Technical Interrogation Manual -MK-Ultra

Guild Practitioner, 2009

Over the past several years, a controversy has arisen over the use of medical and psychological personnel for the purposes of interrogating prisoners in the United States “war on terror.” Recent revelations, including the release of the CIA Inspector General’s 2004 Report on the CIA’s interrogation program, led the human rights organization Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) to conclude that doctors, psychologists and other health professionals designed, implemented and helped supervise “a worldwide torture program” following 9/11. Much of the criticism of this program, and its putative legality or illegality, has focused on dramatically abusive forms of coercive interrogation, such as waterboarding. Less well known, but perhaps just as injurious to its victims, are practices such as long-term isolation, sensory deprivation, sensory overload or over-stimulation, and sleep deprivation. These techniques, along with use of fear, constitute psychological torture. They are exaggerated forms of common psychological phenomena, exercised precisely to break down the psychological defenses of an individual. This article presents a brief historical summary of the research into forms of coercive persuasion, primarily sensory deprivation, conducted 35-50 years ago, in which psychologists, psychoanalysts, and psychiatrists worked for the CIA and the Pentagon to understand and implement these techniques. As a result of this research, sensory deprivation, prolonged isolation, and later, sensory overload became an integral part of the U.S. coercive interrogation paradigm. The primary document summarizing and implementing this material, constructing a comprehensive interrogation program, was the CIA’s 1963 KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation manual, declassified in 1997 (KUBARK was an alternate in-house name for CIA.)

This paper addresses the drawbacks of forced interrogation, and examines alternative methods of learning information from prisoners in a non-confrontational matter. This author researched the two most successful interrogators from World War II; and discovered that they were able to attain a plethora of viable information from war prisoners by merely holding conversations with them. The psychological approach was to treat the prisoners in a humane manner, as a person that is relaxed psychologically will let down their defenses. In addition, when under pressure or severe physical conditions, prisoners may give false information just to have the physical discomfort stopped.

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 2007

Torture interrogation does not yield reliable information. The popular belief that "torture works" conflicts with effective non-abusive methodologies of interrogation and with fundamental tenets of psychology. These were the conclusions reached at a meeting of recently retired, senior U.S. Army interrogators and research psychologists who met to rethink the psychology of torture. This article introduces the military interrogators, the psychologists, and the themes explored. In the process, this article explains why competent interrogators do not require a definition of torture, discredits the "ticking bomb scenario," and outlines the studies that comprise the meeting report, Torture is for Amateurs. The popular belief that "torture works" conflicts with effective non-abusive methodologies of interrogation and with fundamental tenets of psychology.

Retrieved September, 2006

Torture Journal

Interrogation is an essential component of a comprehensive view of torture and deserves special reflection. In interrogational torture, physical and psychological techniques serve the purpose of creating the physical, cognitive and emotional exhaustion in the detainee considered necessary for the successful questioning of a potential source of information. Interrogation can, at the same time, be conducted in a way that deepens the effect of torturing methods and environments when the interview is carried out in a way that fosters cognitive and emotional exhaustion, leading to breakdown (Pérez-Sales, 2016). Interrogations follow procedures and regulations, but in most countries there is a lack of transparency and information. Academia has only recently begun to do systematic research on interrogation and interviewing techniques (Walsh, Oxburgh, Redlich, & Myklebust, 2017; Intelligence Science Board, 2006; Meissner, 2012; Rassin & Israëls, 2014) to prove effects beyond personal opinions.

Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, reminded the nation half a century ago of the price of using coercion, humiliation and degradation to extract confessions from the guilty, and sometimes the innocent. Miller’s comparison of the Salem witch trials to the McCarthy hearings is again an apt message at a time when the need for information is paramount for many, regardless of the cost. Physical tortures are hardly new cultural or militaristic phenomena, what is new is when Jack Bauer, on the hit show 24, orders a man held in total sensory isolation to break him, and the audience watches as psychological disorientation and deterioration rapidly occur. It was the development of psychological torture in the mid-20th century that represented the first advances in sadistic interrogation methods in centuries.

Ethics, Medicine and Public Health, 2020

The impact of interrogation stress on compliance and suggestibility in U.S. military special operations personnel L'impact du stress de l'interrogation sur la conformité et la suggestibilité du personnel des opérations spéciales militaires des États-Unis

Political Research Quarterly, 2012

Debate about the sources of intelligence leading to bin Laden’s location has revived the question as to whether interrogational torture is effective. Answering this question is a necessary—if not sufficient—condition for any justification of interrogational torture. Given the impossibility of approaching the question empirically, I address it theoretically, asking whether the use of torture to extract information satisfies reasonable expectations about reliability of information as well as normative constraints on the frequency and intensity of torture. I find that although information from interrogational torture is unreliable, it is likely to be used frequently and harshly.

The practice of providing psychological or behavioral science support to counterintelligence operations is relatively new, but actively evolving. Psychologists—some of whom refer to themselves as operational psychologists—provide assessments for, and consultations to, operators, case officers, service members, and others on psychological or behavioral issues relevant for planning, managing, or terminating elements of an operation and handling human assets. Specifically, they may conduct direct or indirect risk assessments, offer perspectives on source recruitment and handling, or support interrogations and other information-gathering activities. Counterintelligence's focal areas, currently, are counterespionage and counterterrorism. We describe how psychologists have provided value-added support to each of those Department of Defense missions.