Revealed: Retired CIA agent 'made up' waterboarding details

Revealed: Retired CIA agent 'made up' waterboarding details

rawstory.com

Kiriakou told ABC NewsbNightline in April... that waterboarding — or simulated drowning — is actually effective in forcing prisoners to share secret information...

Now Kiriakou... rather off handedly admits that he basically made it all up."

(visit the link for the full news article)

One of the main arguments by those who argue for waterboarding is that it is effective in getting information. Now one of those who was cited as having first hand proof of that admits he just made it all up.

It always seemed rather odd that the claims of the enhanced interrogation proponents seemed to run contrary to every other expert in the field. Now we have some insight into why... they lied.

Notice that no one is accusing him of lying...

Arguing that waterboarding — or simulated drowning — is actually effective in forcing prisoners to share secret information, Kiriakou told ABC News’ Nightline in April, “The next day [after his first time being waterboarded], he told his interrogator that Allah had visited him in his cell during the night and told him to cooperate.”

“From that day on, he answered every question,” he said, according to ABC. “The threat information he provided disrupted a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks.”

"Now comes John Kiriakou, again, with a wholly different story," Stein noted in Foreign Policy. "On the next-to-last page of a new memoir, The Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA's War on Terror (written with Michael Ruby), Kiriakou now rather off handedly admits that he basically made it all up."

[edit on 27-1-2010 by metamagic]

reply to post by metamagic


OP, I must correct you, he states,

"I wasn't there when the interrogation took place; instead, I relied on what I'd heard and read inside the agency at the time," Kiriakou reportedly said. "But after his one-paragraph confession, Kiriakou adds that he didn't have any first hand knowledge of anything relating to CIA torture routines, and still doesn't," Stein continued. "And he claims that the disinformation he helped spread was a CIA dirty trick: "In retrospect, it was a valuable lesson in how the CIA uses the fine arts of deception even among its own."

There is no claim to first hand knowledge on his part.

Anyways, does this mean that there was a disinformation against the disinformation the CIA spread?

[edit on 27-1-2010 by sporkmonster]

Originally posted by sporkmonster
Anyways, does this mean that there was a disinformation against the disinformation the CIA spread?

Further...if the prisoner was waterboarded 83 times...does that not speak to its effectiveness? Sounds more like an idle passtime than interrogation, unless you're on the receiving end.

You beat me to the scoop this morning. Star & flag for this one. This is huge. This makes all the arguments from last year regarding the use of torture seem pretty silly, if you ask me.

Originally posted by sporkmonster
reply to post by metamagic

 

OP, I must correct you, he states,

"I wasn't there when the interrogation took place; instead, I relied on what I'd heard and read inside the agency at the time," Kiriakou reportedly said. "But after his one-paragraph confession, Kiriakou adds that he didn't have any first hand knowledge of anything relating to CIA torture routines, and still doesn't," Stein continued. "And he claims that the disinformation he helped spread was a CIA dirty trick: "In retrospect, it was a valuable lesson in how the CIA uses the fine arts of deception even among its own."

There is no claim to first hand knowledge on his part.

Anyways, does this mean that there was a disinformation against the disinformation the CIA spread?

[edit on 27-1-2010 by sporkmonster]

What is the error that you are correcting? In fact your quote only supports the original claim. Look at the second last line of your quote where it states that he had no first hand knowledge of anything relating to CIA torture and yet, as the article goes on to point out.

Kiriakou had insisted repeatedly to ABC News that waterboarding, while "torture," supposedly "saved lives," even though he had no way of knowing that.

The other alternative is that Kiriakou is a total idiot if he wasn't lying.. and the spectre of having the CIA populated by total idiots is to me just as concerning as the deliberate lying about torture effectiveness.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck


Further...if the prisoner was waterboarded 83 times...does that not speak to its effectiveness? Sounds more like an idle passtime than interrogation, unless you're on the receiving end.

In the words of the great philosopher...

"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views... which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering." Dr. Who

Agreed.

When there's someone who is not willing to tell you something, everything you do to make him tell you is just torture or a proposition. Period.

How many good deals did the Guantanamo folks got?


So, it's torture and no question about it.

Now, if it is an "efficient" method, well, that's beyond the point IMO.