Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
This article wasn't approved by the admins, so it would normally only be available to TotalFark subscribers. However, this link is so good that we're letting you see it. Posting new comments is still only available to TotalFark subscribers.

If you are a paid TotalFark subscriber, you must have cookies enabled in your browser. You can reset your cookie by logging in.

(Newsweek)   "I've kept my mouth shut long enough" says FBI interrogator who got Abu Zubaydah to talk   (newsweek.com) divider line
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

300 clicks;  Favorite

52 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2009-04-26 5:30:22 PM  
good read.
 
2009-04-26 5:49:13 PM  
Just shows you they ARE STILL LYING. Seriously, we are the USA: no farking torture.
I don't farking care who you are, from the president to the guy who filled the water buckets. If you are a US Citizen, YOU KNEW BETTER THAN TO TORTURE. If you went ahead and 'followed orders', well, tuff shiat. Do your time and be happy if we don't have you shot or hung.

And seriously, this ain't over til some people are 'shot or hung'. If we don't do it ourselves, the international community is compelled to step up to bat. And when a majority of Americans are willing to back these foreign powers in doing what is right, this is gonna get a whole lot worse before it gets better if we don't clean up our own mess..
 
2009-04-26 5:50:15 PM  
Jack Bauer laughed.
 
2009-04-26 6:04:03 PM  

Axias: Just shows you they ARE STILL LYING. Seriously, we are the USA: no farking torture.
I don't farking care who you are, from the president to the guy who filled the water buckets. If you are a US Citizen, YOU KNEW BETTER THAN TO TORTURE. If you went ahead and 'followed orders', well, tuff shiat. Do your time and be happy if we don't have you shot or hung.

And seriously, this ain't over til some people are 'shot or hung'. If we don't do it ourselves, the international community is compelled to step up to bat. And when a majority of Americans are willing to back these foreign powers in doing what is right, this is gonna get a whole lot worse before it gets better if we don't clean up our own mess..


i235.photobucket.comView Full Size


i235.photobucket.comView Full Size
 
2009-04-26 6:08:56 PM  
Soufan could quote Qur'anic passages to radical jihadist prisoners, challenging them about the meaning of the prophet's words and ultimately gaining enough trust to engage them in extended conversations about their lives.

Yeah, but, c'mon...torture is so much more fun!!
 
2009-04-26 6:09:23 PM  
And that's how you gather intel.

Good article. I hope a lot of people read it.
 
2009-04-26 6:16:07 PM  
Excellent article. I hope people will take the time to read it.

+1
 
2009-04-26 6:16:45 PM  
It was a good article, but I kinda would have preferred a play by play, as opposed to the narrative they presented.
 
2009-04-26 6:26:59 PM  

TheDumbBlonde: Jack Bauer laughed.


Jack Bauer is a fictional television character. Change your status on gmail and I'll send you a picture of my first grandchild.
 
2009-04-26 6:32:21 PM  
All this does is depress me because Republicans feel the need to defend this and Democrats feel the need to rub this in their faces, and nothing will be done about it, setting the precedent. Doing nothing means this WILL happen again.
 
2009-04-26 6:32:26 PM  

Obdicut: And that's how you gather intel.

Good article. I hope a lot of people read it.


I read it. Impressive how he was able to get info from prisoners. However, if we get the info to prevent another attack, I don't care if it was done politely or not. And, it was already shown in the memos that were released that torture helped get information to prevent a "2nd wave" attack on Los Angeles. We definitely needed more people like this guy but he's only one guy, remember at 9/11 there wasn't a single person in counter-terrorism who spoke an Arabic language.
 
2009-04-26 6:36:42 PM  

Doublek111: I read it. Impressive how he was able to get info from prisoners. However, if we get the info to prevent another attack, I don't care if it was done politely or not.


You didn't understand it, then.

Doublek111: We definitely needed more people like this guy but he's only one guy, remember at 9/11 there wasn't a single person in counter-terrorism who spoke an Arabic language.


So the response is obviously to start torturing the shiat out of people.


Read it again. And then think, "If I want to get accurate, good intel out of prisoners, what interrogation method should I use?"
 
2009-04-26 6:40:30 PM  
But, but, the Repubs said that you can't get information without torture, that conventional interrogation doesn't work.
 
2009-04-26 6:47:02 PM  

Obdicut: Doublek111: I read it. Impressive how he was able to get info from prisoners. However, if we get the info to prevent another attack, I don't care if it was done politely or not.

You didn't understand it, then.

Doublek111: We definitely needed more people like this guy but he's only one guy, remember at 9/11 there wasn't a single person in counter-terrorism who spoke an Arabic language.

So the response is obviously to start torturing the shiat out of people.


Read it again. And then think, "If I want to get accurate, good intel out of prisoners, what interrogation method should I use?"


Dear San Francisco liberal: Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they didn't get it.

I guess I could post again that the memos that The One himself released showed that the U.S. stopped an attack on Los Angeles, called the Second Wave", after 9/11 with the use of torture. You can ignore that and then ask me again to re-read the article and tell me I don't get it. rinse and repeat 10 times and you have a Fark thread.

What you need to ask yourself is, if your premise is incorrect, would you approve of torture. That is, if we DID get accurate, good intel from torture, you'd be in favor right? So I would encourage you to read the torture memos themselves. The language is in there about stopped the 2nd wave. If you don't believe the cherry-picked memos that Obama released but you do believe this guy, well then I can't help you.

The nice thing is, I don't live in a big city like you that is susceptible to the next attack. You do. Between the 2 of us, you are the one who most wants accurate, good intel.
 
2009-04-26 6:51:11 PM  

MorrisBird: TheDumbBlonde: Jack Bauer laughed.

Jack Bauer is a fictional television character. Change your status on gmail and I'll send you a picture of my first grandchild.


I read the second sentence in an angry, threatening mental voice and it was just really funny.
 
2009-04-26 6:53:56 PM  

Cake Hunter: MorrisBird: Change your status on gmail and I'll send you a picture of my first grandchild.

I read the second sentence in an angry, threatening mental voice and it was just really funny.


That's funny. Just how hideous IS the grandkid?
 
2009-04-26 6:54:06 PM  

Doublek111: Dear San Francisco liberal: Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they didn't get it.


By San Francisco standards I'm a conservative.

Doublek111: I guess I could post again that the memos that The One himself released showed that the U.S. stopped an attack on Los Angeles, called the Second Wave", after 9/11 with the use of torture. You can ignore that and then ask me again to re-read the article and tell me I don't get it. rinse and repeat 10 times and you have a Fark thread.


No, you didn't understand what I meant. Without even engaging with the specifics of the Los Angeles attack-- which I know nothing about, but do find it bracing that you are so upbeat about us using torture to get that intel; so many people around here have been trying to dance around and say 'it's not really torture-- I can ask again:

"If I want to get accurate, good intel out of prisoners, what interrogation method should I use?"

Also known as: "Just 'cuz you were able to defeat the killbots by sending wave after wave of your own men until their kill quotas were complete, does not mean that was the best, or even a good, tactic to use."


Doublek111: The nice thing is, I don't live in a big city like you that is susceptible to the next attack. You do. Between the 2 of us, you are the one who most wants accurate, good intel.


Exactly.
 
2009-04-26 7:13:40 PM  

Axias: Seriously, we are the USA: no farking torture...And seriously, this ain't over til some people are 'shot or hung'. If we don't do it ourselves, the international community is compelled to step up to bat.


Proof: People like you think torture is wrong, because you're forgetting all about what people did get to get tortured. The "shot or hung" thing is not only alright in your world, but mandatory, because of what those people did...which demonstrates you believe in consequences to actions. And yet "torture" is wrong. Shootin'-n-hangin' is required.

I really don't know how people like you get dressed in the morning and start walking around. Seriously.
 
2009-04-26 7:13:58 PM  

Obdicut: Doublek111: Dear San Francisco liberal: Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they didn't get it.

By San Francisco standards I'm a conservative.


That still leaves a lot of room for error ;)

You mistake my tone for upbeat about torture. I am upbeat about success. I don't really care how we get the information from prisoners. If torture works, fine, if it doesn't, fine. most students of history know that war is about winning, you write te textbooks later.

the cia says it worked:
Link (new window)

obama's memos showed it worked:
According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack - which KSM called the "Second Wave"- planned " 'to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into' a building in Los Angeles."

Obama's National Intelligence Director says it worked:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html

The issue isn't does torture work, it clearly does-- not always, and the newsweek guy is clearly skilled without torture methods. However, the debate is do we want to use an effective method of getting information to stop attacks on this country. My answer is yes.
 
2009-04-26 7:16:34 PM  

Doublek111: The issue isn't does torture work, it clearly does-- not always, and the newsweek guy is clearly skilled without torture methods. However, the debate is do we want to use an effective method of getting information to stop attacks on this country. My answer is yes.


I'm sorry, could you answer the simple question I'm asking:

"If I want to get accurate, good intel out of prisoners, what interrogation method should I use?"

You appear to be spending most of your time arguing against a position that I'm not holding, which seems like a waste of your energy.
 
2009-04-26 7:18:54 PM  

Doublek111: I guess I could post again that the memos that The One himself released showed that the U.S. stopped an attack on Los Angeles, called the Second Wave", after 9/11 with the use of torture. You can ignore that and then ask me again to re-read the article and tell me I don't get it. rinse and repeat 10 times and you have a Fark thread.


this so called "second wave" as it was called. You do know that it wasn't operational at the time the info was given right?
it was months late info on a plan that had been scuttled or never existed in any meaningful form anyway.

but this is all beside the point. torture is illegal and a couple of neocon lawyers' opinions don't change that.
the thing is there are a lot of people who signed off on this stuff and if it comes out lots of heads will be under the axe.

so here is what is going to happen. The DoJ won't touch it. The congress will hold a circus and then come to the conclusion that we shouldn't do it again. and that will be that.
 
2009-04-26 7:19:19 PM  

Obdicut: I'm sorry,


I'm sorry, but if you read this links I posted and my comments then you will have the answre to your simple question.

This is the part I referred to above where I said that you wouldn't read my responses and would maintain your position. rinse and repeat 8 times more.
 
2009-04-26 7:21:52 PM  

Doublek111: I'm sorry, but if you read this links I posted and my comments then you will have the answre to your simple question.


No, you really haven't answered it. You have asserted that torture worked in order to produce intel. I'm sure you're not asserting that torture is the only intel-gathering method that works-- certainly the article shows otherwise.

So, I'd like to ask you, if I want to get good, accurate intel out of prisoners, what interrogation method should I use?
 
2009-04-26 7:23:37 PM  

vygramul: Cake Hunter: MorrisBird: Change your status on gmail and I'll send you a picture of my first grandchild.

I read the second sentence in an angry, threatening mental voice and it was just really funny.

That's funny. Just how hideous IS the grandkid?


Be afraid, be very afraid. He's 7 pounds, ten ounces of kick ass future liberal terror. I just wanted to show him to the Blonde.
 
2009-04-26 7:24:33 PM  

Hobodeluxe: so here is what is going to happen. The DoJ won't touch it. The congress will hold a circus and then come to the conclusion that we shouldn't do it again. and that will be that.


not really. Obama and Hillary will do it if need:

...Barack Obama responded by declaring that we cannot "have the president of the United States state as a matter of policy that there is a loophole or an exception where we would sanction torture." He then shifted, in the very same breath, to state that "there are going to be all sorts of hypotheticals, an emergency situation, and I will make that judgment at that time." In other words, he wants to preserve the very same loophole for which he lambastes President Bush.

Hillary Clinton was seemingly much clearer, declaring that "As a matter of policy, [torture] cannot be American policy, period." But buried in this unequivocal statement is a lawyerly loophole, evident in the carefully constructed caveat, "as a matter of policy." But still, she came close to standing her own previous position on its head. On an earlier occasion, she had held that there were "very rare" instances in which severe interrogation methods might be necessary and that the United States needs "lawful authority" to engage in them in cases involving an "imminent threat to millions of Americans."
 
2009-04-26 7:24:45 PM  

Obdicut: So, I'd like to ask you, if I want to get good, accurate intel out of prisoners, what interrogation method should I use?


It's funny, you keep asking about the best way to dig a hole, and he keeps telling you that, because slaves may have helped build the pyramids, they're a worthwhile solution to the hole digging problem.
 
2009-04-26 7:29:34 PM  

Obdicut: Doublek111: I'm sorry, but if you read this links I posted and my comments then you will have the answre to your simple question.

No, you really haven't answered it. You have asserted that torture worked in order to produce intel. I'm sure you're not asserting that torture is the only intel-gathering method that works-- certainly the article shows otherwise.

So, I'd like to ask you, if I want to get good, accurate intel out of prisoners, what interrogation method should I use?


ok, I will repeat myself. I am for whatever works.

I would happpily start with the guy FTA and let him works his magic. if that didn't work, I would move on to other techniques described in the torture memos. Again, right after 9/11 we didn't have people like this guy, we had a one-pager on Saudi Arabia as a threat. it was a joke. So I ask you, if this guy isn't available or for whatever reason his magic doesn't work on someone, are you willing to use proven effective torture methods?
 
2009-04-26 7:32:02 PM  

Doublek111: ok, I will repeat myself. I am for whatever works.


You keep having to repeat yourself because you're not answering the question being asked. You're instead dodging and answering a question, though related, that was never asked of you.
 
2009-04-26 7:40:14 PM  

puffy999: Obdicut: So, I'd like to ask you, if I want to get good, accurate intel out of prisoners, what interrogation method should I use?

It's funny, you keep asking about the best way to dig a hole, and he keeps telling you that, because slaves may have helped build the pyramids, they're a worthwhile solution to the hole digging problem.


Comparing building a monument to how to best protect our national security. What are you, 15? You better start studying b/c you are going to fail the analogies on the PSATs.
 
2009-04-26 7:44:44 PM  

Doublek111: ok, I will repeat myself. I am for whatever works.


That's completely circular. I'm asking what will work. You're responding "Whatever works will work".


I would happily start with the guy FTA and let him works his magic. if that didn't work, I would move on to other techniques described in the torture memos.


Man, again, it's refreshing to see someone so blithely say he'd go ahead and torture someone, without any foolishness about guilt, innocence, or the rest of that jazz.

Okay, to actually respond: the problem with "didn't work" is that it's entirely subjective. The whole thing about intelligence gathering is you can never be sure what your prisoner actually knows.

So by what method would you determine the prisoner knew more than he was telling, and feel okay with proceeding with torture?

Is the answer to that to torture someone else until they tell you he knows the info? Then you'd be consistent, at least.

The reason old-school dictators use torture indiscriminately is because they don't care, at all, about torturing innocent people. They could give a shiat. They're absolutely fine in torturing the hell out of a bunch of people; so what if the first five rebels don't actually know the location of the base (and weren't even really rebels) the sixth one did.

Torture does not, cannot work unless you're willing to torture innocent people who know nothing about any crimes. Are you?
 
2009-04-26 7:47:39 PM  

Doublek111: Comparing building a monument to how to best protect our national security. What are you, 15? You better start studying b/c you are going to fail the analogies on the PSATs.


Actually, it was a good analogy, though personally I like my killbot analogy better, if only because that way I get to compare you to Zap Brannigan.

You also should avoid begging the question repeatedly, by asserting that the torture is "proven effective". That's kinda the topic under discussion; what does it mean for an interrogation method to be 'effective'? Any method will produce some good, and some bad intel, at some certain cost. Torture doesn't produce 100% good intel-- especially if you're torturing someone who's actually ignorant about the question you're asking him.
 
2009-04-26 7:55:18 PM  

Doublek111:
I would happpily start with the guy FTA and let him works his magic. if that didn't work, I would move on to other techniques described in the torture memos. Again, right after 9/11 we didn't have people like this guy, we had a one-pager on Saudi Arabia as a threat. it was a joke. So I ask you, if this guy isn't available or for whatever reason his magic doesn't work on someone, are you willing to use proven effective torture methods?



These questions aren't directed just at you, but at everyone:

What if it turns out that the prisoner in question didn't actually know anything useful? Or what if it turns out that the prisoner wasn't who we thought he was exactly, and was an underling that hadn't done anything major to warrant his capture? How "guilty" should a prisoner be to warrant these methods?

If you found out that your family was going to be killed and the only way to stop it would be to torture 5 people of which only 1 person knows anything useful (the others are innocent), would you torture them all? What if it was 10 people to 1? 100 to 1?
 
2009-04-26 8:28:25 PM  

Obdicut: Doublek111: ok, I will repeat myself. I am for whatever works.

That's completely circular. I'm asking what will work. You're responding "Whatever works will work".


honestly, dude, you amaze me. truly. you are mis-reading my answer and then are trying to educate me on what I am saying. At least you read that part though, half of my answers you don't read (or, perhaps, don't internalize), which doesn't amaze me, per my post above (no insult intended).

"whatever works" is not equivalent to "whatever works will work". The latter is indeed circular. The former is not, as in whatever works, such as waterboarding, talking, etc. In fact, "whatever works" means keep going UNTIL you find something that works, not that by definition, any single thing works. In fact, after making the statement, whatever works, I went on to explain how if non-torture got the answer then fine and if it didn't I would proceed to other methods. None of which was circular.

also, you asked me a question, which I answered several times. I asked you a question, which you ignored and then proceeded to ask me 5 more questions. Doesn't work that way for me. Let's try on another thread, another time. My guess is that we are doomed to fail again though if your brain thinks that the slave/pyramid to enemy/national security things works. have a good one.
 
2009-04-26 8:28:35 PM  

BigSnatch: If you found out that your family was going to be killed and the only way to stop it would be to torture 5 people of which only 1 person knows anything useful (the others are innocent), would you torture them all? What if it was 10 people to 1? 100 to 1?


img5.allocine.frView Full Size


How bout a thousand?!?
 
2009-04-26 8:40:44 PM  

Doublek111: In fact, after making the statement, whatever works, I went on to explain how if non-torture got the answer then fine and if it didn't I would proceed to other methods. None of which was circular.


Actually, that just revealed the deeper problem with the concept; how do you define 'works'? How can you know that you've gotten all the intelligence?

honestly, dude, you amaze me. truly. you are mis-reading my answer and then are trying to educate me on what I am saying. At least you read that part though, half of my answers you don't read (or, perhaps, don't internalize), which doesn't amaze me, per my post above (no insult intended).

Oh, feel free to insult. I'm insulting you a lot, because I think you deserve it. If you think I deserve insults-- and you do, since you're insulting me a lot-- feel free. However, I don't think any insult I lay on you can be nearly as bad as your condemnation of yourself.


Is there some reason you're not understanding the problems of:

A) How do you know what intel the prisoner has in the first place? How do you know you 'should' torture them?

B) How do you know, even if you know they know 'something', that they've told you everything they know-- that the interrogation has 'worked'?

Both of these questions are necessary to address your statement "I am for whatever works."
 
2009-04-26 8:44:12 PM  

BigSnatch: If you found out that your family was going to be killed and the only way to stop it would be to torture 5 people of which only 1 person knows anything useful (the others are innocent), would you torture them all? What if it was 10 people to 1? 100 to 1?


You cannot torture anyone to save anyone, unless you are willing to be tried and convicted for torture. In other words, if you choose to sacrifice yourself, and bear the moral and legal consequences of doing a horrific thing, then you might decide it was a good choice for you. This choice is only meaningful if you cannot escape punishment.

However, America must never legally permit torture, because torture is precisely contrary to American values. To torture is to cease to be America, and as a result to torture is to sacrifice the very thing you're claiming to want to protect.

A hero is not a person who throws their values away to protect anything; a hero is a person who throws away themselves to protect others and their values.

It doesn't matter how many people you save: if you torture someone, you're a monster. There's no calculus of exchange; torture is wrong, period. Human lives aren't utilitarian goods to be exchanged.
 
2009-04-26 8:48:52 PM  
To be clear: being a moral person, being a good American, being a good human being...these things have nothing to do with what is do to you or your people. The only thing is what you choose to do.

No matter how you are treated, the only way to be a good person is to be good to others. The only way to be a moral person is to be moral to others.

No matter how many Americans are tortured, murdered, etc., the only way for us to be moral as a culture is to not violate our morals. We must never torture. Period. No matter what.
 
2009-04-26 9:10:45 PM  
This thread could go on for a thousand replies and it wont get any better than what has been put forth by mattharvest
 
2009-04-26 9:14:38 PM  

Litterbox: This thread could go on for a thousand replies and it wont get any better than what has been put forth by mattharvest


I am in full agreement with your statement and will respond thusly, this.
 
2009-04-26 9:17:34 PM  

Litterbox: This thread could go on for a thousand replies and it wont get any better than what has been put forth by mattharvest


Agreed. Makes my posts look like so much frippery.
 
2009-04-26 9:19:32 PM  

Obdicut: Agreed. Makes my posts look like so much frippery.


As usual, he is 100% correct.
 
2009-04-26 10:09:35 PM  
Good link, but we already ran it: 4346276
 
2009-04-27 12:40:48 AM  

Doublek111: Comparing building a monument to how to best protect our national security. What are you, 15? You better start studying b/c you are going to fail the analogies on the PSATs.


It's actually much easier to build a monument than it is to protect our national security.

However, there are predictable, tried-and-true methods to build a monument. Unlike what your dumb ass believes, there arE NOT clear, tried-and-true methods to protect our national security. In fact, torture is more likely to lead to false information than factual information.
 
2009-04-27 12:47:43 AM  
And regarding what was "stopped"... hey, anyone can say anything. I can say that the rock in my yard has kept tigers away, as I see no tigers near my home. It would be factually accurate, but intellectually dubious, at best. Sort-of like suggesting torture is a viable method of gathering information for national security.

I mean, you could shiat on someone and get them to confess to something. That does not mean that shiatting on someone is a proper method to obtain information in most cases. Usually, it will not work, or it will just provide you with worthless/false information, just so you'll stop sh*tting all over the person making the confession.
 
2009-04-27 12:55:09 AM  
And to clarify my earlier comment... the methods used to construct large buildings may have quite a number of variables, but the approach is generally the same. And the results are generally accurate, as we can pretty well approximate worst-case scenarios, average gravitational forces, and the like. This is because we use real-world testing, and we use mathematics (which, arguably, have no bias).

Approaching an enemy combatant (or whatever you call them these days) with the idea that you may have to torture them, and that they absolutely MUST know something... well, you're going to get biased results. That's why double-blind experiments are a good thing when dealing with any human testing.

Of course, sadly, there are millions of people in this nation (and billions worldwide) that would rather believe a biased source than a well-done statistical study.
 
2009-04-27 12:57:10 AM  
puffy999 [TotalFark]

I, would like to buy, your rock.
 
2009-04-27 1:01:29 AM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: puffy999 [TotalFark]

I, would like to buy, your rock.


You don't understand, it's protecting me from the terrorist Tigers.\

/those Sri Lankan guys
 
2009-04-27 1:18:34 AM  

puffy999: Uchiha_Cycliste: puffy999 [TotalFark]

I, would like to buy, your rock.

You don't understand, it's protecting me from the terrorist Tigers.\

/those Sri Lankan guys


damnit.
 
2009-04-27 1:21:08 AM  
btw, I agree with pretty much everything else you said.
Still want your rock. I guess I need a lion rock though,
for mountain lions. You got one of those?
 
2009-04-27 5:43:27 AM  
can't believe this excellent article gets a redlight and any piece of crap article about Obama and the latest outrage over what he had for dinner gets the green.
 
Displayed 50 of 52 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.