Effectiveness of Torture

[thaiboxerken]

You're asking for evidence that torture can provide false-data and false-confessions, Cobalt? Do you believe in witches?

 

[Cobalt]

You're asking for evidence that torture can provide false-data and false-confessions, Cobalt? Do you believe in witches?

Your statements suggest that torture is only capable of producing false information.

I suggest you provide evidence for that.

And the witch question is dumb. Did you even read the part of my post where I admit that any truly innocent person will say anything to get out of something, and that who was waterboarded were exceptional cases?

Give up on that crap, it's quite lame.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Your statements suggest that torture is only capable of producing false information.

Let me clarify my statement to you, so that no straw-men are erected. I'm stating that there is plenty of evidence that torture CAN produce false information on a regular basis.

And the witch question is dumb. Did you even read the part of my post where I admit that any truly innocent person will say anything to get out of something, and that who was waterboarded were exceptional cases?

Here is a secret for you, guilty people will also say anything to stop torture as well. There is no magical property that makes torture work differently on innocent or guilty people.

 

[tsig]

Evidence?


This always sounds like a weak cop out. I'd agree that if someone is actually innocent, sure, they'll say a load of crap to stop it from happening.

But the people that were waterboarded were exceptional cases, not just some middle eastern looking people who were walking down a street looking at a high rise funny.

I would imagine that those people were in fact prepared for interrogations, of many sorts. And when simple stuff doesn't work, you attempt something more.

Do I think that it's something to be proud of? Hell no!
If it can save lives and be worthwhile, do I think it should happen? If necessary, sure!

So they were superhuman? Why would you think that the info you got was true?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

So you are saying that "an agent of a government for the purpose of extracting info, a confession or as punishment" couldn't also get a little joy out of watching the pain?

No. I'm saying if the only reason he's doing it is out of fun (as Marc's post suggested), it's the other definition of torture.

I would guess if an interrogator showed evidence that he was enjoying the torture (the C.A.T. kind of torture) such as taking a photo of himself with the dead body of the guy he helped torture to death grinning and showing a thumbs up sign, that should be considered an aggravating circumstance to the crime of torture.

I realize there were sadists involved in these things. However, I also think a lot of the people guilty of torture, especially the higher ups who were pretty far removed from the dirty work, probably did or ordered the torture out of decent motives. Again, doesn't matter; it's still a crime.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

But the people that were waterboarded were exceptional cases, not just some middle eastern looking people who were walking down a street looking at a high rise funny.

Waterboarding is just one form of torture that was conducted under the Bush administration. (The way I read this thread title, the question is about the effectiveness of torture.) Other forms of torture, especially beating and having the prisoner hung from his handcuffed wrists in a position not quite kneeling have even led to the death of these prisoners from the torture.

In at least one case, just about what you facetiously suggested is about what happened--a perfectly innocent Afghani (no connection to any bad guys at all) driving his taxi was taken into custody and tortured to death.

As for waterboarding, does the fact that it was only done to 3 prisoners (over and over again) make it somehow NOT a crime?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Your statements suggest that torture is only capable of producing false information.

You're deliberately misreading his statements then. If you like, respond to my point number 1 in post number 103.

The point isn't that torture never ever produces correct intelligence. The point is that at the time you make the decision to break international and US law by committing torture, you have no idea whether or not it will produce good intelligence.

Also, you also can't possibly know that it's the only possible way of producing that needed intel (a point that the "ticking time bomb" hypotheticals ask us to concede).

 

[Distracted1]

Were'nt the expectations for American P.O.W. s changed after the Korean conflict allowing our soldiers to say just about anything whilst undergoing torture without damaging their honor or reputations? Can that be considered evidence for the efficacy of torture?

Do the advocates of Torture under " the right circumstances " in this thread aknowledge the justifications of the Koreans to torture our soldiers?, after all, they were fighting an enemy that had a history of at least twice using WMD's on its' opponent.

The same for the Vietnamese, were they justified to use torture on our soldiers because it was "effective"?

Is what's good for the goose good for the gander?

 

[BeAChooser]

You can, of course, provide a link to my post where I made such an insistence.

Don't you remember saying this?

That we are discussing the very notion of torture as being acceptable in my view violates the very bedrock principle of sacred honor. I don't want to be a part of it.

 

[BeAChooser]

It looks to me as if the argument from the pro-torture side is that there is no evidence that water-boarding works because Obama is hiding it.

The dishonesty (or at least lack of understanding) from your side appears to be endless. I think dishonesty applies in your case because in a previous thread YOU were referred to posts that provided specific statements (i.e., evidence) and facts from CIA and other sources that indicate waterboarding worked. Here is some of the material you ignored.

Dennis Blair, Obama’s director of national intelligence - "High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html )

General Michael V. Hayden, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency under President Bush - “the use of these techniques against these terrorists made us safer. It really did work.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html ). Hayden recently wrote "As late as 2006, fully half of the government's knowledge about the structure and activities of Al Qaeda came from those interrogations." (http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=AvantGo&op=ReadStory&sid=6029 )

Former National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell has said, "We have people walking around in this country that are alive today because this process happened." (The Washington Post via http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stor...auth22258-exceptions-no-torture-rule/?opinion )

George Tenet told CBS' "60 Minutes" (http://mikesamerica.blogspot.com/2007/04/george-tenet-terrorist-interrogations.html) - "Here's what I would say to you, to the Congress, to the American people, to the president of the United States: I know that this program has saved lives. I know we've disrupted plots. I know this program alone is worth more than the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency put together, have been able to tell us."

And here is an article that you were referred to that gives specific details about how waterboarding worked to save lives and stop terrorist attacks when conventional approaches had failed.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDE5YTNmZTg5OWUyOTlkMGUxOTk3OGMxY2I4ZDQ4YWQ=

Summarizing the facts claimed in it one could say ...

1) On 9/11 a terrorist plot horrifically murdered over 3000 innocent men, women and children in the United States.

2) We captured the mastermind of that plot, a man with the initials KSM. He was a man so evil that he actually plotted the death of 30,000 people and managed to murder over 3000.

3) KSM was interrogated by conventional means and yes, he did reveal some information, but apparently nothing that he didn't already think we knew. They were totally unable to get him to reveal information about any ongoing or still planned plots, and he did not give up the names of any other terrorists that he thought we didn't already know.

4) When asked what al-Qaeda plots were in the works, KSM told the interrogators that "Soon, you will know". So here was a terrorist, who they already knew had masterminded the killing of 3000+ people in a horrific manner; who destroyed four commercial passenger jets and a complex of skyscrapers to do it; who caused a trillion dollars in damage to an economy overall; and who damaged the psyche of an entire nation, and he was leading investigators to believe that "soon" there would be other such calamities.

5) And those investigators knew that there were indeed other plots underway. They knew that the terrorist organization was large, with many members. They knew that KSM was high enough in the al-Qaeda organization to know about some of the plots. In fact, they'd already discovered that he looked into crop dusters before he was caught ... planes whose only terrorist use might be to spread some form or biological or chemical weapon, which it was feared they might have obtained. So if nothing else, they suspected that might be an ongoing plot.

6) So they decided to waterboard him. And after getting nothing out of KSM by conventional interrogation, that he didn't think they already knew, he broke in minutes and started telling them things about ongoing plots and the names of other terrorists. Sure, he continued to resist, week they learned many things that indeed did prevent the loss of many additional lives (and not just Americans).

7) The article I linked lists some of the life saving facts they learned from waterboarding KSM and the two other top al-Qaeda members. As result of the information they obtained, they captured multiple additional terrorists ... terrorists who they hadn't known anything about even after months of conventional interrogation ... terrorists who were actively plotting additional mass murders at the time they were caught ... terrorists who were involved in the mass murder plots that had already taken place or that had been involved in plots that had been stopped.

8) And as pointed out in that article, one the plots (carrying out simultaneous attacks on the consulate, western residences and westerners at the local airport in Karachi) was stopped only days before it was completed. And the only reason that happened is that we used enhanced interrogation techniques on another captive.

The truth is you simply don't like what the CIA officers and that very specific evidence say, so you and the others have just ignored it or dismissed it out of hand. So you just ignore this evidence and continue your charade.

Now you can argue that the facts in that article aren't true ... that the CIA agents who provided those facts are liars. That the other officials I quoted above are liars. If that's the way you want to view it, then the best we can say is that the verdict is out. And the only way to resolve this is for Obama to release whatever information is necessary to resolve it.

 

[BeAChooser]

I'm thinking that it takes a bit of a sadist to torture another human being, for any reason.

What sort of human will not apply some temporary pain and discomfort to a very bad person who likely has knowledge about terrorist plots that will soon kill hundreds or even thousands (or tens of thousands) of human beings? Especially if the CIA is right and waterboarding is effective at eliciting accurate and actionable intelligence in a short time? Hmmmmmmm?

 

[BeAChooser]

The proponents of torture out themselves with every post. It's not information they want but to punish the evildoer.

Garbage.

If anyone is outing themselves, it is those who see the application of some temporary pain or discomfort (via waterboarding) as morally worse than not waterboarding ... even though past use of that method might now suggest one could get the information needed to prevent thousands of people from being murdered. Those folks are saying that applying some temporary pain and discomfort to one demonstrably bad person is more evil than allowing the murder of 1000's of people to take place when one perhaps could have prevented it without causing more than temporary pain and discomfort to one demonstrably bad person. I think that shows your own moral compass is broken, tsig.

 

[Upchurch]

What sort of human will not apply some temporary pain and discomfort to a very bad person who likely has knowledge about terrorist plots that will soon kill hundreds or even thousands (or tens of thousands) of human beings?

I just have to ask. Thread after thread, you have presented this logical fallacy, but you refrain from calling it what it is: torture. Why is that? If you think torture is justified, why not own up to it and ask:

What sort of human will not torture a very bad person who likely has knowledge about a terrorist plot that will soon kill hundreds (thousands, etc.) of human beings?​

Is it that you know the answer is that it takes a very bad person to torture another human being in the first place?

 

[BeAChooser]

A total of over 250 waterboardings occurred, couldn't 250 methods of interrogation that didn't involve torture produce just as much or more information?

KSM said he was waterboarded 5 times. He experienced 5 SESSIONS of waterboarding over a period of a week. Water was applied more than once in each of those sessions for numbers like you stated. So your question is whether conventional methods could have produced the same information in that week.

The answer to your question is that the CIA is already on record stating that they had applied conventional methods for far more than a weeks time and had obtained no information from KSM that he didn't already think we knew. He did not disclose any details about the plots we didn't yet know about or reveal the names of other terrorists. And he showed no signs of breaking. But in one week of waterboarding, he not only revealed the existance of other plots but the names of other terrorists would allowed those plots to be defeated. Another instance of enhanced interrogation is said to have produced information that managed to stop a terrorist attack only days before it was set to occur. Had we relied on conventional methods, that terrorist attack would likely have occurred, killing many people.

So as long as we believe the CIA, that's excellent evidence that waterboarding worked where conventional methods did not. Now you can argue that the CIA are liars but then only way to resolve this issue is for Obama to release the data to do it. That he isn't releasing that data suggests to me that he knows the CIA is right and his supporters are wrong, and that he's embarked on a policy that is deeply flawed and may eventually lead to the death of many Americans.

 

[Cobalt]

So they were superhuman? Why would you think that the info you got was true?

The **** are you babbling about, superhuman?

Waterboarding is just one form of torture that was conducted under the Bush administration. (The way I read this thread title, the question is about the effectiveness of torture.) Other forms of torture, especially beating and having the prisoner hung from his handcuffed wrists in a position not quite kneeling have even led to the death of these prisoners from the torture.

For one thing, multiquote rules. Two, offer up evidence about those other forms of torture?

In at least one case, just about what you facetiously suggested is about what happened--a perfectly innocent Afghani (no connection to any bad guys at all) driving his taxi was taken into custody and tortured to death.

By the US? If so, that's not good and that was hideously poor judgement. Where did I say that it's perfectly fine to torture everyone?

As for waterboarding, does the fact that it was only done to 3 prisoners (over and over again) make it somehow NOT a crime?

Didn't say that either, hoss.

You're deliberately misreading his statements then. If you like, respond to my point number 1 in post number 103.

Perhaps later. So far I'm just saying what his posts read like to me.

The point isn't that torture never ever produces correct intelligence. The point is that at the time you make the decision to break international and US law by committing torture, you have no idea whether or not it will produce good intelligence.

And if it does, great, still a crime, I get that.

Also, you also can't possibly know that it's the only possible way of producing that needed intel (a point that the "ticking time bomb" hypotheticals ask us to concede).

I never said it was the only way. Goddamn, do people not read?

 

[tsig]

The dishonesty (or at least lack of understanding) from your side appears to be endless. I think dishonesty applies in your case because in a previous thread YOU were referred to posts that provided specific statements (i.e., evidence) and facts from CIA and other sources that indicate waterboarding worked. Here is some of the material you ignored.

Dennis Blair, Obama’s director of national intelligence - "High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html )

General Michael V. Hayden, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency under President Bush - “the use of these techniques against these terrorists made us safer. It really did work.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html ). Hayden recently wrote "As late as 2006, fully half of the government's knowledge about the structure and activities of Al Qaeda came from those interrogations." (http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=AvantGo&op=ReadStory&sid=6029 )

Former National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell has said, "We have people walking around in this country that are alive today because this process happened." (The Washington Post via http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stor...auth22258-exceptions-no-torture-rule/?opinion )

George Tenet told CBS' "60 Minutes" (http://mikesamerica.blogspot.com/2007/04/george-tenet-terrorist-interrogations.html) - "Here's what I would say to you, to the Congress, to the American people, to the president of the United States: I know that this program has saved lives. I know we've disrupted plots. I know this program alone is worth more than the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency put together, have been able to tell us."

And here is an article that you were referred to that gives specific details about how waterboarding worked to save lives and stop terrorist attacks when conventional approaches had failed.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDE5YTNmZTg5OWUyOTlkMGUxOTk3OGMxY2I4ZDQ4YWQ=

Summarizing the facts claimed in it one could say ...

1) On 9/11 a terrorist plot horrifically murdered over 3000 innocent men, women and children in the United States.

2) We captured the mastermind of that plot, a man with the initials KSM. He was a man so evil that he actually plotted the death of 30,000 people and managed to murder over 3000.

3) KSM was interrogated by conventional means and yes, he did reveal some information, but apparently nothing that he didn't already think we knew. They were totally unable to get him to reveal information about any ongoing or still planned plots, and he did not give up the names of any other terrorists that he thought we didn't already know.

4) When asked what al-Qaeda plots were in the works, KSM told the interrogators that "Soon, you will know". So here was a terrorist, who they already knew had masterminded the killing of 3000+ people in a horrific manner; who destroyed four commercial passenger jets and a complex of skyscrapers to do it; who caused a trillion dollars in damage to an economy overall; and who damaged the psyche of an entire nation, and he was leading investigators to believe that "soon" there would be other such calamities.

5) And those investigators knew that there were indeed other plots underway. They knew that the terrorist organization was large, with many members. They knew that KSM was high enough in the al-Qaeda organization to know about some of the plots. In fact, they'd already discovered that he looked into crop dusters before he was caught ... planes whose only terrorist use might be to spread some form or biological or chemical weapon, which it was feared they might have obtained. So if nothing else, they suspected that might be an ongoing plot.

6) So they decided to waterboard him. And after getting nothing out of KSM by conventional interrogation, that he didn't think they already knew, he broke in minutes and started telling them things about ongoing plots and the names of other terrorists. Sure, he continued to resist, week they learned many things that indeed did prevent the loss of many additional lives (and not just Americans).

7) The article I linked lists some of the life saving facts they learned from waterboarding KSM and the two other top al-Qaeda members. As result of the information they obtained, they captured multiple additional terrorists ... terrorists who they hadn't known anything about even after months of conventional interrogation ... terrorists who were actively plotting additional mass murders at the time they were caught ... terrorists who were involved in the mass murder plots that had already taken place or that had been involved in plots that had been stopped.

8) And as pointed out in that article, one the plots (carrying out simultaneous attacks on the consulate, western residences and westerners at the local airport in Karachi) was stopped only days before it was completed. And the only reason that happened is that we used enhanced interrogation techniques on another captive.

The truth is you simply don't like what the CIA officers and that very specific evidence say, so you and the others have just ignored it or dismissed it out of hand. So you just ignore this evidence and continue your charade.

Now you can argue that the facts in that article aren't true ... that the CIA agents who provided those facts are liars. That the other officials I quoted above are liars. If that's the way you want to view it, then the best we can say is that the verdict is out. And the only way to resolve this is for Obama to release whatever information is necessary to resolve it.

Until we waterboard those agents I see no way to get to the truth.

Your gold standard of truth is torture so why believe them till we make 'em gag on there own vomit?

 

[Towlie]

BeAChooser, any pain or discomfort forcibly inflicted upon people to make them bend to your will is torture. That's what the word means.

If you wish to argue otherwise, please tell us what alternate word you would use for "pain or discomfort forcibly inflicted upon people to make them bend to your will" in cases where you would contend that such inflicted pain or discomfort doesn't qualify as torture.

 

[tsig]

Garbage.

If anyone is outing themselves, it is those who see the application of some temporary pain or discomfort (via waterboarding) as morally worse than not waterboarding ... even though past use of that method might now suggest one could get the information needed to prevent thousands of people from being murdered. Those folks are saying that applying some temporary pain and discomfort to one demonstrably bad person is more evil than allowing the murder of 1000's of people to take place when one perhaps could have prevented it without causing more than temporary pain and discomfort to one demonstrably bad person. I think that shows your own moral compass is broken, tsig.

You wish to inflict pain in order to serve a problematically higher good.

I see a human in front of me.

Why do you think that only pain produces truth?

 

[thaiboxerken]

For the purposes of this thread..and human understanding, water-boarding is considered torture. If someone wants to debate about this, there are plenty of other threads to do so. If someone has good evidence that torture is effective and reliable, feel free to give it. So far, all we have are anecdotes and opinions.

 

[tsig]

The **** are you babbling about, superhuman?

For one thing, multiquote rules. Two, offer up evidence about those other forms of torture?

By the US? If so, that's not good and that was hideously poor judgement. Where did I say that it's perfectly fine to torture everyone?
Didn't say that either, hoss.

Perhaps later. So far I'm just saying what his posts read like to me.

And if it does, great, still a crime, I get that.

I never said it was the only way. Goddamn, do people not read?

"The **** are you babbling about, superhuman"

Once again you attack me rather than what i said.