One Man Says No To Harsh Interrogation Techniques

[FreakinDJ]

One Man Says No To Harsh Interrogation Techniques

Matthew Alexander led the interrogation team that tracked down al-Qaida leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 2006.

Alexander, a critic of the harsh techniques employed by the military during the administration of George W. Bush, says he used strategic, noncoercive methods of interrogation to find al-Zarqawi, which he wrote about in his book How to Break a Terrorist

http://www.npr.org/2011/02/14/133497869/one-man-says-no-to-harsh-interrogation-techniques

[Luminous Animal]

1. I think he meant to say torture.

[Poll_Blind]

2. Well, I didn't listen to the interview but I read all, including the excerpts and...

...I'm still 40 zip codes away from anything remotely like impressed. At least in what is shared in the article portion of the story it seems like Alexander's revolutionary way of thinking was just not breaking the laws we shot not be breaking anyway. Instead he does some of the worst things that our police do, including lying and making promises which they have no intention of keeping. I'm not saying people we capture in, say, Afghanistan, should be given the same kind of treatment that a U.S. citizen will likely get but I am saying both of them are subpar (at best) given our intentions there.

Because it's worth remembering our intentions there are to actually make a positive impression on the Afghanis we're fighting "for".

Otherwise, they might as well all be Al Quaeda/Taliban because that's what we'll turn them into.

We are paying the tippyist of top dollar to lose wars left and right, both against enemies and the hearts and minds of those we're supposed to "free" or at least "rid" of the enemy.

I inwardly winced a few times reading through this article and especially the excerpt. I see nothing impressive here.

PB