Newsweek Writer’s Story Claiming That Torture Might Work Contradicts His 2006 Article Saying That It Doesn’t
Newsweek Writer’s Story Claiming That Torture Might Work Contradicts His 2006 Article Saying That It Doesn’t
In Newsweek’s cover story this week, Evan Thomas and Stuart Taylor, Jr., argue that President-elect Barack Obama should embrace Vice President Dick Cheney’s movement for the expansion of executive power. They conclude that Cheney’s work, especially with respect to torture, may be a necessary evil:
The issue of torture is more complicated than it seems. America brought untold shame on itself with the abuses at Abu Ghraib. It’s likely that the take-the-gloves-off attitude of Cheney and his allies filtered down through the ranks, until untrained prison guards with sadistic tendencies were making sport with electric shock. But no direct link has been reported. [...] It is a liberal shibboleth that torture doesn’t work—that suspects will say anything, including lies, to stop the pain. But the reality is perhaps less clear.
But, as Big Tent Democrat points out at Talk Left, Thomas came to a much different conclusion in 2006, reporting in Newsweek that “most intelligence experts” say torture is ineffective:
In recent interviews with NEWSWEEK reporters, U.S. intelligence officers say they have little—if any—evidence that useful intelligence has been obtained using techniques generally understood to be torture.
Experts widely believe that torture fails to provide reliable intelligence. In an article for Vanity Fair last month, the counterterrorism officials with whom David Rose spoke were “unanimous” in their belief that torture does not work:
Their conclusion is unanimous: not only have coercive methods failed to generate significant and actionable intelligence, they have also caused the squandering of resources on a massive scale through false leads, chimerical plots, and unnecessary safety alerts
Newsweek’s recent claim that torture is effective fails to consider the consequences of its usage. Not only has torture caused the United States to lose standing in the world, but the perception that the U.S. tortures “directly and swiftly” helps terrorists recruit.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Not to mention that in the future, Americans, including captured soldiers, will prolly be more likely to be tortured in return.
But guys like Botch and BiggusDickus will not be there, so what do they care?
January 14th, 2009 at 8:22 pmIt is always the chickensh$t chickenhawk cowards who have never worn a uniform or heard an incoming round who decide what the tactics should be…ever notice that? I just listened to a former military officer who does not agree. Go figure.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:28 pmNewsweek Writer’s Story Claiming That Torture Might Work Contradicts His 2006 Article Saying That It Doesn’t»
– - Print media must constantly reinvent itself to survive today. Newsweek’s clever approach is to contradict it’s prior issues.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:30 pmThis is what we call the “trickle-down” effect: so much Bushwa has been dumped in the last 8 years that the excess has flowed into nearly every aspect of life–life for public figures. If BushCo can reverse itself every few months or proclaim lies as truth, why should we be surprised that others with a pulpit do the same thing?
January 14th, 2009 at 8:34 pmBig pay day and money will always change your mind. Cheney is giving big bucks to spread the word in hopes something sticks. With the Military now speaking out about the horror and crimes committed by the order given to torture by Rummy, Cheney and Bush. It’s all over the Foreign Press and now makes it clear detainees and even children were tortured by the USA. War Crimes charges will be hard to ignor now by the United Nations. Looks like there will be two trials you can see the Bush Administration at. One in the USA and the other the International Court.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:35 pmno more regrets about forgetting to get that subscription to newsweek…
i can’t believe the upright man-o-god jon meachum put this out…
it’s simply giving in to the ‘terrorists’…
January 14th, 2009 at 8:36 pmSign Evan up for the torture test. How long before he says “just anything”?
January 14th, 2009 at 8:41 pmshouldn’t rrdaos be here? What about you drew?
January 14th, 2009 at 8:46 pmWay to ruin your reputation this late in the losing game.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:49 pmWonder how much Cheney paid these two guys? Or, on the other hand, what kind of information he’s holding over their heads? One week, and counting…
January 14th, 2009 at 8:52 pmthe inhoffe/ Center for American Progress story just made keith’s WORST PERSON list … inhoffe took the prize…
January 14th, 2009 at 8:53 pmAmerica brought untold shame on itself with the abuses at Abu Ghraib.
The pro-torture crowd should reverse themselves on this. If torture is great, then the Abu Ghraib soldiers should be set free. If what they did is wrong, then so is torture.
.
It is a liberal shibboleth that torture doesn’t work
“Liberal shibboleth?” Goddamn magazine writers, this is the kind of crap they always try to pass off as “clever.” Anyhoo…
Actually, that wasn’t so much a liberal claim until it was verified by military specialists. Before that we merely pointed out that it’s morally and ethically evil, is against everything America stands for, is a violation of all assumptions of decency that we’ve held for over a century, puts our own soldiers at risk, and recruits more enemies to fight us.
The first claim of someone with absolutely no argument is “it’s more complicated than normal people can understand…”
January 14th, 2009 at 8:57 pm“it was fun to watch him think while he was talking.”
-e.j. dionne, just now one keith
who was part of the group who met with obama this morning…
January 14th, 2009 at 9:01 pmNewsweak sucks and has since the late ’70’s.
Seeking the truth does NOT involve NEWSWEAK!!!! Or Time or any of the other MSM a$$ rags!!
January 14th, 2009 at 9:01 pmSo Andrew Sullivan is a liberal? It’s a right wing shibboleth to use the word “shibboleth” to lump all of those with whom they disagree into a homogenous group of true believers, yet another projection of their own dogmatic ideology. It is a dead giveaway that Thomas was simply the conduit for more Cheney propaganda.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:01 pmAll the Japenese and Germans that showed good intel came from torture were aquitted, right?
January 14th, 2009 at 9:01 pmSooooo–Cheney had an attitude that somehow translated into torture because the prison guards were sadistic and untrained in take-the-gloves-off attitudes.
Gotcha.
This guy gets payed to write?
January 14th, 2009 at 9:06 pmLets waterboard him and find out what he really thinks.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:20 pmNewsweak . . . .
January 14th, 2009 at 9:38 pmIt’s truly disgusting that Bush/Cheney types of never-been-to-war Repubs are the ones who constantly push for more war, more American deaths, & torture. And they think they are patriotic? Um– never fought for the U.S., but want to have Americans killed & tortured?
January 14th, 2009 at 9:47 pmMan! Was the Kool-Aid extra double strenght this morning when the Wingnutocracy and assorted Whackjobs got their doses? Lots of stupidity today.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:09 pmI read the article this morning & was stunned by the piece of crap put out by newswk.Thomas used the Repuke talking points it was if the WH wrote the article.The claim most stunning was that FISA had become obsolete & so Bush had to spy on us.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:21 pmApparently he feels strongly both ways…
January 14th, 2009 at 10:22 pmThe Right’s defense of torture stems from two central qualities of the wingnut personality.
One is simple sadism. The sadistic tendencies of wingers are well known. We are saying goodbye to a President who used to torture animals. It’s no coincidence that he was a right-wing President.
The other factor is a confusion between meanness and toughness. Wingers tend to believe that, if they are saying or doing cruel things, this makes them tough.
Since it enabled them to act out their sadistic tendencies and feel tough at the same time, the use of torture was impossible for them to resist.
The poor, tortured devils:
January 14th, 2009 at 10:33 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Paq_fIxPCM
This discussion has been raging for several years now, and in my opinion, MUST be settled to establish/reinforce our identity as a people/country. The only way to do that is to treat torture as the illegal activity it is and try the torturers. When the courts decide, then we know where we currently stand as a nation in terms of our moral authority, sense of justice, and ideals. At that point, we can take the next collective step to more clearly proscribe torture (or throw our lot in with some of the worst actors in history). Until this is done, our collective ambivalence to torture will continue to undermine the esteem we garner both internationally and domestically.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:51 pmNuck Fewsweek.
I stopped getting that rag years ago.
Blogopshere or bust baby.
Evan Thomas will be sitting on a media panel with Joe Wurtzelcracker the Journalist soon enough.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:16 pmTorture must be like war for those who like them.Any excuse is good enough to continue.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:29 pmMay be time to check the mental status of people who create excuses for either to continue.
Zooey Says:
Apparently he feels strongly both ways…
I guess he’s slow on the uptake that the neocons are losing power. Then again, I’m sure Sarah Palin needs another BFF in the media.
January 15th, 2009 at 12:18 amtbone Says:
When the courts decide, then we know where we currently stand as a nation in terms of our moral authority, sense of justice, and ideals. At that point, we can take the next collective step to more clearly proscribe torture (or throw our lot in with some of the worst actors in history). Until this is done, our collective ambivalence to torture will continue to undermine the esteem we garner both internationally and domestically.
Well put.
To those who would counter this argument by claiming that a bunch of high-minded ideals is impractical and puts us at risk, I’d remind them that the establishment of Democracy with the founding of this nation was an extremely risky proposition, one that we undertook because of our ideals. And it worked out great.
But before that point, it was “common knowledge” that a country needed a king, that people were foolish and needed to be bosesd around, that allowing freedom of speech was dangerous, ditto freedom of religion, etc. At every step when we’ve chosen to do the right thing over the voices of those who claim it’s too dangerous, we’ve never had cause to be sorry.
If others would prefer to violate basic codes of morality to keep themselves “safe from terror,” I invite them to go establish the country they’d prefer elsewhere. But they don’t get to warp America into their twisted vision.
January 15th, 2009 at 12:22 amWell, if torture works so well, why don’t we torture everyone connected with the Project for a New American Century to find out if they were the ones behind 9/11?
It shouldn’t take too long to put all the “conspiracy theories” to rest…or to confirm them….
Their “harsh interrogations” should be videotapped and posted on the internet for all to see. They can prove to the world how effective Bush’s “harsh interrogations” are for getting to the truth of the matter. If they truly have nothing to hide, they should not object to the proceedure they so wholeheartedly endorsed. Not only that, but their videotapped interrogations would prove to the world that Bush did not torture.
or vice-versa.
January 15th, 2009 at 1:10 ami don’t subscribe
to newsweek.
*
January 15th, 2009 at 1:46 amA pathetic moment in American history that this discussion is being held at all.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:07 amHowever, should those who represent the Darkness prevail, and torture become official policy, I sugest we torture George Bush and Dick Cheney to glean information about their roll in the California “Energy Crisis” about their foreknowledge of the 9-11 attacks, about their profiteering off of a war based upon lies, about their complicity in the murder of thousands of Americans and some 1 million innocent Iraqis, about their contacts and complicity with Osama Been Forgotten.
Nobody in America would talk like this about torture unless they were trying to cover for someone’s major out in the open crimes.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:55 am#
kassandrasduplex Says:
….I sugest we torture George Bush and Dick Cheney to glean information about their roll in the California “Energy Crisis” about their foreknowledge of the 9-11 attacks, about their profiteering off of a war based upon lies, about their complicity in the murder of thousands of Americans and some 1 million innocent Iraqis, about their contacts and complicity with Osama….
Agreed.
January 15th, 2009 at 4:57 amHere we go again….
January 15th, 2009 at 6:54 amThe continuous talk of effectiveness of torture is of no consequence. And by design, it’s a diversion from the rule of law. Spin up the ‘all we got was lies’ or ‘we have really gotten some really useful information that made us safer’, it has no bearing, but is 90% of the discussion.
We are a nation of laws. Torture is against the law. Prosecute.
End of story.
If I were to say rob a bank and get caught would the issue be how successful my crime was or if the money I took was put to good use?
January 15th, 2009 at 7:10 amPlease prosecute, next.
I can hardly wait for next week’s Newsweek so I can see which felonies they will advocate committing next. Will it be rape? Bank robbery?
Boy, I bet Herman Goering and his Nuremberg buddies down in Hell are really pissed that they were all born a century too early. Just think, they could have had a Newsweek cover story advocating in their behalf. Who says the world hasn’t made moral progress since 1945?
January 15th, 2009 at 8:30 amWhen did the apologist argument for torture go from, “we DO NOT torture, and we DO NOT condone torture”, to, “Torture is useful and it is a complicated issue” ?
Gone from denial to excuses.
And, not new but prominent again, the great justification for morally deficient greedy self-centered types, “The end justifies the means.” It is this, and this alone, that their argument, “its a complicated issue”, is based upon.
The end can only justify the means if there is no moral justification sought, as this argument is ONLY ever brought up to defend morally reprehensible actions. One NEVER hears, “I donated a bunch of cash to this charity. I didn’t get a tax receipt, but that’s o.k. because it is a good charity doing good work. The end justifies the means.” You will ALWAYS see this argument used to justify BAD actions.
The end NEVER justifies the means. The means are ethical or unethical in their own merit, not based on results. That is to say – an action is judged by itself, not by consequences following the action.
January 15th, 2009 at 8:42 amTorture works ONLY IN SPECIFIC circumstances. Let me explain with 2 different scenarios.
Scenario 1) I have been cuffed and tied down against a metal pole.
Torturer: “What’s your ATM password?, tell me or I am going to drench you in acid, your skin will peel off and you will die a slow painful death.”
Me: “My ATM password is (my real ATM password here)”
Scenario 2) I have been cuffed and tied down against a metal pole.
Torturer: “What did you give your mother for her birthday back in 1976? tell me or I am going to drench you in acid, your skin will peel off and you will die a slow painful death.”
Me: “I gave her…(a load of BS goes here)”
My main point, yes, torture works and sometimes it doesn’t.
January 15th, 2009 at 9:07 amAfter reading that Newsweek article the other day, I came away very disheartened by the opinions of the two authors.
January 15th, 2009 at 9:20 amThey make a case for continuing the illegal and unethical practices of Bush/Cheney, while dismissing the assault on the Constitution and international law as a necessary evil.
That’s the sort of twisted and perverted thought process still embraced by Bush/Cheney and Thomas and Taylor give it further validity – shame on them.
I have had my issues with Jon Meacham over the years, and he should have provided a counter point to the current article.
Too many people believe that the law is relative – the end justifies the means (Cheney’s false rationale) – in this case, that claim can’t even be made – the end did not provide anything except a reduction in our national integrity.
Thomas has been looking for years for the perfect sentence in which to use the word “Shibboleth”.
January 15th, 2009 at 9:42 amTorture “works” if what you are trying to do is extract confessions.
Targeted against ‘thought crimes’ such as heresy, apostasy, blasphemy, sacrilege, etc, torture is effective in compelling admissions of lapses of orthodoxy.
Other than that, it’s nothing more than official sadism (well, it’s that in the previous case, too).
January 15th, 2009 at 9:42 amSomeone called this “trickle-down.” That’s exactly right. It’s what you get when someone pees their pants and the warm yellow fluid trickles down their legs and makes a mess all over the floor. Isn’t that a perfectly fair and balanced description of our “news” media and the Bush regime?
January 15th, 2009 at 10:06 amHow about this? My father, who served this country for 37 years and dodged bullets for more than a few of those told me that we didn’t torture because of only one reason – it is wrong.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:19 pmtbone Says:
This discussion has been raging for several years now, and in my opinion, MUST be settled to establish/reinforce our identity as a people/country.
tbone, I understand what you’re saying, but the fact is that the issue has been settled, for quite some time now. The only reason it is being discussed as a “possibly legal” method of interrogation is because the right-wing wants to use it.
This is typical of their tactics: They don’t like something (like torture being illegal), so they claim there’s a dispute over it when none existed before. (They lie regularly, so this isn’t difficult for them.) The more people talk about it, the more they say, “See? The issue isn’t ’settled’ after all,” when, in fact, it is. Their ultimate goal is not to convince anyone that torture should be legal, only that there’s doubt about whether or not it is. Because if they convince people there’s doubt about the legality of torture (specifically, waterboarding), then they can say they can’t be convicted of a crime when “there’s doubt that a crime has even been committed.”
We have to make sure they never achieve their goal. Waterboarding is torture, and no empathetic person (or a person who has undergone it) in the world would disagree. And torture is always illegal. We need to prosecute the people who authorized torture to be used (and it was), and stop giving them the benefit of the doubt because of the position they hold. Presidents and Vice Presidents are not above the law, and they are not the ones who say what the law is.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:27 pmKristol, Mr. Israel -lite, are you allowed to eat lamb chops?
January 15th, 2009 at 2:29 pmNewsweek, like Time, while not as diluted as Faux News, they are still, MSM, rightwing stooges.
January 15th, 2009 at 8:30 pmglezzery Says:
So is your argument that we have joined the evil doers club but we arent as bad as some other evil doers? I expect more from my country. By that logic why do we prosecute murderers. I mean they arent as bad as John Wayne Gacy or the BTK killer. YOU are a MORON.
January 16th, 2009 at 1:35 amTheir ultimate goal is not to convince anyone that torture should be legal, only that there’ssohbet doubt about whether or not it is.At every step when we’ve cetchosen to do the right thing over the voices of those who claim it’s too dangerous, we’ve never had cause to bbedava mp3 indire sorry.
March 1st, 2009 at 11:43 am