Who are C,D and E? Are they as confused as F (F being myself).

If torture is about cooperation, to what end? Not intell? OK, no argument on that, you can use it for propaganda purposes...revenge, arguably some form of deterrence, but way back when, the torture advocates were arguing it produces actionable intel fast fast fast!!!! Quicker than a ticking time bomb! Now it takes time, patience, like conventional interrogation does. Soooooo what's good about it?

Liz -54

I see it as a moral issue as you do, but I'm just trying to explore one thing at time. Still, scratch an ethical argument, and you generally find ethics have a great deal of practical utility when 2 or more people must get along with each other.

Apologies.. I am a bit sensitive on this subject, as it's an old topic.. As indicated, it's the subject that introduced me to Chris.. :D

Torture is a fairly effective means to get someone to say what you tell them to say. We know that, there is no argument. But how does the torturer know when the prisoner has told "the truth?" Or even knows the truth? If the torturer already knows the truth, than why bother to torture? Torture has been claimed to be quicker than conventional interrogation, but if you just get bad information quicker, what's the point?

That's my problem with torture as an intelligence tool. Prisoners basically give evidence. The only way to judge the validity of evidence gained through torture is to corroborate it with other independent sources of evidence. Otherwise, you can't exclude the very real possibility that the prisoner is just telling you what he/she thinks you want to believe. It's a lazy way out of doing tedious work.

But, as you indicate, this assumption follows the idea that torture is designed to elicit intel...

It's not.. It's designed to elicit co-operation...

Let me lay it out for you...

In the normal process that I am familiar with, it would go something like this...

You have scumbag A and Interrogator B..

B knows C, D and E... B interrogates A with torture to get him to "confess" to C or D or E.... A obfuscates and withholds and tries to last..

Finally, A breaks and gives B the intel C, D and E... B doesn't NEED to know C, D or E because B already knows C, D and E..

But by torturing A to reveal C, D and E, B has broken A and now A will be co-operative in revealing intel that B does NOT know..

Granted, that is a way way WAY oversimplification of the process that can take weeks and MONTHS to achieve...

But it is EXACTLY that process that led to the sanction of Osama Bin Laden....

Torture is NOT about intel..

It's about co-operation...

Once the terrorists co-operates in revealing intel that is already known, then the rest flows very easy...

Liz,

So, you don't see US government-sanctioned torture as a moral issue but, rather a mere policy option that may or may not be an effective intelligence tool and/or method of obtaining cooperation?

As I have been saying.. Torture is a tool.. No more, no less "moral" than a hammer or a table saw...

It's how it is utilized that determines the morality..

A hammer is a very useful tool... But when it is wielded as a weapon to decimate an entire family, does that change the designation, or more accurately, the value as a tool of the hammer??

Of course not..

Michale
202

So, you don't see US government-sanctioned torture as a moral issue but, rather a mere policy option that may or may not be an effective intelligence tool and/or method of obtaining cooperation?

My observation was not directed specifically to you - and it wasn't directed at the ticking time bomb scenario either.

Until recently, the argument of torture advocates has been that it generates useful intelligence you wouldn't get otherwise.

Now, advocates of torture seem, to me, more apt to claim it makes a prisoner more cooperative. That's a different argument, and one I'm more inclined to agree with. A classic use of torture is to get a subject to sign a confession. That's certainly a form of cooperation, but the prisoner is not giving up any information, beyond a signature, staged photo, or sound bite. The transaction is easy to judge.

Torture is a fairly effective means to get someone to say what you tell them to say. We know that, there is no argument. But how does the torturer know when the prisoner has told "the truth?" Or even knows the truth? If the torturer already knows the truth, than why bother to torture? Torture has been claimed to be quicker than conventional interrogation, but if you just get bad information quicker, what's the point?

That's my problem with torture as an intelligence tool. Prisoners basically give evidence. The only way to judge the validity of evidence gained through torture is to corroborate it with other independent sources of evidence. Otherwise, you can't exclude the very real possibility that the prisoner is just telling you what he/she thinks you want to believe. It's a lazy way out of doing tedious work.

I would have to know which scenarios you were referring to and the context that they were referred in...

Michale
193

As I have said ad-nasuem...

Uh...that's a flip flop that would make Clinton proud. So none of your many, many ticking time bomb scenarios over the last 7-8 years were serious. OK, got it.

The ticking time bomb, while "fun" to contemplate, was never a serious consideration...

As I have said ad-nasuem...

Torture is about obtaining co-operation, not intel...

Michale
185

Glad to hear that. :D

So, lemme ask ya...

If you DID condone torture, would you agree that the likes of KSM et al DESERVED to be tortured???

Michale
173

Now, here is a prime example of you seeing things that aren't there.

Brennan said in the very same statement that torture HAS saved lives...

Michale

Michale
167

And yet, Director Brennan said in the very same statement:

"Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation program produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives."

Michale
167

And, yet, YOU, on the other hand, know that torture works 95% of the time!

Yes I do..

Because I am not shackled by political correctness or Party/Ideological enslavement..

Michale
166

And yet, Director Brennan said in the very same statement:

"Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation program produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives."

Couple that statement with what I already know for a fact to be true and it's pretty easy for me to claim what I am claiming..

Torture HAS saved lives..

Michale
166

And yet, Director Brennan said in the very same statement:

"Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation program produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives."

Couple that statement with what I already know for a fact to be true and it's pretty easy for me to claim what I am claiming..

Torture HAS saved lives..

Why all the tears and hand-wringing over a few mass-murderers who have killed, literally, THOUSANDS of innocent men, women and children???

And, yet, YOU, on the other hand, know that torture works 95% of the time!

Yes I do..

Because I am not shackled by political correctness or Party/Ideological enslavement..

Michale
166

For a guy who says he values accuracy and is quick to point out inaccuracies, that statement of yours highlighted above is a whopper!

Director Brenner said today that he believes that the question of whether or not actionable intel was extracted as a result of torture is, and I quote, UNKNOWABLE.

And, yet, YOU, on the other hand, know that torture works 95% of the time!

I reject categorically any responsibility for actions I wasn't strong enough to stop but vehemently decried.

You should feel responsibility for what occurred in the same manner as the Left feels that the entirety of the American people should feel responsibility for slavery...

It's the same concept...

But, here's a newsflash for ya that's gonna keep you up at night..

I completely agree with you.. :D

It's ridiculous to be expected to feel responsible for actions you had no control over and were never a part of...

Michale
165

Moreover, would would Obama tolerate such bogus statements if they were, in fact, bogus??

Michale
164

On what evidence - cite real accounts of interrogators involved in the use of torture, proven inaccuracy of the information gleaned under conditions of torture - do you rely to make such a statement?

You have to remember.. The claim from those who make such statements that "people will say anything to stop the torture" is not relevant once you under stand that torture is NOT designed to elicit intelligence..

It's designed to elicit co-operation..

Ergo, since intelligence is not the immediate goal, the interrogator cannot be satisfied with intel...

Which is why I distrust the statements of those who make that "people will say anything" claim..

It PROVES they are completely ignorant of exactly what torture is and what it's designed to accomplish...

I have given you many real world examples of how torture HAS rendered accurate intelligence...

Michale
163

I don't understand why specifics are required for the discussion to continue??

"Are you saying I have to DIE before you will discuss your feelings on death??!!"
-Dr Leonard McCoy, STAR TREK IV, The Voyage Home

:D

Michale
162

It's the difference between what I know and what I have done.. :D

I'll be happy to talk ad-nasuem (and often do :D ) about what I know...

But what I have done is really not open for discussion..

Michale
161

Predictable.

And, infinitely amusing, given your own consistent (well, consistent until now) take on taking the fifth on one question but not on all others of an issue ...

I'll take the 5th on that..

However, I WILL say that in my military career I was part and parcel to the very programs and career fields we have been discussing...

Terrorism wasn't just a far off concept or a theory or an intellectual exercise.. It was very real and something me and my fellow soldiers lived with 24/7 for many years...

There is theory and there is reality.. And while the theory that torture is un-necessary is nice to snuggle up with when we sleep at night...

The reality is far far difference..

Michale
160

So, you categorically reject responsibility for actions taken by your fellow Americans years and years ago...

Interesting.... I might have to remind you of that in future discussions. :D

This torture program was the product of cowards and bullies being in charge. It is a profound disgrace -- actually, I can't think of words harsh enough to encompass it. There is no defense for it.

Except 13 years without a terrorist attack on US proper..

Michale
159

It's co-operation....

As KSM aptly demonstrates, intel comes later...

Michale
158

"We did this"

Uh uh. I didn't do it. I was against everything that was done by Bush/Cheney gang from the beginning. When 9/11 happened the first reaction I had after the smoke was cleared was a fear that the Bush/Cheney gang were going to take advantage of it to do stupid and evil things, which they did. I knew the war was a BAD idea and I knew because they had already established themselves as both liars and bullies, and they then proceeded to act the way liars and bullies act.

Lots of Americans protested and were reviled and ignored. So while this report is a stain on "America" I reject categorically any responsibility for actions I wasn't strong enough to stop but vehemently decried.

To your point re: wartime -- see above. We have plenty of knowledge and history to tell us exactly how barbarous people become in war. We had Colin Powell's doctrine warning us not to engage in the debacle. But they did it anyway and everything that has happened was both inevitable and PREDICTED. American leaders lost their heads in the emergency, much like hysterical cops apparently shoot first and dodge responsibility later.

When scary bad things happen leaders can be strong and help people figure out constructive responses, or they can have hysterics and lead out of fear, settling on brute force over intelligence, fairness or foresight. That is what our leaders did when the test came.

This torture program was the product of cowards and bullies being in charge. It is a profound disgrace -- actually, I can't think of words harsh enough to encompass it. There is no defense for it.

What, my comment was clear as mud, again!?

Beyond personal experience??

The man who led the United States to bin Laden, a courier known as Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti, was mentioned by earlier sources but only as one of many associates bin Laden had years before. Detainees in the CIA interrogation program pushed Kuwaiti to the top of the list and caused the agency to focus tightly on him. The most specific information about the courier came from a detainee, Hassan Ghul, who, after interrogation, strengthened the case by telling of a specific message the courier had delivered for bin Laden to operations chief Abu Faraj al-Libi. Finally, interrogated senior operatives such as Khalid Sheik Mohammed, who by that time was enormously cooperative, lied when confronted with what we had learned about the courier. That was a dramatic tip-off that he was trying to protect bin Laden.
washingtonpost.com/opinions/senate-interrogation-report-distorts-the-cias-success-foiling-terrorist-plots/2014/12/09/de5b72ca-7e1f-11e4-9f38-95a187e4c1f7_story.html

There, torture lead us to Bin Laden..

KSM, once co-operative, led us to one Riduan Isamuddin AKA Hambali. Who, once co-operative, led us to Hambali's brother. The brother had just recruited 17 terrorists to recreate the 9/11 attacks on the west coast of the United States..

The plot was stopped..

I could go on and on with a dozen more examples, but all you have to do is listen to Obama's CIA Director...

"Coercive interrogations did produce intelligence that helped thwart attack plans, capture terrorists, and save lives. The intelligence gained from the program was critical to our understanding of al-Qaida and continues to inform our counterterrorism efforts to this day."
CIA Director John O Brennan

Michale
157

Ironically enough I am the only one here who is NOT wearing blinders... :D

Ya'all's position is based on theory..

My position is based on fact...

That was a bit terse, on my part.

Not at all.. It's an emotional topic, to be sure...

For me, the use of torture by any democracy-loving government can NEVER be justified or condoned. Period. This is one of the very, very few issues that are “black and white” for me, no grey areas, whatsoever.

I completely understand and respect your opinion...

On the other hand, if you had worked in the field and been there and done that, could you allow that your opinion MIGHT be different??

Depending on the circumstances under which the decision to resort to the use of torture was taken (by seasoned and competent interrogators, I hasten to reiterate), the penalty for this crime may be appropriately mitigated.

I am of two minds on this..

On the one hand, NO ONE should have to be criminalized for doing the right thing...

On the other hand, it would prompt people to think hard about what they are about to do..

But, here's the thing. It's been aptly proven that politics simply CANNOT be taken out of the mitigation process..

Given that, it simply is not morally defensible to criminalize the decision and then mitigate the punishment..

Michale
156

Okay, okay ... I just have one question that I would like you to answer, Michale, with an appropriate degree of specificity ...

On what evidence - cite real accounts of interrogators involved in the use of torture, proven accuracy of the information gleaned under conditions of torture - do you rely to make such a statement?

For me, the use of torture by any democracy-loving government can NEVER be justified or condoned. Period. This is one of the very, very few issues that are “black and white” for me, no grey areas, whatsoever.

Having said that, I would defer to seasoned and competent interrogators who may deem it necessary, in rare circumstances, to resort to the use of torture. However, that need and action should, in no way, diminish from the fact that torture is the equivalent of pure evil and should be punished in a court of law.

Depending on the circumstances under which the decision to resort to the use of torture was taken (by seasoned and competent interrogators, I hasten to reiterate), the penalty for this crime may be appropriately mitigated.

Let me put it this way...

The Minority Report serves it's partisan agenda, just as the Majority Report serves their agenda...

Two sides of the same corrupt coin...

Is torture outrageous? Yes..

Is it horrible? Yes..

Is it uncivilized and barbaric?? Yes and Yes...

But the ONLY question that matters is...

IS IT NECESSARY....

And the answer to that is ALSO yes..

We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
-George Orwell

Michale
155

But, Michale ... doesn't the Republican minority report do all of that?

Heh.

Depending on what exactly you mean by "timely" I would have to agree... Or disagree...

The fact that this Dem report came out in the waning days of Dem power in Congress, it strikes me as a sour-grapes report.. One last kick in Bush's balls before the Dems are thrown out...

I might add a thought or two as someone old enough to remember not only the Korean war but World War Two (when I was a boy reading "Steve Canyon" and "Buzz Sawyer"comics) wherein contrasts were repeatedly made with "Them" (the malicious, sadistic, sneering enemy fighters). "They" were evil, unprincipled, inhumane . .etc. etc while "clean-cut& wholesome" American "Doughboys" always fought fair. Nazis did such stuff. Japs did such stuff, but not our 'boys.' Made us comics readers feel good about "us."
And there was a lot of truth to all that,</I

Michale
154

Ahhhh I get it now..

So, you are saying that Bush's CT policies that Obama has continued and expanded are not effective??

And yet, there hasn't been a successful terrorist attack on US proper since 9/11...

So, tell me.

How do you reconcile that fact with your claim??

Michale
153

Mainly.. NONE..

NONE.. ZERO... ZILCH.... NADA...

Michale
152

And, more importantly, everything that DIDN'T happen...

Let's be clear..

We have a DEMOCRAT PARTY report...

This report is nothing but a partisan hit piece..

And I can PROVE that....

Michale
151

For those of you new to Weigantia, you can thank (or blame... Blame is problably a better word.. :D) this column for my presence here.... :D

Michale
150

For those who have been there and done that, we don't HAVE to "pretend" it's OK..

We KNOW for a fact that it's OK...

Unlike your Democrat (so-called) "leaders" who were fully briefed on the programs and then got all holier-than-thou when the programs became public knowledge..

They're still refusing to acknowledge that non-terrists were tortured,

Mistakes happen and that's a shame..

Doesn't change the facts that the programs worked and saved innocent lives..

Obama's own people have STATED such...

not to mention the fact that this "protection" thing doesn't seem to be working any better than the torture.

You'll have to clarify this because I have absolutely NO CLUE what you are trying to say here..

Like I said, I wish you came with a translation matrix.. :D

Michale
149

If I may be a bit blasphemous here..

"So I get back to earth right?? And I see all these crosses everywhere and I'm like, 'What the frak!??' Do they think that, if JFK were to come back, he wants to see frakin' sniper rifles everywhere!!???"
-Jesus

:D

Apologies if that was too raw...

Michale
148

I was struck by this with Obama's statement..

“Imagine a future 10 or 20 years from now when the United States of America is still holding people who have been charged with no crime on a piece of land that is not part of our country. Is this who we are? .?.?. Is that the America we want to leave to our children?”

He simply states the act and ignores the result..

“Imagine a future 10 or 20 years from now when the United States of America is still holding people who have been charged with no crime on a piece of land that is not part of our country and, in doing so keeps the lives of innocent Americans safe and secure. Is this who we are? .?.?. Is that the America we want to leave to our children?”

He leaves that part out because he KNOWS that any rational American is going to say, "Damn skippy!!!"

The unconventional enemy we face requires an unconventional response..

"You don't fight a rabid dog with ASPCA rules... You take the leash off your own BIGGER and BADDER dog.."
-THE SEIGE

Michale
147

Torture is not about obtaining intel.. Not specifically.. Sure, the ultimate goal is intel.

But the immediate goal of torture, in the environment we are discussing, is to obtain co-operation, not intel.. Once that co-operation is obtained, the intel flows freely...

That is why I always have to shake my head sadly when people claim torture doesn't work. If applied properly and with the proper goals in mind, torture does work 95% of the time..

And it's an established fact that, in the instances under discussion, torture accomplished the goal..

To save innocent lives..

Michale
146

Let's be clear..

We do NOT have an "official" report.

We have a DEMOCRAT PARTY report...

If the report contained ALL the facts, ALL the lives that were saved, ALL the attacks that were stopped, EVERYTHING that happened as a result....

Ya know what the response of Joe and Jane Sixpack would be??

"Eh, well. Yea, it's a bummer we had to go there, but they brought it on themselves..."

Just keep in mind.. It's entirely likely that someone ya'all know and/or someone ya'all love are alive today because of the actions of the CIA...

It's a fact that someone's daughter is alive today because of the actions of the CIA..

In the world of counter terrorism, the ends DO justify the means...

Michale
145

It says we will protect Americans at ALL costs, even if that means a few mass murders are made uncomfortable for a time...

Michale
144

We can't pretend it wasn't torture anymore, because the facts weren't swept under a historical rug this time.

While Senator Feinstein's address on the floor of the US Senate upon the release of the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on the use of torture and the condoning and justification of the use of torture by US government officials was admirable, along with the statement by Senator McCain, what does it say about a nation when it's officials who have practiced, condoned and justified the use of torture are not held accountable?

Is the excuse of preferring to "look forward" a valid one, under the circumstances?