I wouldn't go so far as 'just the opposite'. He did give them useful information of a general/historical nature at the beginning when he was being interrogated with standard techniques. They got nothing of value later when they started the other stuff.
I don't understand what is so hard to understand about this. It has NOTHING to do with coddling our enemies. To some, I guess it just shows weakness if we don't bust em up every chance we get. And we should - on the battlefield. Once they are in our custody, the rules change. (see Convention, Geneva)
New York Times
April 22, 2009
Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says
By PETER BAKER
WASHINGTON – President Obama’s national intelligence director told colleagues in a private memo last week that the harsh interrogation techniques banned by the White House did produce significant information that helped the nation in its struggle with terrorists.
“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country,” Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the intelligence director, wrote in a memo to his staff last Thursday.
Admiral Blair’s assessment that the interrogation methods did produce important information was deleted from a condensed version of his memo released to the media last Thursday. Also deleted was a line in which he empathized with his predecessors who originally approved some of the harsh tactics after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
“I like to think I would not have approved those methods in the past,” he wrote, “but I do not fault those who made the decisions at that time, and I will absolutely defend those who carried out the interrogations within the orders they were given.”
A spokeswoman for Admiral Blair said the lines were cut in the normal editing process of shortening an internal memo into a media statement emphasizing his concern that the public understand the context of the decisions made in the past and the fact that they followed legal orders.
“The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means,” Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night. “The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
This is my point, even Obama's national intelligence director, in a written memo, says the release of the techniques used have damaged our image more than the benefits initially reaped. Which he may have used himself and will defend absolutely.
