The Ex-Veep and Torture: See Dick (Not) Read

Can Dick Cheney not read?

On Tuesday, the former power-behind-the-throne reacted to the release of a 2004 CIA report examining the use of enhanced interrogation techniques (aka torture) on detained terrorist suspects by saying:

The documents released Monday clearly demonstrate that the individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al-Qaida. This intelligence saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks. These detainees also, according to the documents, played a role in nearly every capture of al-Qaida members and associates since 2002.

Cheney has long contended that using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods produced intelligence that essentially saved the United States from additional attacks in the years after 9/11. And he tried to exploit the public unveiling of this report to buttress his argument. There's one problem: the document doesn't back him up.

This CIA report was produced by the agency's inspector general in response to reports of specific abuses and concerns raised by CIA officers regarding the use of extreme interrogation methods, and it repeatedly notes that the effectiveness of these techniques could not be accurately measured.

The report does say that the CIA's overall interrogation program yielded "intelligence that has enabled the identification and apprehension of other terrorists and warned of terrorist plots planned for the United States and around the world." But that includes all interrogations. When it comes to those involving the extreme measures, the report is less certain: "Measuring the effectiveness of EITs . . . is a more subjective process and not without some concern." Noting that "there is limited data on which to access their effectiveness," the report states that determining:

the overall effectiveness of EITs is challenging for a number of reasons including: (1) the Agency cannot determine with any certainty the totality of the intelligence the detainee actually possesses; (2) each detainee has different fears of and tolerance for EITs; (3) the application of the same EITs by different interrogators may have different results; and [three lines deleted].

And the CIA inspector general points out, "The effectiveness of particular interrogation techniques in eliciting information that might not otherwise have been obtained cannot be so easily measured." There's no telling if information that was gathered after a detainee was waterboarded might have been gotten another way. Simply put, maybe the EITs worked; maybe they didn't.

The report also notes that the CIA's Office of Medical Services believed that other parts of the CIA "appreciably overstated" the "power" of waterboarding and that there was no reason "to believe that applying the waterboard with the frequency and intensity with which it was used . . . was either efficacious or medically safe."

Now go back and review Cheney's statement quoted above. Note that he says that suspects "subjected" to EITs provided critical intelligence. It's a clever formulation. He's not specifically asserting that they did so due to the EITs. He has slyly crafted language that makes it seem as if that's what happened -- because useful intelligence came from detainees who were interrogated with torture techniques as well as the standard methods. The CIA IG report, though, makes it clear: no one can claim definitively that it was waterboarding and the like that produced the best and most valuable intelligence.

So Cheney is spinning the CIA report. I know that's a shock. But this shows that as more information emerges from the dark corners of the Bush-Cheney years, the more Cheney, the defender-in-chief of the last administration, has to enhance the materials to make his case.

You can follow my postings and media appearances via Twitter.