RE: Military Interrogation [OT]

Glover, spake thusly upon matters weighty: 
> >>  Apparently, it is a big really thickly padded suit. The helm has 
> 
> <SNIP>
> 
> >I'd say having light shine in you face 24 hours a day and being
deprived of
> >sleep counts as physical torture.  BTW, Interrogator was one of my
MOSs in
> the
> >US Army.  I went through the school in 91-92, then served for a
couple of
> >years in an interrogation company and I never heard of anything like
that.

Well, I know it was used (as I said) in Desert Storm at least once 
and the Iraqis it was used on broke in the 6-12 hour range. 

> I have to agree with Mike here. Sensory deprivation is considered a
form of
> torture under the GC.

Well apparently the interrogators that I'm talking about felt it was 
more human than other methods, very effective, and ultimately not too 
harmful to the victim. I would have agreed with you, but then why 
would they be teaching this technique? If it is so effective, I guess 
that may be the argument for it. 

 Although it is an effective means of conditioning it
> must be handled very carefully. The fact that someone "spills their
guts" is
> not an effective result in an interrogation. As Mike said, asking the
right
> question and getting a CO-OPERATIVE answer is the desired end result.
A
> subject blubbering and giving you anything he thinks might please you
just
> so he doesn't have to endure any further "treatment" is the same end
result
> as plain old-fashioned torture.

Not necessarily. I think in this case, he just wants to talk to 
another human being. And it doesn't (I'd assume over shorter 
exposures) leave the lasting damage physical interrogation might. 
Plus physical interrogation can bring out a 'you-them' mentality. 
Like you said, you want them to cooperate. 

Now some spy type works have suggested using multiple methods (normal 
requests, then drug, then physical) and corroborating testimony. If 
you have a cooperative subject, you still have to be skeptical of 
them telling you the truth in areas that are hard to verify. You must 
watch for inconsistencies. But yes, you do eventually get to a point 
with any interrogation where the target tries to anticipate what you 
want to hear in order to end the interrogation. 

 No, each individual has a character type
> that is susceptible to a specific series of interrogation methods and
> techniques. Most people respond to what we call "soft, logical
reasoning".

And yet some individuals can sustain themselves with the 'grey man' 
strategy... anyone having SERE or equivalent training, or some of the
special conditioning Intel operatives sometimes receive (on the 
civilian front anyway), may last a lot longer in the 
'conversational-approach' method than in the sensory deprivation 
method which tends to be (I would guess) a great equalizer of men. 

I also think it is well suited to the futuristic and none-to-nice 
world of 2185..... where the Geneva Convention seems to be forgotten 
quite regularly ("Damn, left my copy in my other uniform....").  

> Sorry to say that I've worked with both US and UK interrogators and
not
> heard of 'the suit' either. Maybe it was a trial thing?

Well, tried in Desert Storm, possibly other places, and people in the 
CF have been trained on it. As to widescale deployments, I don't 
imagine so. It is probably only used for important interrogations in 
active theatres.  

> If anyone is really interested in reading about interrogation try a
book
> called "The Interrogator" about Hans Joachim Schaffe an interrogator
in the
> German Luftwaffe in WWII; well accepted as the most effective
interrogator
> in the war. It was required reading on my course.

The Germans had some really good interrogators. Of course, I may 
point out, that depriving an indivdual of food, sleep, medical 
attention, etc. would constitute a lower stage of this 'sensory 
deprivation' approach. Get someone tired, bleary, not thinking 
clearly, and they may trip themselves up (used by unethical police 
departments on uninformed citizens).   

I wasn't speaking in favor of this technology except insofar as 
anything that would save my squad mates lives while not being a true 
attrocity (and since you recover quickly from this, I don't define 
this in quite that league) seems to me to be something I'd want on my 
side in a Hot War. Fortunately, we seem to be able to avoid these 
things. But in the GZG universe, they come up a lot. As do rioter-cop 
scenarios. I can see special police interrogation units using this 
type of tech. 

An interesting aside. David Feintuch wrote a series of depressing 
novels. One of the neat components was Polygraph & Drug testing (P&D) 
which the Admiralty used to get to the root of any court martial or 
military court issue. This was used based on the Truth in Testimony 
Act. This had been passed on the "if you are guilty, you can recant 
your testimony later, but it is admissible" idea and the thought that 
the innocent have little to hide. Kind of 1984 ish. But at least (in 
principle) it would mean more guilty men would pay for their crimes 
and more truth (or perception anyway) would be known. 

Tom 
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay		     
Voice: (613) 831-2018 x 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255

 "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot.  C++ makes
 it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg."
 -Bjarne Stroustrup
**************************************************/