Glenn Garvin TV Reviews

Does Torture Work?

Frontline examines the brutality detailed in the Senate's report on CIA interrogations.


The rescue crews weren't even through sifting the rubble of the Sept. 11 attack when the debate over torture broke out: Is it necessary in the pursuit of the war on terror, and does it work, and is it right? Oddly, the argument seemed to fasten on the utilitarian side–does it work?–rather than the moral side–is it right?–despite the fact that we had practically no empirical data with which to measure success or failure. We knew practically nothing of who the government was questioning, how, what information was being produced, or what action it was leading to.

Fourteen years later, we've learned a lot about what was happening inside the interrogation rooms of the war on terror, but it often seems we know even less than we started. The latest cryptic artifact of this debate is "Secrets, Politics and Torture," an episode of PBS' Frontline documentary series, which tries to puzzle out the truth in the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee's hotly contested report on CIA and torture. (The episode airs tonight on PBS at 10 P.M. ET; details at bottom of this article.) 

Senate investigators spent six years and $50 million on the report, examining some six million pages of internal CIA documents before reaching the conclusion (among others) that the CIA's euphemistically labeled "enhanced interrogation techniques" were useless, producing no actionable intelligence that hadn't already been collected with the bare-knuckle approach.

But the report was hotly disputed by several of the committee's Republicans, and many of their objections cannot be dismissed as mere yahoo partisanship. The committee's exclusive reliance on documents–it did not conduct a single interview–leave it open to charges that it worked in a vacuum in which context and emphasis were not understood. And the fact that the report seems to concentrate its fire on former CIA director Michael Hayden, a Bush appointee who didn't take office until the interrogation program was nearly over, while sparing Clinton appointee George Tenet, the lifelong Democrat and former Intelligence Committee staff director who ran the CIA when the program was at its most brutal, certainly has a distinct whiff of politics about it.

The CIA gets its fair shot in "Secrets, Politics and Torture." Former deputy director John McLaughlin and general counsel John Rizzo (who was in charge of keeping the interrogations within legal, if not humanitarian, bounds) argue forcefully that they were carrying out Bush administration instructions with the legal blessing of the Justice Department, and that their work produced results. "It's a hit job on most of us," says the furious Rizzo of the committee report.

On the other side, Intelligence Committee members Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and former Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colorado), are equally forceful in charging that the CIA "lied to its overseers, destroyed and tried to hold back evidence," as Udall puts it, in propagandizing in support of a needless exercise in sadism.

There's much to be said for the way "Secrets, Politics and Torture" deftly tells the story of the interrogation program. It offers up the not unreasonable belief of CIA officials that the sort of "committed, remorseless, psychopathic personality" that would commandeer civilian airliners and crash them into skyscrapers was not going to surrender much information to an ACLU-approved interrogation complete with Miranda warnings and evidentiary hearings for search warrants.

But it also documents the appalling costs of coloring outside the lines, starting with the real nature those "enhanced interrogation techniques": not just waterboarding but beatings, threats of mutilation with cordless drills, forced rectal feedings, ice-water baths, and prisoners stuffed in what amounts to dog carriers or chained to walls in a standing position for 17 days at a stretch. Small wonder that one detainee, left half-naked in a near-freezing cell following a typical round of such non-torture, died of hypothermia.

The CIA insists none of this stuff meets the legal definition of torture, but as they say, it's close enough for government work. Certainly the CIA was not anxious for the world to inspect its handiwork; when it was revealed that agency officers had recorded some of their interrogations, the CIA's head of operations ordered the tapes burned despite instructions from Rizzo to keep them.

The human damage from these medieval encounters went well beyond the victims. "Secrets, Politcs and Torture" describes CIA interrogators, horrified at their own acts, begging Washington to let them stop. And slippery slopes opened up, most notably at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, where American soldiers inflicted unspeakable acts of perversity and cruelty not on so-called high-value targets but random peasants.

Plenty of people viewing "Secrets, Politics and Torture" will conclude that nothing could be worth engaging in this kind of behavior. That, however, is very different than saying it produced nothing of value. And there, the documentary is much less convincing.

It makes much of the fact, for instance, that Khalid Shiekh Mohammad–the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, universally known as KSM–told some preposterous lies following his first round of waterboarding, including a yarn about sending operatives to Montana to recruit disgruntled black Americans for an al Qaeda terrorist attack.

But KSM and other detainees also lied when they weren't being tortured. And Sen. Feinstein's flat declaration that "waterboarding KSM 183 times did not work" simply fails the smell test. By all accounts, KSM provided a motherlode of useful intelligence to his captors. Are we seriously to believe not a single syllable of it ever followed a waterboarding? Feinstein and her allies seem to believe that a prisoner will say anything at all while being tortured, as long as it isn't true.

There's an interesting statistic presented in the Intelligence Committee report that does not appear in "Secrets, Politics and Torture," a claim that "seven of the 39 CIA detainees known to have been subjected to the CIA s enhanced interrogation techniques produced no intelligence while in CIA custody." Flipped on its head, those numbers tell a very different story: that 82 percent of the tortured prisoners talked. To me, that sounds very much like torture does work, at least in some ways at some times.

That's why the moral argument against torture–that its injuries are afflicted on the innocent as well as the guilty, and that it shreds the souls of the torturers as surely as it does the bodies of the tortured–is a lot better than the utilitarian one. Crime isn't wrong because it doesn't pay; it's wrong because it harms others.

Below, watch the first five minutes of tonight's episode of Frontline.

Frontline: Secrets, Politics and Torture: PBS. May 19, 10 p.m. EDT.

NEXT: Hillary Clinton and the Saga of Sidney Blumenthal

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. My buddy’s mother makes $75 every hour on the laptop . She has been laid off for seven months but last month her pay check was $18875 just working on the laptop for a few hours.
    Look At This. ????

    1. Most likely she’s participating in torture.

      1. On her webcam.

        1. With a donkey.

    2. You know who else was named Adolph?

  2. ” By all accounts, KSM provided a motherlode of useful intelligence to his captors.”

    By all accounts? You mean the Govt.’s accounts? The lamestream media? Yeah, just like the “intelligence” regarding Iraq and WMDs. lol

    1. It was my understanding that the guys who got swept up early like KSM were interviewed by the FBI among other agencies and were not immediately tortured. Even if “actionable intel” was acquired there is some debate who gathered it. Regardless, this is a government that has lost all credibility; by which I mean the US government & not some lame partisan snipe. The very idea that torture is being not just used but openly defended speaks volumes about how depraved the state has become. Defending torture is like defending rape: it demonstrates not just a mistake in judgement but a complete absence of moral calculus.

  3. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

  4. that the CIA “lied to its overseers”

    It’s cute when Congress thinks they have power over the federal bureaucracy, particularly after just having the IRS piss down their backs and tell them it’s raining.

  5. Ever been water boarded?

    Trust me, you’ll sing like a canary.

  6. I have a good idea. How about only letting willing torturers do the job. That way, the numbers of traumatized people will be reduced by half. I almost said “cut in half,” but that would have been gross.

    1. hey they were just following orders

  7. Who gives a flying fuck if it WORKS? It’s a CRIME.


    1. Thank you. Who cares if it works? It is wrong. End of converstaion.

  8. I have never bought the line that “torture doesn’t work.” Of course it must work at least sometime.

    These guys are prisoners. You have plenty of time to check up on what they tell you after the torture ends. I have a very hard time believing nobody volunteered truthful information to make the pain and suffering stop. It just doesn’t make any sense.

    My rejection of torture as a technique has never had anything to do with its effectiveness. I have to consider it morally off limits for the same reason I reject the death penalty: false positives. But “it never works” is obviously not true.

    1. It works great if you need someone to corroborate some unsubstantiated information so you can get a judge to sign a warrant or the prez to authorize a drone strike.

    2. Just look at how terrifically it worked at smoking out heretics and witches when properly used by priests.

  9. Earn Up To $3,500 Monthly!! Google is Paying Out Big Money. Learn how to get in on the Action. We Do All the Work Once You Join! Love it or Leave it 100% Test Trial!
    See Here Details:………………

  10. Nathaniel . although Stephanie `s rep0rt is super… I just bought a top of the range Mercedes sincee geting a check for $4416 this last four weeks and would you believe, ten/k last-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the best-job I’ve ever done . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away started making a nice over $79.. p/h….. ??????

  11. Progressives will never seem to grasp that war is a very ugly and violent business. When that war becomes a covert war, it is even worse. Does torture work? Who cares. These are not poor innocent civilians who were being interrogated by the Nazis or KGB for crimes against the state. These were stone cold killers who had one mission, kill Americans. They had no hesitation to kill over 3000 Americans who were totally innocent, so why should we have any hesitation about using whatever means available to extract info? Even if it did not work, who cares? The fact we locked so many up at Gitmo instead of immediately executing them is much to kind in mine and the minds of many other Americans. You reap what you sow and they got exactly what they asked for in the end.

    1. Yeah, I remember when those people were convicted in a court of law.

    2. That’s a real big they you are using. They meaning those people detained and tortured were not all proven to even be involved. So yes that means some of them were innocent.

  12. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

  13. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.