he goes out of his way in his report to say that the efficacy of EITs are not clear
sorta
the cia's ig report released by doj on the monday preceding august 29, 2009, as reported by wapo, says "his work did not put him in a position to reach definitive conclusions about the effectiveness of particular interrogation methods"
"certain of the techniques," helgerson said in an interview, "seemed to have little effect, whereas waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information, but we didn't have the time or resources to do a careful, systematic analysis of the use of particular techniques with particular individuals and independently confirm the quality of the information that came out"
he's hardly going out of his way in any assertion, either way
the ig, however, also describes a ksm who was extremely resistant ("an avowed and truculent enemy") until he was waterboarded in the month after his capture, when "his spirit was broken," after which he "cooperated, and to an extraordinary extent," conducting "terrorist tutorials" and becoming langley's "preeminent source on aq"
"mohammed was an unparalleled source in deciphering al qaeda's strategic doctrine, key operatives and likely targets"
"detainees in mid 2003 helped us build a list of 70 individuals----many of whom we had never heard of before---that aq deemed suitable for western operations"
"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 united states and abroad"
and that the length of detainment may have played a factor
no mention of length of stay, not in the ig's report made public by doj in august, 09
He does note that EIT increase the volume of reports coming out of a detainee, but that the quality is a separate matter from the quantity.
nonsense, not a word goes that way, at least not in wapo's account
How a Detainee Became An Asset - washingtonpost.com