Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

This is the single most damning sentence about the CIA’s torture policies

A Guantanamo detainee stands at the fence in 2009.
A Guantanamo detainee stands at the fence in 2009.
A Guantanamo detainee stands at the fence in 2009.
John Moore/Getty Images
Zack Beauchamp
Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers ideology and challenges to democracy, both at home and abroad. His book on democracy, The Reactionary Spirit, was published 0n July 16. You can purchase it here.

The 525-page Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture is a deeply disturbing read. It documents, among other things, CIA officers forcing hummus into a detainee’s rectum, imprisoning an “intellectually challenged” man “solely as leverage to get a family member to provide information,” and hiding the truth about the horror from the rest of the government.

Perhaps the worst part of all of it is that the CIA should have known inflicting all that pain was pointless — because their own officers told them. This is, in some ways, the most telling sentence of the entire report:

CIA officers regularly called into question whether the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques were effective, assessing that the use of the techniques failed to elicit detainee cooperation or produce accurate intelligence.

While the CIA was “rectally rehydrating” prisoners, many of their own experts were telling them that the torture was pointless. As the Senate report makes very clear, these dissenting officers were right.

“The Committee reviewed 20 of the most frequent and prominent examples of purported counterterrorism successes that the CIA has attributed to the use of its enhanced interrogation techniques, and found them to be wrong in fundamental respects,” it finds.

“In some cases,” the report concludes, “there was no relationship between the cited counterterrorism success and any information provided by detainees during or after the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques.” In the remaining cases, the information either wasn’t new or was acquired before detainees were tortured.

This isn’t an ancillary point. While the case against torture rests on the moral repulsiveness of inflicting pain on a helpless person, the case for torture depends on the fact that it saved lives by stopping terrorist attacks. The CIA’s torture program didn’t do that — as CIA experts said at the time. All of this brutality for naught.

Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
Podcasts
Did Trump actually help Venezuela?Did Trump actually help Venezuela?
Podcast
Podcasts

Post-Maduro, some Venezuelans are feeling cautiously optimistic.

By Ariana Aspuru and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
5 ways the Iran standoff could end5 ways the Iran standoff could end
Politics

Is the US on the verge of a deal with Iran or a return to war?

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Ukraine’s fight against Russia is going better than you might thinkUkraine’s fight against Russia is going better than you might think
Politics

The war in Iran looked like a gift for Russia. It hasn’t worked out that way.

By Joshua Keating
The Logoff
Why Trump says the US-Iran war is overWhy Trump says the US-Iran war is over
The Logoff

Trump’s plan to evade an Iran deadline, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters