Skip to footer

Senate torture report: six top findings

The Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday released an executive summary of its investigation into the Central Intelligence Agency’s detention and interrogation program – an investigation launched in 2009 after lawmakers learned that the CIA had destroyed videotapes of detainee interrogations. Here are six top findings in the report.

2. The CIA misled the White House and Congress about the effectiveness of the techniques

  • By Anna Mulrine Staff writer

After 9/11, when terrorist plots seemed to be everywhere, the CIA claimed that its enhanced interrogation techniques had helped to thwart a number of plots.

“The CIA used these examples to claim that its enhanced interrogation techniques were not only effective, but also necessary to acquire ‘otherwise unavailable’ actionable intelligence that ‘saved lives,’ ” the report said.

However, the Senate committee found this was not the case. In reviewing 20 of the “most frequent and prominent” examples of such thwarted plots, it found that in some cases there was “no relationship between the cited counterterrorism success and any information provided by detainees during or after the use” of torture.

In the remaining cases, according to the report, the CIA said that the intelligence was the result of enhanced interrogation techniques when it was not. This included cases when the CIA obtained the information prior to the use of these techniques.

2 of 6
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.