tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4509736829271344872.post5013857385768038478..comments2024-03-02T03:24:43.931-05:00Comments on Advanced Analytic Techniques: EVIDENCE GAINED FROM TORTURE: WISHFUL THINKING, CHECKABILITY, AND EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCESKristan J. Wheatonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02566135545863154089noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4509736829271344872.post-712466781637670552016-11-21T10:54:22.769-05:002016-11-21T10:54:22.769-05:00Great point.
-Eric S. Great point. <br />-Eric S. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4509736829271344872.post-76631482390620425912016-11-21T10:52:05.654-05:002016-11-21T10:52:05.654-05:00I think he's saying that "quite probably ...I think he's saying that "quite probably true" means verifiable and I guess somewhat believable. But I agree this wording is confusing. It seems like he's saying as long as whatever the detainee coughs up sounds like a believable answer, and it can be checked, it works.<br />-Eric S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4509736829271344872.post-60755431070738802982016-11-21T10:48:26.706-05:002016-11-21T10:48:26.706-05:00He did include a couple examples of instances when...He did include a couple examples of instances when torture didn't work including the interrogation of the Al-Qaeda operative as well as his mentioning of the archaic practices of torturing females accused of being witches until they confessed to make the interrogations cease. But I agree that I would have placed more credibility in the article if it wasn't clearly biased as opposed to staying neutral while showing the talking points of each side of the argument.<br />-Eric S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4509736829271344872.post-46399971271300222652016-11-21T09:44:52.197-05:002016-11-21T09:44:52.197-05:00Another issue, and one that I think confounds most...Another issue, and one that I think confounds most of the research is that much of the information surrounding the results from "enhanced interrogation" is classified. The data exists, but it will be a long time before anyone gets to compile and study it. Ruark Downinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09226150761903698212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4509736829271344872.post-67083857814966095702016-11-20T23:54:14.192-05:002016-11-20T23:54:14.192-05:00I would agree with Aubrey. Also the authenticity p...I would agree with Aubrey. Also the authenticity piece means its verifiable in some form, and therefore you must either have a piece of information or someone else must have the other piece of information to prove its true. Therefore it runs right into a straight guessing game, if the only means of verifying it is through the targeting and acquisition of the said piece or objective. Particularly if you don't have the proof. Seems like a very slippery slope argument.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15570421089217688796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4509736829271344872.post-75869309349117450012016-11-20T22:20:34.020-05:002016-11-20T22:20:34.020-05:00I think that it's interesting how Franklin spe...I think that it's interesting how Franklin specifies that the information must be "quite probably true" in order for it to be effective, but then says that it must be checked for authenticity to be effective. It would seem like Franklin is saying it must be entirely true, then. Aubrey Hedrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05707584541105661465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4509736829271344872.post-38686555306910384102016-11-19T20:46:48.527-05:002016-11-19T20:46:48.527-05:00Eric,
It was interesting how the author chose to o...Eric,<br />It was interesting how the author chose to only have one case opposing the rest. I was hoping that the author would have shown less bias and more research, but as you stated, due to the nature and sensitivity of this topic the body of research is currently lacking. Charles Bookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16363976406059954349noreply@blogger.com