As I wrote earlier, one defense tactic employed by the pro-torture crowd is to make the argument that “ticking time bomb” scenarios justified the inhumane interrogations. But then we learned that Abu Zuybadah was waterboarded 183 times in one month, which at the time the information came available, either suggested the presence of an improbably high number of time bombs or revealed that the interrogations were pervesely used as punishment. Now that the Senate Armed Services Committee has released a report on “enhanced interrogation techniques,” we found there was another reason: complete stupidity. McClatchy reports.
“Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s people were told repeatedly, by CIA . . . and by others, that there wasn’t any reliable intelligence that pointed to operational ties between bin Laden and Saddam, and that no such ties were likely because the two were fundamentally enemies, not allies.”
Senior administration officials, however, “blew that off and kept insisting that we’d overlooked something, that the interrogators weren’t pushing hard enough, that there had to be something more we could do to get that information,” he said.
The article itself goes in to a fair amount of detail, so I’d suggest a full read. That the torture techniques employed were based on methods aimed at extracting false confessions from U.S. prisoners of war only makes the Bush Administration look worse, if that’s even possible. Not only were intelligence gathering agencies unable to produce any legitimate link between Iraq and al Qaeda (though they did hire Doug Feith to fabricate such “intelligence”), they couldn’t even extract a false confession to make the connection and still prosecuted the war anyway.
To call the Bush Administration morally bankrupt would be an insult to sociopaths everywhere. These people were truly reprobate degenerates.
For some good reporting on the issue, check out Spencer Ackerman here.