The American public should know that the Senate report actually reveals that 82% of detainees subjected to enhanced interrogation did, in fact, produce intelligence that saved American lives.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I mean the fact is that some of this information that we have found out that led to Usama bin Laden actually came from these enhanced interrogation techniques.
If we have to do enhanced interrogation on terrorists, then I can live with that.
In my book, I detail the critical information we obtained from al Qaeda terrorists after they became compliant following a short period of enhanced interrogation. I have no doubt that that interrogation was legal, necessary and saved lives.
The CIA has acknowledged that it has detained about 100 terrorists since 9/11, and about a third of them have been subjected to what the CIA refers to as 'enhanced interrogation tactics,' and only a small proportion of those have in fact been subjected to the most serious types of enhanced procedures.
I do support enhanced interrogation techniques. Obviously their value is shining through with respect to the bin Laden killing.
We got a lot of information from the detainees that eventually led us to bin Laden.
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.
In the continuing debate over the morality of enhanced interrogation, an essential consideration is often overlooked: intent.
Intelligence collection is not confined to the communications of adversaries or of the guilty. Rather, it's about gaining information otherwise unavailable that would help keep Americans safe and free.
Sometimes we have to take measures to protect the innocent that we do not like. Severe interrogations are sometimes part of doing that.
No opposing quotes found.