• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Guantánamo leaks lift lid on world's most controversial prison

panetta:

WILLIAMS: Turned around the other way, are you denying that waterboarding was in part among the tactics used to extract the intelligence that led to this successful mission?

PANETTA: No, I think some of the detainees clearly were, you know, they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees. But I'm also saying that, you know, the debate about whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always going to be an open question.

RealClearPolitics - Video - Panetta: "Open Question" If Waterboarding Helped Find Bin Laden

the ig:

John L. Helgerson, the former CIA inspector general who investigated the agency's detention and interrogation program, said his work did not put him in "a position to reach definitive conclusions about the effectiveness of particular interrogation methods."

"Certain of the techniques seemed to have little effect, whereas waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information," he said in an interview.

link above

a preeminent source is, after all, a preeminent source
 
that's nice

"waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information:" ig report released by ERIC HOLDER, monday preceding aug 29, 2009
 
that's nice

"waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information:" ig report released by ERIC HOLDER, monday preceding aug 29, 2009

Repeating the claim doesn't answer me. No examples to verfiy the claim have been given. :coffeepap
 
Repeating the claim doesn't answer me

then why don't you stamp your little feet

LOL!

"waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information:" language endorsed by eric holder, aug, 2009
 
That's not the point. I do work in similar situations, and my work overlaps with counter terrorism all the time. I'm not some joke from the BIA who protects the sovereignty of Indian reservations. I've arrested people who are/were suspected of terrorism. That said, intelligence collection is not the case here. The case here is whether or not torture works as an interrogation technique, which, as I have said, it does not. I really hate how all of the people who seem to argue for torture in this thread continuously ignore every single point I make and just attack my credibility, or in another case, compliment me for being a law enforcement officer (not what i was going for)

You say it does not. If we're throwing our personnel experience out there, while I was only a 35M for one of my deployments to Iraq, I think that's a pretty strong testimonial. Torture, or even just waterboarding, can be effective as an interrogation technique. Even if a federal law enforcement officer doesn't think so.
 
then why don't you stamp your little feet

LOL!

"waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information:" language endorsed by eric holder, aug, 2009

I think that's you game and not mine. The thing is, you haven't answered me. I can't make you, but it is clear that you can't answer me. :coffeepap
 
How covenient for you :)

I like it when pseudo-intellectuals just scream nu-uh at everything they don't like/agree with:)

There is a lot of redaction, but also highly unclear. You say suggests. But not clearly states. Nor provides any specifics. The CIA has an inherent interest in making this appear effective. It is another thing to prove it effective. IG is outside the CIA, and while they share a government interest, it would be a step removed from the CIA.
 
How covenient for you :)

I like it when pseudo-intellectuals just scream nu-uh at everything they don't like/agree with:)

Besides, that's not what I did, the fact is I'm asking for something specific which is not in that document. It suggests, but provides no specifics, and I am asking for specifics. I have specifics of misinformation that is verifiable. It seems only fair that those who believe in the effectiveness offer at least as much.
 
You say it does not. If we're throwing our personnel experience out there, while I was only a 35M for one of my deployments to Iraq, I think that's a pretty strong testimonial. Torture, or even just waterboarding, can be effective as an interrogation technique. Even if a federal law enforcement officer doesn't think so.

So you conducted interrogations with torture while you were working in humint? You tortured terrorists? I don't think so...especially since you were in the army, and the army uses their field manual for interrogations, which EXPLICITLY states that torture does not work and not to use it.

And again, have you seen it used? Because I have, and it doesn't work. Like I said, I've seen a lot worse than the waterboarding they used in the black sites, which had doctors in the room, and was time limited. And btw, like the report says, torture did not work prof. Your report you keep linking shows the IG saying that it was ineffective at a later party. You are simply posting one line over and over like an idiot and no one is taking you seriously.
 
Last edited:
So you conducted interrogations with torture while you were working in humint? You tortured terrorists? I don't think so...especially since you were in the army, and the army uses their field manual for interrogations, which EXPLICITLY states that torture does not work and not to use it.

Did I ever say that I did? I'm simply saying that I have a vast, vast array of contacts in the community.

And again, have you seen it used? Because I have, and it doesn't work. Like I said, I've seen a lot worse than the waterboarding they used in the black sites, which had doctors in the room, and was time limited. And btw, like the report says, torture did not work prof. Your report you keep linking shows the IG saying that it was ineffective at a later party. You are simply posting one line over and over like an idiot and no one is taking you seriously.

So it didn't work the few (?) times you used it, and you've decided it can never work anywhere, anytime, on anyone? That's fantastic.
 
No, Holder, Panetta, Hayden have ALL said that EIT's have provided solid info....it jusy is what it is.

Besides, that's not what I did, the fact is I'm asking for something specific which is not in that document. It suggests, but provides no specifics, and I am asking for specifics. I have specifics of misinformation that is verifiable. It seems only fair that those who believe in the effectiveness offer at least as much.
 
Did I ever say that I did? I'm simply saying that I have a vast, vast array of contacts in the community.



So it didn't work the few (?) times you used it, and you've decided it can never work anywhere, anytime, on anyone? That's fantastic.

Yes. It doesn't work. I never used it myself, for the record. I've seen it used many, many times, and I've arrested people whom I released to the custody of others who ended up exposed to these methods. If you want me to put in less hyperbolic terms, think of it this way: ANY type of method in which the only incentive to give information the person being interrogated has is to stop pain, the information will be unreliable. People will say anything under torture. Like I said before but it was carefully ignored by everyone in this topic, McCain said himself that he was tortured and gave starting lines of football teams as names of his contacts. There are methods that are 100x more effective to elicit information from people. As I previously mentioned, sleep deprivation is a good one, and even the ACLU says that sleep deprivation isn't illegal (though they do say it is "humiliating", I don't really care, because it works)

That said, for the 100th time, talk to an interrogator. He/she will tell you these methods are not reliable. I'm not sure if you conducted interrogations while you were in humint, but if you did, and you embraced coercive methods, then I can understand why you are no longer in that career field.

Why do you think your army interrogation manual, which you and your "vast array of contacts" should have been trained on, says not to use torture? 1) because it doesn't work 2) it's illegal, and unwritten reasons include that it helps recruit the enemy's ranks, and it gives the enemy the unalienable right to torture our soldiers.

Here is a quote from the manual, which, as I said, since you were in HUMINT, regardless of if you were involved with interrogation or not, should have studied at some point.

"Acts of violence or intimidation, including physical or mental torture, or exposure to inhumane treatment as a means of or aid to interrogation are expressly prohibited. Acts in violation of these prohibitions may be a violation of US law and regulation and the law of war, including the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and may be criminal acts punishable under the UCMJ and other US law. Moreover, information obtained by the use of these prohibited means is of questionable value. (United States Department of the Army)"
 
Last edited:
Yes. It doesn't work. I never used it myself, for the record.

Okay, dude. I'm to believe your experience as an interrogator (perhaps?) in federal law enforcement trumps my experience as a counterintelligence interrogator in international operations, when it comes to counterintelligence operations conducted by folks who aren't in federal law enforcement. Can you see why I don't really give you much benefit of doubt? Why there's literally nothing you could say that would dissuade me, that would influence me, more than what I've already learned? Okay.

( I've seen it used many, many times, and I've arrested people whom I released to the custody of others o ended up exposed to these methods.

I'm sure you haven't, actually.

If you want me to put in less hyperbolic terms, think of it this way: ANY type of method in which the only incentive to give information the person being interrogated has is to stop pain, the information will be unreliable. People will say anything under torture. Like I said before but it was carefully ignored by everyone in this topic, McCain said himself that he was tortured and gave starting lines of football teams as names of his contacts. There are methods that are 100x more effective to elicit information from people. As I previously mentioned, sleep deprivation is a good one, and even the ACLU says that sleep deprivation isn't illegal (though they do say it is "humiliating", I don't really care, because it works)

Right. Which is why it's only useful in an extreme set of circumstances. But I appreciate you letting the world know what is useful in general situations. I'm not sure why you'd share what was useful in specific situations. Did you have an HCS clearance? If you did, why would you talk about what activities were useful and what weren't?

That said, for the 100th time, talk to an interrogator. He/she will tell you these methods are not reliable. I'm not sure if you conducted interrogations while you were in humint, but if you did, and you embraced coercive methods, then I can understand why you are no longer in that career field.

I've talked to an interrogator and I've been an interrogator. So stop trying appeal to authority when I know you don't know what you're talking about. Carrots are as useful as sticks, and sticks are usually most useful when they're used in very simple ways. But in some situations, sticks are needed. And in the extreme of those situations, waterboarding- or even torture- are useful. To pretend their not is just not grounded in reality- even if it's not moral. Useful =/ moral.

Why do you think your army interrogation manual, which you and your "vast array of contacts" should have been trained on, says not to use torture? 1) because it doesn't work 2) it's illegal, and unwritten reasons include that it helps recruit the enemy's ranks, and it gives the enemy the unalienable right to torture our soldiers.
Or because of the Geneva Conventions?

Here is a quote from the manual, which, as I said, since you were in HUMINT, regardless of if you were involved with interrogation or not, should have studied at some point.

"Acts of violence or intimidation, including physical or mental torture, or exposure to inhumane treatment as a means of or aid to interrogation are expressly prohibited. Acts in violation of these prohibitions may be a violation of US law and regulation and the law of war, including the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and may be criminal acts punishable under the UCMJ and other US law. Moreover, information obtained by the use of these prohibited means is of questionable value. (United States Department of the Army)"


Well, that tells me what's prohibited, not what's useful, but I appreciate the UCMJ brief. It's been awhile, but god knows there's nothing I miss more than a 0600 brief about annual training, so thanks.
 
Last edited:
You consider Obama sick?

any entity which would do this to kids is sick
such as the republican congress which would not appropriate funds to close guantanamo
 
in may of 09 the united states senate voted NINETY to six to keep gitmo open

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/20/senate-votes-to-block-fun_n_205797.html

there were SIXTY dems in upper parliament at the time

FIFTY of em voted with GEORGE W WHAT'S HIS NAME

prominent dems who voted for continued operation of gitmo included john f kerry, harry reid, chuck schumer, ron wyden, jay rockefeller, diane difi, barbara boxer, frank lautenberg, robert menendez, claire mccaskill, daniel inouye the appropriations chair...

america is grateful to the blue fifty as well as every republican in the chamber for NOT dismantling the key anti terror elements of the previous administration, thus allowing this assassination of america's top enemy to happen
 
Okay, dude. I'm to believe your experience as an interrogator (perhaps?) in federal law enforcement trumps my experience as a counterintelligence interrogator in international operations, when it comes to counterintelligence operations conducted by folks who aren't in federal law enforcement. Can you see why I don't really give you much benefit of doubt? Why there's literally nothing you could say that would dissuade me, that would influence me, more than what I've already learned? Okay.
You're not getting what I'm saying. You worked in the Army. The Army does not use torture. The army uses conventional methods which are proven time to time to work and be effective. I'm sorry to say, but you can't claim that since you interrogated in counterintelligence, you have more experience. An interrogation changes subject to subject, and different methods are applicable. Whether it's a serial murderer, a narcoterrorist, or whoever you interrogated or talked to friends about interrogating, torture is never acceptable and never works.

I'm sure you haven't, actually.
Really? You're sure I haven't? Ok, if you want to doubt what I said, my guess is I doubt you were a 35M. I think you are actually a 91 year old widower living in Australia. I am 49 years old. I have been around for a while, and I've seen it all.
Right. Which is why it's only useful in an extreme set of circumstances. But I appreciate you letting the world know what is useful in general situations. I'm not sure why you'd share what was useful in specific situations. Did you have an HCS clearance? If you did, why would you talk about what activities were useful and what weren't?
I wasn't talking about interrogating detainees. I was talking about in general. I've used techniques like sleep deprivation as well as seen reports of it used on people. Of course it's not the methods that were used in the black sites which was pretty damn long sleep deprivation, but the point is, regarding sleep deprivation, if done for long enough, it confuses the hell out of the subject, and gets them to talk. As for the HCS clearance, I don't talk about what my clearance level is on the internet, though I have seen some people on this forum do that (not you).

I've talked to an interrogator and I've been an interrogator. So stop trying appeal to authority when I know you don't know what you're talking about. Carrots are as useful as sticks, and sticks are usually most useful when they're used in very simple ways. But in some situations, sticks are needed. And in the extreme of those situations, waterboarding- or even torture- are useful. To pretend their not is just not grounded in reality- even if it's not moral. Useful =/ moral.
I can agree with the useful =/ moral part. However, these methods are not useful, and the fallout from them is not worth it.
Explain to me how I don't know what I'm talking about. Carrots usually work, and if they don't, brutally beating or torturing the subject isn't going to get them to want to give up information. It's going to cause them to spew whatever crap so they can stop being tortured. I hear people I know who work counterterrorism telling me that it worked to get them to cooperate, as in, stop being silent. That's really as far as I've heard. Whether or not it produced actionable info is probably a no. There are no documented incidents of torture stopping an attack, or in the case of UBL, being the key to finding him.

Or because of the Geneva Conventions?
You failed to elaborate on the rest of what I said, namely that torture can happen to our own men, or that it can be a recruitment tool (which it is, Gitmo is a huge recruitment tool, even though most of these EITs didn't even happen there)

Well, that tells me what's prohibited, not what's useful, but I appreciate the UCMJ brief. It's been awhile, but god knows there's nothing I miss more than a 0600 brief about annual training, so thanks.
That's not just a UCMJ brief.. that's what you should've been following as an interrogator or as someone who worked with them.

Let me just say I appreciate having this debate with you rather than the idiots in this thread who just post links to random isolated quotes from retired CIA directors who say "It worked" but offer no clarification, or from idiots who just post a link from the IG, who later mentioned that the methods were not clearly helpful.
 
Last edited:
"waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information"

after a month of brutal eit's in a secret prison in europe ksm "cooperated, and to an extraordinary extent"

ksm "transformed" into langley's "preeminent source on aq"

"detainees in mid 2003 helped us build a list of 70 individuals---many of whom we had never heard of"

"cross referencing material from different detainees and leveraging information from one to extract more detail from another, the cia and fbi went on to round up operatives both in the us and abroad"

"ksm was an unparalleled source in deciphering aq's strategic doctrine, key operatives and likely targets"

from the ig report released by doj on the monday preceding aug 29, 2009
 
Just a claim without supporting evidence. I realize you can't give supporting evidence because you don't have any. Apparently only the examples of us getting misinformation, clear and verifable, is all we really have outside of claims. :coffeepap
 
yup, just a claim

endorsed by eric holder

LOL!
 
No, Holder, Panetta, Hayden have ALL said that EIT's have provided solid info....it jusy is what it is.

Cklaimed, yes, supported, no. I'm not asking for claims, but for verifiable evidence of their claim. BTW, I hope you're not misreading Panetta concerning the information on OBL. I'd hate to see that misinformation based on a poor reading of his comments posted again. :coffeepap
 
Back
Top Bottom