Have you heard of Ishmael? He is the bogeyman of Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen.
In his column today, Cohen says that Ishmael, a fictionalized "terrorist or a suicide bomber or anything you want" who the U.S. will capture one day, won’t talk because the Obama administration has outlawed the use of waterboarding and other abusive "enhanced" interrogation techniques.
He knows the new restrictions. He knows the new limits. He may even suggest to his interrogators that their jobs are on the line — that the Justice Department is looking over their shoulders. The tape is running. Everything is being recorded. He is willing to give up his life. Are his interrogators willing to give up their careers? He laughs.
The implication is that the U.S interrogator – who sits across the table from this trained killer – can do nothing (but maybe cry) when the terrorist laughs.
The reality is that U.S. interrogators in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo and elsewhere face thousands of real-life Ishmaels every day and they consistently get them to talk without abusing them.
Here are three real life examples that I hope Cohen (and others who are interested) will look into:
(1) The capture of Saddam Hussein
Eric Maddox, a former Army Staff Sergeant, spearheaded the effort to catch the most wanted man in Iraq. When he arrived in Iraq in July of 2003, he had never done an interrogation. Six months later he interrogated the man who was principally responsible for Saddam’s security and he got him to reveal the location of the spider hole where the former Iraqi President was hiding within a matter of hours. Along the way he "broke" at least nine key insurgent leaders, using entirely legal techniques. He even has a book out describing how he did it – Mission Black List #1.
"There is nothing intelligent about torture," says Maddox. "If you have to inflict pain then you have lost control of the situation, the subject and yourself."
(2) The hunt for Al Zarqawi, the former head of Al Qaeda in Iraq
When Matthew Alexander (a pseudonym) began interrogating a cleric who used to bless Al Qaeda suicide bombers, the cleric told him that he wished he had a knife so that he could cut Alexander’s throat. Three days later he willingly gave up info that set Alexander and his team on the path to find Zarqawi. Alexander, like Maddox, has been able to seduce senior level Al Qaeda leaders into talking to him about sensitive information hours after he begins an interrogation. Alexander’s techniques are also described in a book that he wrote about the hunt for Zarqawi: How to Break A Terrorist.
"The former administration never brought Osama bin Laden to justice," says Alexander. "Our best chance to locate him would have been through Khalid Sheikh Muhammed or Abu Zubaydah had they not been waterboarded."
(3) Interrogations of Japanese soldiers during WWII
I chose this as a third example to show that this is not new. Generations of U.S. interrogators have been questioning hardened detainees and getting answers without resorting to abuse.
The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) recently published a study that reminds us that the most effective U.S. interrogators during WWII resisted the temptation to view their detainees as fanatical animals who should be brutalized. The same study catalogues efforts by three U.S. interrogators during the Vietnam War who treated their hard-core prisoners humanely and got them to talk. Check out: Interrogation: World War II, Vietnam and Iraq.
* * *
I have talked to Maddox, Alexander and COL Stu Herrington (one of the interrogators profiled in the DIA study). They all agree that torture can "work" in the sense that you can waterboard a detainee and he may talk. He may even tell you the truth.
Alexander says, "anything can work." He used to give a milkshake to a young kid whose dad used to bring him to suicide bomb Al Qaeda planning sessions. They’d drink their milkshakes and the kid would tell him who was involved and where they used to meet. Anything can work.
But they all say that the percentages are not on your side if you use waterboarding. "These are determined people," Joe Navarro, a former FBI interrogator explained to me once. "You think that if you rip their fingernails out or dunk them under water, they will all of a sudden change their minds and tell you everything? That’s not how it works."
As we all know, torture leads to all sorts of larger problems. It undercuts the morale of your own force. It creates diplomatic hurdles. And it has been used as an extraordinary recruitment tool by the opposition. Intelligence officers who served in Iraq report that after the revelations of Abu Ghraib they often found pictures of U.S.-induced torture in the pockets of the foreign fighters they picked up on the battlefield.
Why would U.S. interrogators choose to use techniques that cause so much harm when other techniques have proven to be so much more effective?
If and when we do pick up the next Ishmael, I hope that the interrogator who questions him took the time to read Maddox’s and Alexander’s books and not just Richard Cohen.
David Danzig is the Deputy Program Director of Human Rights First, a New York City-based international human rights organization. Facebook Twitter



18 Comments







I don’t read or listen to idiots like Cohen, so no, he didn’t scare me at all.
“The answers are already there for us. Torture is illegal, immoral and to be prosecuted. No guess work is needed. No theories are needed or venturing into some hypothetical like “your child’s life” is in danger. The Geneva Conventions and other conventions and covenants against torture — which we are a signatory onto — already give us the very answers that Mr. Cohen claims to be struggling to find.
Cowards — like Dick Cheney — have led us here and other cowards — like Richard Cohen — now protect them, while the rest of us watch and wonder how much longer before we are finally reduced to a nation populated entirely with cowards. “
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..74237.html
“As we all know, torture leads to all sorts of larger problems. It undercuts the morale of your own force. It creates diplomatic hurdles. And it has been used as an extraordinary recruitment tool by the opposition.”
It does, however, let immature little men like Bush and Cheney and their sycophant followers feel all rough and tough…that seems to be all Republicans are about…
Cohen’s dishonesty is breathtaking (although par for the course given that he works for Fred Hiatt):
(my bold)
You see, little people, this is all about DFHs changing the rules after the game.
Where do they find these sadists? Seriously, one has to be a sadists to do such things even if you believe in your mission as an interrogator? Surely many would simply say they would not be sadistic? Do you think they identify people with sadistic streaks or is this something they figured out how to bring out in almost anyone?
I was in the military and I met more than my share, they’re not hard to spot
Richard who?
Richard Cohen was considered a liberal when the buildup to the Iraq War began. He lost that status before the war got started. He’s never truly gotten it back.
———-
I wrote my letter on this by reading a few paragraphs, writing one or two of my own, reading a few more paragraphs, etc. I wrote that Cohen was a complete slob by jumping immediately to considering torturing the suspect without even exploring the option of non-violent interrogation methods.
I discovered he did indeed include such a consideration, many paragraphs down, almost near the end.
But his justification for rejecting a non-violent method was so ludicrous (Lack of time, as though waterboarding someone over 100 times was a quick and efficient process), I decided not to bother changing my letter.
This is the essence of it, isn’t it? That there is some kind of continuum of methods that linearly and without choice lead to torture as the intensity increases? And that similarly, there is a linear continuum from the cooperative subject to the hard core fanatic, impervious to all other methods?
What are these continua, really? The continuum from simple questions to brutal beatings and enforced disappearance is really an escalation of anger, not an escalation of effectiveness. The continuum from cooperative, reasonable subject to hardened fanatic is a continuum of dehumanization of the other, not an escalation of resistance to reason.
When these continua show up, the argument is already skewed by social values that are very questionable, and there is only the appearance of a logical argument. Richard Cohen’s defense of torture is reprehensible, but it should really be discarded as not logical and fallacious on its face, there is no need to join such a debate by arguing about the “effectiveness” of torture.
And, oh, yeah, Richard Cohen, by this point in the debate, can be assumed to know the relevant international covenants, ignorance of the law is no excuse in any event. He and others that argue as he does are not merely protecting political figures and agents. They are trying to undermine international humanitarian and human rights law, and they are trying to justify and to gain the right to categorize of groups of people as inhuman. I highly doubt that Mr. Cohen thinks about September 11th and feels unsafe. He thinks about it and feels angry. And it isn’t just any groups that are inhuman. I don’t recall that he ever called for the “enhanced interrogation” of Eric Rudolph. By his own standards, that makes him culpable in Dr. Tiller’s murder. Or don’t those standards apply, Mr. Cohen, without regard to race, religion, or ethnicity?
KSM and Abu Zabaida were waterboarded 183 times between the two of them , and didn’t reveal one bit of useful information . This fact alone should point out the efficacy of torture.
Illogical…he’s suicide bomber…and caught. He’s in detention.Presumably he’s not strapped up to commit his act right there? Cohen is trying to revive the “24″ ticking time-bomb scenario in another guise. Yet time after time the “EIC” methods he wants applied failed to provide accurate, incisive, or critical information. Lies, yes. Misdirection, yes. Time-wasting, also. Information the detainees thought the CIA already knew, yes. Fingering innocuous people, yes. Claiming involvement in every sort of plot suggested to them by the interrogators, yes.
But not one tangible bit of evidence that actually prevented a planned attack from occurring. Not Bali, not the London Tube attacks, not Richard Reid, not the attacks on Musharraf. Not Madrid. Not the attack on the Synagogue in Morocco. Not a single attack in the Philippines, nor in Jakarta. Nor Mumbai. And none of the attacks in Iraq or Afghanistan. Not a single bomber who had even infiltrated a likely target country w arrested from all this “information”. The Inspector General said he had no evidence that this intelligence was “quality”.
Foiled attacks were always the result of some other line of evidence, or accidental discoveries by local police or civilian reports of suspicious activities.
Yet the torture went on, and on, and on..weeks, months and years.
Yet Soufan and other interrogators got quality intelligence. The information was accurate, not exaggerated, and not framed to what the interrogator “wanted to hear” (true or not) simply to make torture stop.
And finally, the most devastating thing for Cohen and his torture apologism…the Dept. of Homeland Security “terror alerts”. These cost US businesses hundreds of millions of dollars in closed business districts, delayed contracts, interrupted travel, meetings, shipments, etc. Most of the orange alerts were based upon something the tortured detainees said- some vague reference to attacks on motels using bottled gas trucks, or an attack on a museum, or Disneyland. All of these turned out to be misdirections or statements simply to stop the torture. Tapped out wells would claim to be the devil.
Finally the torture itself very likely reduced the ability of the detainees to provide any tangible intelligence after a time. Brains confused with exhaustion, tortured with pain, wracked with stress, and malnourished are not simply going to be capable of putting together past events, names, or experiences without vast distortion and scrambling of interrogator suggestion, reality, and hallucination. It’s test taking anxiety several orders of magnitude removed. They don’t call it brainwashing for nothing.
These guys only want to torture to lash out and punish someone. They are for torture to make up for the empty places inside themselves.
Apparently the media have received their
marching orderstalking points on torture. Joe Klein, now Richard Cohen. What irritates me no end is that they parade around as liberals at the same time they are spewing this fascist bilge. Whenever they are mentioned, they should be referred to as torture apologist Joe Klein or another one of the WaPo’s resident fascists Richard Cohen. We should call them what they are, not what they claim to be.That NDIC book is online, BTW, and free for the downloading. Just go to the site and look for the “download a copy” link. It’s a PDF, of course. Here’s a quote from the introduction:
The emphasis is mine, of course.
Anyway, a terrific article. Too bad guys like Cohen and Joe Klein are such soulless cowards. They’ll never read articles like this, I’m sure.
By the way, it’s interesting that Cohen’s terrorist is “Ishmael”. It’s not a common name in Islam…but I wonder if Cohen selected it for a particular reason as his “iconic terrorist”.
Islamic traditions consider Ishmael as the ancestor of northern Arab people.Judaism has generally viewed Ishmael as wicked though repentant…Judaism maintains that Isaac (the father of the Jewish people) rather than Ishmael was the true heir of Abraham. The Qur’an views him as an Islamic prophet who was the actual son that Abraham was called on to sacrifice, as opposed to Isaac. Thus the whole feasting month of idul f’itri (Ramadan or Puasa) is based around the potential sacrifice of the founder of the Arab peoples to God’s command, and the essential trust by Abraham that God would do “right” and trusting him.
So was Cohen obliquely suggesting that all Arabs are terrorists? And did he realize that he’d pass this insult off during the Muslim holy month?
Torture is ineffective at best and the long term damage is much worse than any tidbit of information that you may be lucky to get. Holder needs to go after the big fish and show the Bushites that there day is done. No more of Cheney spewing his crap or the former CIA director spreading his lies and misinformation. The only way to prevent this kind of Executive abuse is for Holder to get a spine and put the pressure on the entire Bush administration.
I’ve been sicken by the right’s torture “logic” for years. As Emptywheel said yesterday, we need to change the conversation. People like Cohen are using the right wing’s frame and when that happens they have already partially won.
1) Note how they put YOU in the position of the potential torturer?
Why don’t they put you in the position of the potential person being tortured?
2) The Ticking Time Bomb scenario is used for a reason, to get us to drop away any reason and go right to the heart of our emotional response. The deepest one they can find. “Protect your children. Protect your family. Protect your country.” These are all used so that you can be forgiven the most deprived acts that their scenario requires. Note how the scenario never requires you to do something that might work that is NOT horrible?
I’ve said in the past that we need to flip this argument on the people using it. INSTANTLY. They can set up their premise, but tear it down right away. Flip it. “I noticed that you are using the ticking time bomb argument and you are trying to make me imagine myself as the person torturing. How DARE you attempt to use my love of my children in your fearful fantasies! If you knew anything about the real world an interrogation you would know how inane it is, but you really don’t want to have a conversation about torture do you? You want to get me to agree with your world view so you can feel better about supporting torture. I’m not going to play your game. You want to talk about torture let’s really talk about torture, as it is practices in the US. You want to talk about laws and torture? Let’s talk about the way Israel does it. No you really don’t want to talk about torture you want to talk about the tv show 24.
24 is a fictional TV show where the writers make sure torture always works.
This is not the real world, I know the real world. I live in it, you obviously want to live in your TV fantasy world where torture works and Jack Bauer saves the day. Grow up.
Are there going to be tissues in the interrogation rooms, in case the interrogators start “crying”[line 10] because they cant torture people? They should do a commercial like the one from the 70’s, the one with all the garbage everywhere and the close up of the old native American with a tear rolling down his cheek – remember that one? it was a loooooong time ago, anyway they could have a shackeled, hooded prisoner inside a grimy room, and a closeup of dick standing in the hall with a car battery and some wire, or cat’o nine tails, with a tear rolling down his cheek, cause he cant torture the guy.