It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Washington Post described the report by the Intelligence Science Board: There is almost no scientific evidence to back up the U.S. intelligence community's use of controversial interrogation techniques in the fight against terrorism, and experts believe some painful and coercive approaches could hinder the ability to get good information, according to a new report from an intelligence advisory group.
Dick Cheney stated: "I know specifically of reports... that lay out what we learnt through the interrogation process and what the consequences were for the country", however the only examples publicly released that attempt to support this claim are: The claim that the waterboarding of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed helped prevent a planned attack on Los Angeles in 2002 - which ignores the fact that he wasn't captured until 2003, and Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi who had confessed that Iraq had trained al Qaeda in the use of weapons of mass destruction which was then used as justification for the subsequent invasion of Iraq - a confession now known to be false
Originally posted by hp1229
reply to post by Nephlim
However what do you recommend the US interrogation methods should be? ..... What do you think are the alternatives?