counter The Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture: Complete Standard Reflowable Flexible Ebook Edition: Complete Standard Reflowable flexible Ebook Edition - Free Download Books
Hot Best Seller

The Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture: Complete Standard Reflowable Flexible Ebook Edition: Complete Standard Reflowable flexible Ebook Edition

Availability: Ready to download

Long awaited: This is The Complete Standard Reflowable Flexible Ebook Edition of the Official Summary Report of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation of the Central Intelligence Agency Interrogation and Detention Program, finally released by the United States government on December 9th, 2014. “A portrait of depravity that is hard to comprehend and even harder t Long awaited: This is The Complete Standard Reflowable Flexible Ebook Edition of the Official Summary Report of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation of the Central Intelligence Agency Interrogation and Detention Program, finally released by the United States government on December 9th, 2014. “A portrait of depravity that is hard to comprehend and even harder to stomach.” – The New York Times “The Senate intelligence committee’s report is a landmark in accountability … It is one of the most shocking documents ever produced by any modern democracy about its own abuses of its own highest principles.” – The Guardian “Releasing this report is an important step to restoring our values and showing the world that we are a just society.”– Senate Intelligence Committee chair Senator Diane Feinstein “The most extensive review of U.S. intelligence-gathering tactics in generations.” – The Los Angeles Times “I believe the American people have a right—indeed, a responsibility—to know what was done in their name; how these practices did or did not serve our interests; and how they comported with our most important values. I commend Chairman Feinstein and her staff for their diligence in seeking a truthful accounting of policies I hope we will never resort to again.” – Senator John McCain


Compare

Long awaited: This is The Complete Standard Reflowable Flexible Ebook Edition of the Official Summary Report of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation of the Central Intelligence Agency Interrogation and Detention Program, finally released by the United States government on December 9th, 2014. “A portrait of depravity that is hard to comprehend and even harder t Long awaited: This is The Complete Standard Reflowable Flexible Ebook Edition of the Official Summary Report of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation of the Central Intelligence Agency Interrogation and Detention Program, finally released by the United States government on December 9th, 2014. “A portrait of depravity that is hard to comprehend and even harder to stomach.” – The New York Times “The Senate intelligence committee’s report is a landmark in accountability … It is one of the most shocking documents ever produced by any modern democracy about its own abuses of its own highest principles.” – The Guardian “Releasing this report is an important step to restoring our values and showing the world that we are a just society.”– Senate Intelligence Committee chair Senator Diane Feinstein “The most extensive review of U.S. intelligence-gathering tactics in generations.” – The Los Angeles Times “I believe the American people have a right—indeed, a responsibility—to know what was done in their name; how these practices did or did not serve our interests; and how they comported with our most important values. I commend Chairman Feinstein and her staff for their diligence in seeking a truthful accounting of policies I hope we will never resort to again.” – Senator John McCain

30 review for The Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture: Complete Standard Reflowable Flexible Ebook Edition: Complete Standard Reflowable flexible Ebook Edition

  1. 4 out of 5

    Jeremy

    Of the many profoundly uncomfortable decisions our Government made during the early years of the 'War on Terror', this book is a vital and disturbing chronicle of one of the darkest and most mysterious. What really shocks about this report is not merely the descriptions of torture, though I found reading about people being stripped naked and handcuffed in stress positions for days at a time, deprived of sleep for weeks at a time, being force fed rectally, being made to wear diapers to defacate in Of the many profoundly uncomfortable decisions our Government made during the early years of the 'War on Terror', this book is a vital and disturbing chronicle of one of the darkest and most mysterious. What really shocks about this report is not merely the descriptions of torture, though I found reading about people being stripped naked and handcuffed in stress positions for days at a time, deprived of sleep for weeks at a time, being force fed rectally, being made to wear diapers to defacate in, and of course, being water-boarded (is there a more frightening or definitive image of secretive American power in the last quarter century?) to send me into a head space beyond simple moral outrage and verging into sheer horror and revulsion. No, what really REALLY shocks about this is the almost gleeful incompetence of everyone involved. The CIA at various times had essentially no idea how many people it detained, who those people actually were, and what if anything their value was for intelligence gathering, or if they even had any intelligence to offer at all. And this incompetence was hidden and obfuscated time and time again, not just from the public and the media, but from the Bush administration, from foreign governments, from the judicial branch, and from true congressional oversight. The CIA's rendition, detention and interrogation program was literally power run amok, justifying itself by deception, attempting to prolong itself based on faulty information, and making itself accountable to no meaningful set of standards or restraints. There's been lots of talk about this report being politically and ideologically motivated (as if ANY report created by congress isn't full of such motives). But the investigation which produced this began well after the program in question ended, and under a completely new administration. The full report (of which this book is merely the summary) is over 6,000 pages in length and took 5 years to create; hardly a time frame in which to score a few cheap political points. The senate torture report is as sincere an attempt at an official reckoning with these issues as we will likely ever see without possessing a high level security clearance. It showcases one of the most famously secretive organizations in our government engaging in behavior that blatently contradicts some of our most hallowed legal and constitutional principles. And all of it was paid for by our tax dollars, tacitly approved by our elected representatives, and done in the name of the American people. Whether what the CIA did in its secretive black sites will be repudiated and deplored or held up as a valid standard of counter-intelligence in future times of conflict is, ultimately, up to us. Any American with even a tangential interest in government accountability, transparency, and constitutional and human rights should read this. This is an essential document of our time.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Jeeps

    The publisher is offering the ebook FREE for a week in light of Trump's nomination of Gina Haspel to head the CIA. More details here: https://www.mhpbooks.com/were-giving-... (Warning at the link for an excerpt with detailed description of torture, as well as in the book itself, of course.) The publisher is offering the ebook FREE for a week in light of Trump's nomination of Gina Haspel to head the CIA. More details here: https://www.mhpbooks.com/were-giving-... (Warning at the link for an excerpt with detailed description of torture, as well as in the book itself, of course.)

  3. 4 out of 5

    Alex Linschoten

    Not as coherent a read as the 9/11 report, but worth dipping into nonetheless. I've written up some general thoughts that I jotted down while reading, now reordered but still somewhat disjointed. The book was a far more argumentative document than the 9/11 report. With the latter, the goal was (in part) to explain to the American public how this happened, what happened etc. As a result, they really tried hard to make it readable, accessible, and to give it some sort of narrative momentum. You can Not as coherent a read as the 9/11 report, but worth dipping into nonetheless. I've written up some general thoughts that I jotted down while reading, now reordered but still somewhat disjointed. The book was a far more argumentative document than the 9/11 report. With the latter, the goal was (in part) to explain to the American public how this happened, what happened etc. As a result, they really tried hard to make it readable, accessible, and to give it some sort of narrative momentum. You can read all about this in the memoirs of the people who were involved with the 9/11 Commission. With the torture report, something far more legalistic seems to have been at the forefront of their goal and approach. It was far less generally expansive and expressive than I might have hoped, and there was *a lot* of repetition. The repetition stems from how the document is structured. Quite often, because each section is making a different case, we have to revisit each separate interrogation. As a result, I feel like I read dozens of slightly different versions of the KSM or Abu Zubayda interrogation history. The meat of the report/book shows (or, at least, seems to show; I'll come back to this) how the CIA misled, lied and manipulated throughout the post-9/11 period. Public congressional enquiries seem to have been invitations to lie and misrepresent, and the culture of leaking information to the media was embraced as a way of furthering this obfuscation. This seems to have extended to the extent to which the law was followed. Moreover, the compartmentalism (and sheer scale of the bureaucratic system) of government seems to have made it easy to lie, especially when there were low incentives for doing the hard work of checking up on what was happening. I conclude from reading this report (in tandem with various other reports and stories in recent years) that, most likely, if the CIA or some other unnamed part of the US government wants to detain you and hold you (or kill you) without open legal process, they're probably going to go right ahead. Maybe this is an over-reading of the evidence, but it seems clear that the law is fluid and people in power will do whatever they want. The legal standards -- and the debate within the system over the details of those standards -- don't seem to have been effective at provoking real reflections among those involved. The main thing they seem to have inspired was semantic squabbling and petty legalism to cheat the system. Internal feedback loops and voices of dissent seem to have been important in not allowing things to get worse, but they had no teeth so were ultimately ineffectual and unheard. It seemed that the feeling of certainty and a belief of somehow being on the right path led to a variety of the mistakes and crimes described in the report. People pushed through their doubts, or tried to convince others that they just needed more time, or more waterboardings etc. Confirmation bias seems to have been a really serious issue, made all the more salient given the apparent lack of information or understanding at the time, and investigators followed up on a wide variety of lines of enquiry, often finding what they were looking for when subjects responded to their enquiries with information, information that later turned out to be false. As in all research work, you'll find what you're looking for. There should have been more value placed in avoiding these sorts of fundamental biases of analysis. As a corollary, too much emphasis seems to have been placed on short-term gain to the exclusion of long-term considerations. This is systemic within our culture, it seems -- despite the valiant efforts of organisations like the Long Now Foundation [http://longnow.org/] -- and maybe this is accentuated because of the way our political systems function. Nevertheless, it seems more heed could have been given to thinking more strategically. Two things were missing, I felt. Some sort of account of CIA anxiety and soul-searching at realising they had dropped the ball with regards to the 9/11 attacks would have helped balance out the report, and could probably help explain at least one factor in how things headed down the path that it did. I also feel that the report could have added some sense of doubt as to their conclusions. They had access to a lot of information and correspondence etc, but this wasn't a report or accounting from the inside of the CIA. Records were destroyed, not everything was written down etc. The actors responsible could have shed light on a bunch of things where the report itself admits it has no idea what happened. I don't have the exact figures for how much the report cost to produce, but the FAQ suggests that it's in the order of tens of millions of USD, which just goes to show that proper study and historical explanation is worth its weight in gold. [http://opensocietypolicycenter.org/wp...]. The report is really well written, and even though I could have done with something that had more of a narrative flow to it (and much less repetition, I learnt a lot reading through it. P.S. Melville House did a really great job making this text available in electronic format for ebook readers, taking the non-OCRed PDF and preparing it for publication over December 2014. A real public service.

  4. 5 out of 5

    Liz Janet

    I decided to read this due to John Oliver's segment on torture because I too had some misguided ideas of it. Segment on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmeF2... I decided to read this due to John Oliver's segment on torture because I too had some misguided ideas of it. Segment on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmeF2...

  5. 4 out of 5

    kami little

    I feel the information in this book is important and, for the most part, well-presented.

  6. 5 out of 5

    Phil McGyver

    Of the many controversial decisions made by the US government in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the establishment of a network of black sites and the employment of enhanced interrogation techniques that would be labeled torture (not just by the usual leftists but by none other than the Red Cross) is definitely one of the most controversial. If the report’s conclusions are taken at face value and accepted as factually and historically accurate, this is the conclusion you would have to arrive at: a Of the many controversial decisions made by the US government in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the establishment of a network of black sites and the employment of enhanced interrogation techniques that would be labeled torture (not just by the usual leftists but by none other than the Red Cross) is definitely one of the most controversial. If the report’s conclusions are taken at face value and accepted as factually and historically accurate, this is the conclusion you would have to arrive at: a very large number of CIA personnel orchestrated a massive, years-long conspiracy in which they 1) lied to the Justice Department about the EITs they planned to employ to gain formal legal support for them 2) recklessly detained people who met no legal standard for detention, without even properly accounting for their number, 3) systematically lied to their overseers about the detainees’ conditions, 4) impeded oversight by the White House, Congress, and their own IG, 5) ignored numerous critiques and objections from their own workforce, and 6) then managed a coordinated program of targeted leaks of classified information in order to manipulate the media into inaccurately portraying the effectiveness of the EITs — all so that, year after year, they could stubbornly maintain a program that...wait for it...was producing no intelligence of any worth! The report allows for no other conclusion than this one, and accepting the report as a truthful, definitive account requires its acceptance. Obviously, the report does not get into moral issues, focusing its inquiry around three main questions: 1) did the program follow guidelines set by the Justice Department? 2) did it help prevent terrorist attacks?, and 3) was Congress, the White House, and the Justice Department kept adequately informed? The Senate report tries very hard to make these answers a definitive no, and it reads much more like a prosecutor’s brief than a historical document. Feinstein has been the politician most identified with the report, and its release has done much to appease her leftist base, who apparently have no problem with Feinstein’s support for the NSA’s collection of bulk phone records (“It’s called protecting America,” she says), even though two independent panels have doubted its value, or with the Agency’s drone program. There’s been a lot of buzz that the release of the report was motivated by politics. Of course it was. The Democrats have long claimed to be against these practices, and are now claiming tohave been kept in the dark regarding the program. Whether you believe that or not is up to you. Another apparent problem with the report is that the authors refused to interview any of the participants. As such, it relies exclusively on cable traffic between Langley and the various black sites. Again, the scope of the report is specific, and, unfortunately, the report has nothing to say about the Agency’s use of aircraft proprietaries to shuttle the detainees between their points of origin and the various black sites. One of the most striking headings in the conclusions section is this: "CIA's use of enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.” The very next sentence after this conclusion reads, “According to CIA records, seven of the 39 CIA detainees known to have been subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques produced no intelligence while in CIA custody.” In other words, EITs were ineffective because 18% of detainees subjected to the techniques revealed no intelligence---while 82% of detainees subjected to the techniques did. Is this supposed to convince us that the techniques were ineffective? Do these SSCI staffers take us for idiots? Apparently so. In another instance, the authors claim that the CIA learned about Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti “prior to any detainee reporting.” This is misleading: the Agency had information about the Kuwaiti, but none of it was corroborated until it had access to detainee interrogations. Whether these particular interrogations involved EITs, however, is still a matter of dispute, and readers will pick whatever version suits them. The report also ignores context to some extent; following 9/11 there was a surge of overseas threat reporting and a widespread perception that there would be some sort of second wave? How did that affect the performance of the Agency or the authorities that the government delegated to the Agency? Isn’t that a reasonable question? At the same time, the report documents many shortcomings on the Agency’s part. In one instance, the Agency claimed that reports from KSM’s interrogation led to the arrest of Saleh al-Marri---even though al-Marri was captured in December 2001 and KSM was captured in March 2003. Either the officers involved were incompetent or their memories were pretty damn short. Also, the report claims that "there is no indication in CIA records that Abu Zubaydah provided information on bin al-Shibh's whereabouts.” It cites no evidence to support this claim, even though Zubaydah reportedly identified bin al-Shibh four times, according to the minority report. The report claims that the CIA impeded oversight by its own inspector general. The law requires the IG to report its level of access to CIA programs and to file reports when its access is impeded. If the CIA really did illegally interfere in this area, one would expect reports to be filed, and for the Intelligence Committee to have enough clout to gain access to them. Unfortunately, the report does not cite any such documentary evidence. The IG made almost 30 reports about the program throughout its duration, visited two of the black sites, and of course, reviewed the 92 interrogation tapes that were eventually destroyed by Jose Rodriguez. Often the analysis is cursory or convoluted. One particularly glaring problem that is often raised is this: if, as the report claims, the program was ineffective from the start, why was it kept going for four years, even when Congress was briefed? To be clear, only the leadership of the oversight committees was briefed when Abu Zubaydah was interrogated, with the others only briefed in 2006. By all accounts, the leaders posed no objections at this initial briefing. It is entirely possible that this fairly large and expensive detention program was kept going only by default. If it was, why doesn’t the report look into this? Another question is the issue of interviews; the committee did not interview any of the CIA or government personnel involved inthe program. Whether this is the Committee’s fault is unclear, given that Obama’s Justice Department opposed such a move. But I don’t doubt they would have proved useful. The report charges that the CIA “actively avoided or impeded oversight” by Congress. Unlikely; if the committee chairmen wanted to brief the other members, they could have done so on their own initiative, or expressed this wish to the White House. If they really wanted to brief their colleagues, I’m sure they would have found a way to do it. Again, the Study did not conduct any interviews; if they had, we might know what these members were briefed on, but we don’t. And restricting briefings to committee leaders isn’t exactly unprecedented. The Study claims that Bush was not briefed until 2006; Bush’s memoirs indicate he was briefed in 2002. The Study cites this section of the memoir in a footnote somewhere but does not explain the apparent contradiction. The Study also claims that the CIA “blocked State Department leadership” from access to information regarding the black sites, but cites no real evidence. Another aspect is that the RDI program was basically three different programs: renditions, in which terrorists and terrorist suspects were illegally snatched by CIA paramilitary officers and transported by planes to the various black sites; detention, in which the prisoners were held indefinitely in black sites; and interrogation, in which the prisoners were questioned using both standard rapport-building techniques and the controversial EITs. Were all of these aspects complete failures, or just the EITs? The report constantly hints that detainees were cooperative until subjected to EITs. Were traditional interrogations more successful? These traditional interrogations were part of the program, after all. As an example, the Study claims that the CIA was inaccurate in asserting that EITs led to the disruption of a terrorist attack on Camp Lemonier. This is misleading; nobody ever claimed EITs led to the plot’s disruption; President Bush asserted that terrorists “in CIA custody” provided this information. Also, the study does not offer a single recommendation regarding interrogation practices even though this was one the study’s purposes. This is odd, given that it was part of the Study’s terms of reference. I’m not convinced that this report is completely historically accurate. Is it entirely useless? No. Can it be called “definitive”? Probably not.

  7. 5 out of 5

    Joe Broadmeadow

    The definitive examination of the effectiveness of CIA "enhanced interrogation techniques." Puts the bed the notion that torture, by any other name, is useful as a tool for interrogation. It is immoral, un-American, and ineffective as an interrogation technique. Well worth the effort to read and examine the conclusions. Without spoiling the story, the total of actionable, real-time intelligence gathered through years of applying these "enhanced" techniques is zero. The only tangible evidence obta The definitive examination of the effectiveness of CIA "enhanced interrogation techniques." Puts the bed the notion that torture, by any other name, is useful as a tool for interrogation. It is immoral, un-American, and ineffective as an interrogation technique. Well worth the effort to read and examine the conclusions. Without spoiling the story, the total of actionable, real-time intelligence gathered through years of applying these "enhanced" techniques is zero. The only tangible evidence obtained was historical and generally available from other sources before the application of these methods. Many of the CIA officers involved complained that the procedures were counter-productive. The most frightening thing was the resistance to giving the FBI, and its experienced interrogators, full access. The record shows that high-value targets like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, undergoing enhanced interrogation, fabricated stories to stall or delay the process. He never provided one single bit of actionable material in the years he was in custody. On the contrary, FBI interrogators did get actionable material when they had the first crack at those in custody. The study highlights a troubling element of American history.

  8. 4 out of 5

    Liana

    Solidly put together, meticulously researched and utterly damning. I found every aspect interesting, even the references (very thoroughly redacted). It was a particularly good read after John Yoo's "War By Other Means", the book explaining post-9/11 actions by the Bush Administration from the OLC perspective. John Yoo's book made me think and gave me a more nuanced perspective on the issues and actions of the past several years, but the Senate report blew his main argument out of the water, that Solidly put together, meticulously researched and utterly damning. I found every aspect interesting, even the references (very thoroughly redacted). It was a particularly good read after John Yoo's "War By Other Means", the book explaining post-9/11 actions by the Bush Administration from the OLC perspective. John Yoo's book made me think and gave me a more nuanced perspective on the issues and actions of the past several years, but the Senate report blew his main argument out of the water, that the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques were effective and resulted in actionable intelligence that we could not have gotten otherwise. It also throws a bright spotlight on CIA's standard interrogation techniques and broader communication and power dynamic problems. Very interesting read.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Anna Taylor

    I opted to read this prior to watching the movie. I wanted to have a better sense of the recitation vs dramatization. The poorly conceived, justified and conducted program is a war crime. The people who promoted these actions have not been held responsible. The report repeats information, emphasizing the pattern of lying and deception by program operators. We had better procedures and gained nothing except crippling our moral standing. Leadership should have been better engaged, sought honest ev I opted to read this prior to watching the movie. I wanted to have a better sense of the recitation vs dramatization. The poorly conceived, justified and conducted program is a war crime. The people who promoted these actions have not been held responsible. The report repeats information, emphasizing the pattern of lying and deception by program operators. We had better procedures and gained nothing except crippling our moral standing. Leadership should have been better engaged, sought honest evaluations and weighed the costs. The need to know and thwart terrorist attacks was real, but this did not serve. The unitary executive is present in the arrogance of the CIA in failing to address congress honestly and completely.

  10. 4 out of 5

    AttackGirl

    Be prepared to vomit. Once you read it you will understand why ... James Comey, Hillary Clinton, I won't list them all and spoil the fun but you will hear the names and see the game that was played and you will understand why they will never go to jail for "lost email" or be "unfunded". Where was, no IS the UN Human Rights Council that put to death WWII military leaders and doctors. Where is the outrage at the hubris of the CIA, the FBI, now the public will see how the dont ask dont tell really wo Be prepared to vomit. Once you read it you will understand why ... James Comey, Hillary Clinton, I won't list them all and spoil the fun but you will hear the names and see the game that was played and you will understand why they will never go to jail for "lost email" or be "unfunded". Where was, no IS the UN Human Rights Council that put to death WWII military leaders and doctors. Where is the outrage at the hubris of the CIA, the FBI, now the public will see how the dont ask dont tell really works.

  11. 5 out of 5

    Aliya

    This may be one of the most disturbing documents I've ever read. It took me a long time to complete it because I needed a breather every few pages. After reading this, I will never put anything past any government ever again. Yup... it's that bad! Nonetheless, I think every person should read this in hopes of having a more peaceful future. Torture is not the answer. This may be one of the most disturbing documents I've ever read. It took me a long time to complete it because I needed a breather every few pages. After reading this, I will never put anything past any government ever again. Yup... it's that bad! Nonetheless, I think every person should read this in hopes of having a more peaceful future. Torture is not the answer.

  12. 4 out of 5

    James Koehler

    One of the most disturbing books i’ve ever read. Not only for the details of torture done by Americans, but the CIA’s consistent deception of what they did and its effectiveness. The lies told to all members of America, congress, president, and the public; shows their lack of respect for all parties.

  13. 4 out of 5

    Daniel Casey

    This isn't light reading. In fact, it feels like the ultimate TL;DR document but this alongside the 9/11 Commission Report make up some of the most important historical and government documents concerning the War on Terror This isn't light reading. In fact, it feels like the ultimate TL;DR document but this alongside the 9/11 Commission Report make up some of the most important historical and government documents concerning the War on Terror

  14. 5 out of 5

    Gary Bendall

    Thorough if repetitive.

  15. 5 out of 5

    Katelin

    I would leave a review but it would just be redacted. This was torture to read don't know why I read it. I would leave a review but it would just be redacted. This was torture to read don't know why I read it.

  16. 5 out of 5

    Pie Resting-Place

    Just watch the movie, not worth the slog.

  17. 5 out of 5

    Han-Ching Joyce Chiu

    Readers should be aware that this is not a book written with any intention to engage the readers. It is a report of facts, an account of a sequence of events about the development of detention system and the so called “enhanced interrogation technique” applied by the CIA. Basically, this book is as dry as it comes. It’s difficult to rate the book in the same way that it’s difficult to rate a textbook. For the general public, the section titled “Findings and Conclusions” contains pretty much all Readers should be aware that this is not a book written with any intention to engage the readers. It is a report of facts, an account of a sequence of events about the development of detention system and the so called “enhanced interrogation technique” applied by the CIA. Basically, this book is as dry as it comes. It’s difficult to rate the book in the same way that it’s difficult to rate a textbook. For the general public, the section titled “Findings and Conclusions” contains pretty much all the information that one will ever need. The rest of the book is comprised of details on specific events surrounding individual detainees or the legal implications involved with these incidents. By the end of section III, I found myself starting to speed read the book. There’s something to be learnt though. Mainly how ineffective and inaccurate the info derived from torture is. The scale of cover up and the incompetence of the personnel involved were so amazing that oxymoronically one would consider it to be far-fetched were it fiction yet believable in real life. To conclude, I don’t think I can treat the “enhanced interrogation” frequently depicted in films the same way that I used to anymore.

  18. 4 out of 5

    Bradley Morgan

    Led by committee chair Senator Dianne Feinstein, this bipartisan government report details information about the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation Program from 2001 to 2006. Compiling information from over six million CIA documents and pieces of correspondence, this report points out inaccuracies and misinformation presented by the CIA regarding their use of enhanced interrogation techniques (or torture, for short). Making international headlines, the report was released December 2014 after a vo Led by committee chair Senator Dianne Feinstein, this bipartisan government report details information about the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation Program from 2001 to 2006. Compiling information from over six million CIA documents and pieces of correspondence, this report points out inaccuracies and misinformation presented by the CIA regarding their use of enhanced interrogation techniques (or torture, for short). Making international headlines, the report was released December 2014 after a vote in 2009 to open an investigation. The most striking quote in this report came from CIA Director Porter Goss on March 15th, 2006. He said the CIA’s interrogation program “is not a brutality. It’s more of an art or science that has been refined.” That quote perfectly summarized the CIA’s viewpoint on the treatment of detainees. The report was conducted after the CIA destroyed almost 100 video recordings of interrogations in 2005. What the committee would soon find revealed the CIA conducted forms of torture that were illegal and presented falsified and misleading information to the media, the public, Congress, and the President. The original report that was declassified by the President and released to the public was 6,700 pages. The Executive Summary of the report was published for commercial sale and contained summaries and annotations of key details in the report including , 1) use of enhanced interrogation techniques were not effective in acquiring intelligence, 2) claims of its effectiveness were inaccurate, and 3) the conditions of confinement for the detainees were harsher than reported. I wanted to read this report for a number of reasons. Some of which included that I have never read a government report before and that this was a contemporary issue. On a more personal and local level, an alleged “black site” used by the CIA and Chicago Police Department was recently identified by a British newspaper. These claims haven’t been confirmed by any government agency, so it is all very speculative at this point. However, the possibility that there was a facility where people were abused, unlawfully detained, and perhaps even tortured is a lot to take.

  19. 4 out of 5

    Andy

    Had to read it to find out a version of the truth. With all the redactions, it was hard to follow at times but the story seems pretty clear - the CIA lied to cover up their desire torture. Of course I begin to wonder - how much is the CIA painting itself to look incompetent so that the reading public begins to think they are incompetent when the reality could be something different? How stupid are they and how much of it is just for show. If this is all to be believed, and why shouldn't it, the Had to read it to find out a version of the truth. With all the redactions, it was hard to follow at times but the story seems pretty clear - the CIA lied to cover up their desire torture. Of course I begin to wonder - how much is the CIA painting itself to look incompetent so that the reading public begins to think they are incompetent when the reality could be something different? How stupid are they and how much of it is just for show. If this is all to be believed, and why shouldn't it, the CIA is guilty of great crimes against the people of the United States for misrepresenting what they were doing. This does not even begin to cover what they did to 100 plus people in the name of national security. When did we become "that" country? Were we always and it was just better hidden in the past? Aren't we supposed to be better than all of this? So many questions that won't be answered because of the lying, cheating, malevolent behavior of an agency that claims we need them to do the nasty work we don't want to think about but if this is how they operate, we get nothing but blowback from their gross abuses. Along with so many Wall Street insiders responsible for the economic meltdown, I think this country would get a boost in world opinion if CIA and government officials were perp walked out of their houses. This goes for all the CIA directors of the past 15 years (or more), the people who authorized this ghastly behavior, and especially the lawyers who tried to put some sort of legal justification coverage on this - I'm looking squarely at you Alberto Gonzales (among others).

  20. 4 out of 5

    Ray

    This was a particularly difficult book, partly due to the subject matter (CIA torture), and partly due to the fact that so much of the material has been heavily redacted. So many pages have as many words blacked-out as not. So the continuity of the text is frequently lost. Even without that limitation, the committee study isn't written as a novel, but rather a series of subjects which vary frequently, so there isn't much continuity to begin with. With that said, the information in the book is st This was a particularly difficult book, partly due to the subject matter (CIA torture), and partly due to the fact that so much of the material has been heavily redacted. So many pages have as many words blacked-out as not. So the continuity of the text is frequently lost. Even without that limitation, the committee study isn't written as a novel, but rather a series of subjects which vary frequently, so there isn't much continuity to begin with. With that said, the information in the book is still important to review. In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, and the uncertainty of the times, those in charge took the approach that they needed to determine if other attacks were being planned. Sometimes, and too often if you read this book, lines were crossed in trying to obtain intelligence from captives. Those in charge maintain that the "enhanced interrogation techniques" did not constitute "torture", and that the methods used produced important intelligence which prevented other attacks. This book shows the flaws in that argument. Personally, I think Ali Soufan's book, "The Black Banners: The Inside Story of 9/11 and the War Against Al-Qaeda" is a much more readable book detailing the failings of torture, but both books come to the same conclusion, i.e., we got no actionable intelligence by means of torture, and that the conventional interrogation methods are not just more humane, but also more effective.

  21. 4 out of 5

    John Ink

    Chiron Academic Press did a job that the Senate was supposed to do. This epic task of creating a free-flowing legible and searchable version of the intelligence report on the torture is highly laudable. This will definitely help the public and researchers to motivate to study the report. And the horrors of implementing the torture tactics that are not supposed to be used will be widely appreciated. I doubt anybody can stop thinking (after studying this report) that the methods used to exhort the Chiron Academic Press did a job that the Senate was supposed to do. This epic task of creating a free-flowing legible and searchable version of the intelligence report on the torture is highly laudable. This will definitely help the public and researchers to motivate to study the report. And the horrors of implementing the torture tactics that are not supposed to be used will be widely appreciated. I doubt anybody can stop thinking (after studying this report) that the methods used to exhort the information are anything but barbaric. A highly recommended book for the masses, aspiring politicians, and psychology students. This report is not only enlightening, but also educating. It teaches the effects of using horrifying measures better than any scientific report out there. I think this report can also be considered as a memoir of American behind the Scenes War. This enormous book is dry but enlightening. It feels like it will take eternity to finish. That would have been the case if Chiron Academic Press had not come up with this free flowing version of report. At the cost it is priced, one can hardly feel the pinch when on pocket when it comes to buying such an enormous data filled report.

  22. 4 out of 5

    Shannon

    This book is truly horrifying to read but I think that it is also vitally important for every American to read. The revulsion and loathing that I have for the techniques that were used against these people (some of whom were found to be in a case of mistaken identity) pales in comparison to the disgust that I have for the people who committed or were a part of this sanctioned torture. We're made to believe by the head of the CIA, politicians, and others who are in support of this program that it This book is truly horrifying to read but I think that it is also vitally important for every American to read. The revulsion and loathing that I have for the techniques that were used against these people (some of whom were found to be in a case of mistaken identity) pales in comparison to the disgust that I have for the people who committed or were a part of this sanctioned torture. We're made to believe by the head of the CIA, politicians, and others who are in support of this program that it gets us much needed intelligence that we would otherwise not get out of the detainees and that is necessary to save lives, but that is simply not the case. Torturing detainees gives us no new information and can irreparably harm these individuals, some of whom had done nothing wrong. It also harms the American image abroad that as a "civilized" country we are still using barbarian techniques against people. We should be better than this, and we can be better than this.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Albert Galliano

    I was fascinated when the report on torture was first published. I had tried to read it in its entirety. I could not. I started doubting whether releasing this enormous report as a scan copy was meant to stop the readers from reading! Especially it was almost impossible to read the half of the text that was in the form of footnotes. I wonder how this could be justified, considering the fact that the compilation of report itself was a $40 million task. However, with the release of this version, I I was fascinated when the report on torture was first published. I had tried to read it in its entirety. I could not. I started doubting whether releasing this enormous report as a scan copy was meant to stop the readers from reading! Especially it was almost impossible to read the half of the text that was in the form of footnotes. I wonder how this could be justified, considering the fact that the compilation of report itself was a $40 million task. However, with the release of this version, I was delighted to scroll and read through the entire report in just two days. I sincerely thank Chiron Academic press for their enormous efforts in giving me an easy to read eBook version that is priced so low. I feel that they did a wonderful job which was indeed the responsibility of the Senate.

  24. 5 out of 5

    Blake

    A horrifying artifact of the Bush Administration and a compelling argument for the disbanding of the CIA. Not only are the actions described morally despicable, they also were totally and completely useless in combating global terror or securing the United States from future attacks, having yielded no new or prescient information about the activities of our enemies. Not only is moral ambivalence of this sort typical to the history of the CIA, but so is the blundering. The notion that we have a s A horrifying artifact of the Bush Administration and a compelling argument for the disbanding of the CIA. Not only are the actions described morally despicable, they also were totally and completely useless in combating global terror or securing the United States from future attacks, having yielded no new or prescient information about the activities of our enemies. Not only is moral ambivalence of this sort typical to the history of the CIA, but so is the blundering. The notion that we have a shadow army of secret agents doing anything but creating enemies, and destroying our moral rectitude and undermining our national identity in the process, is laughable.

  25. 5 out of 5

    Peter

    pure evil Having read this report, I am convinced that evil is most effectively perpetrated by bureaucrats. This report catalogues a litany of lies, misrepresentations, and obfuscation perpetrated by the CIA against congress, the president, and the world in general. It is amazing to me that no one is in prison because of this, but we as a country are poorer for having allowed these acts to happen. What is clear is that we tortured people, repeatedly, but did not derive any useful information as a pure evil Having read this report, I am convinced that evil is most effectively perpetrated by bureaucrats. This report catalogues a litany of lies, misrepresentations, and obfuscation perpetrated by the CIA against congress, the president, and the world in general. It is amazing to me that no one is in prison because of this, but we as a country are poorer for having allowed these acts to happen. What is clear is that we tortured people, repeatedly, but did not derive any useful information as a result of this torture and continue now to face the consequences for our actions.

  26. 5 out of 5

    Joe

    Sad and persuasive takedown of all the "inaccuracies" the CIA promoted about the need for their "enhanced interrogation techniques." In my opinion, the CIA should actually promote this book, since the behind-the-scenes look into their internal discussions shows that there is diversity of opinion within the CIA, instead of it being the soulless, lawless, violent bureaucracy that many imagine. Unfortunately, those worst elements are on display here, and defended by their administrators even when i Sad and persuasive takedown of all the "inaccuracies" the CIA promoted about the need for their "enhanced interrogation techniques." In my opinion, the CIA should actually promote this book, since the behind-the-scenes look into their internal discussions shows that there is diversity of opinion within the CIA, instead of it being the soulless, lawless, violent bureaucracy that many imagine. Unfortunately, those worst elements are on display here, and defended by their administrators even when it's staring them in the face.

  27. 5 out of 5

    Julian

    Very heavy and very repetitive, hard to get through but I feel it's a book that's necessary to read, knowing the cruel and horrific things as well as the level of incompetence that happened under the CIA's watch. If you're after something exciting, this book probably won't get close to what you're after, but it is nevertheless a fascinating read as you begin to understand that the CIA did not and still doesn't want you to know these things. I recommend it but it certainly won't appeal to everyon Very heavy and very repetitive, hard to get through but I feel it's a book that's necessary to read, knowing the cruel and horrific things as well as the level of incompetence that happened under the CIA's watch. If you're after something exciting, this book probably won't get close to what you're after, but it is nevertheless a fascinating read as you begin to understand that the CIA did not and still doesn't want you to know these things. I recommend it but it certainly won't appeal to everyone.

  28. 4 out of 5

    Eleanor

    Holy shit, this book is important. It's also immensely readable and clear throughout. For full review, see https://ellethinks.wordpress.com/2015... Holy shit, this book is important. It's also immensely readable and clear throughout. For full review, see https://ellethinks.wordpress.com/2015...

  29. 4 out of 5

    Don Kasprzak

    One step forward, two steps back.

  30. 5 out of 5

    Ken

    Extremely important ... though the prose is plodding, and the material repetitious, and way too much is blacked out. The rogue agency has yet to be brought to account for the crimes it committed.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.