It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


So What's the Real Reason for CIA Torture? Recruiting.

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 07:12 PM
We all know that torture is not a reliable way to extract information. You torture someone long enough, they'll say more and more ridiculous things. They'll talk more, in proportion to more torture, but there's no evidence that they'll speak more truth.

The organizations we're trying to combat use a command and control structure very similar to that of the CIA, it's organized in such a way as to prevent the lower tiers from having substantial information about the upper tiers, and to prevent higher level operators from dropping dime on their important collaborators.

The information is partitioned, access is restricted, all in an effort to thwart the interogators.

We know this, because we do it too. It's standard practice in secret societies, intelligence organizations, and even corporations and the like - really any group with a vested interest in restricting access to information, and limiting the ability of individuals to compromise the organization as a whole will employ these principles.

If I'm wrong, please let me know, but I'll keep going for now...

So if torture is ineffective for gathering information, what's the point?

One of the main problems facing our intelligence guys is that they have all kinds of technology, but very little in the way of assets on the ground. They need a human presence inside the organizations we're up against. They need humint - human intelligence.

The nature of these organizations that we're trying to infiltrate makes them exceedingly difficult to compromise, if I'm not mistaken they're often based around tribal and family relationships, regional groups that are together from birth, religious associations, all very close-knit and suspicious of outsiders.

In order for our intelligence services to know what they need to know, they would need current members to come over to our side.

So that brings us back to the question, why are the CIA involved in torture?

They're probably attempting to convert people. Of course they won't say so, but it's the truth, I think.

The human mind can only take so much. Trauma can sublimate the consciousness, and make the victim exceedingly susceptible to suggestion. Torture victims, after a while, can come to identify with their torturers. Even in the absence of this bond, fear and humiliation can do the trick, and persuade someone to come over to your side, so to speak.

Since the CIA can't effectively bribe or otherwise coerce these individuals, they're probably left with little choice but to attempt to break them psychologically. They could be using drugs as well, but sleep deprivation alone is a powerful tool of persuasion.

Anyway, the 'bad guys' are almost certainly aware of all this, so what's the point?

The other side isn't going to welcome former captives back into the fold, they're just not going to do it if they have any sense. So all this has been for nothing.

That's the shame of it, as far as I'm concerned.

One must do what one must do. But if all the horror was a waste of energy, at the expense of our national security and our reputation (however tarnished), that would be a true shame.

Any thoughts on this? Have I gone wrong somewhere? Should I provide links documenting the psychological effects of torture and sleep deprivation, or is this common knowledge? What about the lack of intelligence assets, is that common knowledge as well? I'm working under the assumption that people know these things.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the subject of torture. As far as I'm concerned, it's not good for much besides revenge. They may be able to brainwash some people, and seed them into the ranks of the enemy, only time will tell. My suspicion is that this tactic will not be successful, and is in fact a waste of precious time and resources.

If we stopped trying to eliminate the people who disagree with us, and started protecting ourselves directly through domestic infrastructure upgrades, we would be in much better shape, and less of a pariah in the world community. That's just my opinion of course, but I think it's sensible. Anyone care to disagree?

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 07:41 PM

Originally posted by WyrdeOne

So if torture is ineffective for gathering information, what's the point?

I agree with you that it does`nt make much sense.

All i could really think of is,i saw a program of an experiment.They took a bunch of people (just everyday people)made some guards and some prisoners as time went on it became not a role play game but reality to the both sides.Where the guards were getting off on the power they had over the prisoners.

I have no doubt if the experiment had of continued serious abuses would have occurred.

So what i`m trying to get at is maybe these laws are an arse covering for the inevitable of human nature,of abuse/torture litigation and or accusations.

Not a strong point i agree but something i was wondering whilst reading your post.

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 08:12 PM
I agree, torture is not a reliable method for gathering information. I've said my stance on torture before, I don't agree with it.

Interrogation (w/o torture) is a much more reliable and promising method for getting true, accurate answers. Most people will crack under a good interrogation, sleep deprivation (takes down your guard), a little rough housing, deception, maybe a little exposure to some uncomfortable situations and enviorments, etc....will get desired results and someone will "talk" if they have anything to talk about, it may take a little time, but it will happen...and when it does the results are accurate and are coming from an "intact" mind.

They're probably attempting to convert people. Of course they won't say so, but it's the truth, I think.

That's assuming that the person being tortured is in fact guilty of being involved with a terrosrist cell (or whatever else).

The way I see it, people will admit to anything if tortured enough. When an innocent person falls to torture and admits or gives a confession then they subject themslves to being tortured more because now they are not giving answers to specifics (when, where, why, how, who, etc..). They are unable give that kind of information because they don't know the torture gets worse and worse until the torturers are finally like "Alright, this guy's telling the truth"...let's let 'em go.

See my point? People will admit to anything...yes/no type questions. But by doing so they will be pressed harder to give answer to more specific things that they don't even know answers to.

That is why, overall, torturing is inhumane and not a reliable method of interrogation

[edit on 22/9/2006 by SportyMB]

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 08:52 PM
Look up MK ULTRA.
In short: trauma can result in dis-associate mind states.
It is possible to create 'alters' that can exist within an individual.
An 'alter' can be brainwashed, programmed, etc - shaped into a virtual slave to do the bidding of the 'programmer'.
The victim ordinarily is not aware of his or her 'alter' - 'amnesia walls' are created as a defense mechanism to protect the victim's everyday ego.
The 'alter is usually triggered by a special code set by the 'programmer'.
These codes range from simple words, patterns to more elaborate ones.
Thus ordinary people can potentially be e.g., assasins, terrorists, etc, when triggered.
The process is well understood by the CIA.
When such people are released and free, a little bit of imagination is all that's needed to acknowledge the benefit of having such people available at the switch of a trigger.
The film 'The Manchurian Candidate' deals with a similar phenomena.

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:02 PM

IMO, your analysis has merit.

But, when I read the title...

I thought by "recruitment" you meant that the CIA wanted to recruit sadists, with the torture opps - the opportunities to torture with impunity - being a major perk of employment with the CIA/US military.

If not, why the huge campaign to market S&M and develop a niche?

Will ya gimme 50/50?


[edit on 22-9-2006 by soficrow]

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:50 PM

Originally posted by soficrow

I thought by "recruitment" you meant that the CIA wanted to recruit sadists, with the torture opps -

You know what Dg, I feel that anybody that can inflict pain and torture on a person without knowing if that person is Innocent or guilty just to find out if it is has to be a sadist and sick in the mind.

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 10:03 PM
I think its called the Stockholm Syndrome, where the victim identifies, even becomes attached to the perp.

Stockholm Syndrome describes the behavior of kidnap victims who, over time, become sympathetic to their captors. The name derives from a 1973 hostage incident in Stockholm, Sweden. At the end of six days of captivity in a bank, several kidnap victims actually resisted rescue attempts, and afterwards refused to testify against their captors.


Perhaps the CIA is seeding the world with Manchurian Terrorist Candidates, so they can continue to execute 9/11 type scenarios (if indeed they, and their puppet masters, were behind the original) of ever increasing magnitude, blaming them successively on the fruits of their own MK ULTRA endeavors.

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:10 PM
Indeed, I'm familiar with the experiment you mention (The Stanford Experiment). Even reading about it is pretty disturbing, one can only imagine how the researchers must have felt. To my knowledge, similar experiments have not been conducted, on campus or anywhere else for that matter, because the results were so extreme and shocking. It really went too far, and it happened faster than anyone thought possible.

Anyway, if anyone hasn't read about the incident, I encourage them to do so. It's really very interesting stuff.

This is ATS man! MK Ultra is not unkown to us.

Thanks for bringing it up though, it's definitely something to consider.

Logically, one would have better luck trying to brainwash people with a proven penchant for fanatacism (if I recall, brain scans of uber-religious people have shown marked differences when compared to the brains of more centered, rational individuals).

Maybe extremist religious types, of the sort we're ostensibly fighting in the ME, provide a ready crop of recruits for modern equivalents of MK Ultra style endeavors...

I'll go halfway for ya', no problem.

One of the necessary safeguards in this type of situation is compromised collaborators. If they're ashamed and disgusted by their own actions, they're much less likely to drop dime on their co-conspirators. Their similarly compromised 'friends' are the only community that will accept them, and the desire for acceptance is a powerful, primal human urge.

A milder example of this can be seen in fraternity intitiations. Getting spanked, half-naked and humiliated with a bunch of other guys creates a shared bond of shame, nobody wants to expose their brothers because doing so is to expose the self. It's a nice little psychological lock to prevent the ranks from falling apart. The military does a similar thing, to foster bonds between servicemen and improve their functionality as a unit.

Criminal organizations are famous for this behavior, by forcing intitiates to commit a heinous crime as a prerequisite for membership. In this way, they compromise the individual and make them dependent on the group for safety, understanding, trust, support, and so on. I wouldn't be surprised if a similar thing is going on with the US-trained Iraqi special forces, the hit squads that have been operating over there since before open hostilities even commenced.

The trainers know that their crew won't defect and go back to the other side, because the atrocities they've committed would make them pariahs in their former community. How do you murder women and children, commit rapes and torture against your countrymen, and then decide to abandon your position and seek a return into the community you terrorized? It's nearly impossible, I think...

Thank you all for your replies.

new topics

top topics


log in