Text 11285, 121 rader
Skriven 2009-05-20 20:21:12 av JOHN FITZGERALD (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av DAVE DRUM
Ärende: Re-examining Torture ...
================================
-



DD>   A couple months ago we had a fairly spirited discussion on
DD>   interrogation techniques after I posted an article by
DD>   actual people from the field who did not think that
DD>    torture to get information works well.

JF>   You mean that public relations piece where they claim none of the
JF> gov's techniques have been "scientifically tested" but in the same
JF> breath they turn around and claim what does work?

DD>   You claim it's "public relations". 

   Yes, here are some excerpts from that PR piece that make it sort of
obvious.

    "The ban on torture is a major step toward reclaiming 
    our heritage as a nation of laws and a people of character."
    ...
    "The president's new panel has a fresh opportunity to solve 
    these problems. The group should include experienced interrogators
    and policymakers who recognize the need to examine longstanding
    interrogation methods objectively."



DD>  In fact it was a well-reasoned article containing observations 
DD>  by people who have actually "been there and done that".  
DD>  Which you have not. 

  Nor have you.  You left that part out.  Why did you do that, Dave?



DD>   I submit that you do not know what the hell 
DD>   you are talking about.

  And I am refunding your submission, because it's spun on fantasy and
contradicts itself.




JF>   This begs the question...why would they continue to use
JF>   waterboarding, etc, all of these years if it didn't work??    
JF>   I mean, if all they have to do is sit down and be 'clever' 
JF>   with these prisoners  WHY would they abandon that approach 
JF>   for something that they claim doesn't work?

DD>   Apparently you did not read the testimony of 
DD>   Ali Soufan, one of the FBI's lead interrogators.

  Quote the part of his testimony that explains why they would abandon
what works for something that doesn't.  Again, if a chat with a prisoner
yields the results you claim, why would they resort to harsher methods?

      'Hey guys... we decided to abandon our successful methods 
      so we can employ those that don't work.  After all, we have
      a bunch of "sadistic bastards" who need something to do, and 
      to hell with getting good info."

  Wake up someday.



 DD>   Ex-FBI Interrogator Calls Harsh Tactics 'Ineffective'
 DD>   by Scott Neuman
 DD>   NPR.org, May 13, 2009 · A former senior FBI agent involved
 DD>   in the interrogation of captured al-Qaida operative Abu Zubaydah
 DD>   told a Senate panel Wednesday that the use of harsh techniques
 DD>   to extract information was "slow, ineffective and unreliable."

JF>   One man's (bought and paid for?) opinion against many 
JF>   others who have claimed otherwise.  Notice he didn't 
JF>   say it never works.  Notice also,  he offers no alternative 
JF>   which provides better results.

DD>   So, you think that an FBI agent's testimony was bought 
DD>   and paid for, do you?  What planet was that you 
DD>   come from, again?

  Gotta wonder what planet you come from if you don't think government
agencies around the world don't put a lot of effort into placating the
masses so they can avoid criticism.


The man testified, under oath, to the Senate committee that the FBI was
getting good, useful, actionable intelligence from Abu Zubaydah using
standard interrogation techniques.

    No one said harsh interrogation methods always work.  No one said
'friendly' methods never work.  I just have reservation about the people
who work in earnest to place these sorts of limits on the options are
people are allowed to use.  It must make our enemies very comfortable
knowing that if one of their people is captured, they have nothing to
worry about because we won't even take their blanket away.  In fact, you
can bet that all of our enemies have been informed on our milk-toast
approach to interrogation.


DD>   When CIA contractors took over the interrogation
DD>   using harsh coercive (waterboarding, etc) techniques 
DD>   Zubaydah clammed up.

   Again, you are saying they abandoned a successful interrogation to
employ something that doesn't work.  That alone should tell you they're
just jerking you around by your partisan puppet strings.


DD>  Crawl back under your rock, dude.

    Sure, Dave.  Just as soon as you stick your head back where it
belongs.



---
 *   You're going to need more than a long nose to win this race.   *
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)