Enhanced Interrogation Techniques Pros And Cons

With the threats to the United States by foreign nations, techniques such as the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques(EITs) were created. These techniques were developed by the CIA which eventually became integrated into the culture of the United States. Along with the creation of EIT came the debate about the morality of their use in the country. The Enhanced Interrogation Techniques were meant to retrieve important information from prisoners. The idea of “enhanced interrogation techniques’ that would allow the United States to get prisoners to provide accurate information without torturing them” (Risen 177). It is important to note that it was claimed to be harmless to those that were being interrogated. However, after the 9/11 attack in

Some psychologist tried to disprove the effectiveness of EITs in SERE such as Charles Morgan who claimed that “SERE simulated torture techniques [that] impairs memory and prompts inaccurate answers from those subjected to the tactics” (Risen 180). This meant that the interrogators might receive the answers that they seek, but that does not necessarily mean they are correct which discredits the use of these techniques. The trainees were put through techniques that were thought to cause memory damage, but this appeared to be of no importance. Not only was the CIA conducting a torture program, but the “Senate report shows that the CIA had to deceive the nation about the effectiveness of its torture program in order to keep it going and…misled the nation… to make sure that no one from the CIA was ever held accountable for engaging in torture” (Risen 181). Reports were manipulated only to have those that were involved come out unaffected. Torture technique were shielded in order to maintain in compliance to the law that was not in favor of torture which led to organization to change their policies and

The American Psychological Association changed their ethic rules in order to “protect the psychologist who did get involved in the torture program” (Risen 194). Psychologist were given the chance to either follow the government laws even if it did violate the ethical standards of the APA in order to prevent and retaliation. EITs also had legal backing such as by the Justice Departments which argued that “because health professionals were monitoring the interrogations to make sure they stayed within the limits established by the Bush administration” (Risen 195). James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, psychologists, played an important role in the validation in EITs because they omitted the information that other psychologists provided to disprove their methods were safe to