Al Qaeda in the early 1990's and served as a special agent for the Bureau's Osama bin Laden unit from 1996 to 2002.


Colonel (Ret.) Stuart A. Herrington, US Army

Stu Herrington served thirty years as an Army intelligence officer, specializing in human intelligence/counterintelligence. He has extensive interrogation experience from service in Vietnam, Panama, and Operation Desert Storm. He has traveled to Guantanamo and Iraq at the behest of the Army to evaluate detainee exploitation operations, and he recently taught a three-day seminar on humane interrogation practices to the Army's 201st MI Battalion, Interrogation, during its activation at Ft. Sam Houston, Texas.


Pierre Joly

Pierre Joly has more than 39 years of military intelligence experience. He currently serves as the Vice President of Phoenix Consulting Group where he leads more than 350 employees involved in providing human intelligence training to members of the intelligence community and law enforcement agencies of the United States. Immediately before joining Phoenix he served as the Chief of Controlled Operations at DIA from 2005- 2006 and the Chief of Operations for the Iraq Survey Group in Baghdad from 2003-2004.


Brigadier General (Ret.) David Irvine, US Army

General Irvine enlisted in the 96th Infantry Division, United States Army Reserve, in 1962. He received a direct commission in 1967 as a strategic intelligence officer. He maintained a faculty assignment for 18 years with the Sixth U.S. Army Intelligence School, and taught prisoner of war interrogation and military law to soldiers, Marines, and airmen. He retired in 2002, and his last assignment was Deputy Commander for the 96th Regional Readiness Command. General Irvine served 4 terms as a Republican legislator in the Utah House of Representatives, has served as a congressional chief of staff, and served as a commissioner on the Utah Public Utilities Commission.


Steven M. Kleinman

Steve Kleinman is an active duty intelligence officer who has twenty-five years of operational and leadership experience in human intelligence, special survival training, and special operations. He has served as a case officer, as a strategic debriefer, and as an interrogator during Operations JUST CAUSE, DESERT STORM, and IRAQI FREEDOM. He previously served as the DoD Senior Intelligence Officer for Special Survival Training and is currently assigned as the Reserve Director of Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance at the Air Force Special Operations Command. As an independent consultant, his engagements have included serving as a senior advisor to the Intelligence Science Board's Study on Educing Information and as a member of the faculty for the U.S. Army Behavioral Science Consulting Team Course.


Dr. George Mandel

Dr. George Mandel, born in Berlin, Germany, came to the US in 1937. He was inducted into the U.S. Army in 1944, and after basic training was transferred to Camp Ritchie, MD, for training in military interrogation because of his knowledge of German. He was then transferred to P.O. Box 1142, outside of Washington, D.C. where he conducted interrogation of German scientists brought to this country as prisoners of war. After a brief stint at Fort Strong, outside of Boston, he returned to 1142 to continue his previous work in military intelligence until the end of the War in Europe. After discharge in 1946 he returned briefly to 1142, and then entered graduate school at Yale University, specializing in organic chemistry. After receiving his Ph.D. he began his career in biochemical pharmacology, at George Washington University School of Medicine, starting as Research Associate in 1949, and promotion to the ranks to Professor. He became chairman of the Department of Pharmacology in 1960, stepped down from that position in 1996 and currently is working there as Professor of Pharmacology & Physiology. His research work has been in drug metabolism, cancer chemotherapy and carcinogenesis.


Joe Navarro

For 25 years, Joe Navarro worked as an FBI special agent in the area of counterintelligence and behavioral assessment. A founding member of the National Security Division's Behavioral Analysis Program, he is on the adjunct faculty at Saint Leo University and the University of Tampa and remains a consultant to the intelligence community. Mr. Navarro is the author of a number of books about interviewing techniques and practice including Advanced Interviewing which he co-wrote with Jack Schafer and Hunting Terrorists: A Look at the Psycopathology of Terror. He currently teaches the Advanced Terrorism Interview course at the FBI.


Torin Nelson

Torin Nelson is a veteran Human Intelligence (HUMINT) Specialist and interrogator with 16-years of experience working with military and government agencies. He has worked in major theaters of operation in Eastern Europe, the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Mr. Nelson has worked in tactical and strategic environments, both as a soldier and civilian advisor. Primary assignments include the 66th Military Intelligence and 300th Military Intelligence Brigades. He has also worked for the US Army Intelligence Center, Southern European Task Force (SETAF), the On-Site Inspection Agency (OSIA, later DTRA), Combined Joint Task Force 170 (later CJTF-Gitmo), CFLCC (Iraq), CJTF-76 (later -82/-101) (Afghanistan), NATO (IFOR, SFOR, and ISAF), as well as numerous military to military joint training exercises. Mr. Nelson is one of the founding members at the Society for Professional Human Intelligence (SPHI). He is currently working in the Middle East as a senior interrogator and mentor.


William Quinn

William Quinn served in the United States Army from 2001 to 2006 as a human intelligence collector, interrogator, and Korean linguist. He was deployed to Iraq from February 2005 to February 2006 in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and was stationed at Abu Ghraib and Camp Cropper. Will is currently studying International Politics and Security Studies at Georgetown University and is a cadet in Army ROTC.


Buck Revell

Mr. Revell served a 30-year career (1964-1994) in the FBI as a Special Agent and senior executive. From 1980 until 1991, Mr. Revell served in FBI Headquarters first as Assistant Director in charge of Criminal Investigations (including terrorism); then as Associate Deputy Director he was in charge of the Investigative, Intelligence, Counter-Terrorism and International programs of the Bureau (1985-91). In September 1987, Mr. Revell was placed in charge of a joint FBI/CIA/U.S. military operation (Operation Goldenrod) which led to the first apprehension overseas of an international terrorist. Prior to joining the FBI, Mr. Revell served as an officer and aviator in the U.S. Marine Corps, leaving active duty in 1964 as a Captain. He currently serves as the President of an international business and security consulting group based in Dallas.


Ken Robinson

Ken Robinson served a twenty-year career in a variety of tactical, operational, and strategic assignments including Ranger, Special Forces, and clandestine special operations units. His experience includes service with the National Security Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency. Ken has extensive experience in CIA and Israeli interrogation methods and is a member of the U.S. Military Intelligence Hall of Fame.


Roger Ruthberg

Roger Ruthberg served as an interrogator in the U.S. Army for 22 years. He conducted interrogation and counterintelligence operations during Operations Desert Storm, Joint Endeavor, and Iraqi Freedom. He currently works as an instructor in debriefing operations on contract to the Department of Defense.


Haviland Smith

Haviland Smith is a retired CIA case officer and Station Chief who served for 26 years. He served in East and West Europe and in the Middle East. He also served for three years as Chief of the Counterterrorism Staff at the Agency, as well as a tour as Executive Assistant to the DDCI.


Lieutenant General (Ret.) Harry E. Soyster, USA

Lieutenant General Soyster served as Director, Defense Intelligence Agency during DESERT SHIELD/STORM. He also served as Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Department of the Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command and in the Joint Reconnaissance Center, Joint Chiefs of Staff. In Vietnam he was an operations officer in a field artillery battalion. Upon retirement he was VP for International Operations with Military Professional Resources Incorporated and returned to government as a Special Assistant to the SEC ARMY for WWII 60th Anniversary Commemorations completed in 2006.


http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/2008/06/24/top-interrogators-declare-torture-ineffective-in-intelligence-gathering
................


If you guys don't care about being moral do you at least care about being effective?

believe the facts.