Putting the forthcoming OPR report in context

[noise]

Many people argue that it doesn't matter if torture works or not, the use of torture is illegal. Debate over. The suggestion being that discussion of whether torture works in some way helps to justify criminal interrogation methods. IMO it is extremely important to discuss the effectiveness of torture because the argument being made by torture apologists is that the breaking of the law was done in good faith. Thus, the OLC went along with the torture because they truly believed that the ends justified the means, i.e. the torture was necessary to prevent follow up attacks.

FBI agent Ali Soufan:

There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics. In addition, I saw that using these alternative methods on other terrorists backfired on more than a few occasions — all of which are still classified. The short sightedness behind the use of these techniques ignored the unreliability of the methods, the nature of the threat, the mentality and modus operandi of the terrorists, and due process.

My Tortured Decision

We actually know something about one of KSM's interrogators. He had no CT background, no Arabic language skills and no interrogation experience:

Inside a 9/11 Mastermind’s Interrogation

1) Torture is illegal.

2) The torture program did not work as advertised.

3) Torture helped increase terrorist recruiting and inflame the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Where was the good faith? The advocates of torture don't seem to believe in American democracy. They don't seem to care about keeping the country safe. They don't seem to believe in supporting soldiers. Where is the patriotism?