CIA veteran on “Zero Dark Thirty”: Yes, enhanced interrogation helped get Bin Laden
First, my reasons for repulsion. “Zero Dark Thirty,” which will open for Washington audiences Friday, inaccurately links torture with intelligence success and mischaracterizes how America’s enemies have been treated in the fight against terrorism. Many others object to the film, however, because they think that the depiction of torture by the CIA is accurate but that the movie is wrong to imply that our interrogation techniques worked.
They are wrong on both counts. I was intimately involved in setting up and administering the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation” program, and I left the agency in 2007 secure in the knowledge not only that our program worked — but that it was not torture…
What I haven’t heard anyone acknowledge is that the interrogation scenes torture the truth. Despite popular fiction — and the fiction that often masquerades as unbiased reporting — the enhanced interrogation program was carefully monitored and conducted. It bore little resemblance to what is shown on the screen.
The film shows CIA officers brutalizing detainees — beating them mercilessly, suspending them from the ceiling with chains, leading them around in dog collars and, on the spur of the moment, throwing them on the floor, grabbing a large bucket and administering a vicious ad hoc waterboarding. The movie implies that such treatment went on for years.
The truth is that no one was bloodied or beaten in the enhanced interrogation program that I supervised from 2002 to 2007.
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 3 Next »
We actually to do MEAN STUFF to TERRORISTS?!?!? Worse than tickling their feet with a feather or dumping ice water over their heads?
Oh noooooooooo! We’re just like the not-zees!!!
Liberal fool to the white courtesy phone, reality is calling…Mr.Fool to the white courtesy phone…
MelonCollie on January 4, 2013 at 8:58 AM
How do you like them apples?
thebrokenrattle on January 4, 2013 at 9:01 AM
“enhanced interrogation” … Newspeak
enhanced interrogation = torture
Dante on January 4, 2013 at 9:09 AM
In your worldview, where does the line between interrogation end and torture begin?
thebrokenrattle on January 4, 2013 at 9:21 AM
Ever been waterboarded, Dante? I have. It’s not torture.
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 9:27 AM
Enhanced Interrogation of non-citizen POW’s (with active connections to their cells) with declared malicious intent to do harm to US citizens and property. Exactly how do you plan to defend that?
nobar on January 4, 2013 at 9:33 AM
Discussing anything with Dante is torture.
gwelf on January 4, 2013 at 9:45 AM
Excellent question.
Dante probably thinks that playing bad music is torture. Dante probably thinks that denying a detainee 8 hours of sleep is torture. Dante probably thinks that making a detainee uncomfortable around an attractive woman is torture. Dante probably thinks that years of incarceration is torture.
While I might disagree with certain enhanced Interrogation tactics used by the US, they most certainly are NOT torture. But Dante isn’t smart enough to understand anything that isn’t spoon fed to him by his anarchist/isolationist websites.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 9:49 AM
Torture has been debated for years and I really don’t see how any of the enhanced techniques are torture. They are so orchestrated and thought out with careful safety procedures in place. These terrorists have received far better treatment than any prisoner in the history of warfare.
The fact is it worked and nobody can deny that. Hollywood will depict things in a sensationalized manner or a movie is boring, but the film does make the important statement that the enhanced interrogation techniques were highly successful as multiple first hand accounts have already attested.
Ellis on January 4, 2013 at 10:06 AM
Lots of people who have been waterboarded disagree…
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 10:12 AM
They are wrong.
Besides, many people that have been incarcerated for years probably think that it’s torture. Do you agree with them? Is long term incarceration torture?
blink on January 4, 2013 at 10:16 AM
And I can just as easily say that Washington Nearsider is wrong. See how easy that is.
However, you know who knows a thing or two about torture? John McCain knows a thing or two about torture. More than you or I would ever want to know.
He thinks waterboarding is torture. I’ll defer to his expertise on that one.
As far as incarceration, generally I don’t think it is torture. However, extended periods of isolation may well border on torture, as would incarceration designed to eliminate sensory perception (being incarcerated in a “silent room”). If incarceration is designed to bring on insanity… yeah, it’s torture.
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t EIT also foil a terrorist plot in Los Angeles?
visions on January 4, 2013 at 10:32 AM
Because I “write” for the Washington ComPost.
And I would rather be waterboarded myself than admit that the War Crimes that Election Thief Chimpy Bush used worked.
H
Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2013 at 10:33 AM
“I don’t believe the Judge!”
Only “torture” here? Your posts.
Oh, and what did you get Cindy Sheehan for New Year’s Eve? Bet it was something real nice!
Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2013 at 10:35 AM
I readily concede that different people have different definitions of torture. Fortunately, foreseeing precisely this difficulty, the Geneva Conventions define it for international purposes.
“Severe” will be the word upon which our disagreement hinges. I don’t believe scaring the hell out of a person is severe mental suffering.
Additionally, waterboarding has been found to be legal. That means – by definition – any suffering arising from it is not defined as torture.
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 10:47 AM
And you would be wrong to say that he’s wrong.
OK, so you don’t think that a 20 year prison sentence is torture.
So, if I offered 100 people with 20 years left on their prison sentence the option of being waterboarded and then instantly released, I would bet that at least 90 of them would take the deal.
That means that your definition of torture is meaningless. Congratulations.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 10:52 AM
He thinks that waterboarding is something that the US shouldn’t do to detainees, and I actually agree with him about that. But waterboarding certainly isn’t torture – unless your definition of torture is useless – like yours is.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 10:53 AM
Would you say the same of mock executions?
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 10:54 AM
No. He thinks waterboarding is torture. Here’s the proof that you are eithewr horribly misinformed, or a bald-faced liar
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 10:56 AM
I’d be willing to bet you could say the same about chopping off one of their fingers.
So, by your “logic”, chopping off fingers isn’t torture.
Once again, you’re pathetic…
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 11:01 AM
Eliciting an emotional response is not torture. Fear is an emotion.
Firing a weapon next to someone’s head will cause hearing damage, and on those grounds I would oppose it, but in the spirit in which you’ve asked the question – Yes. I would say the same of mock executions.
When I was waterboarded, I peed myself and sobbed for an hour or two afterwards. It was the single most terrifying thing I’ve ever experienced, and that’s saying something. The thing is though, the fear wore off, I got cleaned up, got myself together, and life went on. I didn’t have a power drill driven through my shoulder, I didn’t watch my daughter being raped, I didn’t witness my children being lowered feet-first into a wood chipper.
Scaring someone is not torture. Jumping out from behind a corner and yelling ‘boo’ is designed to instill fear. So is waterboarding. They are on different levels, but the concept is identical. Neither is torture.
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 11:01 AM
Fair enough. At least you are consistent.
I wonder how the Depts of Justice and Defense view that…
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 11:05 AM
I’m neither. I didn’t claim that McCain didn’t say that he thought that waterboarding was torture.
Apparently, you have below average reading comprehension skills.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:14 AM
First, I guarantee that you couldn’t say the “same” about chopping off one of their fingers.
Second, even if you could, it still does damage to your definition of torture.
It’s mind blowing to me that you have no problem incarcerating someone for 20 years.
You’re pathetic.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:16 AM
You tried pulling a fast one, and got called out.
John McCain, a man with infinitely more room to speak on torture than you, thinks it’s torture. We’ve tried Japanese officers for war crimes for, among other charges, implementing waterboarding.
So far, the evidence is that waterboarding is considered torture by the US Government.
Or at least it was in the past…
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Wow, you really are stupid.
Just because something is considered illegal, doesn’t mean that it’s torture.
There are many things that are illegal with respect to prisoner treatment. That doesn’t make them all torture.
Mock executions are considered an illegal, “form of coercion…” They are not considered torture.
Obviously, you are too clueless to debate this accurately.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:27 AM
Mock executions were not specifically mentioned in the DoJ memos authorizing waterboarding, though they are defined as torture by Geneva.
The CIA apparently staged a single mock execution, and I wouldn’t oppose trial for that.
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 11:27 AM
I’m wrong – they’re defined as ‘coercion’ by Geneva, not torture.
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM
I didn’t try pulling a fast one. You’re just so slow that anything I write seems fast.
You tried pulling a fast one, and got called out.
No, it was deemed illegal. Are you trying to pull a fast one?
Again, I agree with McCain that waterboarding isn’t something that the US should engage in, but that doesn’t make it torture.
It’s hilarious that you have difficulty comprehending this.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 11:31 AM
Except that if a nation is allowed to execute someone, then they should be allowed to cease such execution at any moment – even the very last moment. That shouldn’t be considered illegal. So, under certain circumstances, mock executions could be considered legal.
Legitimate POWs can’t be executed, so this obviously wouldn’t apply to them.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:34 AM
Quote please.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:35 AM
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 11:35 AM
The moment it moves from interrogation to force.
Dante on January 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM
It’s slippery, but I can buy it. It sounds very lawyer-y, but I accept the premise.
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 11:37 AM
So the ends justify the means?
Dante on January 4, 2013 at 11:37 AM
Interrogation – by definition – is forcing someone to tell you something they don’t want to.
Fail.
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 11:37 AM
Apparently, JohnGalt23 thinks that any illegal treatment of a prison constitutes torture.
He probably thinks that it’s torture for an enlisted man to take the prisoner’s identification card or money without an officer’s approval.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:37 AM
No, but don’t try claiming something stupid – like that it doesn’t work.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:38 AM
LOL. Don’t you find that somewhat amusing that the State gets to decide what the State can do? Of course it’s going to contort itself into justifying it.
Dante on January 4, 2013 at 11:40 AM
From the UN Convention on Torture, Article I (torture defined):
Thus 20 years imprisonment, as resulting from legal sanctions, is not torture.
Waterboarding and mock executions are not legal sanctions, and therefore torture.
QED
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2013 at 11:40 AM
So, it’s torture to “force” someone into a prison cell? By your definition prison guards across this country are torturing prisoners every day.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:41 AM
You sure like straw men and putting words in people’s mouths. I’m sure torture works. That doesn’t make it ok.
Dante on January 4, 2013 at 11:41 AM
Wait. Are you actually claiming that mock executions ARE torture?
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:42 AM
I think Galt finds the idea of physical force used on helpless detainees abhorrent. I can’t find fault with that – I’d certainly prefer NOT to use force, whether armed combat, waterboarding or fist fights.
The thing is though, what is at issue here is our survival. I’m willing to apply force to ensure it.
Washington Nearsider on January 4, 2013 at 11:42 AM
That’s a stretch. Interrogation is questioning, it is not force.
Dante on January 4, 2013 at 11:43 AM
Stop being so clueless. Plenty of people claim that it doesn’t work. Ellis’ statement was addressing this.
First, I agree with you about this.
Second, just because it’s NOT ok, doesn’t make it torture.
blink on January 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM
Torture or no torture. I don’t care. Does it work? The answer seems to be yes. Thats it. These are terrorists, not rude salespeople.
tommy71 on January 4, 2013 at 11:45 AM
You must suffer from short-term memory loss. I was responding to your post and your words, not the posts and words of “plenty of people.”
Your intellectual dishonesty is incurable.
Dante on January 4, 2013 at 11:46 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »