Bombshell: ABC independently confirms success of CIA “torture” tactics
posted at 9:15 pm on September 20, 2006 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Ace e-mailed me the instant this finished airing on O’Reilly with the subject header “must record”. He was right, as you’ll see.
Anti-”torture” absolutists like Sullivan adamantly deny that harsh tactics produce reliable information. It’s their way of avoiding the moral dilemma presented by a ticking time-bomb scenario. But they’ll have to face it now, because in four short minutes Brian Ross utterly explodes that particular article of quasi-religious faith as fantasy. Not only did they break Khaled Sheikh Mohammed; not only was the information he gave them valuable; not only did it save lives; but Ross’s sources include people within the CIA who are opposed to the practices.
The best part, though? Learning that Ramzi Binalshibh cried like a three-year-old girl.
Hard decision time for St. John of Tucson. Choose carefully, Senator.
Please note that the clip has been slightly edited for time/bandwidth purposes.
Update: Is Frist ready to go to the mattresses?
Update: Across the dial, right about the same time that O’Reilly and Ross were talking about this, smug halfwit Keith Olbermann was blithely asserting that “torture” doesn’t work. You picked the wrong night, jerky.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
If it worked, it must be torture. QED
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on September 20, 2006 at 9:25 PM
Screw it. The RINO’s in the Senate are determined to cave in to the demands of terrorists, and ILLEGALS. We have no one to blame except for ourselves for worrying more about how Ann Coulter writes a column than we do about casting a vote for a real conservative.
I used to think that symbolism over substance was a liberal trait.
DannoJyd on September 20, 2006 at 9:27 PM
Allah,
I have to take issue with your title in which you call the CIA’s interrogation techniques “torture techniques.” I don’t know if you saw the second season of “24″ but the very first scene of the first episode included a man who was tortured for information. He was strapped to a table, I think, and his feet were in bags of what I assumed was acid and various parts of his body where terribly beaten and bloodied. I think even some of his teeth were pulled out.
That is torture. Having water poured over your face to mimick the sensation of drowning may be scary as hell, but it’s not torture.
kimpriestap on September 20, 2006 at 9:39 PM
It doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference how effective these interrogations were, or how many lives were saved. People like Andrew Sullivan and his ilk have far to much invested in this to re-asses their position.
If anyone is expecting Andy to post anything that even hints that perhaps this “torture” wasn’t quite that, or that “Torture never works! Never!” they will be sorely disappointed.
I know his heartache over this will continue. I just don’t know the exact manner in which it will be expressed.
I for one think it is high time for AP’s photoshopped version of the Andrew Sullivan HeartAche Alert.
EFG on September 20, 2006 at 9:39 PM
Did they try asking nicely? I’ll bet they didn’t even try.
Jim Treacher on September 20, 2006 at 9:50 PM
Treacher, we may have to be a little stronger than that. Professor Turgidson may be our last, best hope.
EFG on September 20, 2006 at 10:00 PM
It is a very good thing I am not in charge of “torture”. These techniques are for wussies. I have written better
torture scenerious when just musing. I guarantee you, if
we used what I would do to these guys, nothing else would
have to be done and they’d be talking in less time than it
would take for me to take off one square inch of skin, rub
salt with hot oil in the wound.
The broad who was also on is such a nitwit! Where do these “people” come from?
sharinlite on September 20, 2006 at 10:02 PM
There is a HUGE difference between useful interrogation techniques and ‘torture’!!!
Those who side with our enemies ARE our enemies.
speed647 on September 20, 2006 at 10:11 PM
All this outrage over pimpslaps and pinkbellies. God forbid we should ever get rough with one of these head-chopping animals.
I question Colin Powell’s moral basis for his opposition to a much-needed clarification of Geneva.
Kid from Brooklyn on September 20, 2006 at 10:17 PM
The best part: right then, on MSNBC, Olbermann was telling us torture doesn’t work.
Alex K on September 20, 2006 at 10:26 PM
OH MY GOD, WE DIDN’T STOOP TO THEIR LEVEL, DID WE?!?!?!??!?!?!?
It’s over, man. This country has lost it’s soul. We’ll never survive now cuz we’re no better than they are!!!!
/sarcasm off
thirteen28 on September 20, 2006 at 10:55 PM
Maybe they do, but I’m not sure they understand that most of us really do not give a damn what they do to get information out of KSM and his companions. It boggles the mind that Sully and Olbermann and others on the left would stake out this position in the face of that certainty.
And a boggled mind is of no use to anyone.
daveintexas on September 20, 2006 at 11:51 PM
That chick from Human Rights Watch got her butt kicked and she knows it. Good job Bill.
As I was watching, I was yellin’ at the TV “Well then what techniques DO we use, tickle their damn feet?” Just then she said “Talk tough to them.” OH MY GAWD! Yeah, that’ll work: “Tell us where the next attack will be … OR ELSE!”
Kid, when I was in the Air Force, the pinkbelly was the harshest form of hazing … I’d rather give birth (and I’m a guy!) then go thru THAT again! Well, ok, maybe not.
They should line these guys up, by rank, start at with the lowest rank, pull out a gun and ask a question.
“I will not tell you, infidel.”
“Ok.” BAM!
“And you? No? Ok.” BAM!
All that crap about being eager to die for islam is all a bunch of B.S. It’s only for the guilable suckers they get to act as suicide bombers. And yes, binalsheeb cried like a little biotch. We should post THAT on the internet!
Tony737 on September 20, 2006 at 11:51 PM
Hey, watch yourself. This country doesn’t have a soul - remember the Establishment Clause (separation of church and state)?
Rick on September 21, 2006 at 12:17 AM
Give Terrorists Rights and Give Americans Death!
Love,
“Jihad” John McCain
SilverStar830 on September 21, 2006 at 4:21 AM
I have to say, waterboarding sounds like torture to me (unlike forceful shirt grabbing).
I guess that means I’m not pro-torture.
frankj on September 21, 2006 at 8:52 AM
That was said in sarcasm, but I have actually heard people say that we ARE no better then the terrorist, because we are not nice and give them lolypops (halel of course) for information.
My answer to that is “The middle east is not glowing, your wife is not wearing a burka, and I did not just have you shot for speaking against our government, so I guesse we ARE still better then they are”
Wyrd on September 21, 2006 at 9:30 AM
The real truth is that “torture,” properly applied, does extract information from people who have it. The Germans in WWII got everything that they wanted from the resistance people they interrogated. So did the North Vietnamese (even John McCain spilled his guts).
The real question is whether we are using this as an interrogation technique against known terrorists, or simply using it to abuse prisoners. In the first case, we should do everything necessary to protect our citizens.
For the record, it should be noted that none of our enemies have ever complied with the Geneva Conventions, even if they had signed them. The argument that we risk our soldiers being abused is stupid. They already are.
old_dawg on September 21, 2006 at 9:35 AM
I keep wanting to ask Sen McCain if he would liek to play some solitaire.
The way he has been acting lately, I wonder if he hasn’t been compromised.
Wyrd on September 21, 2006 at 9:50 AM
Torture (or “torture”) can work. It can also not work. It can also work incorrectly (i.e. they’ll say whatever you want them to say in order to get the doberman to stop snapping its jaws at his testicles.)
The issue being that there’s often no way to tell if the person is telling the truth, lying, or lying “the truth” that you want to hear.
I’ve said it before, but I’ll repeat: torture should be illegal, but I’d hope that someone would break the law for a “ticking time bomb” scenario. I’d acquit, if they turned out to be right.
Mark Jaquith on September 21, 2006 at 9:58 AM
If waterboarding acceptable for our special forces, it is OK for terrorists and not torture. I am waiting for McCain to give captured terrorists their Second Amendment rights. McCain, like the aged Goldwater before him, has spent too much time in the Arizona sun.
Valiant on September 21, 2006 at 10:24 AM
Isn’t there a clause in divorce formental cruelty?
Torture was written about by Jack London, see The Star Rover.
It’s in the public domain, won’t cost two cents to read, and is done by one of the best american writers.
Besides, those who know say it’s how often you practice.
tormod on September 21, 2006 at 10:41 AM
This reasoning doesn’t hold water. We WILL find out whether its a lie or not fairly soon. We’ll check out their story and the ‘perp’ will still be incarcerated if its a lie.
Most lies, while sitting in prison, dont work.
shooter on September 21, 2006 at 10:53 AM
How understanding of you!
In the meantime, said someone who would break the law would have to correctly guess beforehand whether or not they would be right. So what will you do if they honestly believe the detainee is holding critical, time-sensitive information but fail to get any out of them?
thirteen28 on September 21, 2006 at 10:55 AM
Why stop there? Waterboarding might not be good enough…let’s tie them to a truck and drag them trhough the streets..let’s chain their hands and feet and fully submerse them in water…why not cut off some digits everytime we think they lie?
Look, a little chest slap, sleep deprivation, cold rooms and listening to Drowning Pool for 24 hours straight I would consider torture, but waterboarding is right there on the line for me. As I noted before we aren’t only American by virtue of the fact we live here, we are American by our values as well. I find it hard to support torture regardless of what the jihadis do to our troops. Sure it makes me mad, but stooping to their level makes us no better than these animals. I’d like to think we’re the civilized ones..
bentman78 on September 21, 2006 at 11:41 AM
Let me rephrase, a little chest slap, sleep deprivation, cold rooms and listening to Drowning Pool for 24 hours straight I would NOT consider torture. My error.
bentman78 on September 21, 2006 at 11:43 AM
For those that ask the question, “what’s the difference between us and them if we torture?” I ask what result is expected. We torture to gather information that will save the lives of civilians inside and outside of the US. It will also save the lives of our military. They torture just to make the person feel pain before they murder them.
I view it as a unfortunately necessary device in this war to gather information. As a christian, I hate the idea of it but when I weigh the pain of one person against the lives of thousands, it’s pretty obvious what we need to do.
Benaiah on September 21, 2006 at 12:11 PM
Get off your moral high horse.
When we start making propaganda snuff films in which we saw off heads with dull knives, then we will have stooped to their level. Using extreme means to extract information from a terrorist to save lives our own lives is not stooping to their level, so quit moral masturbation.
thirteen28 on September 21, 2006 at 12:14 PM
That first comment says it all: If it worked it must be torture.
-T
The Therapist on September 21, 2006 at 12:26 PM
All you guys worrying about us ‘becoming like them’; let me ask you a question. How do you feel about the firebombing at Dresden? What about the nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Dresden was a purely civilian target and we burned it down. Why? To break the will of the enemy. Does it make us worse than the Nazis? They never bombed one of our cities. The japanese only killed around 3-4000 in their bombing attack. Yet we nuked 2 cities. Why? To save lives. But did that make us worse than them? Some say yes. Many say no. Many more don’t bother to think abou it. Well during the course of the ‘let’s give terrorists the bill of rights’ debate I did. We did those things because it was war and we were trying to win. We weren’t worrying about give and take and becoming worse than them. We already knew we were better than they were. We were trying to win the war and stop the fighting. They started it. Many you guys have slipped into moral equivalency and don’t even realize it. We’re not just picking up arabs at random and throwing them in the pokey and shoving red hot pokers up their collective a$$es. We are in a war. We are trying to get information on a very adaptive, clever enemy who knows how to play our societal weaknesses like a bloody violin. I don’t advocate needless cruelty, although I think most of these guys deserve to be put in stocks and let all the 9/11 and military familys come by and beat 10 kinds of sh*t out of them; I think we need to let the professionals decide what works and what doesn’t. We all sit here ‘well, waterboarding is on the line for me’. What the hell do you know about the effectiveness of waterboarding that you haven’t been told? What do I know? Let the professionals decide what is necessary. Give them limits (the ones I’ve seen interviewed know how far they can go), but let them tell us what is effective. Putting all this touching feely horsecrap ‘we’re no better than them’ around it is a waste of time. We are better than them. We are a peaceful generous society that got groin kicked by a bunch of 3rd world radicals with nothing better to do than inflict their pathetic world view on us. Pressing them for information to defeat their attacks does not make us worse or even remotely like them. They attacked us. They wouldn’t be sitting in our prisons if they hadn’t forced us to war. We need to stop screwing around and get to winning it.
austinnelly on September 21, 2006 at 12:27 PM
I saw this interview in its entirety. He stated that sometimes torture works–you get reliable info; sometimes it doesn’t–you get bad info. The thing is of course, in everyone’s favorite highly improbable ticking bomb scenario, you don’t know which you have. On MSCBC there was an interview with an ex CIA agent who adamantly opposed torture, saying it rarely works and damages our reputation, he was particularly irate about the “intelligence” we gleaned thru the outsourced torture program. That stuff he claimed was “a complete mess”. Go figure.
honora on September 21, 2006 at 12:43 PM
I’m for using sugar and fire ants to break these scum. Americans are known for being mean when they have too. Look at napalm, nukes, and fire storms. A good taste of their own own jihad will be good for them.
Shmo on September 21, 2006 at 1:09 PM
I don’t know about you, but finger nails across a black board still works with me. I guess I’m just old school….
soulsirkus on September 21, 2006 at 1:36 PM
I long to relive the days when the press and an entire political party did not actively work to undermine the effectivess of intelligence collection. That’s one part of the Clinton years I can deal with.
It still baffles me that this question is being publicly debated. The average U.S. citizen does not need to think about this shit. For many years things happened in the background that those-in-the-know just turned a blind eye to. Why? Because it worked. Because 90% of those receiving this treatment were certified scum-bags. Yes, I agree that it’s a terrible shame for the other 10%. But guess what, the 90% likely saved more lives than the worth of the 10%. It’s moral math. It’s shitty, but true.
On the subject of waterboarding, why should we ban a technique that we use on our own service? That’s simply retarded. If someone can’t distiquish the difference between drowning and simulated drowing, they need to be sterilized for the good of the nation.
natesnake on September 21, 2006 at 1:38 PM
Austin gets a standing ovation.
Brian Ross ALSO mentioned the CIA agents who were IN FAVOR OF waterboarding AND THE PLOTS THEY BROKE UP … BECAUSE OF IT! Are those lives saved NOT WORTH a little FEAR put into a FREAKIN’ TERRORIST??? What the &@*# is wrong with these idiotic “liberals”? They don’t seem to mind when Saddam tortures people, do they?
The call themselves “liberals”, “progressives” and “Democrats” but they don’t want liberty, progress or Democracy for anybody but themselves.
Tony737 on September 21, 2006 at 2:55 PM
Then we have no room to criticise others for human rights violations then.
So what you’re saying is as long as we don’t do any worse than a bunch of fundamentalist uncivilized thugs operating under the guise of the Islam religion, then we are OK. And why stop there? Let’s go down to the same level as Somalis who dragged downed wounded pilots on the ground, or perhaps the high standard levels defied in Rwanda, where the government troops attacked civilians with machetes?
You can sit there and accuse me of being on my high horse, but we are in the Geneva Conventions, we either follow it or we don’t. If we don’t then we pull out…there isn’t any grey issue here.
bentman78 on September 21, 2006 at 3:21 PM
Well, folks, maybe I’m the anomaly here. I’m PRO-TORTURE!, AND I think that wars fought in an “effort to reduce civilian casualties” are just plain stupid! WHAT DO YOU THINK SOLDIERS PROTECT, if not civilians! There has NEVER been a war where all we did was attack OTHER SOLDIERS, how stupid would that be? All that does is get more of our soldiers killed as they pussyfoot around the battlefield in fear of Human Rights Watch.
There is no real threat in war without the threat being to the civilian population. This might not be neat and tidy for some of you elitist theorists, who never had a gun pointed at you but hey, the truth is never easy! This should be especially obvious with our current enemies who actually DESIRE DEATH. They don’t care about themselves, but they do care about Mama, ’cause she doesn’t get any VIRGINS.
I think that once you start adjusting your fight so as NOT to kill a significant portion of the enemy, or their SYMPATHIZERS, or you declare certain segments of the enemies’ territory, Out of Bounds, you give cowards a perfect hiding place and you have already lost. JOHN KERRY is a lying piece of liberal scum, because when he said our soldiers were “KILLING BABIES” he didn’t tell the whole truth! The Vietnamese women would run out to the helicopters, in the guise of being “rescued”, they would toss their babies to the soldiers in the choppers, they’d wave them off, like they had other kids to go get or something. As soon as the chopper took off it would explode because of the BOMB STRAPPED TO THE DAMNED BABY! Kerry’s soft ass didn’t understand that, he preferred to not deal with our enemy because the enemy was too tough. So he turned his vitriol on the American Government. Liberals after all are cowards, they are the “lunch money kids” in school who needed guys like me to protect them.
Soothsayer on September 21, 2006 at 3:33 PM
Like hell we don’t. We do what we have to do to defend ourselves against their aggression against us.
Like honora, I will be on you in a fight between you and a strawman everytime. You kicked that strawman’s ass good!!
There is a gulf between what we do and what the terrorists do is wide enough that it has to be meausred in astronomical units.
And who the F besides your little morally preening ass ever suggested dragging people through the streets a la Mogadishu or the like? I’m suggesting we do what we have to do to win and to protect ourselves from terrorist attacks, and if that means using severe measures, even torture, then we do it.
That’s the difference between most of us here and you - we’re focused on protecting the country, while you are focused on protecting your own moral vanity so you can continue to indulge in self-congratulation about what a great humanitarian you are.
… as I have and continue to do.
We follow that treaty that does not apply to non-uniformed combatants just fine, thank you very much.
P.S. ditto on the standing ‘O’ for austin.
thirteen28 on September 21, 2006 at 3:35 PM
Let’s send bentman78 to Great Britain, where defending yourself from an attacker can get you thrown in jail. After all, it doesn’t matter why you are doing it, it just makes you as bad as the criminals.
mcg on September 21, 2006 at 3:50 PM
But you have to invoke the old “if a tree falls…” question. It’s not like anyone was watching Olby.
RightWinged on September 21, 2006 at 4:43 PM
I wonder if McCain is against heightened interrogation because he gave it up in Viet Nam? Wonder what broke Johnny, panties on his head? OH Wait…he likes that.
Wade on September 21, 2006 at 5:51 PM
Mark Jaquith on September 21, 2006 at 9:58 AM
This is true, but it is also true for non-coercive interviews, like in a regular, lawful police interview. Sometimes those interviews work. Sometimes they don’t. And sometimes suspects give fake confessions, or just lie inorder to try to make the interrogation stop, or mislead it. Having said that, we still use police interrogations, even though they aren’t 100% effective.
No. Only rarely is there no way to tell if they are telling the truth. Just as in police interrogations. Oftentimes the interrogator is confirming something he already suspects, or he has enough information to be able to tell a lie, even if he doesn’t know the exact truth. Interrogations oftentimes aren’t started from a position of complete lack of knowledge about the circumstances surrounding the suspect and what they want to know.
If you want to argue against the morality of these coercive techniques, you may have something. But if you argue against the effectiveness, you are on much, much weaker ground.
EFG on September 21, 2006 at 10:14 PM
The whole liberal “why can’t we all just get along” thing is going to get a lot of people killed. We need to stop this messing around and start gearing up for a very long war. Our enemy doesn’t think the way we do, and they never forget a perceived wrong. If you don’t think that these people are evil, truly evil, search out the videos of westerners being beheaded in Iraq. I’ve watched as many as I could find. My family and friends asked “How can you watch that stuff?” My reply: “How can I not watch it??” Yeah, they’re gruesome and sickening, but until we realize what kind of animals we are dealing with we will never be able to fight them effectively. Right now there are children in the mideast and other predominately Muslim nations being taught to hate us, and our children will be facing them in their adulthood because this is going to be a long, brutal war. So torture away, I say. Anything that will gain time to stop an attack, anything that will garner information about our enemy, and I do mean anything should and must be done. I’m tired of hearing about the “rights” of detainees. Do they care about your rights? These people would kill you, your spouse, your children without a second thought, and in my view that means they have surrendered any rights of “fair treatment”.
If we refuse or are to squeamish to fight this war all out, with victory as our goal, we are doomed. There will be no unconditional surrender, no cease fire, no peace talks, because our enemy will never stop trying to kill us all. Never.
pwhited on September 22, 2006 at 12:37 AM
“Pale Ebenezer thought it wrong to fight.
But Roaring Bill, who killed him, thought it right.”
But sometimes you have to choose: Scruples or Survival. Sometimes you can’t have both.
the-gunslinger on September 24, 2006 at 12:17 AM
Should have said:
SOMETIMES you have to choose: Scruples or Survival.
Sometimes you can’t have both.
Nicely said, Pwhited. Jihad as “The Terminator”…he never stops coming at you, until you kill him completely, utterly, overwhelmingly, and finally dead. And consideriing he doesn’t play by “human” rules, you don’t much worry about HOW you do it.
the-gunslinger on September 24, 2006 at 12:28 AM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »