Osama Bin Laden is Dead!!!

[Aliantha]

I got a video about possible rail attacks on the anniversary of 9/11. Not sure if that's what you were directing me to.

[Trilby]

Ditto RE: DanaC RE: Well said, Uday.

I think Bob Dylan said "Ya gotta serve somebody..."

[piercehawkeye45]

I don't see how that is a valid point dmg? Here is a good article that I feel lays down some very good points against torture.

In fact, the information about the existence of a courier working for bin Laden was provided by several detainees, not just waterboarded al Qaeda operatives Kalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Faraj al-Libi -- we had one detainee in Iraq who provided information about a courier in 2006. The key pieces of information, however, were the courier's real name and location. His family name was first uncovered by CIA assets in Pakistan through other sources. The NSA subsequently figured out his full real name and location from an intercepted phone call. Waterboarding had nothing to do with it.

........

Understanding these cultural nuances is just one critical skill interrogators must have to be effective. The other is an understanding of the social science behind interrogations, which tells us that torture has an extremely negative effect on memory. An interrogator needs timely and accurate intelligence information, not just made-up babble.

What torture has proven is exactly what experienced interrogators have said all along: First, when tortured, detainees will give only the minimum amount of information necessary to stop the pain. No interrogator should ever be hoping to extract the least amount of information. Second, under coercion, detainees give misleading information that wastes time and resources -- a false nickname, for example. Finally, it's impossible to know what information the detainee would have disclosed under non-coercive interrogations.

.....

the fact that torture handed al Qaeda its No. 1 recruiting tool, a fact confirmed by the U.S. Department of Defense's interrogators in Iraq who questioned foreign fighters about why they had come there to fight. (I have first-hand knowledge of this information because I oversaw many of these interrogations and was briefed on the aggregate results.) In addition, future detainees will be unwilling to cooperate from the onset of an interrogation because they view all Americans as torturers. I heard this repeatedly in Iraq, where some detainees accused us of being the same as the guards at Abu Ghraib.

The more you think about, the less sense torture makes. U.S. allies will become unwilling to conduct joint operations if they are concerned about how detainees will be treated in U.S. custody (an argument made by the 9/11 Commission, among others). And future enemies will use our actions as justification to torture American captives. Torture also lowers our ethical standards to those of our enemies, an ugly shift that spreads like a virus throughout the Armed Services; witness the abuses of Abu Ghraib or the recent murders of civilians in Afghanistan.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...logic?page=0,0

[DanaC]

There is a wealth of evidence to suggest that torture is the least effective way of gathering information. The information gathered under toture is the minimum needed to stop the pain; the informant is not clear headed and therefore the information is prone to inaccuracy; prisoners who believe themselves beloved of God become more entrenched and unwilling.

'Enhanced interrogation' has been used in some instances, but the useful information gathered from prisoners has generally been through theuse of ordinary interrogation techniques. Added to that there are several prominent cases of individuals who have been subjected to normal interrogation techniques actually changing their minds and begun to work for their captors, against their former groups. Several such figures have become active in the fight against extremism within universities and the like, performing outreach with youths who are believed to be vulnerable to extremist propoganda.

Now, there may be odd cases where information given up during waterboarding or sleep deprivation turns out to be genuine and useful. But there is no way to know whether they'd have given more information through ordinary techniques. There is good evidence however to suggest that clever interrogators get more and better information than brutal interrogators.

So, whilst waterboarding may well get you a name, a long and well-crafted standard interrogation may well get you more. And has the added benefit of possibly breaking through the brainwashing and turning one of them. Then you really do have a useful informant.

Quite aside from the moral dimension, it is the least effective way of information gathering.

[sexobon]

Originally posted by General Stall

Words are the weapons of women folk.

Designer drugs are the way to go: better informants through modern chemistry!

[DanaC]

*coughs*Staal*coughs*

[infinite monkey]

Wait...what? Bin Laden is dead? When the hell did this happen?

[DanaC]

The Sontarans got him.

[infinite monkey]

The who?

[DanaC]

No, the Sontarans.


(sorry. Couldn't help that pun. They're a villain in Who)

[infinite monkey]

I can't resist puns. When I googled Sonatrans I saw it was a Dr Who thing...hence my "the who?"

[Big Sarge]

Originally Posted by infinite monkey

I can't resist puns. When I googled Sonatrans I saw it was a Dr Who thing...hence my "the who?"

Dr Who? Isn't he a Dr Seuss character? I read "Horton Hears a Who" to Addie recently

[DanaC]

ahhhhh


You outpunned me.


I feel I have shamed my nation.

[infinite monkey]

It's not your fault. My mom got me this book when I was in HS.

[DanaC]

Ahahahah. Ok. Well, I have no such formal punning in my edumacation. Unless you count being in a British school as such.