Former CIA Official Seeking To Confirm Efficacy of Torture Does The Opposite

[EFerrari]

Jose Rodriguez, the former head of the CIA's Clandestine Service during the Bush administration, was supposed to offer proof that the torture of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and other Al Qaeda detainees led to the discovery of Osama bin Laden's hiding place. Instead, his interview with CBS reporter Leslie Stahl confirmed the exact opposite.

"I am certain, beyond any doubt, that these techniques, approved at the highest levels of the U.S. government, certified by the Department of Justice, and briefed to and supported by bipartisan leadership of congressional intelligence oversight committees, shielded the people of the United States from harm and led to the capture of killing of Osama bin Laden," Rodriguez told the Washington Post's Dana Priest in a piece inexplicably published in the paper's Style section early last week.

The debate over the efficacy of torture has been renewed by Rodriguez' recently published book and the Obama campaign's agressive effort to remind voters that bin Laden was found and killed under the current administration. Since bin Laden's death, Republicans have sought to reap credit for the raid by focusing on the torturous interrogation techniques Obama banned by executive order his first few days in office, claiming they led directly to the discovery of bin Laden's hideout. But the CIA's own inspector general found "you could not in good conscience reach a definitive conclusion about whether any specific technique was especially effective, or [whether] the enhanced techniques in the aggregate really worked."

Rodriguez' 60 Minutes interview doesn't do much to bolster the case of torture supporters. In fact, it actively undermines it. When Stahl confronted Rodriguez with the fact that KSM refused to divulge the identity of the courier who eventually led the CIA to bin Laden, Rodriguez confirmed what we already knew—that when asked about the identity of bin Laden's courier, KSM lied.



http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/04/former-cia-official-seeking-confirm-efficacy-torture-does-opposite?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Motherjones%2Fmojoblog+%28MotherJones.com+|+MoJoBlog%29

[OnyxCollie]

1. K&R. nt

[leveymg]

2. The major result of waterboarding was brain damage to the witnesses and destruction of evidence.

Both the human record and the recorded tapes got erased. In the former case, destruction of evidence was by repeated and prolonged partial drowning and cutoff of oxygen to the brain leading to unconsciousness and memory loss of key witnesses to the crimes of 9/11. Sometimes, such a result isn't unintended and can't plausibly be characterized as unforeseeable. See, http://journals.democraticunderground.com/leveymg/415 and for a more complete set of journals on the subject, please see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5259653&mesg_id=5260141

[freshwest]

5. +1. Sounds intentional to protect the higher ups.

[The Magistrate]

3. The Aim Of Torture Is Terror, Ma'am, Not Information

People need to be clear about this, and understand it thoroughly.

The aim of torturing prisoners is to make people fear to fall into the hands of torturers, and conclude that the best way to avoid falling into the hands of torturers is to not act against the authority which employs them.

[freshwest]

4. +1

[EFerrari]

8. I couldn't agree more. n/t

[felix_numinous]

6. Torture is intimidation tactics

--all their lies about getting information is just a cover--we have KNOWN this for years!! But like women's, civil and human rights--we are having to fight these battles all. over. again.

[just1voice]

7. It's so pathetic that a crime like torture is promoted without accountability

There are so many millions of Americans who actually think torture is some sort of positive thing. It makes me realize exactly how heinous regimes of the past came into existence.