'Zero Dark Thirty' is a great piece of filmmaking and does a valuable public service by raising difficult questions most Hollywood movies shy away from, but as of this writing, it seems that one of its central themes - that torture was instrumental to tracking down bin Laden - is not supported by the facts.
I would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding. And believe me, it will be effective.
Torture gives you reliable and unreliable information. That's the reason why most people in the world don't do it. So this idea that you have to torture people in order to protect national security is a false argument, and I reject it.
While the notion that torture works has been glorified in television shows and movies, the simple truth is this: torture has never been an effective interrogation method.
There is still much debate about whether torture has been effective in eliciting information - the assumption being, apparently, that if it is effective, then it may be justified.
I truly believe that if torture had worked and there was a case to be made for it, we would see that on the front pages of the American press.
There's been a lot of experience with torture in history. It doesn't work.
I don't believe that torture works.
I mean, we sit around and we go, you know, 'Torture doesn't work.' Well, it's been around for 5,000 years. Most stuff that doesn't work goes the way of the dodo pretty quick, like waterbeds and 8-tracks and things like that.
Torture is an extremely effective tool for getting people to talk. It is a terrible tool for getting people to tell the truth.
Experienced military and intelligence professionals know that torture, in addition to being illegal and immoral, is an unreliable means of extracting information from prisoners.
Don't tell me it doesn't work. Torture works. Okay, folks?
My take on the torture thing and even drones is: If we're going to get into assassination and torture, the second question is the morality, but the first is the effectiveness of it.
I don't trust American intelligence. You look at the torture report from the Senate: People inside the CIA are saying that it doesn't work, and we're getting the information not from torture, but simply from questioning people.
Military people have a heavy investment in rules against torture, not only because we want to protect our own POWs from reciprocal brutalities … but also because war is so terrible that it desperately requires any limits anyone can agree on, any gesture toward dignity, any mitigation suggesting civilized scruple. There isn’t even persuasive evidence that torture makes its victims tell their secrets, instead of saying whatever we want to hear.
