When Torture Becomes Science – New York Times


To some degree, the documents suggest, the two psychologists resisted pressure within the C.I.A. for rigorous assessment of the program’s efficacy. They argued that interrogation strategies can’t be standardized and therefore can’t be compared, like medical treatments, in randomized, prospective fashion.

But backers of more systematic assessment seem to have won out. In an undated document, the C.I.A.’s chief of medical services chided Dr. Mitchell and Dr. Jessen for treating the torture program as an “art form” that “could not be objectively analyzed,” then pressed the “need to look more objectively for the least intrusive way to gain cooperation.”

Is this the stuff of Josef Mengele, the doctor who conducted gruesome experiments on captives at Auschwitz? Or would it be more correct to conclude that the C.I.A. could lawfully collect and review evidence…



Read the full article from the Source…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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