Senate intelligence report: Enhanced interrogation was ineffective
The 6,000-page document, which was not released to the public, was adopted by Democrats over the objections of most of the committee’s Republicans. The outcome reflects the level of partisan friction that continues to surround the CIA’s use of waterboarding and other severe interrogation techniques four years after they were banned…
That conclusion has been disputed by high-ranking officials from the George W. Bush administration, including former vice president Richard B. Cheney and former CIA director Michael V. Hayden. Both of them argued that the use of waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other measures provided critical clues that helped track down bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader who was killed in a U.S. raid in Pakistan in May 2011.
Largely because of those political battle lines, Republicans on the Senate intelligence committee refused to participate in the panel’s three-year investigation of the CIA interrogation program, and most opposed Thursday’s decision.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, the committee’s ranking Republican, said in a statement that the report “contains a number of significant errors and omissions about the history and utility of CIA’s detention program.”
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
Stopped reading right there.
The Rogue Tomato on December 14, 2012 at 3:43 PM
YEP!
Completely ineffective.
That is …..completely as effective in getting information from terror suspects as is turning them into GOO via a drone strike a la Obama style and without all that icky “due process” stuff…….
Opposite Day on December 14, 2012 at 3:45 PM
Dems being Dems.
steebo77 on December 14, 2012 at 3:47 PM
Sorry, wrong again. Without these techniques, OBL would still be free.
tommy71 on December 14, 2012 at 3:48 PM
LOL. Now, go crawl back under your rocks, you worms.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 14, 2012 at 3:50 PM
Read the article by prog David Ignatius at WaPo, and you’ll know how imp these techniques are.
tommy71 on December 14, 2012 at 3:52 PM
Only a democrat could take 6000 pages to say something was ineffective.
CurtZHP on December 14, 2012 at 3:52 PM
Alternate Headline: “Report shows killing terror suspects via drone strikes does not produce significant intelligence breakthroughs”
Opposite Day on December 14, 2012 at 3:53 PM
This report goes on the shelf with the intelligence assessment of 2007 that Iran had long stopped working on a nuke bomb. I wish we couild put the contributors on the shelf with the reports.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 14, 2012 at 3:55 PM
Bullsh*t.
jawkneemusic on December 14, 2012 at 4:01 PM
Yeah, KSM started talking out of the kindness of his heart.
Bitter Clinger on December 14, 2012 at 4:14 PM
In that case, they were doing it wrong!
OldEnglish on December 14, 2012 at 4:15 PM
Except for when it worked.
Qzsusy on December 14, 2012 at 4:18 PM
But was it peer reviewed?
Skywise on December 14, 2012 at 4:24 PM
The ommissions Saxby Chambliss refers to is the fact that NOBODY involved with the program was interviewed for the report. The report is an opinion piece that ignores the facts that say otherwise. It is old news that enhanced interrogation techniques were extremely successful. I don’t really understand the point of even releasing this fictional piece that has already been discredited.
Ellis on December 14, 2012 at 4:29 PM
You know, life on the planet was a lot more enjoyable when the CIA just went around offing the bad guys and starting coup d`etats…..all in the background….while we were laughing at Lucy and Ricky or Fred and Wilma.
BobMbx on December 14, 2012 at 4:53 PM
John, do we torture our soldiers when we water board them during training?? you sir, are pathetic and old..please leave
sadsushi on December 14, 2012 at 8:48 PM
But for the efforts of certain liberal activists – especially those in the media – the vast majority of America wouldn’t give a rat’s fanny. Look how little most people care about the wars once Bush was gone.
Hint, hint, CIA.
I do admit that’s not all of what’s different. Back then, though we didn’t like to discuss such things in polite company (an irony of civilized people), Americans understood what needed to be done to keep Western order on the world.
It meant overthrowing ‘elected’ governments that hated our nation. It meant strapping terrorists to a table and telling them “talk or scream”. It meant putting a bullet in the noggins of wicked people. At the very least, we understood this and quietly supported what needed to be done.
The price of freedom is vigilance, so your freedoms aren’t taken away from under your nose. The price of civilization is converting or cowing the barbarians, so they don’t burn down your farms or storm the city gates the minute they think whitey isn’t looking.
MelonCollie on December 14, 2012 at 11:48 PM