NewsMine — security — terror-suspects — coerced-confessions — Viewing Item

Army intelligence says torture creates bad intelligence { September 6 2006 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/06/AR2006090601442.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/06/AR2006090601442.html Defense Department News Briefing on Detainee Policies CQ Transcripts Wire Wednesday, September 6, 2006; 4:58 PM SEPTEMBER 6, 2006 SPEAKERS: CULLY STIMSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR DETAINEE AFFAIRS LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN KIMMONS (USA), ARMY DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR INTELLIGENCE BRYAN WHITMAN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS [*] EXCERPT - 32:30 minutes into conference ------------------------------------------------------- QUESTION: General and Mr. Stimson, some of the tactics that were used, in particular in Guantanamo Bay, that were considered by investigators to be abusive when used together are now prohibited, for example, the use of nudity, hooding, that sort of thing. In looking at those particular tactics and now not being able to use them, does that limit the ability of interrogators to get information that could be very useful? In particular on one detainee in Guantanamo Bay, some of those tactics that are now prohibited were deemed to be very effective in getting to that information. Also, are there going to be safeguards to prevent whether it be interrogators or commanders from interpreting the tactics that are approved in ways that could be abusive, as some of those tactics were derived from standard interrogation tactics? KIMMONS: Let me answer the first question. That is a good question. I think -- I am absolutely convinced -- the answer to your first question is no. No good intelligence is going to come from abusive practices. I think history tells us that. I think the empirical evidence of the last five years, hard years, tell us that. Moreover, any piece of intelligence which is obtained under duress, through the use of abusive techniques, would be of questionable credibility, and additionally it would do more harm than good when it inevitably became known that abusive practices were used. And we can't afford to go there. Some of our most significant successes on the battlefield have been -- in fact, I would say all of them, almost categorically all of them, have accrued from expert interrogators using mixtures of authorized humane interrogation practices in clever ways, that you would hope Americans would use them, to push the envelope within the bookends of legal, moral and ethical, now as further refined by this field manual. We don't need abusive practices in there. Nothing good will come from them. STIMSON: And let me add another piece to that. Obviously, because of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, the Army Field Manual now is in effect law, the law of the land. I can tell you, I'm not an interrogation expert. I'm just a lawyer who happened to end up in a policy job. But as a prosecutor in my former life, and when I spend time in Guantanamo talking to the interrogators there, they'll tell you that the intelligence they get from detainees is best derived through a period of rapport-building, long-term rapport-building; an interrogation plan that is proper, vetted, worked through all the channels that General Kimmons is talking about, and then building rapport with that particular detainee. So it's not like Sipowicz from the TV show where they take them in the back room. You're not going to get trustworthy information, as I under it, from detainees. It's through a methodical, comprehensive, vetted, legal and now transparent, in terms of techniques, set of laydown that allows the interrogator to get the type of information that they need. ------------------------------------------------------- .ETX Sep 06, 2006 13:32 ET .EOF Source: CQ Transcriptions © 2006, Congressional Quarterly Inc., All Rights Reserved © 2006 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive

Army intelligence says torture creates bad intelligence { September 6 2006 } British used info gained by torture { March 8 2003 } Britons held at gitmo offer detailed allegations of abuse Britons made false confessions { August 5 2004 } Bush wants to use coerced testimony { September 14 2006 } Canadian forced to confess { November 6 2003 } China rules confessions by torture illegal { April 15 2005 } Cia interrogations lead to questionable confessions Death row convicts confessed under torture released Detainee sent to egypt for torture { January 6 2005 } Detainees told confess or die { July 6 2003 } Documents tell of brutal torture interrogation { August 3 2005 } Effectiveness of interrogations questioned { May 10 2004 } False alqaeda intelligence from harsh interrogation { December 9 2005 } Forced to make false confessions Guantanamo detainee confessed to stop torture { March 31 2007 } Harsh interrogation went beyind fbi standards Interrogation techniques Most iraqi prisoners arrested by mistake No reliability of prisoner interrogation information says DIA { November 7 2005 } Report says men beaten to false confessions { August 5 2004 } Secret cia interrogation center in jordan Shiites tortured sunnis for false confessions { November 16 2005 } Suspects pressured to make false confessions { August 5 2004 } Torture can be used to detain enemies Torture has long history of producing bad information { October 19 2007 } Tunisian made false confession { August 8 2004 } US forces confessions with lions Virginia man says saudis extracted confession through torture Waterboarding elicites false information { November 8 2007 } Files Listed: 30

Correction/submissions

CIA FOIA Archive

National Security Archives

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purpose of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.