CIA boss John Brennan defends post-9/11 strategy

[webfact]

CIA boss John Brennan defends post-9/11 strategy

WASHINGTON: -- CIA Director John Brennan has defended the agency's post-9/11 interrogation methods but admitted some techniques were "harsh" and "abhorrent".

Speaking at CIA headquarters, he said some officers acted beyond their authority but most did their duty.

A scathing Senate report two days earlier said "brutal" methods like waterboarding were ineffective.

But Mr Brennan asserted the CIA "did a lot of things right" at a time when there were "no easy answers".

"Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation programme produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives," Brennan told a rare CIA news conference in Virginia.

But we have not concluded that it was the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" (EITs) within that programme that allowed us to obtain useful information from detainees who were subjected to them, he added.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30437804


-- BBC 2014-12-12

[Ulysses G.]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[ezzra]

The hypocrisy of those bleeding hearts liberals and goody two shoes Arab's ass kissing people

who love to go to bed at night safe and snug and trust the gate keepers to keep the bad people

out, but will not hesitate for a moment to throw the same people under the bus for their political agenda...

and that Obama guy is the leader of the pack...

Edited December 12, 2014 by ezzra

[Ulysses G.]

Indeed. The Head Hypocrite.

[Mr Yim]

You reap what you sow.

[LawrenceChee]

Some things should stay as a secret and better served in the background

....guess in this the Chinese communists have an advantage

[Ulysses G.]

Some things should stay as a secret and better served in the background

Especially when it comes to spy agencies.

[zydeco]

It would have been better had Brennan not held this press conference. His performance was terrible--stuttering, stammering, gasping, while hiding behind weasel words. Far better had he come out sounding like a leader rather than a first year law student. Not to mention the couple of times I saw him with the deer in the headlights look.

[BadBouy]

My guess, Brennan will be resigning shortly and we will be told what a wonderful job he was doing. Funny how many resignations there are from people doing a wonderful job but if you screw things up or get caught cheating you get a promotion.

[anon467367354]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

Interesting that people still perpetuate the Bin Laden getting caught story.

All the newspapers in Pakistan and the region reported back in Dec 2001 when Bin Laden died.

When Benazir Bhutto publicly stated that "Bin Laden has been dead for 5 years, everyone knows that",

they had her assassinated just two weeks later.

There is no reason for torture ever, nothing justifies it nor what the US has done that led up to them

trying to justify them doing it.

Torture is not just something that happens and then it's over, back to life as normal. It actually reprograms

the brain and the lasting results are far more damaging then PTSD.

Shame to anyone justifying this type of behavior, I would have liked to have thought "we" were better than that.

[LawrenceChee]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

Interesting that people still perpetuate the Bin Laden getting caught story.

All the newspapers in Pakistan and the region reported back in Dec 2001 when Bin Laden died.

When Benazir Bhutto publicly stated that "Bin Laden has been dead for 5 years, everyone knows that",

they had her assassinated just two weeks later.

There is no reason for torture ever, nothing justifies it nor what the US has done that led up to them

trying to justify them doing it.

Torture is not just something that happens and then it's over, back to life as normal. It actually reprograms

the brain and the lasting results are far more damaging then PTSD.

Shame to anyone justifying this type of behavior, I would have liked to have thought "we" were better than that.

I would think being a leader means making hard choices at times

Whether it's at the corporate level or a country ...I believe there is some information that is best kept secret and way from the masses

If you discount the amount of threats stopped in a month ...most citizens would be hyperventilating ...and I am talking about the Chinese here and not the USA

For the peace of mind and the normal pace of life ...let's keep the spy agencies work secret ...some will be wrong and mistakes will be made but in the grand scheme of things the masses are protected ...

For those who want perfection and openness in everything ...get a grip of life and move on ...the reality is it's not possible.

Edited December 12, 2014 by LawrenceChee

[Ulysses G.]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

Interesting that people still perpetuate the Bin Laden getting caught story.

So you believe that Bin Ladin was dead 10 years before he was killed by the Navy Seals. Is there any reason why we should take anything else you have to say on the subject seriously?

Edited December 12, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[anon467367354]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

Interesting that people still perpetuate the Bin Laden getting caught story.

So you believe that Bin Ladin was dead 10 years before he was killed by the Navy Seals. Is there any reason why we should take anything else you have to say on the subject seriously?

Don't take anything I say seriously, go look it up for yourself, it's public information.

Unfortunately most of the seals involved have been killed, so we can't ask them.

[Ulysses G.]

You mean, other than the Seal who actually pulled the trigger.

[LawrenceChee]

I am sure there are skeptics who still think Osama, Saddam and Michael Jackson are alive and all dancing nightly at some underground club in Afghanistan.

[Morch]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

Well, reading the second paragraph, it would seem that the CIA director is somewhat less decisive regarding this point:

"Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation programme produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives," Brennan told a rare CIA news conference in Virginia.

But we have not concluded that it was the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" (EITs) within that programme that allowed us to obtain useful information from detainees who were subjected to them, he added.

[lil fluffy clouds]

You mean, other than the Seal who actually pulled the trigger.

What trigger?

You talk like you were present....

[lil fluffy clouds]

"Post 9/11 strategy" or just 9/11 strategy?

[Thai at Heart]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

The obvious problem is sorting the wheat from the chaff of information gleaned this way, but I side with the idea that overall, it provided a lot of information, some useful some not.

But that can be the case for information gained withhout duress.

[Ulysses G.]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

Well, reading the second paragraph, it would seem that the CIA director is somewhat less decisive regarding this point:

"Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation programme produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives," Brennan told a rare CIA news conference in Virginia.

But we have not concluded that it was the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" (EITs) within that programme that allowed us to obtain useful information from detainees who were subjected to them, he added.

Other CIA directors were more positive about the results of the program and dismisssive of the partisan report.

What is wrong with the committee’s report?

First, its claim that the CIA’s interrogation program was ineffective in producing intelligence that helped us disrupt, capture, or kill terrorists is just not accurate. The program was invaluable in three critical ways:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/cia-interrogations-saved-lives-1418142644

[Morch]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

Well, reading the second paragraph, it would seem that the CIA director is somewhat less decisive regarding this point:

"Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation programme produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives," Brennan told a rare CIA news conference in Virginia.

But we have not concluded that it was the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" (EITs) within that programme that allowed us to obtain useful information from detainees who were subjected to them, he added.

Other CIA directors were more positive about the results of the program and dismisssive of the partisan report.

What is wrong with the committee’s report?

First, its claim that the CIA’s interrogation program was ineffective in producing intelligence that helped us disrupt, capture, or kill terrorists is just not accurate. The program was invaluable in three critical ways:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/cia-interrogations-saved-lives-1418142644

I do not subscribe to the position that torture (why beat around the Bush?) cannot produce valuable information.

I do recognize that here are both moral issues in applying such measures, and that the information's reliability is suspect.

Simply noted that CIA director was expressing a more ambiguous view than presented in your post.

His statement could reflect political pressures, or be seen as handling of the media, or as protecting his own backside, etc.

It could also represent different realities, lessons learned over time, or the man's professional take,

[Ulysses G.]

May 2, 2011 is over a decade ago. Who knew?

[rondii]

Of COURSE enhanced interrogations produced successful results. They led to Bin Ladin being caught. Trying to pretend otherwise is idiotic. The only real argument is whether it is ethical to torture terrorist murderers to prevent more attacks on innocent civilians.

What utter garbage. It's well documented, hence the Directors careful words, that enhanced torture techniques did not provide good information, in fact the opposite. It's also documented that many of the tortured detainees were innocent, not murdering terrorists.

[CALSinCM]

In post-WWII tribunials detailing war crimes, some 'enhanced interrogation' techniques similar to those used on prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, were considered war crimes. Unlike the US, where only the lower echelon soldiers were convicted of crimes at prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan (no officers or government officials were indicted), upper level military and government officials were brought to trial for similar methods of interrogation used during that war. Compare and contrast history. However, to the victor goes the spoils, and the ability to indict the vanquished, and the ability to write the history books. Just saying.

Below is an excerpt from The Atlantic:

Here's a document from Norway's 1948 war-crimes trials detailing the prosecution of Nazis convicted of "enhanced interrogation techniques" in the Second World War. Money quote from the cases of three Germans convicted of war crimes for "enhanced interrogation":

• Between 1942 and 1945, Bruns used the method of "verschärfte Vernehmung*"on 11 Norwegian citizens. This method involved the use of various implements of torture, cold baths and blows and kicks in the face and all over the body. Most of the prisoners suffered for a considerable time from the injuries received during those interrogations.

• Between 1942 and 1945, Schubert gave 14 Norwegian prisoners "verschärfte Vernehmung," using various instruments of torture and hitting them in the face and over the body. Many of the prisoners suffered for a considerable time from the effects of injuries they received.

• On 1st February, 1945, Clemens shot a second Norwegian prisoner from a distance of 1.5 metres while he was trying to escape. Between 1943 and 1945, Clemens employed the method of " verschäfte Vernehmung " on 23 Norwegian prisoners. He used various instruments of torture and cold baths. Some of the prisoners continued for a considerable time to suffer from injuries received at his hands.¹

* "verschärfte Vernehmung" - From the Gestapo's interrogation manual translated as 'sharpened interrogation'.

¹The Atlantic, "Verschärfte Vernehmung", The Daily Dish, May 29 2007 (quoted material in italics above)

[NeverSure]

-snip-

Unlike the US, where only the lower echelon soldiers were convicted of crimes at prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan (no officers or government officials were indicted)

Saddam Hussein was tried and hanged.

Try again.

[connda]

-snip-

Unlike the US, where only the lower echelon soldiers were convicted of crimes at prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan (no officers or government officials were indicted)

Saddam Hussein was tried and hanged.

Try again.

[Choctastic]

Keyboard warriors are ever willing to support henious crimes and the false claims used to justify them. Our own troops and civilians, at risk of capture, now have to face retaliation from an Islamic world enraged. I don't think torture is designed to elicit information at all. Like Operation Phoenix in Vietnam, torture is part of terrorizing the local population.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.

[puck2]

What a pity that Mrs. Feinstein had the duty and the responsability to write this awful CIA report - instead of being fabricated by the well know TV- US-ultra-nationalists. Then the CIA boss didn't have to defend the excuses, lies and cruelities.

For the ultra nationalists and the CIA it seems to be impossible to accept what happened and to stand for it. It's painful to read the excuses, justifying the cruelities and the lies. Only one example of a long list of lies:

"Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation programme produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives," Brennan told a rare CIA news conference in Virginia.

Mrs. Feinstein improved just the opposite - by documents ! It's a shame that the top of such a secret service isn't on trial and made responsible for all the fabrications, lies, weasel words and the crimes of his agency.

And in general, starting a war as a reaction to the 9/11 crime (and for some other reasons) was an absolute overreaction (national pride was hurt and therefore -> revange).

- How many innocent people have been got hurt, crippled, killed or murdered in the Iraq war - Vietnamese would name it "American War" ?

- How much is the Middle East now safer than before?

The result "to save lives" was in an inverse proportion to the original crime. Mr. Brennan, and that wasn't predictable?

Edited December 13, 2014 by puck2

[chuckd]

...and then there is the politically correct UK version of prisoner interrogations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't yell at terrorist suspects, soldiers told

Army chiefs warn interrogations are being hampered by go-softly rules

By Robert Mendick and Tim Ross10:30PM GMT 13 Dec 2014

British soldiers have “lost their capability” to interrogate terrorist insurgents because of strict new rules on questioning that even ban shouting in captives’ ears, military chiefs have warned.

The rules — detailed in court papers obtained by The Telegraph — also prevent military intelligence officers from banging their fists on tables or walls, or using “insulting words” when interrogating a suspect.

The regulations replaced a previous policy that had to be withdrawn after a series of legal challenges and the death in custody of Baha Mousa, an Iraqi detainee in Basra.

Some of you people really need to read this article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11292578/Dont-yell-at-terrorist-suspects-soldiers-told.html

PC gone mad.